Theology in the Raw - 694: #694 - A Conversation with Ed Uszynski

Episode Date: September 17, 2018

On episode #692 of Theology in the Raw Preston has a conversation with Ed Uszynski. Ed Uszynski (PhD, Bowling Green State University) has been working with collegiate and professional athletes in various roles with Athletes in Action since 1992. Currently he serves as Executive Editor and Senior Writer for the AIA website, while also speaking nationally to college students, churches, and men’s groups on biblical Christianity. Follow Ed on Twitter. Support Preston Support Preston by going to patreon.com Connect with Preston Twitter | @PrestonSprinkle Instagram | @preston.sprinkle Check out his website prestonsprinkle.com If you enjoy the podcast, be sure to leave a review.

Hello, Theology and Raw fans. I am so excited about this forthcoming episode you're about to listen to. In it, I talk to my very good friend, Ed Uzinski. Now, most of you, if not all of you, probably most of you have not heard of Ed Uzinski. He's one of these guys that's been lingering behind the scenes, so to speak, in evangelical Christianity. behind the scenes, so to speak, in evangelical Christianity. He's very well known in like the Christian and athletics kind of world, like athletes in action. He's been working with athletes in action for a number of years. He was an athlete. He writes a lot on the intersection between the gospel and sport. And most of all, he is just a, he is just a great thinker and a fun guy to be around, as you will see. So I had such a good time in this interview.

I'm pretty sure you're going to enjoy it. We talk about all kinds of controversial stuff. And he's the type of guy, he doesn't care. He wants to talk about what people are thinking about. And he's not going to be policed by people who tell him, you know, you're not allowed to ask that question. You're not allowed to push back on that response or whatever. He's just a good, solid, critical, balanced, level-headed thinker. You're going to love this interview.

If you want to support the show, you can go to patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw. This is a listener supported podcast. If you can't afford it, then listen for free. I have no problems with that. And if you want to give your money elsewhere, like you want to give it to missions or a majority world country or the poor or your grandmother who is sick in bed or whatever, the key is you need to be generous. As Christians, we need to be generous. And if you want to be generous toward the show, I would greatly appreciate it. You can go to patreon.com forward slash theology in a row. You can support shows for as little as five bucks a month or as much as you want. And the more you

support, the more access you get to premium content like Patreon only podcasts that I record every month, Patreon only blogs that I write every month and other-only blogs that I write every month, and other goodies. Go to patreon.com forward slash theology in the Theology in the Raw. I'm super excited about this conversation because I have on the other line, my very good good friend who we go back quite a long ways and here here's the funny thing is ed i still can't spell your last name i mean i i would i would say you you could be my my kids godfather like you could you could be like if i died i would be happy to give my kids to you if i'm on my deathbed you're probably one of the four or five people I want around there. And I don't know how to spell your last name.

Here's the crazy thing. I'm 50 and I still have to slow myself down to get through it myself. So I can't, I don't hold that against anybody. I'm still, I'm still spelling it out in my mind. I just give up now. Like when I'm putting your, like if you give me a new number or something i'm plugging it in my device or whatever i'm just like uh uzyk something whatever like i get it you know i don't know too many ed so i have on the other line ed ed uzinski ed uzinski um let me just i want to kick us off by saying, well, we met many years ago. I think it was back in 2007. I had just finished my PhD, hopping all around the Cedarville, Springfield, Xenia area. We landed at a Baptist church in Xenia, Ohio, which was just culture shock from a guy who just came from California to Scotland to Xenia, Ohio.

And we met. And when we met, it was like we just hit it off right away. Our wives hit it off, our kids hit it off. And it was one of those rare friendships where I think within just a few minutes, you're like, yeah, this is going to work. I just know this is going to work. And since then, it's been a fun journey. We left a couple years later, but I kept in touch. But let's why don't we start by.

Yeah. Who is Ed? Ed Yuzinski. And in particular, because we are going to talk about some intellectual things going on in America in evangelicalism. So in your brief bio, make sure you give us your sort of academic journey as well. Yeah, I was laughing even thinking about this pressing you think talk about our relationship my wife amy asked what we're going to talk about today and i'm like i don't know but if it's preston it's going to be interesting so like that's kind of how it's been for you and i ever since we met we just go all over the place with each other. And I so enjoy that. So I am from Cleveland and very much a city boy myself. I grew up in a sports dominant family. My dad was a high school football coach.

And so sports very much ran through my blood. And but I've also, as you said, I've also been one of those kind of thinking jocks I've always wanted to like engage culture and try to think deeply about what's going on around us and it was just complicated by the fact that I became a Christian my freshman year of college which obviously opened up a whole new really subculture to me and way of thinking about the world. But I've never really stopped doing that. I said I'm 50. And for the last 50 years, I've just kind of been climbing up the academic chain and taking a break and then going back and working on another degree. I did a Ph.D. in American culture studies at Bowling Green State a few years ago, which every time I do that, I say I'm done with going anywhere else in academia.

But who knows? Every time I say that, I wind up doing something more. And I but I currently am working with Athletes in Action. Still, I've done that for over 20 years and held a bunch of different roles. of different roles, but I help oversee our web platform, athletesinaction.org, and I'm responsible for content and getting other people to write. You've written stuff for us. I try to tap into my friends, my thinking friends, who will provoke people to think differently about how the gospel intersects sports. So that's a bit about what I've been doing.

And that's your MO, right? I mean, helping people think differently about how the gospel intersects sports. But it's culture as a whole, really, right? I mean, right now your focus is on sports, but you go far beyond just thinking about how the gospel intersects with sports. Not that there's not a lot there already, but man, your thinking, I feel like is pretty diverse. I want to, let's go back to your recent days as an older PhD student. You were in your 40s when you did your PhD at Bowling Green in American Studies.

What in the world is American Studies and what was that experience like? American Studies. What in the world is American Studies and what was that experience like? Yeah. So it is trying to make sense of the American experiment and really doing so. I think about it like Ecclesiastes. It's like looking at life under the sun apart from God. That's really what we were doing and trying to make sense of power structures and how economics work and politics and privilege versus marginalization, you know, all those kind of hot, what typically are considered liberal words and liberal talking points. Looking at the world largely through a Marxist lens, which I had never allowed myself to do before. So it was way, way out to the left in terms of its thinking. But how do you make sense of the world?

And how do you interpret history? So how do you, I mean, you're obviously a Christian, an evangelical Christian. I don't know if I would say, I don't like the term conservative. I don't use it to myself, so I won't use it of you. I would say you're a moderate, clear thinking, intellectual, evangelical Christian, okay? But in that environment, you're crazy, crazy conservative. Yeah. What was it like to be at a, as you said, kind of a Marxist think tank as an evangelical Christian. Did you feel free to kind of share your thoughts? Did you push back?

Did you sit in the back and just kind of listen quietly? I'm sure as a white, straight male, probably didn't help your credibility in that kind of environment. No, it did not help. So it was all of the above. And it was fascinating. It was fascinating. Like I've, so using those liberal and conservative words, I've done a more conservative leaning theological degree in the past. So I've hung out very around very conservative people.

And so this was a swing of the pendulum completely to the other side. And it's interesting. Like one of the things that I found myself laughing about is that on both sides, there's just questions you're not really allowed to ask. Or if you do ask them, there's only one way to answer them. And I was really sort of... On both sides, on both sides. Definitely both sides. And that was kind of one of the roles that I played with my friends there in this PhD program is that I'm like, guys, we're, we are supposed to be scholars. Like we're supposed to be the best thinkers about this subject material. But in every one of our

classes, we're blocking out ways of viewing this issue. Like we've already, you know, gotten rid of lenses through which to view this issue, because we're saying that the only way that we can look at this is through a Marxist lens or through a feminist lens or through a particular racial view. And so it just made it so that we couldn't even ask certain questions. And I thought, wow, well, that's exactly what happened. It happens when I go back home at the Baptist church that we were at, right? It happens in a place like a Cedarville that's kind of put their stake in the ground on a certain way of viewing the world.

