Angry Men

[2PhiloVoid]

My comment to you elicited a negative response due to the association of the term in the reader’s mind. Everything has a place in God’s kingdom. We don’t randomly choose our position. He determines where we fit within the body. Much as He did with our fashioning.

An angry Christian woman should be a misnomer. It is the antithesis of our makeup. We lose our softness and pliability and become hardened and combative.

Contentious: Of persons or their dispositions: Given to contention; prone to strife or dispute; quarrelsome.

Proverbs mentions a contentious woman on three occasions:

It is better to live in a corner of the housetop than in a house shared with a quarrelsome wife. —Proverbs 21:9

It is better to live in a corner of the housetop than in a house shared with a quarrelsome wife. —Proverbs 25:24

A continual dripping on a rainy day and a quarrelsome wife are alike. —Proverbs 27:15

A persistent angry demeanor will lead to strife and disagreements. Especially with the opposite sex. In every instance her poor behavior is directed towards her spouse.

For me, this is an important reminder of the negative consequences of being combative. It’s off-putting and difficult to live with.

And suggests a propensity to continue the dispute beyond the point of tolerance. After a while the drip will get on your nerves and you’ll tune them out. That’s usually what happens.

The bible emphasizes self-control and the importance of guarding our words. This forestalls anger and nips it in the bud before things get out of hand. Meditating on these passages is beneficial for everyone.

Helpful verses:

Set a guard, O LORD, over my mouth; keep watch over the door of my lips! —Psalm 141:3

When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent. —Proverbs 10:19

Whoever guards his mouth preserves his life; he who opens wide his lips comes to ruin. —Proverbs 13:3

The heart of the righteous ponders how to answer, but the mouth of the wicked pours out evil things. —Proverbs 15:28

Whoever is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he who rules his spirit than he who takes a city. —Proverbs 16:32

Whoever restrains his words has knowledge, and he who has a cool spirit is a man of understanding. —Proverbs 17:27

Good sense makes one slow to anger, and it is his glory to overlook an offense. —Proverbs 19:11

The more words, the more vanity, and what is the advantage to man? —Ecclesiastes 6:11

If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. —1 Corinthians 13:1

Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger; for the anger of man does not produce the righteousness of God. —James 1:19-20

An angry Christian woman cannot walk in love. All that she does is for naught. She must be willing to lay it down and give her anger and pain to God. We are never told to maintain it. To do so is foolish in His eyes.

Fool: One deficient in judgement or sense, one who acts or behaves stupidly, a silly person, a simpleton. (In Biblical use applied to vicious or impious persons.)

Refrain from anger, and forsake wrath! Fret not yourself; it tends only to evil. —Psalm 37:8

The vexation of a fool is known at once, but the prudent ignores an insult. —Proverbs 12:16

A man of quick temper acts foolishly, and a man of evil devices is hated. —Proverbs 14:17

A man of great wrath will pay the penalty, for if you deliver him, you will only have to do it again. —Proverbs 19:19

A fool gives full vent to his spirit, but a wise man quietly holds it back. —Proverbs 29:11

Be not quick in your spirit to become angry, for anger lodges in the heart of fools. —Ecclesiastes 7:9

Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger. —Ephesians 4:26

Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. —Ephesians 4:31

But now you must put them all away: anger, wrath, malice, slander, and obscene talk from your mouth. —Colossians 3:8

The bible makes no allowances for angry persons. Nor are we justified to respond in anger due to personal causes or social justice. Angry reactions are sinful and unloving.

....**** gulp ***** well, there goes my next question, washed down the drain.

[Great post, by the way! I feel there are some caveats in there somewhere, even if not in a way that would overturn much of anything you've said here, and I say this not only for personal reasons, but also for academic and also for other biblical reasons. But this is your thread, and I'm not going to boldly contend for anything here (out of respect for what both you and @Paidiske respectively feel as women of God), despite my small penchant for Purple Activism. I'm just going to thank you for providing a 'balance' to how the considerations which we all must make for the expression of temperament can (or should?) play out in a Christian's life ... ]

Peace and Blessing!

