Strong to Stand: The Duty and Design of Men

Though men possess greater brute strength than women, it is not sufficient to simply recognize it as a brute fact; the greater physical strength and athletic potential of the male sex is only a part of the way that men ought to strive for and embody strength if they wish to embody stability fully.

Testosterone plays a large role in widening the gap of distinction between men and women, for multiple reasons. Aside from the fact that their bone structures alone sufficiently betray differences in natural function, as women’s bones and ligaments are formed around their purpose, namely, childbearing rather than athletics, the far higher level of testosterone present in the male body tends to the development of greater strength and endurance, both physically and mentally. Additionally, higher levels of testosterone lead to man’s overall physicality in how he relates to the world.

One of the unique aspects of manhood, and a direct effect of testosterone in the body, is the ability to undergo physical hardship such as circumstantial misery and physical exertion, and then look back at the hardship with fondness. Men bear scars with pride, tell stories of injuries or miseries they underwent, and otherwise display a distinct pleasure in looking back upon difficulty. Shared hardship is one of the strongest bonding agents between men. From military veterans to gym bros, men can share a natural bond that casual friends cannot without some form of shared physical hardship. 

While the male body is naturally larger and stronger than the female body, testosterone produces in the male mind a heightened desire to exert force. This desire is good when present in the right people and practiced in the right way, for which there are many opportunities.

A fact of life is that there are threats in this world. Many men and women, as I wrote before, live highly protected lives that make forgetting this reality easy. However, animal and human threats in this world have not at all been eliminated, and they still must be addressed. The only real solution to such threats is the exertion of force by those capable of overpowering threats. This is the purview of men only, for a multitude of reasons.

By God’s design, men are gifted with a far greater capacity to address danger than women. Their greater strength and size alone would be sufficient to prove this, but testosterone also plays a vital role: men by nature are more aggressive and dominant. This is fitting for their physicality.

The fact that men are better suited for combative and protective roles is so clear when thought about honestly that another fact ought to be recognized: women in protective roles are not only inferior helps, but their mere presence in militant occupations is a hindrance to the overall mission.

Regular contact with military personnel, especially the enlisted, makes this exceptionally clear. Having been raised in a military family, I have spent a lot of time around such people. The discrepancy in bodily competence is glaring: precious few military women, even after extensive physical training, are capable of measuring up to some of the more pathetic men. In other words, the effort it takes to bring even the most exceptional women up to snuff is a massive waste of time and resources. If these women truly desired to participate in the protection of their people, they should marry and give birth to several boys.

The fact of the matter is that the presence of women in militant professions is a logistical and practical hindrance, but the damage done is largely unknown because the truth is hidden behind lies and somewhat mitigated by the work of exceptional men. Though boots and clothes can be downsized to fit women’s smaller bodies, tools like guns, ammunition, and equipment, which compose the bulk of a ruck’s weight, do not become lighter to account for women’s inferior strength, nor do injured men become easier to carry when women are in the company.

With these factors in mind, the best-case scenario is to station women far away from combat. In that situation, the benefits of having women in uniform at all seem to only be the financial benefits said women enjoy. Thus, we ought to at least refrain from using the term sacrifice to describe women joining the military to have their college tuition paid with our tax dollars. Better yet, we should close the military to women entirely and refrain from the pageantry of ornamenting them in the equipment of warfighters in the name of equality.

With all these factors recognized, I posit that having women in protective roles is more than suboptimal. In light of the law of God, which forbids transvestitism wherein the women are prohibited from donning the equipment of men (Deut. 22:5), I submit that women being placed, or being allowed to place themselves, on the battlefield on behalf of men at home is unnatural and abominable.

What does all of this have to do with the need for men to be strong to embody stability? In the first world, why should strong men be considered a necessity? For men who do not intend to enter a militant profession, why should physical strength be considered a priority? “The honor of young men is their strength, and the majesty of old men is their grey hair” (Prov. 20:29).

For those who wish to order their lives according to what God’s Word says is honorable, strength is a necessity for young men. While of course, the grey hair of old men is a physical characteristic that symbolizes wisdom, the strength of young men is not a testament to spiritual strength. If this were the case, one would need to ask how spiritual strength is not the glory of old men or of women. No, physical strength is clearly in view when described as the glory of the young, as this is a characteristic uniquely attributed to young men.

As men grow old, this glory of strength will fade and be replaced by the honor of wisdom. However, the need for men to protect and provide for their people also depends on their physical prowess on an individual level for very practical reasons.

Civil protectors, while necessary and effective at reducing overall crime and violence in a community, presuming they are not hamstrung by human resources departments and foolish regulations, will never be omnipresent. They are far outnumbered by the populace, and often outnumbered by those willing to break the law. Additionally, their uniform makes them easy to identify and avoid. Even the most senseless criminals know to commit their crimes out of the sight of law enforcement. In any case, law enforcement cannot respond immediately to any crime. Realistically, a crime can be committed and an escape made by the time police can arrive on the scene. Citizens therefore should consider ways to protect themselves from victimhood.

Among the most well-known facts about criminals is their predatory thinking: criminals choose their victims and tend to single out those who seem the most vulnerable. Pedophiles choose children with either passive or absent fathers, while muggers choose weak and inattentive victims.

But criminals also avoid bothering people who give them cause for fear. One can easily take advantage of this fact. In the words of Benjamin Franklin, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” One can reasonably believe that men who visibly embody strength do more to protect their families by their appearance than weak men may try to replicate by simply carrying a concealed firearm. Yet lest I be accused of a false dichotomy, note that you can do both. 

Sentiment is not enough, and no amount of telling yourself you are quite dangerous when you see red will change reality. If you are weak, you will not overcome an enemy. The validity of your devotion to protecting your people is measured by the work you do to become prepared. Fortunately for every man with four working limbs, strength is within reach, even though the price is time and discipline.

SKYLAR BORSMAN
1689 Federalism | Post Millennialism | General Equity Theonomist
Skylar works as a machine operator at a metal shop in his hometown. He lives with his wife, Morgan, and their two children. Skylar graduated from the International ALERT Academy and earned his Bachelor's degree in Youth Ministry from Pensacola Christian College in 2020.

Partner with us—donate to Grace & Truth Press.

Unless otherwise noted, Scripture quotations taken from the (LSB®) Legacy Standard Bible®, Copyright © 2021 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Managed in partnership with Three Sixteen Publishing Inc.  LSBible.org and 316publishing.com.

Copyright © 2023 by Grace and Truth Press L.L.C. and Skylar Borsman / All rights reserved. No portion of this article may be reproduced in any form without written permission from the publisher or author, except as permitted by U.S. copyright law.