Revolting Against Nature: Unmanning Men and Unwomanning Women

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." — Genesis 1:27

I love women. I don’t mean that in any lascivious way, I mean that I love having them in the world. I love what they bring to the world and to my life. I love women so much that I don’t want to see them turned into men.

Imagine my dismay when Susan and I were in a T.J. Maxx parking lot in a fairly large Tennessee town and I spied a woman deputy sheriff. Beneath the uniform I could barely tell she was a woman. I’m pretty sure they size those uniforms in quarts, because the wearers, male or female, have to be poured into them. Those skin-tight outfits with all the epaulets, badges, belts and loops make all wearers look like a stump. Yet above the uniform was bright blonde hair, plaited and piled high on her head. 

Definitely a woman.

My heart turned and sank within me, and not for any knee-jerk objection to women doing men’s work. No, this woman was being completely defeminized – “unwomanned” – by an ideology warring against nature. This woman’s femininity, her identity as a woman, was a casualty of that war. But the longer I pondered, the more I saw that the same war is being waged against men: they are being unmanned.

So women are being unwomanned, and men unmanned, and all are being reduced to one egalitarian humanoid, equally capable of . . .


Of what? Let me hasten to add that I don’t give a hoot whether women fly jet planes or captain industry or men crochet doilies and bake apple pies. Suum cuique – to each his own. And even if men in fact make better pilots and women better dancers, there would always be exceptions to those generalities, although exceptions don’t disprove generalities.

However, the ideology of revolutionary egalitarianism demands not merely that men and women be made equal, but also interchangeable. Now squirm as feminists might, men and women are not identical or interchangeable, not even equal in most respects, and never will be, thanks be to God. Stereotypes exist because nature and experience have spawned and validated them. When I get ready to move an 800 lb. safe, I want a man with his greater upper body strength to help me, not a woman, not even a big woman. If I need help with a squawling baby, I’m not going to ask Joe Quarterback.


During the Enlightenment the Revolution first appeared in France with its ideology of “Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity.” (I will pass over in tempted silence the impossible internal contradiction there, namely, that “liberty” cannot co-exist with government-enforced “equality”.)

But this Revolution came after centuries when Christianity had been improving women’s lot and status. In most ancient cultures, women, even wives, had a status little better than slaves, with no rights or respect to speak of. In some cultures the husband had the right of life or death over his wife and children. Yet as a practical matter, thank heaven, the ordained love of wife and husband stubbornly resists suppression. Women participated widely and vigorously in society and managing the household – a larger undertaking that we might think today, since at that time the household was the site of most economic activity. 

From antiquity’s low point Christianity began to enforce another ethical code toward women that gradually raised their standing. “Husbands, love your wives,” the Scripture says, and not once. By the late middle ages culture and literature placed women on a pedestal of romantic or courtly love, although at the same time there ran a stream of thought that blackened women as incapable of rational thought. As time passed the rights of wives and women became enshrined in the customary law. Even if they were still subject to many cultural restrictions, by the 18th century women had well developed legal rights that continued expanding in the 19th century. 

Enter the Revolution in the 1790s, and the manifold feminist movements of the 19th and 20th centuries, introducing the idea of interchangeable equality. Ultimately that idea leads to the androgyne, the man-woman, the unisex human creature. Gender differences are not merely blurred, but wiped out. Today, in fact, the equalizers claim there are some five genders. (This leaves me open-mouth mystified, as any statement so patently contrary to reality and nature ought to.)


This is a revolt against nature because God never created man and woman as interchangeably equal, but complementary. Most people overlook that gender is essential to man’s created purpose. When God created mankind, creating a man alone would not fully display his image. To display that image fully, God created woman as well. God’s image is not complete without both sexes.

Also often overlooked is that although God chooses to present himself in the Scriptures as male, if women are created in his image then he also contains within his being all that we call “womanly.” The woman does not so much lack something the man contains or vice versa, but rather the two together complete each other and the image of God. Both remain incomplete without the other. In complementing, they complete.

Since the ideology that demands women and men are interchangeably equal makes war against the nature that God has created, we ought to expect that imposing it throws the world and society out of joint. People talk about the “feminization” of society, but they ought in the same breath also talk about its “demasculinization” (unmanning). When the state with all its power tries to deny that women are women, and that men are men, and impose that lie as a matter of law, then the stage is set for all sorts of train wrecks because ideology must run head on into nature. 

Revolutionary feminism scorns women as falling short of true fulfillment unless they have a career. Those who bear and nurture children, the glorious goal of their nature, are denounced as second class citizens. Men are propagandized with the notion that to be a man is by nature to be evil and tyrannical and so dimwitted you don’t even know you are evil and tyrannical.

