As we've studied in the first three articles of this series ( I, II, III), God’s creation communicates that dissimilarities are profound because differences illustrate love in that one uses his opposing nature to serve the other to complete what the other is lacking while the other does the same in reverse. The research we've seen communicates the opposing natures of God's inner formula as the female is inward, emotional-thinking, relationship-centered while the male formula represents outward, logic-thinking and truth-centered. The key point is when these opposing aspects are joined they help what the other is lacking and fulfills the human experience.
To understand the connection, we need to grasp how women and men respond to messages differently. Women were created with special sensors within which they have a closer attachment to the environment outside her than men have. As Manfred Hauke observes of women, “This, along with a larger number of nerve endings in the skin results in greater sensitivity to tactile stimuli and thus in a special attunement to the things encountered in the immediately surrounding areas of the environment." This illuminates that women are more emotionally connected to their relationship environment. If women are more “attached” to their surroundings, they are less likely to engage in thought or activity that will negatively affect their emotional equilibrium with her environment. In short, women have a “let us all get along” attitude given their emotionally centered essence of being relationship focused.
The danger with this attitude is that women may unknowingly attach themselves to false teachings to keep the relationship steady. Furthermore, because women respond to emotional messages, women are more likely to fall trap to deceptive teaching that is camouflaged with positive words. Scam artists tend to target gullible and naïve people through arrousing narratives. A successful con artist mentioned that in his tactics, “It’s all about emotion, not logic" (see here). Most all examples of scam artists tactics indicate they use emotional stories that stress relationship connectivity to perform their fraud on unsuspecting people (see here). The last thing a con artist wants is a person to use reason and little emotion to discern his message. Given that women reason through emotion and they can become too attached to this emotional-relationship environment, they stand as easy prey for scam artists. Therefore, because men utilize reason over emotion in their thought process and aren't as worried about the health of relationships, the male nature is a great tool for the female nature to seek the truth.
Because women stand vulnerable to false teacher’s persuasion through emotional messages the temptation narrative in Genesis becomes intriguing. After God gives his instructions to Adam to pass on to Eve, the serpent makes an appearance to attempt to trick them. The New Testament identifies this “ancient serpent” with Satan himself (see Revelation 12:9, 20:2). Also, the author indicates that the serpent was the “most cunning of all the creatures” (Genesis 3:1). The term used here (arum) is often used to describe a wise man who is “shrewd” (see Proverbs 12:16, 13:16) or the “stealth” and “guile” of the wicked (see Job 5:12, 15:5). In other words, the serpent is crafty at duping people away from the truth. It is also interesting that the cunning serpent went straight to the woman and not the man. At this point, the reason should be obvious why he chose the woman. Given her nature to reason through emotion and her ability to respond more to emotional phrases, she makes an easier target than the man does. After the serpent twisted the wording of the divine commandment, he then made his teaching “pleasing to the eye and desirable for gaining wisdom” (Genesis 3:6). Therefore, the serpent used deceptive language and emotional imagery to trick the woman. At this point, one may be tempted to blame the woman for the great fall of humanity. However, the real blame goes to Adam. Given man’s nature to evaluate without being conned by emotional language, Adam should have known better. Indeed, Adam’s primary responsibility was to protect his wife from deceptive and false teaching. In this role, he failed.
A man’s natural instinct is to protect and defend those that cannot protect themselves. It is no wonder that far more men are interested in the protecting field of the police force, military, and coast guard services. Additionally, it is relevant to ask what primarily do men have to defend women from? If women are open and receptive by nature, this is good; however, the downside is they will be too open to flawed, dysfunctional teaching that attempts to come across as emotionally uplifting. Indeed, the Bible repeatedly teaches that false teachers come by way of a “wolf wearing sheep’s clothing” or an "angel of light" in which on the surface they look nice and sweet but underneath are dark and ugly (Matthew 7:15, cf. 24:11, 24:24, 2 Corinthians 11:3, 13-14, 2 Timothy 4:3). In sum, the man is in the position of Adam. With his ability to discern what is true and untrue, free from emotional persuasion he can guard and protect the woman from the errors of deceptive teaching. Therefore, given the creation story and the psychological and scientific evidence, the man’s primary function is to use his nature to serve and protect the woman.
