Mike Pence, current vice president of the United States, has been criticized for adhering to what is called the “Billy Graham rule.” The idea, taken from Graham’s decision never to travel or meet with women alone, is a topic worth discussing. Does such a rule respect women or degrade them? Is it worth limiting opportunities for women in ministry and the workplace if following the rule helps men stay faithful to their wives? Whatever your views, this rule is a microcosm of the teachings directed at Christian men in modern purity culture. Men are primarily taught that they are lust machines and that the key to battling sexual sin is to avoid images, places, and women who might inspire it.
To illustrate what men were taught in the modern purity era, I will dig into the themes from three bestselling Christian books written by men, popular in the late 1990s and early 2000s: Wild at Heart by John Eldredge (2001), I Kissed Dating Goodbye by Joshua Harris (1997), and Every Man’s Battle by Stephen Arterburn and Fred Stoeker (2000). These were the books I saw my male friends reading in high school. Wild at Heart sold over one million copies, and it seemed like almost every young Christian man had a copy of Every Man’s Battle on his bookshelf. Parents bought their sons these books for graduation gifts, and they were selected for men’s Bible studies. Their influence should not be underestimated.
If you want to understand John Eldredge’s view of manhood in Wild at Heart, picture a Patagonia ad with an unshaven man in hiking gear, and there you have it. According to Eldredge, the problem is not that men “don’t know how to keep their promises, be spiritual leaders, talk to their wives, or raise their children,” but that they have been disallowed freedom and adventure.1 He encourages men to explore their wild strength and to “stop being a nice guy and act like a warrior.”2 In Every Man’s Battle, Arterburn and Stoeker focus on self-control as manliness. They use wartime imagery to communicate practical strategies Christian men can employ to fight sexual lust.3 Harris also touches on the battle against lust, depicting purity as an all-encompassing pursuit which involves one’s motivations, mind, and heart.4
In her research on modern purity culture, Gardner observes that battle metaphors are “common in abstinence rhetoric,” especially in messages directed at young men.5 Harris, Eldredge, and Arterburn and Stoeker all use terms such as warrior, knight, and battle in their descriptions of manhood and discussions about sexual purity.6 Even in St. James’s book, the knight must defeat “countless bloodthirsty creatures” and travel through a “swamp and forest” to make it to his princess.7 According to Eldredge, this is what every man longs for: an adventure, “a battle to fight . . . and a beauty to rescue.”8 As with the books written for women, only heterosexual attraction is acknowledged. These masculine images tell men to harness their bravery and strength to fight against sexual lust and win the heart of their princess.
While this might inspire some men, the medieval knight meets outdoorsy daredevil image doesn’t appeal to all males. According to one man I interviewed, the church put masculinity in a box too narrow. It was all “sports metaphors” and “let’s be pushy and go camping,” he told me. “How will you approach biblical masculinity with your son?” I asked. He paused, then said:
Scripture allows for a man to be himself—to have the kind of personality God has given him. I am not the gruff hunter type of man—that’s just not my personality. And for a very long time I’ve struggled with feeling “manly.” There were times that I played volleyball in high school, but I also sang. I want to teach my kids the roles that Scripture lays out for them—focus primarily on that—and then give them the gospel and encourage them that their personality doesn’t limit their gender role.
During my research, I interviewed Blake and John, both husbands and fathers from different churches and backgrounds, who were full of honest questions, feedback, and zeal to see the church grow in her approach to sexual purity. It did my heart good to talk to these brothers. At one point our conversation turned to the reality of sexual rejection in marriage. Only this time, it wasn’t about how wives don’t give their husband enough sex but about women who feel sexually rejected by their husbands—something I have never heard addressed at any conference or in any book.
“I went into my marriage with certain expectations,” Blake told us. “Things people were telling me, like men crave sex six times more than women do.”
“Where did you hear that?” I asked him.
“One of the megachurch pastors was on stage with his wife and they were breaking it down.” He continued: “A wife might think her husband is looking at pornography, when really, maybe he just had a long day and if you sit still long enough, you’re going to fall asleep.”