And so that's fine. I'm not going to say one way or another whether people are right or wrong about what they believe. But what I realize is it makes it almost impossible to have really honest and open and truth-seeking conversations when you've already decided that certain questions can't be asked. So it happens within religious circles and it happens within very sectarian or secular and non-religious, if you will. It's the same raw material. This is the way we're going to view the world. And we'll talk rigorously inside of that. But there's certain questions and there's certain viewpoints you're not allowed to have at the table. What do you mean by a Marxist perspective, too? I mean, I kind of know what you mean. But just for our audience, when you say they

view the world through a Marxist lens, can you tease that out a little bit? Well, I mean, I kind of know what you mean, but just for our audience, like when you say they view the world through a Marxist lens, like what can you tease that out a little bit? Well, I mean, the simplest way for me to say and how I understand is that everything is looked through a power lens generated by economics, that economics really ends up separating us out as people. separating us out as people. It ends up dictating how we organize our life. And that by nature, when you're in a capitalistic system, there will always be more and more people who have, which is creating more and more people who have not. It's actually super insightful. And I felt like I learned a ton that I thought was very true about that, but everything winds up being boiled down to power dynamics and systematized power and how it works. Um, it's, it's not so much about, um, choice or personal responsibility. I'm just kind of thinking about what's on the other side of the ledger and you

can kind of pull yourselves up by the bootstraps and make decisions that will will help you get along um things are already kind of built into the system in such a way that it's almost predetermined what will happen until there's a revolution of some kind until the average person sort of wakes up to the way that they're being forced to live and rebels against that. Again, that's crazy oversimplification, but that's kind of the raw material that we were talking about all the time. Now with the revolution stuff. So here's my big question. And this is just probably because I haven't been knee deep in that kind of environment. But the glaring question for me is, when has that kind of thinking not led to bloody, violent revolutions?

Like, how's that going for us as a society? I mean, look at every country or nation or whatever culture that has embraced that kind of way of thinking. And I don't think it's ever ended well, right? I mean, what would they say to that? Or it's just, well, yeah. No, I had a conversation. You know how when you look back over a season of education, there's usually only a handful of moments that stick out to you or that you actually remember.

And this was one of them for me, because I was asking that same question of who I thought was the most clear thinking. And I still do. Guy in our class about this. And he kept advocating for this social utopia. And so one day when we were walking in the hall and actually going down to the bathroom, I'm like, Justin, like I said, the exact same thing you just did. Like this has never really worked, though. Like why do you still put so much faith in the idea of a socialist overthrow? And he said, it's not that it's never worked. He said, it's that it's, we've never actually seen pure socialism enacted. Like there's always somebody who messes that up by taking power and becoming a tyrant. And, and I said, well, Justin, I get that. And so that's why the crazy thing is,

I actually have a way of interpreting why none of these systems will ever work the way we hope that they will. And it's called sin. There's theological words that make sense of why that is. And the fact that you don't have that category, again, our conversations about this become disingenuous because you're still holding out hope that there's some kind of a goodness in man and woman that will triumph at the end of the day if we can just get rid of all the major power brokers and power people and inequalities. And it's like, dude, we're all condemned with this thing called sin. And that's always going to make me want to take over the room if I have opportunity to do that.

There will always be somebody that takes over and does so in a tyrannical fashion. So anyways, yeah, those are the kind of arguments and discussions we would get into. And Justin smiled at me when I said that. And he said, that's probably true, but I'm sticking to this. And there was a lot of that, you know, which again, it was like, okay, I respect you at least admitting that. Um, but that's just saying that we're going to have to turn our face away from certain realities when we're having these discussions. And everybody does that. We're all selective, selective listeners and even selective arguers as far as what we're going to allow in the discussion. So what are some of the questions you were in that environment you're not

allowed to raise or say or different perspectives that you're not really allowed to kind of throw on the table and say, well, maybe it's more like this, or maybe we should look at it from this angle, or, but what about this? Like, what are the sort of no, no, no, no questions that you weren't allowed to ask in that environment? Yeah. Which I'm almost scared to say out loud on a podcast where I don't know people like that. That's what it does to you. You know, like you can't, if I say these things out loud, it's going to get me in trouble. I need you to edit them out. You know, the easy ones.

Come on, man. The big ones. There's no safety, man. There's no safety. Gender and race are obviously hugely contested and huge hot, but I don't need to tell you that for heaven's sakes i mean it's yeah such polar um yeah polarized views on those subjects so for example if you're in a more typically uh conservative circle you strongly push the idea that the reason why things

are in black americas is because of moral choice and because of the idea that the reason why things are in black America is, is because of moral choice and because of the breakdown of the family and because, uh, you know, black folks won't get their act together. Okay. If you're on the more and, and you don't are not open at all to the possibility of there being things built into the system that are actually making it very difficult for them to get their act together, right? So then just flip it over. When I'm with my friends at Bowling Green, everything is all

about the way the system works and, you know, the need to kind of own our own problems at some level of responsibility. Like those are just, you can't have a discussion about that. That's one example. If you do raise a question of individual choice, or maybe this person didn't succeed not because he's part of a certain system but because he's lazy and made bad choices or got his girlfriend pregnant at 16? I mean if you start saying that, then do you immediately get labeled a racist? slash um the immediate explanation for why he got his girl pregnant girlfriend pregnant at 15 or 16 is because he was hopeless about the future because of the systematized oppression and so Preston like ultimately my answer to that if people are even there's no way there's no it just all keeps coming back it does so that's why I think this is even where my own

my own psychology has come from I'm always trying to figure out this middle ground place um or even sort of borrowing from from you know that whole uh hegelian dynamic of thesis antithesis and then synthesis right and so i look at both of those and I say, well, there's both, they're both dealing with true ideas. Like both of these things are true. Um, you need to make good moral choices. Like that's a huge factor. And there are definitely things built into the system undeniably that are making it really, really difficult for certain populations to succeed. It doesn't mean that there's not outliers, but both of those are true.

So can we not at least come to the table and talk that way with each other? And the answer is, for the most part, no. Like, you can't. You can't. And both of those sides are so infused with politics. And, you know, I know we're going to end up talking about this, just the rhetoric that's represented on both ends of that continuum, both ends of that spectrum. It makes it almost impossible to be able to have just a clear headed, fair minded conversation about what's going on. You can't do it.

So let's go to the right, because we talked about the left now. Let's go to the right and say, what are some questions you're not allowed to ask there? And what are some of the same kind of conversational shutdowns that happen in more of a far-right kind of Christian conservative environment? Well, in what subject? Maybe throw out a topic. Oh, gosh. Well, just writing the one that we were just on, I mean, again, instead of exploring systemic roots or causes to a certain person's failure,

inability to succeed in life. And instead of exploring that, everything's blamed on personal choice. And so the whole idea that, for instance, you know, black people in America have systemic hurdles that typically, not exclusively, but typically make it harder for them to succeed in certain areas. Like if you start talking like that, the conservative right is just going to flip out and say, no, if you just work hard, you succeed. Look, Obama, we have a black former president and you can do anything you want. And it's, again, it might be a good counterbalance to the extreme left. And I think there's something there. But again, that can go too far, right?

