@musiclady
I am doing no such thing. I am saying that men survive in coarse conditions, not suitable for society (and thereby women). Men live and even thrive in lonesome places, far away from society and civilization. Thus I submit, he is immune not only to the coarse conditions of say, 'Hell on Wheels' at the railhead, or of the last outpost on a frontier, but also to the abhorrent conditions that lie beyond.
The coarsening of society is nothing. The mere coarsening of language is not even incidental. He will adapt. And he will survive. It's how we get from here to there with wilderness and war in between. Only afterward do women come along.
Indeed I am. I will state empirically: If women required polite society and genteel manners, that is what men would give them. I will reiterate: 'Society' is an artificial construct, built by men for women, according to their requirements.
You are mistaking American societal norms for God's way. That is not true. And language, even more so: 'Shit' is not as coarse in Britain as it is considered here. And 'bloody' is far worse, while here, 'bloody' is entirely benign. It has less to do with God than local Christian women, and what they consider coarse... Mind you, there's nothing wrong with that. I just wanted to clear up that misconception.
No, I think your perception of what God ordered is confused with what is considered polite here and now.
Thanks for reiterating a philosophy that once again ignores God's desire to transform lives, including the lives of men who submit to His wil. The idea that, because men can survive in the wilderness, they are not responsible to control their behavior in society as a whole is just not viable Scripturally.
What is polite in England or elsewhere (which I know all about) is not really germane to the point. There are standards of politeness that both men and women in the past have expected of each other. (Other than Ben Franklin, where is the crudity in the language of our Founding Fathers.... whose courage historically is second to none)?
Your attempt to put all the responsibility for civility on women, I repeat, is ridiculous on its face. By doing that, you are claiming that men are not capable of self-control, nor governance, nor decency.
It's too bad that you don't know men who are, by God's grace and a good upbringing, polite people with clean mouths. I'm sorry, but your denigration of so many good men is offensive to one who has so very many in my family and circle of friends.
They, you see, are transformed by the Grace of God, and are capable of, not only hunting bears and surviving in the wild, but of behaving in a civil manner on their own accord.
If I thought that all men were helpless to behave without women forcing them to behave, I would think much less of them than I presently do. (Once again, my respect for men is much greater than yours).
Your argument may hold in your theoretical world, but it is not functional in the real world where God (according to Scripture and multiple verses about controlling ones tongue and not letting coarse words come out of your mouth, not my own thoughts) is in control and men allow Him to rule in their lives.
