Fixing the
Testosterone and Sharing the Power
By Barrington H. Brennen, MA, NCP, BCCP, September 30, 2010
Why are so many men violently
aggressive and abusive? Is it because of their testosterone hormone level?
Ten years ago, I wrote in my article, “Is Testosterone to Blame,” that
“laboratory research has shown that injecting more testosterone into male
and female rats makes them more aggressive. Could it be that dominance in
males is excusable and natural because their level of testosterone is higher
than that of females?”
An important question is what does testosterone have to do with leadership?
If truly the higher the level of testosterone is, the greater the aggression
and that men are defined by their aggressive behavior, does that make them
de facto leaders? Certainly not! In my book, that only makes men bullies.
Why do we like to define a man from the point of view of leadership instead
of personhood or character? It also seems that the more “aggressive” a man
is, the more we praise him. In marriage, some people say that the man is the
provider, protector, and priest. Why is it that we attribute these functions
to leadership? In most non-romantic relationships the protector is a hired
servant (police, security guard). It is the leader who hires the protector
so he or she can be free to lead. It is fair then to say then that if the
husband is the protector of the wife or family, he is no more than a servant
and not the head. In this case, he should seek ways how to become a “humble
servant” and not an “aggressive leader.”
In other words the real challenge we have is not how men are being
influenced by what’s between their legs (testicles), but how they are using
what is between their ears (the brain). It is clear to me that testosterone
is not helping men to think better but only to act badly. What we need are
more men who are not dictated to by the flow of hormones but by the wise use
of their brain cells. We cannot “fix” the testosterone, but we certainly can
train men to think and act differently.
VOCABULARY CHANGE
There is far too much emphasis on male leadership and headship in
marriage. It is my passion to continue to write about this subject because I
am convinced that this emphasis is doing more harm than good. We need to
place a greater emphasis on mutuality, partnership, and companionship in
marriage. Let us look at Jesus as our example. In Revelation 3:21 Jesus
introduces a new concept for many of us. It is truly revolutionary. The
verse is talking about what will be the reward for the saints at His coming.
Here is what Jesus says:
“Those who are victorious will sit with me on my throne, just as I
was victorious and sat with my Father on his throne.”
Here is my point. If the Supreme
Majesty can share power with mortal human beings, why can’t husbands and
wives (males and females) share power on earth? Hence, the new words to add
to our vocabulary concerning the marriage relationship are “power sharing.”
I am suggesting that we should start focusing in our wedding ceremonies,
counseling sessions, sermons on Sundays and Saturdays, and during our
every-day discussions, on how males and females in general and husbands and
wives can become “co-leaders--sharing power and authority in the marriage
relationship and all other relationships. We must stop talking about who is
in charge. We must stop debating whether or not the husband is the head or
the boss. We must stop using biblical texts to try and soften the potential
blow of headship in marriage that has ruined so many relationships. Men, if
we do not give up or share power it will be taken away from us by force by
those power-hungry or misguided women who have been trained so well by us,
and the marital wars will continue.
MEN ON THE MARCH AGAIN
Every year men’s movements pop us because someone is concerned about the
direction in which the men are going. They say that too many of our men are
“falling away,” in jail, and are becoming violent. The big problem with many
of the men’s movements is that the leadership or organizers of these
movements are saying that the reason for these problems in society is
because men have lost their position as leaders. Hence, to use the words of
Tony Evans, they want men to “take back” leadership. Here again, this is
defining manhood primarily in the context of leadership, power, and
authority. This is not healthy for our men neither for our society. We don’t
need more men to “lead” the nation nor do we need more men to “lead” their
families. We need, first of all, more men to lead themselves to a
self-governed, well-balanced, wholesome, non-violent lifestyle. Then these
men will be humble enough to join hands with the females to lead their
families and nation together. That’s revolutionary. We certainly do need
more men and women to lead together their families and the nation. I
strongly believe that women are not looking for men to lead them but
men to lead with them. That’s power sharing. That’s co-leadership,
just as God planned it in the beginning when he gave Adam and Eve dominion
of the earth and not each other (Genesis 1:16-18). They both shared the
power to lead on earth.
Related Articles by Barrington
Brennen:
Barrington H. Brennen is a
marriage and family therapist, Nationally Certified Psychologist and Board
Certified Clinical Psychotherapist in the USA. Send your
questions to question@soencouragment.org or write to P.O. Box CB-13019, Nassau,
The Bahamas. Or you may call 1-242-327-1980 or visit
www.soencouragement.org