So, let's get back to that good ol' stand-by that never seems to go away: ANGRY MEN!

 

[durangodawood]

Place is a reference to etiquette. It means the knowledge of your role in relation to that person. This guides the things we say and do.

In gender discussions the word "place" (as in "her place", "my place") will always invite problematic associations.

"A woman's place is...."

 

[mkgal1]

Some cite the diminishment of masculinity too.

I do wonder how much male disenfranchisement comes from loss of identity, an identity worth striving towards. Sometimes anger is rooted in fear, fear of loss. And then there's resentment towards the percieved cause of said loss.

I've not read through all the posts, but wanted to comment on this. I believe Chadrho hit the nail on the head by mentioning identity.

I think that when men buy into the idea that their identity is about being "masculine" - in a narrowly defined sense which amounts to a valuation of their physical strength, their economic power, and their attention from women - that's when they get angry, because they're either disappointed that doesn't "pay off" (like the guy that was mentioned earlier in the thread, that plowed through a crowd of people in So. California) or they are miserable with their shallow lives and wonder "is this all there is to life" - a lot like King Solomon ("it's all meaningless, a chasing after the wind" ~ Ecc 1:14).

I came across this TedTalk years ago, but it still seems to be a needed message today:

"What matters is how much you've loved, and been loved by, other people." ~ Joe Ehrmann


Interview Highlights
On how his brother's death affected him

When he died, that was devastating to me. And I started to ask all the questions about what is the role, the meaning, the purpose of life. I was 29 years old, I was six years into my NFL career, and I had no concept — no concept what life was about, and no concept what I was about. And on this journey, I ended up asking the question: What does it mean to be a man? ...

I recognized that everything I had invested my life in — all my accomplishments, my achievements, the stuff I had accumulated — I recognized at that moment they offered no hope or help to my 19-year-old brother — 18-year-old brother — lying on his deathbed. ...

All I had was these old "man up" kind of things — "suck it up, we'll get through this together" — when he really needed the emotional, the nurturing, the love. And I had to really struggle to pull that out of my heart. ~ The 3 Scariest Words A Boy Can Hear

 

[tampasteve]

MOD HAT ON

This thread has had a clean of off topic posts or posts in reply to off topic posts.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Paidiske]

You are gauging my comment from the perspective of feminism and that wasn’t its intent. Place was long established before the movement was birthed.

All sinners are hard to love. Our biases and personal experiences influence the ones we choose to love and those we don’t.

@2PhiloVoid and I were discussing male atheists. Not patriarchy.

It's not just a question of feminism, but of critique of power and subjugation in general.

One of the worst hymn verses I've come across is in that children's classic, "All things bright and beautiful," where it says:

"The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at his gate,
God made them high and lowly,
And ordered their estate."

No. No, God didn't do that; sinful people constructed a sinful society which did that. The poor man at the castle gate shouldn't "know his place" either. Our "place" needs to be open to change, growth and improvement.

And what I said wasn't about whom I choose to love but about the relative degree of difficulty involved in following through on that choice.

The bible makes no allowances for angry persons. Nor are we justified to respond in anger due to personal causes or social justice. Angry reactions are sinful and unloving.

I think this is possibly overstating your case. Anger is a normal part of grief. It's certainly a normal (and healthy, and important) reaction to situations such as bullying and abuse. There are times when we are right to be angry.

Now, none of that is an excuse to mistreat another. But Scripture tells us that God Himself knows anger, so it seems to me that suggests it is hardly wrong for humans to do so either.

The last thing we need is people shaming us for anger which is appropriate.

 

[bèlla]

Our "place" needs to be open to change, growth and improvement.

God said the poor will always be with us. Which means our best efforts to eradicate poverty and unfair advantages will fail. We live in a sinful world and evil will always exist.

I think this is possibly overstating your case. Anger is a normal part of grief.

It isn’t my case. God doesn’t intend for anyone to remain angry. If He wanted to include a caveat for grief we’d have it. Many suffered losses then as they do today. At any rate we aren’t discussing grief.