No, it does. You just kind of deny any sort of systemic things it does they they kind of are just getting what they've got coming to them like i know a you know they will always drag out thomas soul or they'll drag out a black conservative who rails against the idea of constantly talking victimization language. And so, see, he doesn't need that. He's managed to make it out. There's, you know, just a, what's the word I'm looking for? Ignoring, ignoring of history or reinterpretation of history that only focuses on certain convenient realities. So, okay, you and I talked about this, Preston,

this whole thing that happened with the kneeling for the NFL. Now this is a whole other camp. Here we go. Right? Yes, all right. And so the lines get drawn, and we never really, really end up talking about the struggles between police and enforcing laws. Like that, that hardly was a bit of that conversation at all, or that there was a claim that there were injustices that were happening on the streets.

There was really, I mean, after the initial Kaepernick thing happened, it turned into nationalism, and it turned into the flag and discussions about the flag. And what does it mean to have allegiance? You even wrote an article about that. What does it mean to be allegiant to the flag or And what does it mean to have allegiance? You even wrote an article about that. What does it mean to be allegiant to the flag or allegiant to a nation? And it kind of got completely off of the subject when what my black friends still very much wanted to talk about is, well, like these things have not just been going on for the last few years, y'all. This has been going on for like a really, really, really long time. And we've all got stories of how people that have power used it aggressively and inappropriately with us.

And those stories just don't have a place to be heard or taken seriously because we've already decided that, yeah, that's not really what happened. And like, if the police did something to you, you had it coming to you. If you'll just act right, you won't get treated unfairly. If you'll just stay away from situations where the police are involved. I've never had that happen to me. Me and my white friends have never been pulled over by the police because we do right and we stay away. So it just comes back to moral choice, ultimately. Again, I feel like we're opening up like humongous topics and oversimplifying them. But that's how it happens.

So you never really end up talking about what the real issue is because we've already decided that the only reason you've got an issue in the first place is because you won't act right and this is this is where again i can't says enough that both sides have a good point it's just when you make that point the categorical solution to the problem or maybe an uh the the categorical explanation of the problem whether it maybe the categorical explanation of the problem, whether it's the system or it's the, you know, every cop is a racist kind of thing, versus, you know, everything comes down to moral choice. If you just, you know, do what the guy says, you're not going to get in trouble. Those are oversimplifications of a complex blend of moral choice and systemic evil, which, here's what's fascinating fascinating is that's so biblical.

You read Colossians and Ephesians and 1 Peter about the powers and authorities. Like clearly there is systemic evil embedded into this world, which has wiggled its way down into our individual hearts. And it's just not an either or, it's a both and. So this is where I don't, I just don't understand why we can't come to the table and rather than shouting and yelling, but actually learn from each other. in the heterodox academy where they say, look, we may actually be more on the left side, but it's a dangerous society we've created when we push out the right. The left needs, even if you're fully on the left, we need to get to a place where you can say, I need the right to sort of counterbalance the left so that the left doesn't get so extreme to where now you have like Antifa or, you know, violent revolutions, you know,

or people wanting a violent revolution brewing on the fringes. So do you see any, who's doing this well? Or who is, or I guess, let me back up and say, do you see hope that even though we're living in a polarized society, do you see hope of it, of people getting tired of that and wanting more of a middle of the road discussion or learning from people on the right and the left or do you see it just keep getting polarized until we just turn until it ends up in a revolution well i think there's i think it's pockets you know again those kind of a kind of a i can't make a grandiose statement about where it's all going to wind up but i really do think that people are hungry for a

more sane middle. I do. I think people are hungry for that. I think people are super attracted to a person who's not, who's secure enough in their position that they realize they actually really do have things to learn from the other side. It's not even just that we need the other side as sort of a restraint. We need the other side because there's actually really good insights on that side if you allow yourself to learn from them. Like exactly what we just said. Like I think that the problem, for example, with race, it is both of those things. It is that there are these massive systematized things that still go on.

Like stop fighting that. Why do we fight that? Like it's woven throughout our history. And there are huge moral gaps that are taking place in our cities and in the way we operate. Okay. So why can't we just say both of those are true and then talk about how best to go about attacking both ends of that continuum. Here's what I want to say. I think I'm most disappointed, and this is sort of my thought of the last decade, really, that I've grown increasingly disappointed at the Christian inability to live in between those poles.

You just said it. Like of all people, we should be able to sort of transcend the poles and come up with some kind of a synthesis solution, some kind of a theological solution that incorporates both the reality of systematized problems and moral choice. I'm not saying it's easy, but we should be able to have that conversation in a humane way. And I see way too much in social media and articles that get written that are just kind of more heels dug in at the extreme, along political lines as much as anything else. And it's like, well, now I'm like, how can we be salt and light if we're just basically playing by the same rules that everybody else is? We're just taking our political side and arguing those talking points. And we're not really even being informed really by a rigorous theological education and an ongoing digging into God's word to try to understand the madness that was created by Genesis chapter three.

And what does it look like to create redemption in time and to point people towards a redemption that will take place outside of time? Like, why are we not hearing more language like that? Like, why are we not hearing more language like that? That's what bothers me and kind of confuses me and causes me to not have as much hope. Because if the salt and light are not doing that, I mean, what did Jesus say about that? Like, if y'all aren't going to do this, like nobody is going to. So that's my little... Do you see anybody doing this?

Yeah. Do you see anybody doing that? So I just had on the podcast just a couple of weeks ago, Scott Salls. Do you know Scott Salls? He's a pastor down in Nashville. He was on staff with Tim Keller in New York for a number of years. Great writer, great thinker. But he would echo everything you and I are talking about.

And when he planted the church in Nashville, he said it was probably like 90% Republican. And right now he said it's about 50-50, maybe 60-40. And he made a passing statement, or maybe I made a passing statement about it. A healthy church will represent almost equally both kind of political parties, or it just won't take a, you know, strong political stance. But I thought that was fascinating that he started preaching this kind of stuff, weaning Christians off the breast of political allegiance, you know, partisan tribalism. And I said, well, did anybody stay at the church? He said, Preston, the church grew by a thousand in Nashville. Like people are actually, I think there's a loud minority that's scaring a large majority, silent majority in the middle. There's a loud minority that is reinforcing this kind of tribalism.

But I do, I don't know. I think the average person is kind of hungry for a discussion, for an actual discussion. Like I actually want to hear from both sides, you know, why they believe what they believe, why they emphasize the things they do, why a Christian over here would say, I'm a Democrat and I would have voted for Hillary over Trump. Yeah.

I would love for, you know, I think there's a hungry, silent, middle-of-the-road Christian that is like, I want to understand why you would vote for Hillary. What about abortion? What about this? What about her line? What about all this stuff that seems to conflict with the Christian worldview? But I want to know. I want to understand that rather than just saying, you're a heretic.

I can't believe you do that. I don't even want to hear why you would vote for Hillary and vice versa. Again, it goes on both sides. Like I keep seeing some Christians that almost say, I think they would probably believe this, but they come close to actually saying that you can't be a real Christian and actually have voted for Trump. And I think that's insane. And I am, again, say it one more time for my audience. They hear me say this all the time. I am not a Trump fan. I think he's probably one of the worst presidents to take the office. But to say that like a genuine Christian can't have good reasons for voting for him over Hillary or

whatever the other options are, you're doing the same thing. Here's what's funny about that, Preston. Again, you just need some historical memory. We're not very good at that either. We really should force ourselves to pay closer attention to our history. So in my lifetime, and since I've become a Christian, so that's been maybe the last 30 years, every presidency that's taken place, those words were said. The same thing was said when Obama became president. Like, you can't vote for Obama to be a Christian. Like, that was the most recent. Or, you know, before Trump, you couldn't vote for any of the Clintons and be a Christian. In some circles I run in, you couldn't vote for the Bushes, for heaven's sakes, and still call yourself a Christian because you're just aligning yourself with power or whatever.