We all laughed. I thought about times I’ve interpreted my husband’s tiredness as rejection and other women who have shared similar experiences. It is a deep pain, pressed deeper still by the stereotype that men always want sex. Women wonder if there is something wrong with their body, their perfume, or their performance in bed. They wrack their brains to figure out what they are doing wrong. Shouldn’t their husband always want them?
John chimed in, “Just look at the commercials on TV when you’re watching sports. They’re telling me I need to take this pill so I can be constantly sexually active.”
“That’s a lot of pressure,” I said.
“Yeah,” he said, “and it’s a prototypical, narrow-minded view about what it means to be a man.” I asked him what he wished women knew going forward. “I think maybe changing the definition from ‘men are obsessed with sex’ to ‘men are immersed in sex,’” he said. “The church culture almost reinforces it, making all the instructions about masculinity about sex. We are immersed in this sexual culture and we limit the focus of Christianity for men to getting a job, being good at sex in marriage, and lifting lots of weights. That’s the biblical masculinity we’re often taught.”
Unlike the way they’re portrayed in sitcoms and Christian books, men are human beings, not sex machines. They are embodied. Health, age, depression, past abuse, and daily life can all affect their sex drive. A husband’s love for his wife is not determined by his libido. A marriage is not in jeopardy simply because the couple has sex less frequently than another couple. If you are a husband or wife feeling sexually rejected, do not despair. Talk to your spouse, but also talk to God. Tell him your hurt, your fears, and your desires. Admit the stereotypes you’ve fallen for, the ones that have skewed your expectations. Lay them down at his feet. We are complex, embodied souls, and this affects every area of our lives.
Eldredge believes that the reason men fall into lust is because their manhood has been repressed, damaged, and managed. He says that it is “no coincidence” that men who are weary with daily tasks and responsibility have affairs for the “adventure” of it.9 Wounded men, he believes, whose hearts have been “driven into the darker regions of the soul” are more likely to engage in pornography, deriving a “false strength” and sense of manliness from the activity.10 Because he sees male sexual sin as “a battle for strength,” Eldredge focuses on male freedom as the cure.11
According to Arterburn and Stoeker, God’s call for sexual purity does not “come naturally” to men.12 They believe that the male struggle with sexual lust is a result of their very “maleness.”13 Alongside this emphasis on men’s susceptibility to lust, these authors teach that Christian manhood means the ability, given by God, to say no to sexual sin.14 Harris believes that “purity does not happen by accident.”15 Whether a man lusts after a female friend, a woman he sees jogging, or a woman in a magazine, Arterburn and Stoeker believe that lust enslaves a man over a “series of bad decisions.” They suggest practical ways to battle sexual sin in everyday life, such as understanding personal triggers, averting their eyes when they encounter certain women or images, and focusing on their wives as the object of their sexual desire.16 And while there is certainly wisdom in this advice, I will address some of the troubling elements as well.
In purity rhetoric for men, women are often depicted as damsels in distress but also as damsels causing distress. It’s confusing. Instead of encouraging men to heed Paul’s advice to treat “older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity” (1 Timothy 5:2), Christian books for men focus more on avoiding women than interacting with them. Sadly, there is little room for fellowship within the church between men and women when women are more often talked about as potential stumbling blocks than as sisters in Christ.
“A woman is at her best when she is being a woman,” Eldredge says.17 Being a woman, according to Eldredge, is about being “more seductive than fierce” and using one’s beauty to “arouse” and captivate men.18 Eldredge believes that the most important question for women is, “Am I lovely?”19 He concludes that women would rather be valued for their beauty than their efficiency, independence, or service to others.20 This view starkly contrasts the often referenced “Proverbs 31 woman,” who is characterized by her mercy to the poor, her strength, and her desire to fear God over being charming or beautiful (Proverbs 31:20, 25, 30-31).
