My first controversial blog entry! I feel like I should get a prize, and it was entirely unintentional.
Before I start, allow me to say this. I am not interested in writing a political blog. I will defend the right to hunt, and advocate for good and smart hunting policy, but I am an apolitical guy when in this space. I am going to mention some politicians in this entry... it isn't an endorsement.
Over on my facebook page I received some gentle criticism, ranging from reasoned arguments about gender roles, to outright statements of "are you NUTS?" when I mentioned that I wanted to take my children (two of whom are daughters) hunting. This surprised me. But when people I respect bring up concerns, I tend to listen. I do not have all the answers. Writing is a part of soul searching. Do they have a point? Should I refrain from taking the girls?
In all things I look to role models for help discerning what is right, and wrong, and I tend to eschew things like cultural norms in favor of objective truth. Are there objective reasons to take sons, but not daughters, hunting? Are there gender roles, norms of dress, ideas about the nature of masculine and feminine, that we ought not play with or alter, and that are threatened when we take our daughters out in the woods in pursuit of the big kill? How have people I respect approached these questions?
Then there is the million dollar question and loaded word: feminism. In the circles I travel in, feminism is a dirty word. Most of my friends are really... really... really conservative. But here is an uncomfortable truth for some of my readers: I consider myself a feminist. Not the sort of feminist most feminists would recognize as a feminist... but definitely an authentic feminist nonetheless. I hope we can still be friends, but there it is. Here is something else to keep in mind, something which I hope we can all agree on: everything that is good and true in feminism has always been good and true. Everything that is wrong about some segments of modern feminism has always been wrong. Truth is immutable. If we don't agree on that, we really can't agree on anything, so there is no use reasoning anyway.
I'll come back to that. First: role models. Most hunter role-models I have strongly encourage us to take our children hunting with us, passing on our knowledge and our way of life (this really what it is) to the next generation. Some of the hunting celebrities out there right now are women. Some prominent figures in American public life seem to have weighed in. Paul Ryan is taking his daughter deer hunting driving the anti's into a frenzy of illogical ranting. Sarah Palin has a big buck to her credit. Every where I look in the sportsman culture I see women making tremendous inroads. Archery, target shooting, hunting, fishing, you name it, women are making a mark in it. Is this a bad thing? Is it an example of how our culture is losing its way. Is it new and modernist and dangerous?
Annie Oakley Takes Aim
A successful Sarah Palin
If I look to the world, I can see tons of example of women who hunt, fish, mother, are feminine and beautiful, and do all this consistently and well. So why not my daughters? Well, my few readers know me and know that I do not consider the world, and whatever everyone else does, to be an authentic measure of what is right. For that I tend to look to more important role models than Annie Oakley and Sarah Palin.
You can tell a lot about what people value by looking at what the names they consider for their children. My wife and I had two names in mind for our youngest daughter while we awaited her arrival: Joan, and Gianna. Joan of Arc is one of my all-time favorite role models. She was a soldier, leader, and fighter. She both led, and killed, men (leaders give orders, and thus people die). Some of the churchmen (beholden to country not God... what else is new...) put her on trial. These were "French" "Bishops" who sided with the King of England and worldly concerns over the witness of a great messenger from God. One of the charges was that she cut her hair short, dressed as a man, and waged war, and that such things were unnatural and wrong for a woman. They argued that God would never inspire one to do what is unnatural and wrong. Therefore, Joan was a heretic, not a saint and a prophet. They burned her: tied her to a stake and lit her on fire. The data are pretty clear that they raped her as well.
The trial was later revisited (one thing the Vatican does is keep good records) and she was exonerated. She is now a Saint, and a very great one. So compelling was her story and her witness, so complete were the details of her life preserved by the trial, that none other than the great modernist skeptic Mark Twain wrote her story in the form of a novel. That book is worth the read.
If God never wanted women to be strong, to lead men, to stand up and fight if necessary, He would never have called Joan. If it is somehow objectively wrong for women to dress in camo, shoot at animals, or bear arms in pursuit of what is good and Holy, the so-called "French" "Bishops" would have been right. They weren't.
What if Joan had said to the angel who appeared to her: "no thanks. I won't go see the King and put on armor and get a sword and lead men into battle. I am a woman, and that would be improper. Go call a man?"
I think of Joan of Arc as a role model for my daughters. Taking them hunting seems pretty consistent with that witness.
Of course, the name that won out was not Joan, but Gianna. Gianna Molla was a pediatric surgeon in Italy. She worked as a doctor the whole time she was married. Until her time, having a woman being a doctor would be atypical to say the least. Men are doctors. Women are nurses. Right? Ummm... not anymore. Dr. Molla is a Saint. Was there something wrong with her breaking down that traditional gender role? Nope. We have an objective standard saying so.
Given the witness of Joan, and Gianna, am I concerned about my daughters going hunting? Is Sarah Palin a raging modern feminist who eschews traditional family life? Say what you will about her, the answer to that is no. There she is, up there on this page, sitting next to a big, bloody, buck of an elk. Is Paul Ryan leading his daughter astray while encouraging her to do something against her nature by buying her camo's and a rifle? Umm... don't think so. Say what you will about his budget or his positions, I don't see any argument that taking his daughter into the woods to shoot would be a bad thing. He should tell her about Joan of Arc before he takes her out next time.
Let's finally get back to the whole "truth is immutable" thing. Hunting is good. It is very good. It's not just that there is nothing wrong with it; it is a well ordered and healthy human activity, and it is a school for the virtues. If it was wrong to break down some traditional gender roles, God would not have called Joan, and the Church would not have canonized Gianna. If hunting is a positive good, and if it is absolutely not a sin for women to break into activities that used to be done mostly by men, then the conclusion I think is obvious.
So, no, I am not concerned about taking my daughters hunting if they want to go.
But there is one more compelling reason I will take my daughters... and my son... hunting should they wish to go. I don't want to leave them in the dark about just how incredible the outdoors, and the hunt, is. And I do not want to orphan them with this consuming hobby (lifestyle) I am embarking on.
As I said on my facebook page:
My grandfather was an avid hunter and a fisherman. He never took his girls (he had no sons) and his relationship with them as a result was somewhat impoverished. Most of the hunters I know are passionate about sharing the woods and nature with their children as a vehicle for passing down values and building familial relationships/bonds. My grandfather didn't do that, because of what were simply social norms. But, there would have been zero harm in taking his girls fishing, or even hunting. Heck, they wanted to go and spend time with him. He didn't do it. And in my mind he failed in his responsibility on that score.
And its much more than just being about "food." It's about responsibility, and the outdoors, and yes, it is even spiritual, so I see no reason to exclude anyone who wants to be included. IF my son says "I don't like hunting" I would not force it on him, but if my daughter wants to do it, I am not going to dissuade her either.
I will not repeat grandpa's mistake... and it WAS a mistake.
Yes, my girls will hunt... if and only if they want to.
No comments:
Post a Comment