So, no, I think that's a really good insight. Like, that's disappointing that we come to those conclusions. And I don't know whether it's out of ignorance. I think it is largely ignorance and just not understanding the other side and why they want what they want, what they're afraid of. There's a good word fear. Like what will happen if I actually have to rethink my positions? I don't think most people want to do that. I think people want to kind of get set in a certain direction and stay there and not have it messed with. Yeah. That's just part of being human, right?

We don't want to be messed with. Um, and an inviting discussion with the other side opens up the possibility of being messed with. So it's just easier to demonize the other side and spin everything that they say in the direction that I want it to go. And then anger, like you were talking about that tweet I sent out earlier, I think emotion gets involved with it. And it just makes it such that I don't want to feel negative emotions. I don't want to feel confused. I don't want to feel, oh, I've got stories in my narrative. My narrative contains these anecdotal moments that create anger for me when I think about this. with the big ones, race, gender, sexuality,

denominational situations. We don't want to feel the things that come with being open-minded. I don't think. And so you ask, are people doing it? I do think people are doing it and I think it's attractive. Yeah. In pocket, in pockets. Yeah, it is. And I think it's attractive. Yeah. In pocket, in pockets. Yeah, it is. And I think it is growing because, again, there are some significant intellectuals on both the left and the right, public intellectuals whose platforms are significantly growing. And they're trying to do this very thing. They may identify with the left or the right, but they are interacting with the other side in a way that's very helpful.

I mean, you look at someone like a Joe Rogan, Joe Rogan, probably one of, if not the most popular podcasters. And this guy is just, he is just hungering for intellectual honesty. And he would identify as much more liberal. I mean, he's pro, you know, gay marriage and abortion and all this stuff. But man, he learns from and has some right-leaning views on other things. And he just wants to genuinely listen and learn. And people, he'll sit there for three hours and talk to somebody on the far right. Then the next week, he'll with somebody on the far left, and he just wants to learn and people are eating it up like

candy. I mean, so I do think that, I think there is a silent hungry middle hungry for more dialogue. You mentioned gender. I want to take a quick turn here. What was in your in your stint in Marxism? some of the assumptions that went into, and I'll say gender conversations, because there's kind of two different volatile conversations with gender. One would be kind of male, female power dynamics, inequality between men and women. And then kind of ironically, there's the transgender, non-binary discussion. Is there such a thing as a biological man and woman? And does that even matter?

Is gender a social construct? Is it related to our biology? What was that conversation like in that environment? Yeah. So here's how I'm going to, I'll say this to summarize that environment as well. And again, this is a bit of an overstatement, but I think it generally held true. OK, that the the agenda, if there was one from that human beings is to do away with the lines. And so that reaches as far as even when it comes to gender, that, you know, we've been hugely oppressed in the way that we think about sexuality and our ability to experiment sexually. You know, you tap back into kind of the Puritan heritage of America and just religious institutions that stop you from experiencing yourself sexually. And so you just keep taking that as far as you can take it.

Just get away with every line that's drawn anywhere. So that's what happened with it. Like everything is wide open as far as sexual expression. Everything is wide open in terms of gender expression. You should get to draw the line where you want to, period. There's another great case where you're not allowed to ask certain questions like ultimately is that healthy for human beings to do that yeah uh you know you're like you you're stepping into like a minefield to suggest that that may not be the most healthy approach to sexuality that in fact like my my life personally, along with many of my friends who went

and just experimented sexually, talk about it never winding up well, talk about the end result not being something that produced life and health and flourishing. it always produced regrets and, and, you know, little forms of death along the way for heaven's sakes. So while I'm all, while I was all for acknowledging, my goodness, there really have been some lines that were drawn by people who had oppression in mind and, and, um, you know, who don't have other people's best interest in mind, to just do away then completely with any lines, to do away completely with any kind of boundaries, doesn't seem to be the most humanist approach to life either.

Right. And this is where the right, I think the right and left has something to say about this. I mean, the right's going to blame everything on the sexual revolution. And much of what they say is probably accurate. Like, where are we as a society sexually? Are we doing pretty good? How's the porn epidemic? How's trafficking going? it that 22 year olds can't even get an erection anymore because they're so washed in porn from the time they were 11 that now they're you know they can't even have sex with a real person why is there a rise in sex with roblox it's going to take over sex with humans in the next 20 30 years so we're not doing too well sexually but then if you only ride that narrative then you could you know glorify the 1940s and 50s and this is where everybody who's not a white straight male is going to roll their eyes and say oh let me tell you about the good old days of the 1940s and 50s. And this is where everybody who's not a white, straight male is going to roll their eyes and say, oh, let me tell you about the good old days of the 40s and

50s. You know, women are going to say, oh, yeah, let me tell you how wonderful my sex life was to my misogynistic husband who just kept me locked in the kitchen all day until he wanted to, you know, get off on me for a few seconds at night. And then my black friends are going to say, well, you think the 50s were the good old days? And then all my gay friends are going to say, yeah, 40s and 50s were when everybody was killing themselves because they couldn't even talk about their same-sex attraction in public. And so what we need, I think, is both sides to say,

like you said, we're all busted and broken, both at a societal level and at an individual level. There were no good old days. Each period of time has its own problems and longing for redemption, which is why not to get all fundy, but why, you know, the solution to all this stuff is to acknowledge sin on a societal and individual level and realize that Jesus is the answer. I mean, is that... My Sunday school teacher was correct. Jesus is the answer to all mean, is that my Sunday school teacher was correct. Jesus is the answer. It's silly, man.

Like the ultimate answer. I was just thinking this, even as you were talking, like this gets fixed in relationship. If it's going to get fixed at all, it gets fixed when you actually sit across the table from somebody that is struggling with homosexuality. And again, I use the word struggle because I, I, I don't think that, uh, well, because it's a struggle period because of the culture we live in, um,

because of the confusion, because of all the turmoil that goes with it. Okay. Whether you're for it or against it, it's a struggle until you actually, yeah, it is no good. Good. It totally is. Um, until you actually sit across from a person and have an honest conversation about homosexual or heterosexual struggle, you almost shouldn't even really be able to have an opinion about it. At least not a loud opinion. And I think there's way too many people that are having like really, really loud opinions about things that are not actually interacting in any kind of relational way with people that are really experiencing those things and struggling with those things. And so it's true in race, it's true in gender,

it's true across denominations, it's true in politics. Can you just sit down and really listen to each other and talk to each other and try to understand and look for signs of grace in the other person's life? It's not that daggone radical. It's just hard to find. And that's what makes it seem radical because it's not the norm anymore to treat each other that way. It's not the norm to even know how to have a conversation with another human being, let alone to have one where I'm trying to explore their different experience and their different worldview from mine. So. Hey, let's I want to take a quick turn here.

so hey let's i want to take a quick turn here uh somewhat related but um you you wrote a very provocative post uh blog post i think a couple months ago on i don't remember the title but you'll know i'm talking about about cheerleading what was even what was the thesis of that and what i mean you i started reading this i'm like oh my gosh i can't believe he's going he's thinking this out loud publicly online for all to see like i think a lot of people have these thoughts but man that took some gut so what was what was the title of that article what were you arguing in it oh uh what i was arguing was that what was actually happening with professional cheerleading was, well, I'll tell you, I was at a game. I was at an NBA game and I was sitting right behind the cheerleaders and I was just struck by what they were wearing. I mean, again, it's like,

who won that game? Did you, did you watch the game or did watch the game, man? Well, that's the whole point. Like I was having to like, make myself not watch what I considered. It was a strip tease of sorts. Like they were wearing clothes that were just a step above lingerie. It wasn't exaggeration. Like it was like continue to change out outfits. Not all of them were exactly that way, but they put on things that were a step above lingerie. And, you know, the things that they were doing during the game were just hyper-sexualized. You know, I watched the teams watch them. I was watching men consume them.