Today, men still stand as servants of women to guide them to the truth and protect them from false teaching that is couched with emotional appeal. As we explore the evidence of the makeup of women, we can conclude that women are more concerned with the health of the relationship over and above discovering the truth. The reason for this is that often in discovering the truth, a relationship will have to endure heartache. For women, they would rather sacrifice the truth than sacrifice the “everyone gets along” aspect of the relationship. Prominent philosopher Jean Guitton confirms this theory as he writes,
“Instead of analyzing and synthesizing the object, she [woman] places herself at a central point, deciding the relationship which the object has to her own life. We express this by saying that she is intuitive . . . On the contrary, man has compartments, sectors, and pigeon-holes in his mind; he likes things to be separate and each in its order (emphasis added).”
Guitton underlines that women approach a topic with simply the relationship in mind. Moreover, the emphasis is to keep the relationship pleased and satisfied. Given this fact, men stand in a better position to help the person from flawed teaching because men can separate a negative message from the person. Also, men are more concerned with finding the truth rather than having a "let's all get along" disposition. The outward, aggression nature of men is good in that it allows a man not to be overly concerned about feelings as he pursues the truth and simultaneously declares that a message is false. In short, men are better than women in telling people (especially those in a relationship), "You've got the wrong teaching." A woman will hardly ever tell her friends or family that they are wrong (example: you're going to the wrong church). Why? They don't want to cause a strain on the relationship.
Saint Augustine famously taught one needs to love the sinner and hate the sin. Since men are well adapted to compartmentalize, men are better suited to separate the person from the person’s negative act. However, since women do not compartmentalize well, they are not as well suited to love the sinner while hating the sin. Because the female perspective focuses on keeping the relationship even-keeled and avoiding negative feelings, they cannot separate the person from that person’s damaging act. With a lack of compartmentalization, the female mind tends to think if they hate the sinner’s sin, they must simultaneously hate the sinner. And, since invoking any animosity into the person will destroy the relationship, the female avoids this situation at all costs. This crucial distinction is one of the reasons women need men so they can better discern between the message and the person or relationship. This fact is why Catholocism puts men in teaching and authoritative positions (see Ephesians 5:22-33, 1 Timothy 2:12-14, Colossians 3: 18-19, 1 Peter 3: 1-7). As spiritual teachers and seekers of the truth, men can better guide women to the truth even if it entails a temporary strain on the emotional balance in the relationship.
To articulate why men need to be teachers and women can become teachers through learning from men, we need to put all the characteristics of the genders together. Recall that previously this study reasoned that women fixate toward relationship development while men are more geared to truth-seeking. To this end, women will demand one to diminish truth-seeking if in the truth-seeking one negatively affects the relationship. If women perceive a thought might disturb the connection of the people in the relationship, they will avoid this because a women’s mind is set to bring people together in a comforting setting. For example, an Oxford study revealed that women, in general, are less interested in politics than men are, and as another report stated, “Women Know Less about Politics than Men Worldwide" (see here). In general, women are not attracted to the topic of politics and governing of world affairs for two reasons. First, this area requires a heavy dose of rational thought to pursue. Indeed, those that attempt to understand politics through an emotional lens are usually the ones that know little about the topic. Second, politics require an outward aggressive demeanor in which both parties must prove one group is correct, and the other group is wrong. The process of political debate often invokes tension on relationships in convincing the other is wrong and ushers in negative emotions. Therefore, women want nothing to do with this topic. Men, on the other hand, have trait patterns that make them more suited for this type of process and discussion. Here, one will notice that in areas women have weaknesses, men can act as a strength for their weakness.
