Hot(ish) Takes, Cool Heads - November 25, 2025
Hot(ish) Takes, Cool Heads is a weekly set of short, sourced opinions—sharp but civil—on family, economics, politics & faith, masculinity, and the modern attention diet. One clear claim per take, built for dialogue rather than dunking.
1. Healthy masculinity needs structure, not vibes
Take: Boys don’t become men by accident. They need rites of passage, mentors, hard responsibilities, and real community.
Why: Social disconnection is now a public-health problem (higher risks of early death, heart disease, stroke). Men report fewer close friendships than in the past, and strong, structured mentoring shows measurable (if modest) benefits—especially when relationships are high-quality and practice-driven. That argues for intentional male spaces that teach skill, restraint, and service.
Question: If you could design one rite of passage in your city (age 13–15), what would it include—skills, service, physical tests, mentors?
If I’m wrong: Show me evidence that unstructured “figure it out” approaches are producing better outcomes for boys than programs with mentors, milestones, and responsibilities.
2. Power-chasing shrinks the church’s witness
Take: When the church seeks political power—especially under a Christian nationalist banner—the gospel gets smaller; service expands credibility, partisanship contracts it.
Why: Most Americans (including most Republicans and Democrats) say churches should not endorse candidates. And while Christian nationalism is influential, it’s a minority position and is correlated with more authoritarian attitudes—hardening opposition outside the base and narrowing reach.
Question: What public good—local service, peacemaking, foster care, addiction recovery—would persuade skeptics more than any endorsement could?
If I’m wrong: Make the evidence-based case that overt partisan alignment has increased the church’s credibility and audience beyond its existing coalition.
3. Intimacy isn’t consumption
Take: Porn and hookup culture train us to “use” intimacy; real intimacy asks for responsibility—commitment, honesty, care.
Why: Meta-analysis finds pornography consumption is associated with lower relationship/sexual satisfaction (especially for men). Studies on casual sex show mixed outcomes, but multiple papers link hookups—depending on motives and context—to higher psychological distress for some participants. Association ≠ destiny, but the pattern is hard to ignore.
Question: What practice—clear boundaries, accountability, therapy, community—best helps you treat people as ends, not means?
If I’m wrong: Point me to longitudinal evidence that heavy porn use and commitment-free sex generally improve relationship quality and well-being over time.