I was watching that all happen. So I just thought, especially in the age of, of hashtag me too, especially when our consciences have been so raised against, um, the misuse and mistreatment of women, how is it that nobody is like saying anything out loud about this? What's it's, it's obvious why these women have been put here, regardless of what their motivations are for being there. And I'm not saying it to judge them, even. At least not yet, I'm not. I wasn't. I'm not saying it to judge them. I'm saying about the institution in general that we tolerate as 20,000 of us sit there at an NBA game and these women are, you know, doing a striptease in front of us and our kids. Why is nobody saying anything about it?

The pushback, though, is that it's not like it's prostitution. I mean, this is their free choice, right? So aren't you stepping on the autonomy of women? Aren't you, in a sense, being misogynistic or even patriarchal? of women? Aren't you, in a sense, being misogynistic or even patriarchal, even though your concerns sound very kind of humanizing or elevating the dignity of women? Aren't you trampling over their free will because this is something that they've chosen to do? Well, that was totally the pushback. Yes, I guess so. And all I'm saying is, so now I would take it down to the individual cheerleader level.

It's the same conversations I'm trying to have with my daughter. You can choose to do whatever you want. You can dress however you want when you go to church. You can do what you want, and ultimately you're going to get to. I just want you to understand that you're being consumed right now. You're being used. The reason why you're being put here by these white male, again, you want to talk power structures, is because sex and sexuality sells. So let's just

say that. You're not out here doing, like these aren't dances that you would do in front of a church audience. Why is that? These are not dances as unto the lord like it's it's sexuality and you're being put here to be consumed by the audience so like let's just be honest about that and no that didn't go well at all again because there's this, you know, retaliation. There were plenty of people that said, I've thought this myself to both men and women. And, you know, kind of said they were glad that somebody finally said it out loud. But there was also plenty of pushback. In fact, one of the cheerleaders, there was a few pictures that we used. And it was one of the women that was in the cheerleader that was in the picture.

One of the cheerleaders that was in the picture wrote and was really upset about it. And, you know, talked about how successful the women are and how many opportunities are created by. And again, I don't deny any of that. You just are having to be used. deny any of that you just are having to be wait you're just saying you're just saying that you're saying that i mean that yes all of that's true but underlying all of that is a male dominant uh objectifying of women kind of narrative that's allowing that kind of quote unquote success to even happen like you're relying on the very patriarchy and male dominance that you're trying to critique that's it that's so man again i'm not saying this is some kind of uh prudish judger i'm not i'm saying this as a cultural analyst. And that's exactly what, what is,

that's what you're signing up for. So that's sort of the crazy maker of it is, is that you have the freedom to get mostly naked and be used by a huge audience, um, the way they, they choose to use you. And yet you still see that and are calling that an empowerment. And I would say that there's better ways to be empowered. How's that sound? Like it is, I guess. It is still a way of being empowered. We used to have this discussion in our class as well about how prostitution is illegal.

And that that in and of itself is a sign of an oppressive male line that line that's being drawn like why is prostitution illegal huge conversation wait wait they they would be against the illegalization of process they would be for prostitution for sure no so this is again this is where it gets messy and ugly. What they're for is that women should be able to choose to use their bodies how they see fit and to make a living doing it. And so whether that's – But wait a minute. Prostitution doesn't exist apart from the power structures to keep it in place. It's not just a raw act of the free will. Like there's all kinds of societal issues that go into getting a woman to

that kind of place right but for sure that's just i mean that they're it's almost like they abandoned their whole narrative of power structures to say something like that well it's going to be select just selective that's what we said earlier right half an hour ago we said that we're all kind of selective about how we're going to frame our argument. So in this case of prostitution, I can still remember having this discussion that particular day, that it's an oppression to make prostitution illegal. Okay, but so let's just go with that. And I did that day. I didn't fight against that. That's fine. Let's let women be prostitutes. What is the end result of prostitution? Does it result in human flourishing for the prostitute?

I haven't sat down and interviewed a hundred prostitutes, but my anecdotal evidence from just reading and what I also understand about even sexuality. Common sense. Common sense. Yeah, the things that sort of inform your common sense about it would say that this is not, just even about what I know about my wife and other women that I've been with. Like when sex is treated that way, when their bodies are treated that way, that's not usually a good thing for them. So can we at least say that? You can fight for prostitution, but at the end of the day,

what you're fighting for is not something that's going to result in human flourishing. And so I'd say, you know, we're kind of making a big deal about something that seems like it shouldn't be that big a deal, but I'd say the same thing about cheerleading. Like you can totally sign up to be a cheerleader. What should make us feel a little bit sick is that what you're signing up for is at least for the men that are in the audience you are being lusted after you're being consumed now did you did you get accused of blaming male lust on the way women dress because that's something that's of course you know the critique of the purity movement and stuff but as i'm here i'm i'm listening very closely to the

actual words you're saying i'm listening for closely to the actual words you're saying. I'm listening for that. And you're not actually saying that. You've never once said that, well, it's the women's fault that the men are lusting. You're just saying men are lustful and this is just the reality of what's happening. It's their fault, right?

I mean, you're blaming it on the men. You're just saying that this is what's going to happen if you strip tease in front of a bunch of half drunk guys at a football game yeah and we even get well i even heard from guys that said i don't i watch them and i don't lust and i just say all right whatever man again this is why nobody will ever say anything like this out loud because you're going to hear everything from everywhere when it it really is sort of the sort I would say, almost obvious realities. We don't even know how to talk about them anymore.

That's what I'm saying. As I'm watching this girl, who could be my daughter, do a strip tease in front of me and all these other guys, we're not allowed to say that this is problematic. I'm not trying to judge anybody it's just problematic look be a cheerleader and can we why can't we just wear different clothes like why are we hyper sexualizing them be a cheerleader and do a hundred different type of dance moves than the type that you would see on a pole in a strip club because that is what they're doing that's what they're doing not all the time

how do you know about polls and strip clubs ed yeah because we've all know there's polls and strip clubs because i've needed the gospel because i need i know i know my need for the gospel and this is gonna get don't don't post this anywhere we're gonna get in so much trouble for this man i can't oh yeah no this is that's the whole i'll edit all this stuff out say out loud all the stuff that we're not allowed to say out loud. This is what we need. We need platforms where we can speak our minds on what everybody else or what the majority is actually thinking because I'm going to get a ton of emails. And the majority of the emails I'm going to get are going to be, thank you so much for talking about this and just like actually having the guts to say out loud what a lot of people are thinking

well let me go back and say this let me go back and say this before you go in a different direction because this is important again because people don't know me you sort of said it when it came to the cheerleading thing i was feeling nothing really but compassion for the girls. I really wasn't. I was pissed at the dudes that are putting them up there because I know why they're putting them up there. Whether the girls get it or not, I'm not getting all that. I'm a dude, and I know why those girls are there. I know why they've been allowed to put on the clothes they've got on and be asked to dance at the game.

I know why they're there. So I'm irritable with the powerful men that are doing that. And I'm also irritable with the people that are out there that are screaming and hollering about these things, about the objectification of women, but refuse to acknowledge this as being an objectification of women. That really annoys me towards both men and women. So for me, this wasn't even really a message to the cheerleaders at all. Again, go do what you want. Do what you want to do. You do get to make that choice.