Eldredge quotes the poet William Blake who said, “The naked woman’s body is a portion of eternity too great for the eye of man” and he holds up Ruth as an example of godly womanhood, summarizing the biblical story as one where Ruth seduces Boaz in order to secure his favor.21
So what does Ruth do? She seduces him. . . . Ruth takes a bubble bath and puts on a knockout dress; then she waits for the right moment. . . . This is seduction pure and simple—and God holds it up for all women to follow when he not only gives Ruth her own book in the Bible but also names her in the genealogy. . . . I’m telling you that the church has really crippled women when it tells them that their beauty is vain and they are at their feminine best when they are “serving others.” A woman is at her best when she is being a woman. Boaz needs a little help getting going and Ruth has some options. She can badger him: all you do is work, work, work. Why won’t you stand up and be a man? She can whine about it: Boaz, pleeease hurry up and marry me. She can emasculate him: I thought you were a real man; I guess I was wrong. Or she can use all she is as a woman to get him to use all he’s got as a man. She can arouse, inspire, energize. . . . Seduce him. Ask your man what he prefers.22
While Eldredge praises the beauty of women, purity rhetoric often depicts female beauty as a threat. Arterburn talks about the day he realized he was not honoring his wife, Sandy, in the way he looked at other women.23 His solution was to avert or “bounce” his eyes away from women and images that inspired sexual lust.24 While it is certainly wise to stop staring at someone you are lusting after, the rhetoric of avoidance begins to take on a dehumanizing tone. Instead of encouraging men to view women as sisters, Arterburn and Stoeker talk about how it is impossible to “eliminate attractive women,” so they must instead “get zapped” by a man’s metaphorical “clicker.”25 What they mean is that men should quickly avert their eyes when faced with visual temptation, but their language brings to mind the image of a buzzing, iridescent lantern that singes any bugs that fly too close. With so little advice offered to men about how to interact with women other than to avoid or “zap” them, women begin to resemble mosquitoes more than image bearers of God.
Although fighting sexual lust is biblical, depicting women as obstacles to and rewards for purity rather than as fellow image bearers of God is not. I asked Paul, a single Christian, his thoughts about how sexual purity is discussed in the church. He said,
I don’t think the idea that women are sexual objects was ever effectively refuted, since it was never replaced with an alternative approach to women. In fact, I think simply telling us not to lust almost affirmed the idea that women are sexual objects. But perhaps the biggest issue was not what was taught but simply that the topic was not discussed enough, not meaningfully anyway. Only in a token and shamed away.
“How will you talk to your son about lust in a way that affirms the dignity and value of women?” I asked him.
I will tell my son that lust is deceitful. Lust tells you that sexual gratification is fulfilling, but there is no such thing as sexual gratification from an object. If you treat women like objects, you won’t find satisfaction in that. Sexuality is about vulnerability and acceptance. You can only find those things in a person you respect. And respect doesn’t mean treat politely and gentlemanly. Respect means that you think of the other person as being as much a person as you are.
Gardner remembers hearing a call for men to respect women at one of the Pure Freedom events she attended but notes that it seemed like a disconnected, “eleventh-hour” attempt in a day that focused almost entirely on male lust.26 Harris stands out in his focus on women as “created in the image of God” and admits that he used to view women as “nothing more than objects to satisfy [his] desire,” but when he gave up dating, he learned how to value women beyond their physical attractiveness and what they could do for him.27 In general, though, the value of all women is not a main focus in purity teachings for men.
Books like Every Man’s Battle reinforce lust as the problem, and rules like Graham’s make avoiding women the solution. Christian writer Katelyn Beaty acknowledges that men who practice the Billy Graham rule likely do so with good motives, believing that “it’s better to limit interacting with women altogether than open the door to temptation.”28 However, she also points out that this way of dealing with sexual sin elevates “personal purity” above the biblical command to love our neighbors.29 Instead of teaching men to avoid women, a proactive strategy for battling sexual lust urges men to see women as neighbors.
