Category Archives: Uncategorized

Grieving with the Musically Abused

Just how fragile do we think black Christians are?

Apparently, my answer would be different than Andrew Peterson’s…because he’s apologizing to his “friends of all colors” for causing them pain with a music video.

Yes, really. (The video is on YouTube, if you’d like to see the deeply wounding content for yourself.)

Peterson seems to think his simple music video has incredible power over the emotions of certain (minority) Christians–and that’s why he has taken full responsibility for anyone who is grieving–GRIEVING–over the sight of “a lot of white people.”

Among the very kind comments on social media were some painfully negative ones, pointing out that there was a conspicuous lack of racial diversity in the video. Someone actually said, “Man, that’s a lot of white people in one video!” Others said they wouldn’t or couldn’t share it with friends of color because it would cause them pain.

…What was meant to be a video drawing attention to the glory of Jesus, one that opened the door for all people to praise him, had become, for some, a source of grief. I immediately thought of some friends of mine and wondered if I had unintentionally hurt them. I called them and my worst fears were confirmed… we cried and prayed together on the phone.

How old are Andrew’s friends?

Maybe second grade?

That’s the mental picture he paints when he describes a couple of boys crying over the fact that only white people responded to the casting call, and no one hit the streets to track down brown people to mix it up…

So, with all due respect to THE WHITE GUY who complained about “a lot of white people,” I don’t believe grown-up black Christians are that easily triggered.

I think Christians of Color are being misrepresented and infantilized (by divisive race activists)–just as women have been misrepresented by Feminists who claim that the word “Fireman” is hurtful for young girls. Supposedly these females are powerful and able to do anything a man can do–and yet the word “fireman” makes them emotionally unable to apply for the job.

Nope, I don’t buy it.

Likewise, I don’t believe that black Christians are unable to focus on the message of a song unless they see other black Christians in the video. We’re talking about warriors for Christ here! These are children of God, indwelt by the Holy Spirit and set apart with the ability to withstand the firey darts of the Evil One.

…but we need to avoid sharing certain praise songs because the video is too white for them to handle?


White musicians don’t need to tiptoe around a warrior’s feelings. And they certainly don’t need to make a scene out of apologizing to “anyone who may be grieving,” when someone’s “grief” over skin pigment is much more akin to an emotional breakdown.

If it is true that a few black/brown Christians expected Peterson and his Asian director to go specifically looking for folks of a darker shade to sprinkle through the crowd and break up the offensive waxen sea, then those people would do well to remember they don’t speak for everyone.

MOST of my brothers and sisters are focused on what unites us rather than on what divides us. And MOST of us don’t have the time to obsess over the ratio of brown-to-white people in a crowd.

Please, white Christians: stop taking responsibility for the feelings of a handful of black people. You do not have the power to turn true, strong Warriors of Christ into helpless messes of emotion, because MOST Christians (of all colors) are too busy dodging darts to “grieve” over something literally skin deep.


People First Language

The new Gerber Baby has Down Syndrome. (He’s cute as a button, by the way. Really a great choice, in my opinion!)

But now that people are talking about little Lucas all across the United States, there are thousands of well-meaning fans being educated on a very important point:

Lucas is a “child who happens to have Down Syndrome.”  He’s NOT a “Down Syndrome Child.” 

This is called “people first language,” because it puts the noun FIRST in the sentence–which makes such a huge difference in the Universe that some special needs activists will spend literally hours annoying educating others about it.   (Oops, I suppose “special needs activists” isn’t People First Language.  What I should have said was “PEOPLE who happen to have a lot of time on their hands.”)

People First Language IS CRUCIAL–because many parents and special education professionals believe it’s crucial, and they’re right about everything.

If speaking nouns before adjectives is important to a parent then you better put that noun first, dang it! 

In fact, if you really, really want to show respect for a child with a certain characteristic, you won’t refer to him/her as a “child,” either.

Are people defined by their ages?! NO!

In that case, the correct way to refer to Baby Lucas is:  A person of a young age who also has a diagnosis of Down Syndrome.

But, wait, maybe that’s still not specific enough?  What if Baby Lucas doesn’t identify as “human” when he’s older? What if he wants to be a pigeon or a walrus?