Now, none of that is an excuse to mistreat another. But Scripture tells us that God Himself knows anger, so it seems to me that suggests it is hardly wrong for humans to do so either.

We aren’t God. His anger is righteous and won’t lead to sin. We can’t say the same. If it was an ideal response to challenges He wouldn’t have spent so much time warning us against it.

The last thing we need is people shaming us for anger which is appropriate.

Have you considered your perspective on power in relation to men could be seen in the same light? Have you wondered if the oppression and subjugation you suppose is not a factor? Have you ever asked yourself how they receive your remarks? Do their feelings ever cross your mind or is the certainty of your position enough?

In short, is it possible your response to feminist slights shames the hearer and may be misplaced?

 

[bèlla]

Great post, by the way! I feel there are some caveats in there somewhere, even if not in a way that would overturn much of anything you've said here, and I say this not only for personal reasons, but also for academic and also for other biblical reasons.

Thank you for the compliment.

There will always be things in life that upset us. But we aren’t expected to maintain our anger or act upon it in a negative way. It’s probable the prohibitions exist because heightened emotions don’t always lead to rational actions. Most of is have had to apologize for things we’ve said or done when we were upset. Some justify their response. That’s between them and God.

I'm just going to thank you for providing a 'balance' to how the considerations which we all must make for the expression of temperament can (or should?) play out in a Christian's life ...

Thank you Philo. I’m still learning just like you and everyone else.

 

[Paidiske]

God said the poor will always be with us. Which means our best efforts to eradicate poverty and unfair advantages will fail. We live in a sinful world and evil will always exist.

That's not an excuse to ignore that, or avoid the part of the mission of God which is about transforming injustice.

God doesn’t intend for anyone to remain angry. If He wanted to include a caveat for grief we’d have it. Many suffered losses then as they do today. At any rate we aren’t discussing grief.

To remain angry as a permanent state, no. But not all anger is wrong, or sinful, or inappropriate. And anger - which we are discussing - is a necessary part of grief.

We aren’t God. His anger is righteous and won’t lead to sin. We can’t say the same. If it was an ideal response to challenges He wouldn’t have spent so much time warning us against it.

God warns us about many things; for example, about the love of money, too, but that doesn't mean God intends us to exist without money.

Have you considered your perspective on power in relation to men could be seen in the same light?

It's not just in relation to men; it's in general, actually. I have gradually become convinced that power is the most prevalent idol of our age.

Have you wondered if the oppression and subjugation you suppose is not a factor?

Are you trying to suggest that women aren't disadvantaged as a class? Because no, that's a position I'd consider completely unsupportable when considering the facts.

Have you ever asked yourself how they receive your remarks? Do their feelings ever cross your mind or is the certainty of your position enough?

I observe that there is a range of responses. But if some men feel uncomfortable because I point out some truths they'd rather ignore, well... their comfort isn't actually the most important thing. I try to argue the point and not the person.

In short, is it possible your response to feminist slights shames the hearer and may be misplaced?

It's never my aim to shame others. But we need to be able to talk about the problems of patriarchy; as indeed this whole thread aims to do. Because "angry men" is a problem created by patriarchy!

 

[bèlla]

That's not an excuse to ignore that, or avoid the part of the mission of God which is about transforming injustice.

No one spoke against that or suggested it should be ignored. I shared His perspective on the subject. Nothing more or less.

To remain angry as a permanent state, no. But not all anger is wrong, or sinful, or inappropriate. And anger - which we are discussing - is a necessary part of grief.

We aren’t discussing grief. That has not been mentioned in the OP or by the many who’ve commented thus far. We’re addressing the issues that contribute to continual anger and its remedy.

God warns us about many things; for example, about the love of money, too, but that doesn't mean God intends us to exist without money.

God’s warnings aren’t for naught. He provides them for our benefit. He knows where our mistakes and sins will lead far better than we do. While we aren’t subject to the same weaknesses. We still must be cognizant of His word on the subject. That’s how we minister effectively to those we encounter.

It's not just in relation to men; it's in general, actually. I have gradually become convinced that power is the most prevalent idol of our age.

I can’t say that most Americans thirst for power. I would put wealth at the top of the heap.