But ponder: when women by nature desire to bear children, but ideology denounces homemaking as demeaning and demands women take on some career or be less than human, then ideology tears the woman heart and mind with an unresolvable conflict: damned if she does, and damned if she doesn’t.

It is a generalization but true that men are combative and protective, while women are nurturing. That implies that one has a tendency to harshness and the other to sentimentalism. (Sentiment is good and essential to humanity, male and female; sentimentalism is its excess. Sentiment is to sentimentality as Rembrandt is to Thomas Kinkade, or as Johann Sebastian Bach is to Lawrence Welk.)

But that very difference makes it essential to cultivate and preserve the distinctive natures of both sexes. Only the sensibilities and tendencies of both men and women – manly men and womanly women – together can maintain a stable, just, and merciful society. Very bad things happen when one side or the other predominates.


In America today little boys are being institutionally unmanned. From birth many are fed soy milk rather than wholesome breast milk – careerists find little time for breastfeeding. Soy contains phytoestrogens, vegetable compounds that mimic human female hormones. Research raises concerns that feeding soymilk to baby boys inhibits their development as males. For as many articles as you might want to read, go here

In public education many more boys than girls are diagnosed with “diseases” like Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The cure is to drug them with pharmaceuticals that slow them down. “Boys are three times more likely than girls to develop ADHD,” according to Web MD. In fact, the website declares without the least awareness how dim-wittedly obtuse it sounds, that “Male sex [is] the greatest risk factor for developing the disorder.” Risk factor?

But think. No genius is needed to perceive that all boys are hyperactive compared to girls or adults; you need only observe children at play for ten minutes. Boys, in the immortal words of my friend Jay from Eastern Arkansas, “can tear the horns off an anvil.” Boys see every stick and stock as an opportunity to hit someone, or throw something at someone. For boys, every height is meant to be scaled, every dare to be answered. Boys fight. Boys tussle. Boys made inordinate amounts of noise. Boys, in short, will be boys.

Still the public education institution punishes them for being boys, even drugging them to curtail their boyish behavior. I doubt not that boyish behavior must be trained to self-control, but drugging them into a gender-suppressing stupor is not the way.


Women don’t like to punish, so they drag discipline out, but “mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.” Men like to punish and let it be forgiven and forgotten. 

The US prison system has been feminized and captured by sentimentalism. At end-2011 the US had 2,266,823 people incarcerated, and another 4.8 million on probation or parole, in all 7.3 million under correctional supervision. That is by far the largest prison population of any nation on the planet. (The U.S. incarceration rate in 2011 was 743 per 100,000 population. Russia was only 577, followed by Rwanda with 561. England has 155, Norway 71, Australia 233. Nobody can touch America for number of prisoners.) As of 2008, one of every 31 Americans is in prison, on probation, or on parole. All is cruel and unspeakable punishment that wants to avoid punishing while punishing, and rehabilitation that does not rehabilitate. The entire system is a failure, unless you count it as an industry for creating jobs and corporate profits. More than anything in the world, the entire US justice system acts like a cruel old maid second grade teacher, torturing its wards into obedience.

But at least it hurts nobody’s feelings. We have no prisoners working on the roads or supporting themselves on prison farms, no public whippings, little restitution to victims, and precious little capital punishment. Rather, by long harsh sentences, probation, parole, revocation, and recidivism, governments have created a hamster wheel that inmates endlessly jump on and off. 

As little as I like it, there are some people who commit crimes so heinous that they ought to be tried and executed as soon as possible, some before sundown. Instead of a merciful death, they are tormented for years by cruel close confinement. Others for victimless crimes are fed into the system and processed for years, ostensibly to be “rehabilitated” but most just stay on the hamster wheel of parole and probation, moving in and out of incarceration. Guilt is remembered forever, and no amount of punishment erases it. The system knows no forgiveness and no mercy.

This is a shameful system. It sentimentally resists punishing real criminals, cripples harmless misdemeanants for life, but never brings judgment and punishment, let alone justice, forgiveness, and restoration. It is all out of joint because it has been taken over by womanish sentiment.


The confusion of sexes and sexuality undermines society more and more deeply by undermining families. Since fathers can’t or won’t be heads of their households, gender confusion is introduced at home. No model of loving headship and loving orderly submission is given the children, so they cannot exercise these themselves. Without strong families, nations cannot survive.

Gay marriage is only the latest manifestation of sexual confusion in marriage, but for half the population, marriage is already so confused, divorce so common, so many homes broken that marriage already makes little sense anyway.