Maybe a safer and more respectful way to talk about Baby Lucas is as, “A Living Being who resembles a human person–but may not be–and happens to have a diagnosis of Down Syndrome.”   ?

Yeah. That sounds very warm and inclusive.

I’m so happy I’m an educated person… Er, I mean, a person who happens to have been educated…

Thanks, Language Police!  🙂

Damned If You Do and If You Don’t

To speak or not to speak?

When someone is out of line, does a mature person “take the high road” by ignoring the drama?  Or would it do more good to call out the bad behavior–so (at the very least) others have the chance to know the truth?

I don’t know.

But it makes me feel a little better knowing the smartest man who ever lived didn’t have a solid answer either:

“Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him. Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes.”

–A Proverb of Solomon

No matter which option you take, there are cons.

Be accused of stooping to the fool’s level?  Not good.

Allow foolishness to go unchallenged?  Also not good.

All of us have that close friend/relative who airs dirty laundry on social media, to the embarrassment of the whole group, right?

(Or maybe not all of us have that.  Am I the only one?)

Responding makes the rest of the family look equally petty and unstable and immature.

And yet, The Fool continues to be wise in her own eyes…

What to do, what to do, what to do?

I’d ask God for the wisdom of Solomon.  But, in this case, he wasn’t much help.  “You’re wrong no matter what you do,” he says.

Thanks for nothing, Sol.

Husbands are Idiots

My husband is an idiot…

…but I’m a stay-at-home mom, so I’m allowed to say that, I guess?

When stay-at-home moms get stressed, they need to “vent.” And venting may include being disrespectful toward their partners, without judgment.

At least, that’s the message I’ve gotten in various online “Mommy Groups.”

12.22.17 Moms Need to Vent (edit)

My sister-in-law is expecting her first baby, so she’s getting her first tastes of the “mom group” culture.  It’s not always a pretty sight when a bunch of bored women get together in the name of “supporting” whatever weird, thoughtless, or downright selfish thing pops into another mom’s head.

It’s literally impossible to support EVERYBODY.  So–in these Mommy Groups–the support goes to the women who say/do what the administrator approves. 

Anyone who asks an unpopular question or, Heaven forbid, calls out another member will quickly have her “support” revoked.  (In other words, the person doing the calling-out will be called out.)

My sister-in-law had her support revoked when she called out the Husband Bashing.  This commenter explained that she broke the rules:

12.22.17 Moms Need to Vent (#2) (edit)

Now, understand what’s happening here.

It’s not against the rules to say rude things about husbands, behind their backs…

But it IS against the rules to “shame” another woman, or say something that might hurt her feelings.

Here’s an official list of Group Guidelines which are very, very common.

12.22.17 Moms Need to Vent (#3)

“Drama” is another one of those words you’ll come across a lot.  The women causing the so-called drama aren’t the ones making jokes about their husbands being incompetent.

The women causing the “drama” are the ones who think they’ve crossed a line.

So, once again, if a woman says something rude about her husband, where he can’t read it, that’s okay…because she needs to vent.

But, if a woman posts (direct quote) “I’m not sure I want to be part of this,” then she has broken the rules. She made the other women feel like it’s not safe to say whatever they want!

It seems the chief rule of being a Mother in America these days is: Thou Shalt Act as if Your Fellow Mothers NEVER Do Anything Wrong.

Ladies–this is why we need good, honest friends who hold us to higher standards. 

(I wrote about how we actually need MORE judgment in this post, and I got a lot of unexpected “amens” for it!)

We desperately, desperately, desperately need to get out of this crazy loop where our girlfriends encourage our worst behavior, by calling it “support.”  We need women who don’t let us get away with “venting” when it inevitably crosses a line into gossip or slander.

We need friends who will remind us that feeling shame or embarrassment about things we said/did in private probably means we need to change what we’re saying and doing!

That’s the kind of Supportive Mom Group I can get behind.


-Speak the truth, in love.

-Care for one another…care enough to say something that might be unpopular.

-Have thick skin, but an open mind.


What do you think? Is that too much to ask?

(*sigh*)  Maybe it IS too much.  Maybe our culture simply is too confused about what “bashing and shaming” mean…

12.22.17 Moms Need to Vent (#4) (edit)

Battered Man Syndrome (Or, “Women Aren’t Happy Because of Men”)

If a woman tells you her ex-husband left her because she was a “bad wife” and didn’t give him enough sex, how would you respond?