Are you trying to suggest that women aren't disadvantaged as a class? Because no, that's a position I'd consider completely unsupportable when considering the facts.

American women aren’t disenfranchised. I don’t pretend to be conversant of the conditions in places I don’t live or spend extended time in.

I observe that there is a range of responses. But if some men feel uncomfortable because I point out some truths they'd rather ignore, well... their comfort isn't actually the most important thing. I try to argue the point and not the person.

Would it be fair to say you’ve elevated the truth over the biblical principles of love? How is it possible that their response or discomfort warrants no concern or consideration? What is the biblical principle you utilize to validate that stance?

It's never my aim to shame others. But we need to be able to talk about the problems of patriarchy; as indeed this whole thread aims to do. Because "angry men" is a problem created by patriarchy!

Do you believe that feminism is wholly innocent? Are you able to admit the movements shortcomings and mistakes? Or do you believe the ends justify the means?

Lastly, is feminism biblical? Is the movement the will of God or man? If you were told it wasn’t would you lay it down and repent for your involvement?

 

[mkgal1]

God doesn’t intend for anyone to remain angry.

You added the word "remain" there. It was stated that anger is a normal emotion.

We aren’t God. His anger is righteous and won’t lead to sin. We can’t say the same. If it was an ideal response to challenges He wouldn’t have spent so much time warning us against it.

You don't believe we are capable of righteous anger? What if you found out a child you knew of was being horribly abused by people that were supposed to love and care for them? THAT reaction is anger. What we are instructed to do with that is to NOT sin (meaning the anger itself is NOT a sin).

But that's veering off topic.

 

[bèlla]

You added the word "remain" there. It was stated that anger is a normal emotion.

Yes I did to distinguish between being angry and staying angry. There’s a difference. This OP is regarding people who remain in that place.

You don't believe we are capable of righteous anger? What if you found out a child you knew of was being horribly abused by people that were supposed to love and care for them? THAT reaction is anger. What we are instructed to do with that is to NOT sin (meaning the anger itself is NOT a sin).

Do you believe we’d have so many prohibitions against anger if we’re likely to be righteous when upset? I didn’t list them all.

 

[Paidiske]

We aren’t discussing grief. That has not been mentioned in the OP or by the many who’ve commented thus far. We’re addressing the issues that contribute to continual anger and its remedy.

But you suggested that there is no such thing as a normal, healthy, appropriate anger. I'm questioning that because I don't believe it's either true or helpful.

I can’t say that most Americans thirst for power. I would put wealth at the top of the heap.

Isn't wealth a form of power?

Would it be fair to say you’ve elevated the truth over the biblical principles of love?

No. It's not loving to ignore problems so that someone else doesn't have to face them.

How is it possible that their response or discomfort warrants no concern or consideration? What is the biblical principle you utilize to validate that stance?

Here's how I see it. There's a massive problem which is causing immense harm to millions of people. Some people don't like it when that gets talked about, but talking about it is the first step to changing it.

Sorry, their dislike or discomfort is simply not the biggest issue there.

Now, yes, there is a way to talk about these things. Needless nastiness is not called for. But I hope I am not needlessly nasty.

Do you believe that feminism is wholly innocent? Are you able to admit the movements shortcomings and mistakes? Or do you believe the ends justify the means?

Feminism is a complex, multi-stranded movement. Some of its actions and ideas are not compatible with Christianity, but Christians are able to take their place as one strand of that movement, and make a positive contribution within feminism, within Christianity, and within wider society.

Lastly, is feminism biblical?

Absolutely. Feminism is the belief that women are equal to men, and the actions taken to make that a social reality. This reflects the Biblical truths that women are created, gifted and called by God, in just the way that men are created, gifted and called; that we all - each and every person - have a contribution to make and a role to play, in the family, in the church and in society, and that limiting anybody because of their sex is wrong.

Is the movement the will of God or man?

It is a mixed economy. I believe that God is at work in and through it.

If you were told it wasn’t would you lay it down and repent for your involvement?

