Regarding the "Rise of Men at Church," it should come as no surprise that younger women are falling away from church.
God's ordered creation, which includes patriarchy, is immutably reflected in the warp and weft of the Bible. Celebration of the different roles of men and women, of marriage, and of children are important Biblical concepts. Even if people cannot articulate their feelings about these teachings, they instinctively sense, intellectually if not spiritually, what the Bible stands for. Feminism stands counter to Biblical teaching because it would deny part of God's created order. To deny any part of His created order is to tear at the tapestry of the Bible and undermine its integrity, with the result that other parts of it are rejected as well as the tear extends itself.
As feminism becomes more virulent and has greater influence over more women, the predicable reaction is for these women to reject the Bible and therefore the church. Conversely, as men are marginalized by the feminist forces in our society, they can be expected to be drawn to the Bible which recognizes their place in God's created order. Such men should seek Christian women as spouses.
Aaron, thanks for your continuing efforts across a wide range of subjects.
I'm not going to pay for a subscription to FT, so didn't read the whole article, but...outsourcing...is that really the problem with the fire at the tower?
Subcontracting, outsourcing, hiring those with expertise in particular areas of design or construction, is normal and customary and necessary, and has been so for millennia. Very few individuals or companies (if any) have the knowledge, expertise, and manpower to know everything and do everything.
From my perspective as an architect, if a product was used that ultimately proved unsafe, the issue is not outsourcing. Someone, an individual working for a particular company, made the decision to use that material.
Did the architect choose an unsafe material? Was the material advertised in a fraudulent way? Did the contractor hire a shady subcontractor based on lower cost? Did the subcontractor knowingly propose an unsafe material? Did the architect adequately review that proposed product. Did a junior employee in the architect's office, without adequate knowledge or experience review and approve the proposed product? Did the material used meet the building codes, which do prescribe certain fire safety parameters for exterior cladding materials? Did the building owner demand the use of the unsafe material because it was cheaper?
Many questions, I know. But I don't see outsourcing, per se, as being the problem. Some one at some level failed to make the right decision. And whatever checks and balances were in place failed to recognize and correct the error.
The fire could have still have happened even if the decision to use that product was not outsourced but made by the most knowledgeable, experienced, honest person in the architect's or contractor's office. Why? Bad hair day, distracting pressures at home, mind on music or podcasts while making the choice, interruption in the middle of making the choice, lack of adequate time to review and compare products, etc., etc.
Lack of ethical motivations and failure to engage in the personal responsibility to protect the life and limb of the public (love our neighbor), compounds the above with negligence, caving to pressure to use a cheaper but unsafe material, etc., etc.
The last few elections I've ignored all the build up but then still watched election night. I'm going to take your advice and skip the election night coverage this year.
There are indeed a lot of stories by adult adoptees who resent the whole situation. What I find remarkable is how much their perspective undermines The Narrative that we are all supposed to believe about family and kinship. "I'm not happy about being raised away from my mother, kin and people" ... Hmmmm... what does that imply about surrogacy, and what does that imply about "race isn't real race is purely a social construction"? And if you think about those questions, what does that imply about same-sex couples parenting (by definition alienating the child from one of the biological parents) and about multiculturalism and mass immigration (where by definition some group of people is going to experience the discomfort of being surrounded by those who are not of their kin/tribe/culture)? So I say, yes, let's keep publishing stories by resentful adoptees, and eventually someone will have to concede that kin/tribe/clan/race/blood are real things that have a real value in society (note that this does not justify making a god or idol of these things, as a pagan would do).
I wish there were a source you could show us that’s easier to access than the New York Times about young men in the church. Having been a young buck myself once, they are of concern to me.
Great advice on turning off the news, letting the dust settle, and then taking a look. I have to say that it's quite a statement about world affairs that I'm finding edification in Crime and Punishment, the Gulag Archipelago, and a book on The Divine Liturgy.
On the outsourcing side,as someone who has managed my own company, worked in local government and now manages a non-profit:
A big part of what drives the desire to outsourcing is how much complexity we’ve created in our systems. Even when I had a small architecture firm (under 10 people), we outsourced our HR and payroll to a PEO because the HR and compliance regulations are daunting. We didn’t want to have to think about that or worry we were doing something wrong, so we paid for that support. It wasn’t cheap, but gave us peace of mind. In a much less litigious and over-regulated world, we likely could’ve handled all that ourselves.
Similarly, in the non profit I run, we outsource some staffing for a security operation. This is again simply a function of reducing liability to us. If we take it on ourselves, we open the organization up to very tricky issues. It’s not impossible to deal with, but with a small organization it’s problematic. Outsourcing the staffing to a large security staffing company eases those issues.
I say all that to say, this is often the reality of what owners and managers are dealing with. I agree with the thrust of the critique you offered, and we routinely ask ourselves if we should do what we do differently. But in a highly complex and litigious managerial society, people mostly try to push risk off to someone else.
I would draw a distinction between outsourcing of pure services, which is what's you're describing, rather than outsourcing the manufacture of things to assemble jigsaw-puzzle-like into a whole, which I took as the thrust of the article.
Or put another way -- you're talking about outsourcing services ancillary to your core business offering (let someone else handle HR so you can focus on architecture), rather than outsourcing pieces of the core offering itself.
Regarding the "Rise of Men at Church," it should come as no surprise that younger women are falling away from church.