The sudden eruption of homosexuality in the last 20 years also mirrors the gender confusion caused by the revolt against nature. Technology has entered the battlefield, and confused people have their sexes surgically altered. This is the new normal, and their propaganda makes me, for criticizing the obvious and questioning it, the miscreant, the troglodyte, the evil bigot.

Listen, I’m not questioning it, God is. I’m not condemning it, God does. C.S. Lewis said that although most people think modern society takes sex too seriously, in fact modern people don’t take sex seriously enough. 

He’s right. Human sexuality, in the love of a man for a woman, enshrouds one of creation’s greatest mysteries. After the love of and for our parents, love of a spouse is our school to teach us divine love. It is the school where we learn the love God has for us through the love we have for another. And that mystery reaches all the way into the Trinity itself, where from all eternity the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit love each other, and where all love originates. Perhaps that furnishes part of the reason that God so severely denounces sexual sin, because it trenches on his very nature. The union of a man and woman in marriage is sacred beyond our capacity to understand. 


God created men and women as sexual beings, but pleasure and procreation must walk together or not at all. Much of the Revolution since the 1790s has aimed at so-called “sexual liberation,” which becomes in fact sexual promiscuity in which the women loses most of all.

Increasingly since the sexual revolution of the 1960s and the contraceptive pill, men and women have been separating the pleasure from procreation. 

Childbearing is put off even by married couples, until (married and unmarried) women in their thirties begin to panic at the specter of their biological clock stopping. They don’t want to miss the female experience of childbearing. At that age they begin to want it all, career and children. Doubt begins to whisper they have missed something important/

Now that people have separated pleasure from procreation, some women find in a panic that they want procreation even without pleasure. I heard an article on National Proletarian Radio on 12 July 2014, available here. It seems that women – unmarried, it goes mostly without saying – wanting to get pregnant are turning to internet sperm banks rather than commercial ones. The commercial ones, after all, cost $500 and more, but the internet sperm banks offer donors for free. Women get to check whether they want “natural” or “artificial” insemination. 

I was dumbfounded with laughter listening to this. As any male can testify, ALL men are all-too-willing sperm donors at all times. Is this a joke, or an internet prostitution service?

No, it is the desperate dead end of overthrowing nature. Now that they have separated pleasure from procreation, women find themselves forced to accept procreation without pleasure or love. It’s an insane inversion of nature, not just morality, but a great deal for men that leaves them without any responsibility of love, marriage, or family. For women, it’s not so great, but it does dehumanize them into mere satisfiers of lust and bearers of children, returning them to their status of ancient times before Christianity.

This doesn’t appear to be an improvement over nature ordained in Eden. 


Time would fail me to describe the church’s feminization. In the teeth of Scripture and tradition, women are ordained or made co-pastors with their husbands. A touchy-feely, sentimentalist theology emphasizes God’s love at the expense of God’s justice, and Christianity becomes a self-centered self-improvement project. Yet the fact remains, whenever you declare that secular ideology (in this case feminism) determines ethics and theology above the Scriptures, you give up Christianity. Once you give up one jot of the Scripture, you give it all up.

Is anyone surprised the Church has lost authority?


Galatians 3:28 says, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: For ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” God loves every one of us equally, regardless of natural or social distinctions, absolutely. However, that does not mean that when we are “in Christ Jesus” that Greeks become Jews, or women become men or men women. Those natural distinctions remain, but mankind must harmonize them by the love of Christ. God made distinctions in creation and economy – male/female, child/parent, master/servant – which were ordained to work in harmony. Instead, the devil twists them into grounds for strife and disharmony. 

My understanding was stunned in 1981 when I stepped out of my car at the Marion County, Arkansas courthouse and looked at the frieze on the courthouse: “Obedience to the Law is Liberty.” I’ve spent years working out its meaning. It is a thoroughly Christian, which is to say, a thoroughly realistic idea, thoroughly in accordance with reality and therefore thoroughly practical and workable. A person is free only to the extent he obeys the law of his Creator. This is the “glorious liberty of the sons of God,” the wide freedom to be what God has created us to be.

But that requires also that we accept with joy what God has made us. If that applies to our actions, how much more does it apply to our nature, especially our gender?

I never offer you lists of hair-raising, disgusting news items. I see them, but St. Paul says that some things are too shameful to mention. However, reports show that twenty years ago the most pessimistic denouncers of unmanning men and manning women fell far short of today’s actual horror. Once feet are set on that slope, they inevitably slide faster and faster to the deepest depths of human perversion and cruelty. It will slide all the way to the unspeakable bottom. That’s where revolt against nature leads, not to a new freedom as it promises, but back to the same old slavery man has known since the Fall – at its worst.

Originally published June 2014