Told by whom? Lots of people say all sorts of things demonising feminism. I see the fruit, and the fruit is more abundant life for all. That's Christ's work.

 

[bèlla]

But you suggested that there is no such thing as a normal, healthy, appropriate anger. I'm questioning that because I don't believe it's either true or helpful.

What we believe and what God says are a different matter. Oftentimes we attempt to make the bible fit our personal perspective. He warns us about anger because sin often follows when our emotions are running high. We may feel anger but leaving it at that and not responding sinfully is a struggle for many. And He knew it would be.

Isn't wealth a form of power?

That depends on the scale. It provides options and a measure of security.

No. It's not loving to ignore problems so that someone else doesn't have to face them.

Godly zeal is never unloving. Oftentimes the individual’s compassion is moved for both. Not only the one in need but also the person who erred or contributed to their problem. Your perspective appears to be victim driven with open disregard for the oppressor.

You’ve shared a lot of opinions but haven’t provided biblical support at all. If you want someone to understand what influences your behavior and you’re engaging with believers why is it absent? Specifically when I asked for the principle you’re referencing.

Here's how I see it. There's a massive problem which is causing immense harm to millions of people. Some people don't like it when that gets talked about, but talking about it is the first step to changing it.

Nothing happening in the world divorces me from the word or its precepts. No event gives me license to misapply or contort it to validate my stance. I would rather acknowledge that it is something I feel passionate about than to affix God to man-made movements.

Sorry, their dislike or discomfort is simply not the biggest issue there.

I think its evident that you are clearly interested in one-side of the dilemma. But that’s not the gospel. God loves the abused and abuser equally. He doesn’t show partiality. And justifying bias because of a problem or whatever matter you’re addressing isn’t biblical.

There’s nothing you’re dealing with He hasn’t seen or heard before. We are called to love our neighbors. Good and bad. And disregarding someone’s feelings when you’re conveying hard truths isn’t loving. That isn’t how He relates to us.

Feminism is a complex, multi-stranded movement. Some of its actions and ideas are not compatible with Christianity, but Christians are able to take their place as one strand of that movement, and make a positive contribution within feminism, within Christianity, and within wider society.

God is not the author of confusion. He didn’t found that philosophy. That was man’s doing and its a mess because it began with us. Christians don’t have to join movements. Jesus is our movement. Operating from God’s guidelines will correctly address the problems we face and society’s ills. If you embrace the leaven you get its results.

Oftentimes people become wedded to their ideals and it inevitably clashes with the gospel. You speak candidly about the plight of women. But I’ve yet to hear you address the challenges men are facing on account of feminism.

As someone conversant in the movement and willing to speak out on injustice. It is odd that you haven’t done so on this thread. Especially given the topic. If I changed the verbiage and made women its theme you’d be laden with information and statistics supporting their position.

But we’ve heard none of that. Not one study. No report on the harmful effects of feminism and the impact its had on boys and men. And if someone suggested women were the cause that is swiftly debated. Perhaps you debunk them and don’t believe the findings or feel the casualties are worth the gains.

You have taken the time to answer and I appreciate your honesty. God made man and woman equal. But I think it is easier to demonstrate equality through the word. We shouldn’t need society’s spin on the subject.

Unless we’re unsatisfied. Unless it doesn’t support our aims. Then you’d need to take up their mantle and make it yours. And when a subject is divisive to the degree that this one is we must take care.

There is conflict within and outside the church. Mothers are raising their voices against the biases their sons are receiving. As a mother the thought is disheartening. To exalt one over the other is wrong. Male or female.

You believe God is at work because you believe in feminism. You see fruit because you have faith in its principles. You are rooted in its philosophy.

Christ isn’t behind it and nor is God. If there are parts that aren’t appropriate for Christians He couldn’t possibly be its Author.

 

[bèlla]

So, let's get back to that good ol' stand-by that never seems to go away: ANGRY MEN!

It is my hope it will depart or lessen. And I don’t think you can address this topic without feminism’s contribution to what we’re seeing.

I purposely excluded it from the OP to encourage men to address the other matters (and you have) that are pertinent to men.