Long-term solutions to the problem of sexual sin and abuse are not accomplished, as Hirsch points out, by “imposing distance between men and women.”30 Though there are times when a Christian must flee sexual temptation, like Joseph did from Potiphar’s wife in Genesis 39, Christians must focus on proactive rather than reactive strategies. The problem of lust, as with any sin, must be discussed in light of the fact that Christians were created for community.
The apostle Peter calls Christians to “love one another earnestly from a pure heart” (1 Peter 1:22 ESV). If women are to be viewed as whole persons, the male gaze must be addressed holistically. The problem of male lust is not solved by looking away from women but by looking at them correctly—as more than their physical bodies, the temptations they pose, or the sexual satisfaction they provide. They must learn to see them as sisters, image bearers, and coheirs of the kingdom of God.
In a recent episode of The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, Kimmy explains that she is writing a children’s book to help young boys learn how to treat girls because every boy has a monster living inside him. Some theologians might point out that the “monster” she refers to could be the sin nature.31 I get that, but the idea that men straddle a line between monster and human is not biblical or helpful. It does not honor image bearers of God. Men and women have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23), but our sin does not make us less human. Men are not monsters.
I think about what I would tell my son—that his body is a gift, something God declares good. That his sexuality is not a threat to fear or a weapon to wield. That women are not objects to use or to avoid but are beloved of God, partners in the gospel, and coheirs of the kingdom. That we are all image bearers of God but are born into Adam’s sin. That we are endowed with dignity, but dignifying others is hard and takes care and effort. And that it is worth the effort, and God is with us as we wage war against sin and selfishness.
Klein observes that some men might worry “that they are monsters” while “others may feel their monstrous behavior is justified” because of the male reputation.32 I wonder if both secular and Christian culture have contributed to a self-fulfilling prophecy. What is the long-term effect of telling our sons that their sexuality is a monster, which when unleashed is unstoppable? Does this help the cause of sexual purity?
Perhaps a better question to ask is, Is it true? Do men reach a point where they are physically unable to stop the sexual progression? Blake, a husband and father I interviewed, said: “The idea that once the drive starts, it can’t stop—that’s not true. It’s hard. But it’s not impossible. The Bible says one of the fruits of the Spirit is self-control. You can have that. God gives us [men] drives but he gives us brakes too.” But purity culture tends to treat male lust as something that reaches a point where self-control is no longer an option. I would want to empower my own son with the truth that sexual self-control is possible.
We want our children to stay far away from temptation. That is wise. That is biblical. We see it all over the book of Proverbs. And we know, as adults, that the closer we get to temptation, the harder it is to say no. But Romans 8 makes it clear that those who are in Christ have been raised from the dead and given new life in Christ. The Holy Spirit dwells inside us. That is power—including power to say no to sexual sin.
When we talk to men about their lust more than their character, we fail them. When we focus on the physical appeal of women more than their value as image bearers, we are not helping the cause of purity. Daniel Darling suggests a “recovery of the robust Christian doctrine of human dignity.”33 This is essential when it comes to how we talk about men, women, and sexual purity in the church. We dehumanize women when we depict them as obstacles rather than allies in the faith, and we dehumanize men when we depict them as monsters who cannot control their lust. Instead, let self-control be taught not only as possible but as good for our flourishing within the church as beloved brothers and sisters in Christ. Let us begin with dignity and go from there.
1. What do you think about the Billy Graham rule?
2. Did you read any of the books mentioned in this chapter? If so, how did they affect you?
3. How has biblical masculinity been depicted in your church? In what ways do you agree and/or disagree? Why are men often portrayed as “sex machines,” and how does this image affect men and women, both in singleness and marriage?
4. Men, how were women depicted and discussed in male-only books, conferences, and conversations in your church? In what ways do you agree or disagree with these depictions?
5. Are there times to flee or avoid specific people? When and why?
6. In what ways should we talk about and to men differently?
As a group, create a list of stereotypes we have about men and a list of stereotypes we have about women. Take time to go through each one, trying to identify where these stereotypes originated (experience, secular culture, Christian culture, parents, books) and how we can combat them in order to view one another more wholly and as image bearers of God.