…Personally, I don’t have a problem with people taking ownership for their role in a dysfunctional relationship.

But, I have a feeling most Americans would be reeeeeeally uncomfortable with the idea that it’s the woman’s fault when her husband leaves. 

So why do we love articles in which abandoned men blame themselves?

There’s this article, where a man confesses he should have done the dishes more.

And this article (by the same guy), where he calls himself a “shitty husband” because he didn’t care about “the little things.”

I’ve also seen different versions of this article being posted and going viral on social media for several years now:


In all of these examples, the man focuses on HIS weaknesses and HIS selfishness…only to conclude that he deserved being left (though none of them were actively abusive toward their ex-wives).

“I was a shitty husband.

And it’s not because I’m a massive jerk, or abusive, or particularly difficult to get along with…

I thought because I was a nice person, and that I’d made sacrifices for her, that I was a good husband. I thought because I didn’t do a bunch of bad things some guys do that I was a good husband. I didn’t realize it until much too late: Good men can be bad husbands...

I tell my story so that maybe other people won’t get divorced like me.”

Again, I’m not opposed to men (and women!) being open about things they’ve done wrong.  

I’m glad there are men who try to understand the perspective of their ex-wife, even after it’s “too late” and their exes are now remarried to the type of men they’d always fantasized about…

(Okay. A little tongue-in-cheek there. But, really, taking personal responsibility is good.)

If you’re someone who cheers when both men and women take personal responsibility, then you and I are on the same page!

But if you’re the kind of person who thinks it’s somehow different when a woman says, “I should have made the effort to see how important sex was to him!” then we’ve got a double-standard to address. 

All of these articles were brought to my attention during a conversation with several women who believe it’s valid for women to divorce their husbands if they’re not happy.

Not because he hit her.  Not because he was maliciously neglectful. But because he doesn’t make them feel a certain way.  (If you have a lot of time on your hands, you can read the original conversation here.)

It started when Matt Walsh recorded a live video discussing how women can–intentionally or unintentionally–wear down their husbands and destroy a marriage.  One of his commenters (Whitney) wrote: “Let’s put the focus on what men do to destroy their marriages, because women are usually the unsatisfied ones wanting a divorce.”

I thought she was joking at first because I couldn’t believe someone would say that women-leaving-men is a sign that MEN are doing something wrong…?

But, after some rabbit trails, she confirmed yes:

“Men do stuff like chronically not listening, not being courteous, not carrying their weight around the house, not being open to their wife’s influence, etc. All while thinking they’re good men and good husbands. These things destroy a relationship over time… then men are dumbfounded when the woman just doesn’t want to put up with it…”

So, what do you think, Reader?  Are those good reasons for divorcing someone you promised to love “for better or worse?”

And–if so–would you also agree if I said, “Women do stuff like chronically nagging, thinking they get to define what counts as ‘equal work,’ making their feelings more important than their husband’s, and refusing sex. These things destroy a relationship, but women are dumbfounded when a man just doesn’t want to put up with it [and leaves].”

Is that okay?

Again, if the love and respect thing goes both ways, then we don’t have a problem.  But the ladies with whom I was speaking yesterday just could not accept that expecting chores and expecting sex are exactly the same.

The women kept gushing over the articles (written by men) which validated their feelings that chores are symbols of respect:

12.14.17 Women Want Total Control (Dishes)

So I wanted to find out whether the 4-5 women in the thread ALSO have “acquired the ability to examine themselves” and validate their husbands’ feelings about sex?

I asked, “What would you say if the articles were written by a woman…about how [the divorce] was her fault for ‘learning these lessons too late?'”

I only got one response, and it was very long and rambling. But I’ve highlighted the important stuff:

12.14.17 Women Want Total Control (edited)

Here’s what I got from that comment: Women always have good reasons for refusing their husband’s requests.

When a man won’t do what his wife wants, it’s because he won’t make the effort to understand her feelings. But, when a woman won’t do what her husband wants, it’s still the man’s job to put himself in her shoes and understand her feelings.

For some women (like those I spoke with yesterday) it’s ALWAYS about her perspective and her thought-process and her interpretation of what’s happening.