But I don’t live in a bubble and alarms are growing. It can’t be ignored. That may require another thread.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

It is my hope it will depart or lessen. And I don’t think you can address this topic without feminism’s contribution to what we’re seeing.

I purposely excluded it from the OP to encourage men to address the other matters (and you have) that are pertinent to men.

But I don’t live in a bubble and alarms are growing. It can’t be ignored. That may require another thread.

Yeah, I think you're right. The Feminism issue, which as you know is multi-faceted in nature, has it's place in all of this as a part of the equation of social response to men's "anger," so you may consider starting a separate thread on that so those who feel the ire of Feminist Need can express themselves. Then again, that may be quite some thread to manage, so only do it if you feel led to do it. I'd probably be a bit too intimidated for all of that. Or would I?

Peace.

{edit: Oh, I see you've already and gone to open that can of worms ... }

 

[Paidiske]

You’ve shared a lot of opinions but haven’t provided biblical support at all. If you want someone to understand what influences your behavior and you’re engaging with believers why is it absent? Specifically when I asked for the principle you’re referencing.

If you want a proof text for why anger is sometimes not only okay, but necessary, I'm not sure I can give you one. For me it's embedded within a concern for the flourishing of a person, which Scripture tells us is what God wants for us. Other disciplines will give depth to our understanding of human flourishing, including psychology and so on. Psychology tells us that anger is normal and healthy in some situations and that repression of it is harmful.

I think its evident that you are clearly interested in one-side of the dilemma. But that’s not the gospel. God loves the abused and abuser equally. He doesn’t show partiality. And justifying bias because of a problem or whatever matter you’re addressing isn’t biblical.

Here I can give you a proof text: "He has filled the hungry with good things, and sent the rich away empty."

God might love everyone equally but he doesn't coddle those who make the lives of others a misery. He has a positive bias for the poor and the oppressed, and calls us to share that bias.

We are called to love our neighbors. Good and bad.

Agreed.

And disregarding someone’s feelings when you’re conveying hard truths isn’t loving. That isn’t how He relates to us.

Look, I don't go out of my way to upset people. But if the pursuit of justice upsets people, I'm not compromising it for them. (God doesn't either).

God is not the author of confusion. He didn’t found that philosophy. That was man’s doing and its a mess because it began with us. Christians don’t have to join movements. Jesus is our movement. Operating from God’s guidelines will correctly address the problems we face and society’s ills. If you embrace the leaven you get its results.

It's not as if feminism is a movement with formal membership, or anything like that. But when I find that feminism accurately reflects aspects of the reign of God, well, I'm a sympathetic fellow-traveller and might as well be honest about that.

You speak candidly about the plight of women. But I’ve yet to hear you address the challenges men are facing on account of feminism.

I don't believe men are facing challenges on account of feminism. Men are facing challenges, but I don't think feminism is a cause of any of the underlying problems. If anything, I'd argue that patriarchy is the root cause of many of the problems, and that as we effectively challenge patriarchy the problems will lessen.

You have taken the time to answer and I appreciate your honesty. God made man and woman equal. But I think it is easier to demonstrate equality through the word.

I have found that people who are convinced of women's inferiority and God-ordained subjugation are not convinced by debating Scripture.

Unless we’re unsatisfied. Unless it doesn’t support our aims. Then you’d need to take up their mantle and make it yours. And when a subject is divisive to the degree that this one is we must take care.

I have no idea what you're suggesting here. I'm not unsatisfied with Scripture, or with God, or anything like that. It's in Christ that I've formed my absolute commitment to the flourishing of every human person. That's not my "aim," it's what we're all called to as Christians. All I'm doing in acknowledging the worth of feminism is acknowledging its contribution to that part of the mission of God.

You believe God is at work because you believe in feminism. You see fruit because you have faith in its principles. You are rooted in its philosophy.

Yes. I see little girls being taught to read and I know that that is good. I see women able to hold money and property and support themselves and their families, and I know that that is good. I see women able to discover and use their gifts in service to others, and know that that is the good for which they are created.

That's feminism. That's what it stands for. It stands for you and me being able to have this conversation because neither of us is illiterate or someone else's property, and we each have the means to access the technology to do so.