But the dudes that put them there and all the people that sit around on their hands yelling and screaming about objectification over here but then sit for two hours at this game and don't say a word about it on social media or anywhere else, that's a hypocrisy that needs to be called out. And it grates me. So that's really where the article came from. just to make so even if here's the thing even if people listening had some quibbles or problems with what you're saying that's not even you're not even saying you need to agree with everything you're saying your main point as i hear you and as we've been talking this whole time is we need to create space for people to be able to talk out loud and think about these things the fact that we can't even raise the question that's the problem that we can't even raise the question, that's the problem. That's the problem. Even if the question, even if you're answering a question

in a way that's off center, or maybe a little bit off here, a little bit off there, the fact that it's daring to even have this conversation we've been having for the last 10, 15 minutes, that's the deeper problem. We need to be able to talk about these things without being accused of being, you know, racist, misogynist, homophobic, or whatever. It really is. Or need to be able to talk about these things without being accused of being you know racist misogynist homophobic or whatever it really is or just to be able to state the obvious those women are being objectified now if we're going to start quibbling about whose fault it is and quibbling about what they should wear or what different kind of dance means these days i mean again i'm hearing about all of this stuff down in the weeds. These women are being objectified. That can't be – I don't know how you fight against that idea.

They're being objectified. They're here to be consumed. They're part of the entertainment structure that's been set up. Their sexuality is to be consumed in these timeout moments, okay? So could we just talk about that even? It gets sidetracked really quickly. And the blame. Go ahead.

Well, the blame is I hear you're, again, you're going, how do I say it? Well, you haven't even said here's who's to blame. You're not even going there. You're just drawing attention to the male-dominated capitalistic structure that enables this to happen. And you're saying the men in the audience are the ones who are doing the objectification. They are the ones to blame. But there are certain structures that enhance the objectification that is largely male dominated i mean you sound almost like a marxist and what

you're saying which is funny because you're probably getting more backlash from a more mike marxist ideology isn't that crazy that is sort of the crazy maker yeah let's talk about me too so you you mentioned me too in passing and what's uh or do you want to go to something safe like the timing of the rapture or something we can it's interesting it's interesting because i was thinking about and times even when we were talking earlier about people being attracted to somebody that knows how to stay in the middle and i'm not a huge end time scholar i've taken my i've definitely taken my dives into it in different seasons of my life. But, you know, it's interesting that the antichrist in the book of Revelation is portrayed as somebody that attracts people to himself and that he's a, he's a ruler who suddenly makes sense of things for people.

And it's, I just think about that, how I really do think it would be a super attractive person that would rise up who knew how to live in the middle somewhere. And I want that as a Christian man, but I'm also probably ushering in the age of the Antichrist because that's what he will be like you know it will be a world that rises up and all people can sort of gather around him um so wouldn't that be somebody that knows how to sort of placate both sides in a in a real way uh i don't know that that's a side note that's a side note I'm fine with talking about

it's good let's save that one for another time well no I mean the cheerleading thing is related to the gender conversations going on and obviously in our cultural moment the Me Too movement is pretty huge it seems

like it's has it died down or am I just not paying as close of attention to it as I did last year? Here's the thing. Are the people that are behind it, again, these are so complex and there's so many, you know, depending on who you're talking to, I think you find lots of different people in different places in relationship to it. Okay. Are the people who have screamed the most about hashtag me too? Are they really, really concerned about women? That's always a question that I wind up having, because again,

I feel like a lot of times I've been around people that are championing certain causes that ultimately don't really care about the people that the cause is about. And that is a judgmental statement. They care about the cause. They care about the overthrow of a system. They care about erasing lines. They care about political agendas and blah, blah, blah. But do we really, really care about people?

Earning moral points from their tribe and virtue signaling. I mean, there are certain things that people have to stand for and applaud and critique if they're going to earn brownie points from their tribe. Yeah, because hashtag me too should never go away. Like that's the answer. too for me is if you're being sexually abused, if you're being sexually harassed, if you're being demeaned on a regular basis, that should be confronted and stopped like immediately, always, everywhere. You know what I mean? Again, power structure. If somebody's being taken advantage of, if somebody's being oppressed, why would we not always stand against that? The problem is, for me, I don't know that we're spending enough time like defining what some of these terms even actually mean. Okay. So I was just having this conversation the other day with somebody. If, if a dude is like showing you his penis in his cubicle at work, I don't know what word we're going to put on that, but like, you shouldn't be having that. You shouldn't be doing that. You shouldn't have to experience that unless you requested it okay again because

there's these consenting situations that's different so you hear about you know all this come out with harvey uh uh what's his last name wine why weinstein weinstein yeah and you know guys like that you hear the details of those stories okay are lewd and, you know, come on, man. All right. That was bad. Like you can't do that. You should be prosecuted for that. Here's my problem with how that all came out.

Tell me if I'm completely wrong. I'm fine going on the air being corrected. Okay. That came out and one of the most common things that came out surrounding harvey is that oh yeah this stuff goes on this has been going on forever in hollywood yeah like so let me get this straight when it's convenient it helps your platform to call it out then you do it but when it would have caused you problems six months ago a year ago five years ago ago, 10 years ago.

And I even heard somebody bring up like Oprah Winfrey. And I don't, I like Oprah. I mean, I don't, I'm not a huge follower or fan or whatever, but somebody kind of raised that point saying, look, Oprah was chummy chummy with Harvey for years. Of course she knew all this stuff was going on. Everybody says, oh yeah, this is just the way it goes. Like you want to work your way to the top, you got to sleep with the guy at the top.

I mean, that's just kind of what you do. Wait a minute. So this has been so well-known in Hollywood, but nobody calls it out because that would get them fired. But now when it actually benefits their career, now they call it out? Like am I – what am I missing? Because it just seems so blatantly like hypocritical. I think it's dripping in hypocrisy. Here, I'll give you another one. The whole Hollywood industry, again, this sounds like an extreme

statement. There is much in the Hollywood industry that's all about erasing lines, that's constantly pushing sexual limits, that's constantly trying to shock and awe people with the very product that they're creating. Okay? So you're making something that is encouraging us to go beyond normal sexual limits. That's happening all the time in movies, right? They're constantly trying to get lower ratings so that they can sneak through some sexually provocative scene.

That's been going on my whole life. But now your own people are actually living without boundaries. They're living without lines. They've moved the lines. They're saying, you know what? I want to come to work today and show women my penis. Now, all of a sudden, we're saying, oh, no, no, no.

Now we need to draw some lines. Now we need to have some boundaries set up as far as what's proper and what's proper etiquette. But when you're actually arguing for what you're going to put in movies, it's going to go out and be seen by millions of people, including our kids. Then we're trying to blow all the lines up. So we're going to look for hypocrisies. I think it's dripping in hypocrisy. Yeah. And I'm not saying that it shouldn't be called.

I'm glad it was called out. It's just and I am no way. Yeah. And I'm glad it that it shouldn't be called. I'm glad it was called out. It's just, and I am no way, yeah. And I'm glad it's continually being called out. I'm actually proud of some Hollywood people for not doing it. Why? But again, it's like when it's, wait, what? What do you mean why? Why are you glad it's being called out?

What's your reasoning for that? Because I think that's important. I'm not trying to corner you. No, no. I mean, it's super immoral. And it's crazy that women would be treated that way and it would be covered up and kind of accepted as part of the path that they have to walk to succeed in Hollywood. That's absolutely insane and barbaric. You just introduced the word immoral, which is interesting.