In Christianity, the concept is similar to politics in how the male nature is the best fit given the teaching of Christianity. As this author has proved, women will more likely accept a teaching based on her immediate emotional reaction and contact within the relationship outside of examining the data. Moreover, if a message poses a tension in the relationship, women will likely avoid that message. However, in Christianity, the teaching is, at first, supposed to put a strain on the human relationship. To show that men are more suited to the teaching role in the Church first consider that the whole concept of Christianity is that because of human sin, the truth is going to be hard to get at. One cannot primarily use feelings to comprehend truth because Christianity declares that human feelings are flawed. Therefore, the male nature of reason and logic is the principal mode to the truth. Second, once a person discovers the truth in Christianity it generally elicits negative feelings. To unpack this idea, one must first understand that Jesus defined himself as the truth (see John 14:6, 18:37). Then, when Jesus appeared and manifested his truth to people, their response was that of fear (see Mark 16:8, Luke 24:36-38, Mark 9:6, Matthew 17: 6-7, Revelation 1:17). Even the announcement of the birth of Jesus disturbed all of Jerusalem (see Matthew 2:3). Not only did Jesus' manifestation of the truth frighten people but his teachings, as well, upset many. Indeed, shortly after announcing the mission to his twelve disciples, Jesus declared, "Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come not to bring peace but the sword"(Matthew 10:34). Now, theologians indicate the sword Jesus is referring to is the truth (cf. Hebrews 4:12, Ephesians 6:17, John 18:37). Thus, what Jesus is communicating is that the truth is going to be uncomfortable to hear at first. Throughout the Gospels Jesus teaches that when his followers give up their way of thinking for his way of thinking, it will entail much suffering and hardship (see Matthew 16:24-25, 10:16-25, 38-39, 23:34-35, Luke 9:23, 14:27, 17:33, John 12:25). Jesus plainly indicated that when a person passes on his teaching to others, they will not like him (see John 16:2, 15:8). Moreover, the crucial point is that Jesus suggested that his teaching will even cause relationship tension in one’s family (see Matthew 10:34-35). Additionally, when Jesus taught people in the synagogue the direct truth about who he is and their flawed nature, they violently revolted at him and wanted to throw him off a cliff (see Luke 4:20-30). In fact, Jesus even said that the world is going to hate him and his disciples because of his teaching (see John 7:7, 17: 14-16). Indeed, people took up stones to throw at him because of his instructions (see John 8:59). To sum up the entire Gospels is that people disliked Jesus’ teaching so much they tried to kill him (see John 10: 31-33, John 11: 53) and eventually did kill him. Many people were constantly put off by Jesus’ teaching and his approach (see Matthew 16:24-25, 19:10, 19:25, Mark 6:3). Therefore, Christianity is declaring that the truth will at first illicit negative emotions and cause a strain on the relationship. In knowing this, one can see how the male nature is required to lead and guide the female nature. First, the male mind fixates more towards understanding the truth. Second, the male can better handle the negative messages that the truth communicates in Christianity. The evidence cited in this series reveals that women revolt to negative ideas and generally respond to adverse messages and emotions with equal adverse emotions and anxiety. However, men are better suited to handle undesirable messages as men can compartmentalize negative images in an non-emotional fashion and men fixate outward on the larger questions in life.
Therefore, men are well fit to handle the hard to hear teachings of Christianity that women are not. It is almost as if God gives men to women as a sturdy resource in which they can understand the truth and be able to handle the truth to bring them peace and happiness. Men are a great counterbalance to help the anxious and fearful emotions of women. Men are a secure pillar in which women can draw on to find calmness and stability. Men’s more reserved, less emotional nature is a great tool for women to counter their up-and-down emotions. If there exists no stable man for the woman, her emotions will pull her all over and take her on an emotional roller coaster that gives her anxiety and fear.
In fact, Paul best expressed how the male nature can help humanity. In the following passage, notice how Paul connects the knowledge of God to the full maturity in Christ (truth) in that false teachers’ emotional messages no longer take people in all directions.
"Until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. Then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming" (Ephesians 4: 13-14).
In bringing women to the truth, men are loving women. Additionally, in this loving of women, there exists a sacrificial aspect for men. Men will experience suffering in this process because people in general, just like in Jesus' day, will revolt to the truth. When a man teaches the truth, the culture is likely going to vilify him and punish him in some way. There are numerous examples that illustrate this. Recently, Google fired a man because he stated the obvious fact that more men work at Google than women because men are more interested in software engineering than women are (see here). Therefore, by giving a woman his nature of grasping the truth and teaching the truth while knowing people will reject him in the process, a man gives himself up to the woman much like Jesus gave himself up for his bride, the Church (see Ephesians 5: 22-27). What a woman does in pregnancy for the man in going through pain to deliver him a child, a man does for a woman in delivering her the truth similarly by going through suffering. When a woman utilizes the male nature in its full flowering, a woman will be closer to the truth. The gift of the male to humanity is so that through the original essence of men, people can draw closer to the truth.
As we come to the conclusion of our study we can see that the whole point of God’s plan is for one to find his or her identity by giving their nature to the opposite gender and, in turn, receiving the other gender’s nature to fulfill them. In short, the greatest thing a woman can do for a man is make him a father, and the greatest thing a man can do for a woman is make her a mother. In the role of father, a man satisfies his traits of truth-seeking, outward nature, and teacher. Additionally, in the role of mother, a woman satisfies her traits of relationship seeking, inward nature, intuition, and nurturing. Moreover, the reason a person finds completion in parenthood is that in this role he or she focuses on helping the other, not the self. From God’s perspective, this is the great exchange where both sexes complete the human portrait.
Let's drop this false idea that women will be happier when they break "free" from men. Quite the opposite is true. Just like men need women, women very much need men.