And I'm going to say, that's a good thing. That is God at work. And hasten the day when more girls have access to education, to health care, are not married off as child brides or trafficked for sex, are able to know their own inherent worth and dignity and discover their vocations, and not told to keep silent and subservient and wreck their health with too many pregnancies, too young and too close together, because having children is all they're good for.

Christ isn’t behind it and nor is God. If there are parts that aren’t appropriate for Christians He couldn’t possibly be its Author.

I didn't say that God is behind every thought bubble every feminist ever had. But I see God at work in the bringing of dignity and opportunity to millions (billions?) of women. And my spirit rejoices in God our Saviour.

 

[Petros2015]

I think you’ve summarized the deeper issues affecting men. Especially the disenfranchised and those grappling with anger about their condition. It is difficult to look beyond upset to hear the heart. But that’s the lone way to empathize and minister to the hurting.
Do you believe things will worsen if improvements don’t occur? Where do you see them heading?

Well to hazard a guess...

Anger loves to have a target to focus blame on...
I suppose if improvements didn't occur you might see things like mass shootings from individuals at a personal level, various types of demagogues empowering themselves through the situation and manipulating the general population from a political level against other segments of the population at both a micro and macro level. Anger and fear make people susceptible to these things, and there are other people who know this and live by it.

In order to keep things from really getting out of hand you'd have to keep feeding them grosser and larger levels of entertainment, distractions and drugs, which will eventually stop working. So while you are doing this, you'll probably want to increase your monitoring of the populations and build up security forces and make sure you have a lot of jails handy.

One of the most underestimated and overlooked of the 10 Commandments is really a very simple one - 'Thou shalt not covet' (especially applied to what your neighbor has). Covet is "to yearn to possess or have (something)". But the whole of capitalistic society is built on generating covetessness, I think. Every advertisement is meant to make you "to yearn to possess or have (something)". Every advertisement shows you something others possess or have. And most (but not all) movies, show what people do and what lines they cross to get the things that they covet.

What is missing are values of Truth, Humility and Compassion. Perhaps a few other things - but in general, the fruit of the Spirit is not present

Gal 5:22 ...the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

And the fruit is not present because the Spirit is not present.

The Spirit is not present, frankly, because no one is really desiring Him to be present. They want the next iPhone instead. Or the next girl, or whatever. No one wants Truth (and the Holy Spirit is known as the Spirit of Truth). Instead they want to be told what they they want to hear, and support those who do this for them.

So what is present when the Spirit is not present? Well... you can take all the fruits above and substitute the reverse, pretty much. But how much good will the next iPhone or the next girl do you once you've done that? To put it another way:

Mark 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?

And even setting aside threats of eternal damnation, or promises of eternal bless, I would have to say that the reverse of the fruits is hell to the degree that one has them, just as the fruits are heaven, to the degree that one has them.

I really don't think that any kind of redemption will come at a societal level. Society is built (most societies anyway) really to do just the opposite. But nevertheless, it can come at a personal level, in the most unexpected ways, to the most unexpected people. As Christ said,

John 3:8 The wind blows where it wills, and you hear the sound thereof, but can not tell from where it came, and where it goes: so is everyone that is born of the Spirit.

I've been giving a lot of thought to your question though at a personal level - what is it that makes me angry personally, what's the real source and root. And I came up with a few things.

1) I don't like to feel like I am being misunderstood - I get angry when assumptions are made about me based on general perceptions and past experiences. Ironically, looking back, sometimes the assumptions were quite correct, and this didn't stop me from being angry about them being made But in general, I am happier when someone is willing to see and believe the best in me from the get go, and angry if they expect the worst. I do find that I have tended to 'live up to expectations' (and often surpass them), whether they were good, or bad. These days, I don't seem to do that anymore, and I'm happier to just stick with the standards that Christ has provided regardless of what anyone thinks. It's a lot safer for everyone.