It’s selfishness. And it’s really, really hard to be married to someone like that, regardless of whether it’s the husband or the wife.

The bitter man would be bitter whether or not his wife had sex with him. (She’s just a convenient scapegoat.)

But, likewise, the bitter woman isn’t bitter because she really works harder than everyone else on the planet.  She’s bitter because she tells herself she’s not getting what she deserves.

I respect any person–male or female–who focuses on his/her personal responsibility to consider others instead of feeling sorry for themselves.

Let’s Talk About Sex

Yeah… “rape culture” exists.  I’m finally willing to admit it.

As person after person after person comes forward to accuse various politicians or Hollywood celebrities of different types of sexual misconduct, it’s clear:  there’s a problem in the culture.

George Takei may have groped a male model.

Richard Dreyfuss may have exposed himself to an actress.

Kevin Spacey may have touched an 18-year-old inappropriately.

This helpful New York Times article details 23 different men (omitting the women) who have been “accused of everything from inappropriate text messages to rape.”

So, if calling this problem “rape culture” gives us some common ground from which to build, then fine.  Let’s start there.


Our country has a rape problem…but I don’t think that’s the root.  

It seems obvious to me that our real issue is with “Casual Sex Culture.”

There is very, very little difference between a fun and crazy memory of a one-night stand–and a night filled with regret because the other person didn’t pick up the “fun” part of the craziness.

I mean, imagine this:

An attractive, young protagonist goes to get a massage after a long day.  The hero is stressed and conflicted by something serious, and he wants to spend some time relaxing.  Luckily, the man doing his massage knows exactly how to take his mind off his troubles…

If this is a movie scene, we know where this is going, right?  Probably John Travolta has done a few scenes just like this, in front of the camera, for lots of money!

A few years ago, a massage therapist who claimed to specialize in “more than massage” said John Travolta was one of his customers.   So…why are we surprised that Travolta is being accused by another masseur of “groping” and “exposing himself” and “making lewd suggestions?”

Why is Travolta in trouble this time, for trying to recreate what was perfectly acceptable in another case?

A wise young person will ask himself: when is it okay to live out movie fantasies, and when does it run the risk of becoming a night that I’ll regret?

The answer is:   You run that risk every time.   Every time.

Whenever you have some sort of sexual encounter with another person, you are taking a risk that you’ll be in a different frame of mind. (And, yes, that includes sexy text messages.)

You might be more eager…more enthusiastic…more interested than the person you’re propositioning.

And, if you’re even slightly more eager than the other person, it’s possible that a police officer or judge or jury might call what you did “rape.” 

The more people you include in your living fantasies, the more you’re putting your reputation into their hands.  Someday, it could be their word against yours.

Of course, this is the point where I have to clarify that not all cases of rape are complicated. Furthermore, not everybody who accuses someone of sexual misconduct is simply regretting what they consented to do at first.

I’m not saying that massage therapists should expect to have their butts touched by celebrities.  Obviously.

What I AM saying is that we can’t have “casual, judgment-free” sex AND fight rape culture at the same time. 

Sex can’t be both a recreational activity between ANY TWO ADULTS, and also something that can completely ruin your life if/when one of those adults remembers the details differently.

There’s nothing “casual” about that kind of relationship.

There’s nothing fun and judgment-free about government officials “investigating” what happened when you were naked.

It’s not fun and judgment-free when all of America debates whether you’ve crossed some arbitrary line between kinky and criminal.

“Well, they didn’t say no!”

“But they didn’t say ‘yes’ enthusiastically and repeatedly!”

“Yet…he didn’t touch the other person!”

“Right, but he was exposing his penis.”

“Okay, but he asked first!”

“No one in a ‘position of power’ should EVER ask a question like that…”


Just stop.

It’s very simple.

Sex isn’t casual.

It’s serious and deeply emotional and life-changing and complicated, and that’s why it shouldn’t ever involved strangers or near-strangers.

If you’re not married to the person in question, just assume they DON’T want to see your genitalia.  And, even if they’re literally begging you to get naked, you still should walk away.

“So now, my sons, listen to me. Never stray from what I am about to say: Stay away from her! Don’t go near the door of her house! If you do, you will lose your honor…
Drink water from your own well—share your love only with your wife. Why spill the water of your springs in the streets having sex with just anyone?
You should reserve it for yourselves. Never share it with strangers.”