You're comfortable with saying there are some things that are immoral which is interesting like you're you're comfortable with saying there are some things that are immoral like there's some things where the line has been crossed and we should try to call people back across the line so again i feel like you actually can say i see there's lots of people out there though that you it's what you said before the only time that they're going to try to play a moral card is when it's convenient well man the whole rest of your life is saying get rid of morality it's saying be immoral let's champion immorality you know it's a romans one kind of thing let's let's create as much immorality as we can and celebrate those who do um yeah so I feel like certain about, okay.

Go ahead. What about, yeah, sorry. What about, um, could it be that some, this is, this is gonna get me in trouble. So you're off the hook here because I'm the one raising the question. All right. Could it be that some women have ridden the Me Too wave and wrongfully accused men of doing something that was actually a consensual thing when it actually happened. Is that? For sure. For sure.

For sure. Again, you want to get really down and dirty. And here we are, two guys talking about this. So that's going to get us in trouble too but i think there's some i know that there's situations where the behaviors were actually liked because it was i'm not again i'm not talking about showing your penis but i'm saying a comment or different what had been considered flirting okay and now that stuff is being reinterpreted as harassment and abuse. And I think, I do think that that's a little bit unfair. And there's guys that have been writing about this, like, where the heck are the lines now? DC McAllister writes for the Federalist,

and I think she wrote an article, and I've seen some other articles of women saying, look, we want men to pursue us and to be provocative and to be flirty. Now, again, there's lines of decor for heaven's sakes, but like, we don't want to scare all the men away to where a guy never feels comfortable to reach out and touch us, never says something flirty or makes a provocative comment about the clothing we have on or the way a perfume smells. Like the context ends up mattering a whole bunch, doesn't it? There's context where that is okay. This happened to be long, long, long before me too, long before I was even I mean, this is like, I remember when I first became a Christian. So this is gosh, 22 years, 23 years ago. And I got involved in, uh, like helping out at youth groups. And here I am, you know, a 21 year old guy, you know,

in a youth group with 17 year old girls. I mean, the, the, the age difference is not that big. Like, um, and I early on, I don't know where I heard it, but heard several stories of guys either sexually harassing women or girls in youth groups or simply being accused of it and seeing early on several youth pastors. Maybe they were 100% guilty. Maybe they're 90% guilty. maybe they're 90% guilty, maybe they were 5% guilty, and it was just kind of made up. I didn't care. I saw people's careers and lives being crushed, whether through their own sin or a lie from somebody else.

And I made it a point, I am not going to talk to any girl in the youth group. I'm a youth leader. I'm literally going to be just, I'm not going to give any space, any room for even some sort of emotional, like, fulfillment or scratching some emotional itch that, you know, their father didn't scratch or whatever. I mean, sexuality and it's complicated. And I was like, I'm not even going to go there. And even early on, you know, before I was a Christian, I was known for being kind of flirty and I kind of was, but part of it's just, I'm a nice guy and I smile and ask questions and I like to make people laugh.

And where's the line between just being a nice guy and being a flirt? I didn't know what it was, but when I became a Christian, that was interpreted of being, oh, he's a total player. He's taking these girls out on dates. He's doing this, whatever. And I didn't. So I'm like, okay, I'm a Christian now. I don't want the reputation of being a flirt. And it seems like if I'm just nice to a girl, it gets interpreted as being flirty. Then you also have this very dangerous possibility of underage girls who could spin something in all kinds of directions. So I would say even to this day, if I'm in an environment, a work environment, whatever, and even people, maybe women out there listening who have worked with me are going to say, oh, this makes sense. Why, you know,

Preston was such a jerk. Like I just, I literally, I don't talk. I don't really talk to other women very often just because how it, where it possibly could go. And this goes all the way back to kind of me too-ish type things happening that I was, it scared me to death. I was scared to death of speaking to another woman with a smile, making her laugh and, and, and, and not being in control of where that could possibly go. It could ruin my career, my marriage, my, I mean, the whole rug of my life could be pulled out from underneath me. I don't want to risk it.

I would rather be accused of being, oh, yeah, he's kind of standoffish. He's not really personal, but I would much rather have that than, oh, yeah, he totally came on to me and I have to explain that to my wife because I told some girl a joke and she laughed. Yeah. Yes. So I think an unjust overreaction is just as wrong as the injustice in the first place. Think about what I'm saying in unjust

is just as bad as, as what the initial injustice. And I think we do this all the time too. So gosh, should women have come forward about some of the stories that I heard? Absolutely. For heaven's sakes. Again, I think that stuff was immoral, but now when every little hint, you know, when there's money to be made, when there's popularity, when there's celebrity to be attained by, by, you know, being in an article or something. There, there tend to be unjust overreactions. So, so here's the thing. I was just talking about this with the whole Urban Meyer case. I don't know if you're familiar with that. No. Well, he was getting in all kinds of trouble and has been suspended for three games because he

Well, he was getting in all kinds of trouble and has been suspended for three games because he harbored a guy on his staff who had been accused multiple times in the past of abusing his wife. Okay, you need to go look this one up, Preston. So I know you're not doing the sports thing, but this one was pretty loaded. Here's all I want to say with it. We don't need to dig down into the weeds of that situation because it's like many others. What I'm concerned about is that now if someone is accused of a particular word that's loaded, he or she is already condemned. They are already guilty. Anything that they say is seen as an excuse or trying to duck out of it or trying to cover up.

they say is seen as an excuse or trying to duck out of it or trying to cover up. And I feel like we need to do a better job of like taking situations case by case. I mean, you see this happening all over the place. If there's been an accusation or the implication of harassment or abuse in the last couple of years, you just get fired because we're not going to, we don't want to have to dig into this in a case by case way. We don't want to be associated with this at all. We're just going to get rid of you right away. And I think that's crazy wrong. That's crazy. Like have the courage to look at a situation and assess it and bring other people in and assess whether this is real or not, you know, whether it's a misunderstanding, whether it's, you know, a million different possibilities that could be the case.

So I want to blame my possible overreaction on that kind of environment that's been created. So I agree that my being a little more standoffish, not really talking to other women at church or whatever, work or whatever, I could say that might be an overreaction. Okay, let's just say it is an overreaction. But I think I'm kind of – am I a little justified in that? Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, no, no.

Okay, I miscommunicated. So I wasn't suggesting that your overreaction was unjust. that your overreaction was unjust. I'm saying that the overreaction that everybody that is ever accused of anything, okay. That they're immediately condemned. That's injustice. That's not doing the thing. Okay. Just assuming that if this accusation comes out, that this person must be guilty in some way, shape, or form is an overreaction. There's a big, big difference between smiling in a flirting way and showing your penis in the

cubicle. Those are two really, really different encounters and different experiences. And like, we don't, I, when I say we, again, that's a unfair collective, but it seems like in the media, at least as it's being portrayed, we're not doing a very good job of handling situations case by case. There's an immediate firing, there are immediate public relations that has to get triggered. There's an immediate assumption of guilt. That's a scary, that's a scary time to live in. And some would say, well, that's just the cost of, you know, there's been so much abuse to women for so long. Tough. Like that's just the cost of, of sending the pendulum back in the other direction. And I say, okay.

Yeah, I don't like that. I don't like that though. I don't either. I don't either. From my vantage point, again, I'm saying this now as a Christian, there should be a better way forward than that. Can we not call out injustice and abuse and harassment? Can't we call those things out without having to just assume

that every time the word gets brought up, everybody's guilty? Can't we bring wisdom and discernment to bear on situations? And not everybody's comfortable with that. Like there's a huge percentage of people that just kind of want the human resources book brought out. What does the policy say? That's it. We're not going to think about this or try to sort through it or do the he said, she said. It's just easier to say if a charge is brought, this is what we're going to do. And I don't live like that. I don't like that. Yeah. Dude, we are, we're out of time, but I know, right? We got to do part two. I know, right? We got to do part two.

