I continue to be perplexed by the (usually American) suggestion that aggression is a male Christian virtue. Michael Patton seems to think that it is not only a virtue but an essential pastoral character trait. It is worth saying, from my own experience, that aggression is totally not the way to deal with confrontation either in pastoral work or wider life. I am a naturally aggressive person but I have had to tame that aggression especially in conflict situations. Aggression always escalates the situation and sends signals to the other party that they too need to become more aggressive. It is a posture of insecurity and fear rather than confidence and love. Aggression seeks to persuade through intimidation and vehemence rather than sound argument and compassion. Aggression closes the heart to the Spirit and fills it with bile towards your opponent.
What Patton, and by implication John Hobbins, need to realise is that aggression and misogyny are both results of the Fall (See Genesis 4 and 3 respectively), and so by definition are to be resisted at every point, not accepted as cultural norms. "Muscular" male dominated Christianity is not worthy of the name Christianity, it is instead a celebration of so much that is wrong with the world. Inconsistent misogynists around the world need to stop telling everyone they are simply doing what the Bible says and realise that they are working for the enemy.