People shouldn’t be having conversations about whether an acquaintance wanted to see you naked or not.   

Sex is for married couples.  That’s it.

Until we stop trying to draw ridiculous, blurry lines between casual “hook-ups” and criminal “sexual misconduct,” our problems will only get worse… with more broken hearts sacrificed on the alter of physical gratification.

The Ten Commandments (Revised)

A few years ago, NBA star Kevin Durant testified that he struggled with guilt and a sense of condemnation, until Hillsong Pastor Carl Lentz explained to him that “We don’t live by the Ten Commandments anymore.”

I don’t want to unpack the reasons that’s partially true and also misleading right now.

Instead, I want to point out that all of us DO live by certain commandments today, whether we call them that or not.

Some members of the modern church have replaced the original Ten Commandments with a new set of Laws.

For example, when Carl Lentz appeared on The View, he explained that his church has a certain way of dealing with the more controversial (“political”) topics, when someone asks where they stand.

Hillsong has a method.

They have a strategy.

Lentz was asked: “Where do you stand on social issues that young people are particularly passionate about, like gay marriage? Abortion? Like, how do you address those types of things?”   And he responded: “I think our job is to help people. Not necessarily change how they think, but try to point them to what God has said…[what] we believe the Bible to say…” and he kept rambling from there.

Then Joy Behar tried to pin him down: “So it’s not a sin in your church to have an abortion?”

And he chose not to answer with a yes or no.

I think this was a difficult question for Lentz because, though he isn’t condemned by the Ten Commandments of the Old Testament, he and many others ARE strongly compelled by the Ten Commandments of Influencing People. 

Here are a few of the most important points of effective evangelism, from a sermon I found:

Law #1: Keep your mouth shut and your ears open

Law #2: Offer questions, not answers.
Remember this: Nobody cares how great you are until they understand how great you think they are.

Forget about trying to “sell” Jesus or you particular church, and focus instead on why your Seeker wants. To do this, you need to get fascinated with your Seeker; you need to ask questions (lots and lots of them) with no hidden agenda or ulterior motives.

Law #4: Speak to your prospect just as you speak to your family or friends

Law #10: Invite your prospect to take some kind of action

After having gone through the first eight steps, you should have established a mutual feeling of trust and rapport. You’re now ready to bridge the gap between your prospect’s needs and what it is you’re offering.  So invite them to church!

Bur remember: You don’t want the prospect to be reminded that he/she is dealing with a “Christian.” You’re not another “Christian.” You’re a human being offering a gift! And if you can get your prospect to understand that, you’re well on your way to becoming an outstanding Christian.

Okay, okay, it wasn’t really a sermon, per se. It came from Entrepreneur Magazine and I just changed a few words.

The closing line is my favorite.  The original article said:

“You’re not a salesperson, you’re a human being, offering a particular product or service. And if you can get others to understand [that you’re not a salesperson], you’re well on your way to becoming an outstanding salesperson.”

I laughed out loud because he doesn’t seem to realize THIS is why 85% of people have a negative view of salespeople…

Salesmen literally teach each other how to obscure and dance around their own motives. They encourage each other to PRETEND TO BE SOMETHING ELSE, in order to “win” clients.

Sound familiar?

Salesmen always insist they’re not selling. They say things like, “I just want to get to know you, with no ulterior motive” or “I want to find out what you need…”

…or really, whatever it takes to get their foot in the door.

I’m not saying that this “technique” won’t turn into sales! (Who am I to argue with the experts?) Clearly, people are interested in piling into amphitheaters, to hear that God loves them and that abortion is complicated.

But, when I look at the product, to see if I’m interested in buying, I’m turned off by churches filled to capacity with excited, brand-loyal fans of the guy on stage–when they can’t say, for sure, why “Thou Shall Not Murder” is still important.

So, I say to the salesman, “I’m not interested in that, thanks.”

And when I am, I’ll just get my fix for “someone who wants to get to know me” from pretty much any other salesman in the country.

(For the record, I’m pleased with how Lentz took a FIRM stance on racism and said “Some of that stuff needs to be called out, up front, out loud…”   Why such different tactics there? It looks to me like this is a game being played between cat-and-mouse. And he knows which issues are easier “sells” than others. You can see The View segment here.)