2) And I think this might be a deep root of male (and maybe female) anger whether they realize it or not. I don't like being lied to. I don't like seeing people deliberately lying or misrepresenting facts to suit their own agenda. I think that there is a deep yearning in the heart of every individual to know the truth, and a deep anger when they realize consciously or not, they have been deceived or that people are deliberately attempting to deceive them. And I feel like so much of the world IS deception, much of it very deliberate. So the state of anger may be very constant. So much of the world is the promise that it will satisfy and gratify. And it does not. So much of the world is the promise that it is honorable. And it is not. So much of the world is the promise that it is fair. And it is not. I'm happy when I hear and know Truth. And I want to hear and know it, even if it hurts sometimes. How can anyone get better if they don't?

3) Rejection by females lol. Can't leave that out in a discussion about male anger. But I think that goes along with society that makes the male definition of 'winning' the amount of attention they get from females. Pornography and sexualization/objectification expectations only make this worse. I can't speak for everyone obviously, but if the 'ground state' of most males is like mine was, other males are largely viewed as competitors. Some of that I think is innately built into us at a primitive level moreso than in females. Culture and pornography in the 21st century have exploded it and it has a real impact by setting expectations somewhere that they can only result in resentment when they are not indulged and fulfilled (and probably even if they are). I think someone once pointed out to me that you can be exposed in this day and age to more sexual content on the internet in about 24 hours than an average man would have had in his entire lifetime in the 18th century. Not sure if that's accurate, but not sure it's not either. Has a huge effect on us and our ability to relate to females and others and ourselves.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's not just a question of feminism, but of critique of power and subjugation in general.

One of the worst hymn verses I've come across is in that children's classic, "All things bright and beautiful," where it says:

"The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at his gate,
God made them high and lowly,
And ordered their estate."

No. No, God didn't do that; sinful people constructed a sinful society which did that. The poor man at the castle gate shouldn't "know his place" either. Our "place" needs to be open to change, growth and improvement.

You understand the origin of kings don't you? It was success in battle. If you go back far enough in nearly every royal line, every dynasty, they almost always begin with a guy who won a great victory. There was nothing more difficult for the common person to understand than victory in battle...so it's often been attributed to divine favor.

I don't know if that particular hymn is rooted in that belief...but the idea that wealth and gain are only gotten by oppression and subjugation is, frankly, naive.

And what I said wasn't about whom I choose to love but about the relative degree of difficulty involved in following through on that choice.



I think this is possibly overstating your case. Anger is a normal part of grief. It's certainly a normal (and healthy, and important) reaction to situations such as bullying and abuse. There are times when we are right to be angry.

Now, none of that is an excuse to mistreat another. But Scripture tells us that God Himself knows anger, so it seems to me that suggests it is hardly wrong for humans to do so either.

The last thing we need is people shaming us for anger which is appropriate.

I think perhaps your belief in the relative place of women compared to men being the result of "subjugation" is ignoring real differences inherent to men and women.

 

[Paidiske]

You understand the origin of kings don't you? It was success in battle. If you go back far enough in nearly every royal line, every dynasty, they almost always begin with a guy who won a great victory. There was nothing more difficult for the common person to understand than victory in battle...so it's often been attributed to divine favor.

I don't know if that particular hymn is rooted in that belief...but the idea that wealth and gain are only gotten by oppression and subjugation is, frankly, naive.

And isn't the use of battle to take power a form of oppression and subjugation?

Wealth in itself isn't necessarily only gotten by oppression and subjugation, but I'd argue that enormous wealth disparity is. The billionaires of this world didn't get that way without it being at the expense of others.

I think perhaps your belief in the relative place of women compared to men being the result of "subjugation" is ignoring real differences inherent to men and women.

"Real" meaning biological? Sure, biology makes women vulnerable in some ways. Pregnancy is perhaps one of the most powerful experiences of vulnerability I've had in my adult life. But the relative place of women (one of deprivation and subjugation) only came because men took advantage of that "real" vulnerability. Doesn't make it right.

 

[durangodawood]

...I think perhaps your belief in the relative place of women compared to men being the result of "subjugation" is ignoring real differences inherent to men and women.

To take just one issue, what were the "real differences inherent to men and women" that kept women from voting?