We got to get the band back together. Let me see if this podcast even exists after this episode. And if it does, then maybe we could do this again. No, honestly, honestly, I have a pretty good handle on my audience. And it's fairly broad and diverse. I think 95% are going to, yeah, be thankful we're having this conversation, even if they don't agree on every point that we've said or whatever. I think it's a very, the people listening to Theology in a Raw want a real honest conversation.

They're not looking so much and what's the right answer? Did he say the right thing? Whatever. But is he asking good questions and engaging various conversations that we're not seeing people engage on an honest level? So no, I think we're fine, but I'll find out. I'm just always uncomfortable for me. And again, you put out there whatever you want. Ultimately, I don't think I care. There's not that much at stake ultimately for me. But I'm always... when you're talking about these huge things without there being any context without people actually knowing what i've said in other places or written

in other places uh right i just i like being able to nuance things better and i'm not being very nuanced right here and nobody wants to listen to tons of nuancing either. You just want an opinion. But that's what I'm uncomfortable with. Do you still have the picture of MLK and Malcolm X up in your office? Yeah. Sitting right above my door. There's a great example. Again, there's a great talking. Like, which is the right way to go about dealing with this problem?

There was both like both of those approaches had insights that the black and the white culture needed at the time. It's it's, I don't think it's either or. Oh man. Yeah. That could be a whole nother conversation, man. I got so many questions already. Well, you got me turned on to Malcolm X. It was after meeting you that I read the autobiography of Malcolm X, which is still top five most influential books in my life.

Nice. I need to go back and read it again. I just, it just blew me away. And, you know, as a Christian, well, I don't know. Yeah, okay. So as a Christian, I would obviously resonate with MLK and his worldview and vision. Although his life, do you remember that line in the movie where the feds are tapping into Malcolm X and they're trying to get some dirt on him? And when they did that to MLK, they found all kinds of dirt, right? Because the guy was just

a total womanizer and yeah and he had all his girlfriend girlfriends and he you know you know he's a normal dude like he he you know um i'm not trying to fault foul mlk but he clearly had some struggles in his life morally speaking yeah but they said that the Fed says, man, Malcolm X, according to MLK, this guy's a saint. Yeah, he looks like a saint. Yeah. Oh, dude, when it came to like actual just raw moral behavior, the dude was off the chart. And then he's the one that blew the whistle on the corruption going on with the Nation of Islam and stuff. Elijah Muhammad.

Yeah. Golly. Oh, man. We we gotta cut this out man but he got me all that's the whole good and bad tension and and learning to live with the reality that there really is something to learn from the other side there really is something really broken with your side no matter how righteous you feel about it and it's really hard to live in that place of, of brokenness and, and being able to admit things and being able to, being willing to learn from people outside your tribe.

Like it's so hard. The human experiment throughout history has shown that we don't do a very good job of it. And I'm committed to doing it, man. I don't know. Maybe there's just certain people that that's supposed't do a very good job of it and i'm committed to doing it man i don't know maybe there's just certain people that that's supposed to be a big part of their journey is they're supposed to just keep calling for that and i feel like i am i i i just think it's the right way to move forward in life is to try to live in that middle place somewhere. I got my son reading that autobiography right now, by the way. Is he really?

About what I liked about it in the first place. I said my daughter's. It's just as a white guy who's, well, in 2008 when I read it, who was very ignorant on the narrative of people, well, Malcolm X and so many African Americans in this country. Yeah, it was just, it was mind blowing. I mean, he, you talk about understanding systemic racism, that the whole, like just his childhood growing up and, and how these, these events in his life that some were overtly racist some were just implicitly racist like if i oh what was it i think with the teacher who really liked who really liked him a white teacher

really liked malcolm good um but but still said like but you'll never be a you'll never be like a lawyer like you're still you're still black but i love you like totally yeah that's crazy like and those implicit subtle kind of like you know nobody's a lawyer but i love you like totally yeah that's crazy like and those implicit subtle kind of like you know nobody's a racist until a bunch of black people start moving into their neighborhood and all of a sudden they're all of a sudden stuff starts getting unearthed and exposed right and but seeing some of the more subtle forms of racism that when you look at it are so hideous and seeing how that just builds and builds and builds and builds and you can't untangle that from current situations and the lens and what that does to

the lenses through which you read and interpret life and and so on well even so that when go ahead so that when when in future encounters as an adult when he comes across again a white person who's nice to him who is wants to help him, but still has these kind of unidentified racist tendencies and how that just triggers a lot more traumatic experiences from the past. And white people, they don't understand. They're like, well, why are you so mad now? Or why won't you accept this gift from me or whatever? And just refusing to try to understand why is this person reacting the way they are? So that book, it just opened up categories for me that I didn't know existed. would come down to Harlem on Saturday nights and they'd come down to the juke joints. Like people that wouldn't have anything to do with black people during the week would come down there to consume the entertainment and they loved the music and they would mess

around with the black dancers or whatever. And so he was just sort of absorbing that hypocrisy. Yeah, there were all kinds of little anecdotes like that that stuck out to me too when I watched it. I appreciate him because he struck me as somebody that was serious about what's true. Like he was cutting through the BS as best as he could. You know, he was a voice of somebody that was trying to cut through and find out what was true. To the point where he even kind of turned against his own philosophy when he realized that not all white people were the devil and i appreciated that he had that breakthrough

and what did that earn him it earned him getting blown up with a shotgun by by some of his own ed where can people find you you have a website you got a i've seen you you've been more active on twitter uh i don't even know what your handle is because i can't spell your name but or something like yeah so you know we're for people that have any interest at all and thinking about how the gospel intersects sport and sport culture We're at athletesinaction.org. Myself and a guy named Brian Smith, who is a campus minister at the University of Wisconsin. He actually just wrote a great book on how to glorify God through sport. I mean, he's a great thinker too. And we're, so we're just getting people to write for the site. We're writing our own stuff there.

So definitely you could come and see it's actually athletes in action.org yeah it's athletes in action.org you got to spell the whole thing out uh and then yeah that's the that's that's where your blog is that you blog at a release blog we just release articles okay you could even click on contributors and you'd see everything that i've written that's probably the best way to okay to consume the stuff that i've done i haven't written anything in a couple months i'm gonna get going here on it again and then uh yeah you mentioned twitter so i've just been trying to understand even how twitter works and for on a business level you

know with athletes and ass so i i got my own since I've been, I've been spending a lot more time there and interacting with people and posting my own stuff and, and just kind of learning about the fact of it, you know, so I'm, I'm both in the playground, but also studying it as well. Just trying to understand what it's doing with and for people. And that's at Uzinski 32. So it's U S Z-z-y-n-s-k-i 32 see that's got a nice little rhythm to it that's it's the s man yeah i need a vowel alex give me a vowel

uh you're branded well oh there's not too many ed uzinski's out there although uzinski's a more popular name than i thought there's a few out there you just can't find me yeah it's great there's there's nobody there you just can't find me. So yeah, I'd love to interact with people. Love your audience. And definitely, man, let's do this again. Let's do it. Hey, you've been listening to Theology in the Raw, my good friend, Dr. Ed Uzinski. If you want to support the show, you can go to patreon.com forward slash theology in the

raw. That's patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw. We's patreon.com forward slash theology in the raw. We will see you next time on theology in the raw. you