I recently saw a meme pic on Facebook (and Oh, how many of my posts originate from those) stating “Why teach my daughter to be a lady when I can teach her to be a warrior?” I’m pretty sure I know what they’re trying to say here, but at the same time I just can’t help but take exception to the oversimplification of the issue. My first thought was that this is a false dichotomy. Why can’t we teach our daughters to be both?
Furthermore, I don’t think this meme pic would get the same response if we reversed things: “Why teach my son to be a gentleman when I can teach him to be a warrior?” Somehow I doubt there’d be any virtual high-fives over that. But why not? What is it about being a warrior that is attractive in the first place? And why would that only be attractive in girls? On the inverse, what’s wrong with being a gentleman or lady? Have manners become so completely passé in our modern society? Certainly there is ample evidence that it is so.
And that’s what worries me about this meme pic. The implication seems to be that it is virtuous to fight, to get into other people’s faces, to offend, to insult, while being genteel, persuasive, patient, forbearing, and diplomatic are something to be avoided.
Mind you, it also seems to be that being “a warrior” is only a virtue for certain people, for certain ideologies. Can anyone deny that Donald Trump is a warrior? And yet so many of the tactics he uses are decried by people who employ those same tactics–and worse–and call it “getting it done.” We want our side to be warriors, but the other side still needs to be ladies and gentlemen.
There’s one major problem with this line of thinking, besides the obvious hypocrisy. Warriors go to battle with one purpose in mind–to destroy the enemy. They’re not there to turn enemies to friends. And if the enemy proves more powerful, it is the warrior who will be destroyed. I’m pretty sure, based on the number of “War is Not the Answer” bumper stickers I see around that people don’t really believe that fighting should be the only option. Indeed, I hear calls for diplomacy, dialogue, and understanding continually in our relations with other countries and powers. No one seems to think that every international disagreement should be resolved by sending in the Marines, especially the Marines.
We don’t need warriors–at least not people who are only warriors.
We need ladies and gentlemen. We need those who have manners, who are diplomatic, who can withhold judgment and seek for understanding rather than just lashing out at the slightest perception of slight. We need those who can take a potential enemy and make of them a friend instead.
There is a section of scripture in my church that explains what I mean:
No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;
By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—
Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;
That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.
In short, there are times when there needs to be enough of a warrior in someone to be able to step up and say what needs to be said, to correct someone in their errors. However, it needs to happen only after the softer approaches have been tried. And when that sharp correction takes place it needs to be followed up immediately with increased love and understanding so that the subject of correction realizes you are not there to make an enemy of them. It’s the “love” part of “tough love.”
These days we only seem to know the “tough” part, and completely disassociated “love” from the equation.
I’ve seen plenty of women who are warriors–and warriors only. However much they may be lionized by their like-minded ideologues, they are just as roundly rejected and mocked by their enemies–and both sides have indeed made it clear they are enemies. Ultimately they accomplish little of value, and only succeed in pushing the two sides even farther apart.
Do what you want, but I would prefer we teach our children–daughters and sons–to be not just warriors, but ladies and gentlemen, diplomats, scholars, open-minded, tolerant, and persuaders. When warriors are needed it is generally too late to salvage the situation in any positive manner. Warriors should be our last resort.
This.
I have always thought “warriors” as something positive. For me “warrior” means someone who fights for a good cause and for the right reasons. Suicide bombers could never be called warriors. But there are Every Day Warriors. People who are trying to do the right thing even when majority opposes them. Maybe the word means different thing to different people. I’m thinking warriors can and indeed should be gentlemen- and lady-like.
Warriors are generally something positive in my mind, too, though there is always the possibility of being a warrior on the “wrong” side, as well. But if we need to have warriors, I’d prefer they be gentlemen/ladies first. And in forcing the dichotomy of “either ladies OR warriors” it seems to me that they’re saying “be a warrior who has no need for manners, decency, or mercy. Do whatever it takes to win.” Just my interpretation.
Reading through this, the first thing that comes to mind, aside from tall the metaphorical high fives is
“There’s one major problem with this line of thinking, besides the obvious hypocrisy. Warriors go to battle with one purpose in mind–to destroy the enemy.
And, that is the entire point. We have come to think of our fellow citizens who happen to have slight differences in opinion, as the enemy. This is why, as a recent poll displayed, a sizable number of the conservatives polled have more favorable views of Putin than President Obama, and why so many Liberals hate Christians and can’t excuse Muslims fast enough. Because those other people have no power to hurt me right now, and at this moment I view those other bastards as the enemy because they are keeping me from getting everything I want.
And right now, we want our daughters to go destroy “the patriarchy” and “kill” anyone who stands in the way.
“Indeed, I hear calls for diplomacy, dialogue, and understanding continually in our relations with other countries and powers.”
Yes, diplomacy with foreign powers, but, our fellow citizens,
“to heck with them!”.