God's ordered creation, which includes patriarchy, is immutably reflected in the warp and weft of the Bible. Celebration of the different roles of men and women, of marriage, and of children are important Biblical concepts. Even if people cannot articulate their feelings about these teachings, they instinctively sense, intellectually if not spiritually, what the Bible stands for. Feminism stands counter to Biblical teaching because it would deny part of God's created order. To deny any part of His created order is to tear at the tapestry of the Bible and undermine its integrity, with the result that other parts of it are rejected as well as the tear extends itself.
As feminism becomes more virulent and has greater influence over more women, the predicable reaction is for these women to reject the Bible and therefore the church. Conversely, as men are marginalized by the feminist forces in our society, they can be expected to be drawn to the Bible which recognizes their place in God's created order. Such men should seek Christian women as spouses.
Aaron, thanks for your continuing efforts across a wide range of subjects.
I'm not going to pay for a subscription to FT, so didn't read the whole article, but...outsourcing...is that really the problem with the fire at the tower?
Subcontracting, outsourcing, hiring those with expertise in particular areas of design or construction, is normal and customary and necessary, and has been so for millennia. Very few individuals or companies (if any) have the knowledge, expertise, and manpower to know everything and do everything.
From my perspective as an architect, if a product was used that ultimately proved unsafe, the issue is not outsourcing. Someone, an individual working for a particular company, made the decision to use that material.
Did the architect choose an unsafe material? Was the material advertised in a fraudulent way? Did the contractor hire a shady subcontractor based on lower cost? Did the subcontractor knowingly propose an unsafe material? Did the architect adequately review that proposed product. Did a junior employee in the architect's office, without adequate knowledge or experience review and approve the proposed product? Did the material used meet the building codes, which do prescribe certain fire safety parameters for exterior cladding materials? Did the building owner demand the use of the unsafe material because it was cheaper?
Many questions, I know. But I don't see outsourcing, per se, as being the problem. Some one at some level failed to make the right decision. And whatever checks and balances were in place failed to recognize and correct the error.
The fire could have still have happened even if the decision to use that product was not outsourced but made by the most knowledgeable, experienced, honest person in the architect's or contractor's office. Why? Bad hair day, distracting pressures at home, mind on music or podcasts while making the choice, interruption in the middle of making the choice, lack of adequate time to review and compare products, etc., etc.
Lack of ethical motivations and failure to engage in the personal responsibility to protect the life and limb of the public (love our neighbor), compounds the above with negligence, caving to pressure to use a cheaper but unsafe material, etc., etc.
One Husband Is Enough: Women in Their 60s See No Need to Remarry
https://www.wsj.com/lifestyle/relationships/boomer-women-divorce-remarried-84312184?mod=e2fb
The last few elections I've ignored all the build up but then still watched election night. I'm going to take your advice and skip the election night coverage this year.
This year, you'll probably have to ignore it for a few days, due to mail in ballots.
challenge accepted
There are indeed a lot of stories by adult adoptees who resent the whole situation. What I find remarkable is how much their perspective undermines The Narrative that we are all supposed to believe about family and kinship. "I'm not happy about being raised away from my mother, kin and people" ... Hmmmm... what does that imply about surrogacy, and what does that imply about "race isn't real race is purely a social construction"? And if you think about those questions, what does that imply about same-sex couples parenting (by definition alienating the child from one of the biological parents) and about multiculturalism and mass immigration (where by definition some group of people is going to experience the discomfort of being surrounded by those who are not of their kin/tribe/culture)? So I say, yes, let's keep publishing stories by resentful adoptees, and eventually someone will have to concede that kin/tribe/clan/race/blood are real things that have a real value in society (note that this does not justify making a god or idol of these things, as a pagan would do).
I wish there were a source you could show us that’s easier to access than the New York Times about young men in the church. Having been a young buck myself once, they are of concern to me.
Unfortunately, the major outlets typically do the best reporting. If you need a gift link to that Times article, just email me at aaron@aaronrenn.com
Great advice on turning off the news, letting the dust settle, and then taking a look. I have to say that it's quite a statement about world affairs that I'm finding edification in Crime and Punishment, the Gulag Archipelago, and a book on The Divine Liturgy.
On the outsourcing side,as someone who has managed my own company, worked in local government and now manages a non-profit:
A big part of what drives the desire to outsourcing is how much complexity we’ve created in our systems. Even when I had a small architecture firm (under 10 people), we outsourced our HR and payroll to a PEO because the HR and compliance regulations are daunting. We didn’t want to have to think about that or worry we were doing something wrong, so we paid for that support. It wasn’t cheap, but gave us peace of mind. In a much less litigious and over-regulated world, we likely could’ve handled all that ourselves.
Similarly, in the non profit I run, we outsource some staffing for a security operation. This is again simply a function of reducing liability to us. If we take it on ourselves, we open the organization up to very tricky issues. It’s not impossible to deal with, but with a small organization it’s problematic. Outsourcing the staffing to a large security staffing company eases those issues.
I say all that to say, this is often the reality of what owners and managers are dealing with. I agree with the thrust of the critique you offered, and we routinely ask ourselves if we should do what we do differently. But in a highly complex and litigious managerial society, people mostly try to push risk off to someone else.
I would draw a distinction between outsourcing of pure services, which is what's you're describing, rather than outsourcing the manufacture of things to assemble jigsaw-puzzle-like into a whole, which I took as the thrust of the article.
Or put another way -- you're talking about outsourcing services ancillary to your core business offering (let someone else handle HR so you can focus on architecture), rather than outsourcing pieces of the core offering itself.