40. audacity

What is it about men that makes them think that, out of all possible mates, they’d be the ideal match or lover for another person?

I ask this because all of a sudden, for the first time, I’ve caught myself thinking like that. Not necessarily the cocky, arrogant frat boy type attitude; but I’m looking at someone and thinking, “Yeah, I could make him happy.” And I want to. I wouldn’t necessarily fulfill all his dreams and desires (no one’s that good), but I’d like to think that being with me would be somewhere on the way to hitting that mark.

Is that just sheer audacity? Or desperate hope?

I don’t know. What I do know is that I just turned 27.

By 28, I’m not going to still be single.

Case in point, this is what I’m talking about:

… I just think you need time to know
That I’m the guy to make it real:
The feelings you don’t dare to feel.
I’ll bend the world to our will,
And we’ll make Time stand still.

 

… now that’s audacity.

024. form

In the way of an introduction to this post, one of my long-time celebrity crushes: Channing Tatum. Don’t ask me why, but I just think he is a fine specimen of the male species. Some people disagree with me, but I could honestly care less.

Yesterday I came home after a four-hour car ride by myself and without A/C. My pioneer ancestors would probably think that’s hilarious since they had nothing in the way of climate control amenities when they had to go somewhere, so I really shouldn’t complain.

I got some lunch and was turning the corner for the garage when I passed by the house on the corner…

And saw neighbour guy in his garage, working on his car.

Shirtless.

And drop-dead gorgeous.

Holy Moses.

And I just found out thanks to my housemate and his shameless flirting with my next door neighbor that her housemate recently moved to be with his (future?) husband. And I just caught a glimpse of him too the other day. Also gorgeous.

And apparently gay.

Damn it all: where were these guys earlier this year when I decided to go on the market (regardless of the fact that back then I couldn’t have approached anyone to save my life)?

That is a moot point though… I am now happily off the market, and have an amazing guy who is coming to see me in two days (and consequently am getting exponentially more nervous by the hour)!

All of that was in the way of introduction.

I’ve asked this question before: What makes a guy confident enough to show off his body, regardless of how developed (or even undeveloped—e.g., Sanjaya and other emo boys like him) his physique is? What makes him so comfortable in his skin that he feels the need to go about shirtless, or practically naked? From art history we see that males have traditionally been less modest in terms of dress, opting for bare torsos, arms and legs—the Greeks and Egytpians come to mind.

From an evolutionary biological standpoint this makes sense. Males have to be more exhibitionistic in order to attract mates. They have to show that their genetic material is superior to the competition—that they are stronger, faster, and more virile. But that’s in animals who are purely about procreation. No matter what Disney tells you, there is nothing romantic about it.

So what in a human male’s set of experiences leads him to feel that not only is it acceptable to show off his body, but that he has something worth showing off?

Discuss.

– Muirnin

015. pov

This past weekend I played for the wedding of a friend of mine. It was pretty conventional, albeit a tad too casual for me. The bride, my friend, looked lovely. Brides usually do. The guys, on the other hand, looked like they just sort of rolled out of bed, threw on quasi-matching polo shirts, and showed up. The bridesmaids, of course, were lovely. Women usually manage to look smashing, regardless. There are some exceptions, of course (the Jerry Springer Show comes to mind), but girls typically look so put-together. Guys today instead generally come out looking like teenage boys who still need mom to take care of them.

The straight ones anyway.

But the twist came when the pastor commented on how the groom should really be the best man at his wedding, because Christ is the only perfect husband who will love perfectly, never fail, and gave himself sacrificially for both the bride and the Bride. She should grow to love Him more every day, just as the husband too should be loving Christ more, and that bringing them closer and together in their mutual love for each other and for G-d.

Of all the weddings I’ve done, that was a first. My sister’s wedding was fairly Christ-centred, and the wedding of another friend of mine blew me away theologically and emotionally.

It made me think though. Traditional marriages are supposed to point us to the relationship between Christ and the Church, and are even to be living parables of that divine marriage. They aren’t perfect, by any means, and that’s the point. G-d doesn’t expect perfection. He expects us to be open-handed with him, acknowledging our creaturely need for him, and to admit that don’t have it all together. Even the ladies who look like they do, and especially the guys who don’t.

But marriage, especially the Biblical model, is supposed to be an example of women displaying the submissiveness to their husbands that the Church is to show to Christ (Ephesians 5:22-33). Men fail miserably here, in not being the shining examples of masculinity that a woman would want to submit to. And amidst the resurgence of goddess worship our culture encourages women to assert their feminine dominance, usually over men, taking back the power that for so many centuries was denied them by the patriarchal status quo.

However, if we look at the Biblical model, that is not what is even marginally hinted at:

Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. (Ephesians 5:25-29, ESV)

Guys have it much harder in marriage if they are to follow this model. They are to follow Christ’s example of living sacrificially, even if that calling leads to death. This isn’t Fiddler on the Roof, where the man claps his hands and his wife falls into line. He is to look out for her needs first.

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. (Ephesians 5:22-24, ESV)

A woman then, in response to this sacrificial lifestyle that her husband is presumably displaying, acknowledges his leadership through submission. So what happens is hopefully this mutual submission, where each partner is putting the other first in the relationship and each is likewise submitting to the ultimate authority of Christ.

So.

How does that look in a homosexual relationship, where it’s two men or two women who are partnered and are equals (egalitarian versus gender-structured pairing)? Because this is not the same relationship that Paul was talking about in Ephesians; and regardless of what you may think of the Apostle (e.g., that he was a chauvinistic misogynist), he drew some marvellous paralells between earthly and divine marriage.

Men were not designed physically, psychologically or emotionally to submit in the same way to other men that a woman was designed for a man, and likewise women for other women. However, as Virginia Mollenkott said on Speaking of Faith in 2006, “Apparently the Creator likes diversity a lot more than we human beings do.” So I believe the relationship can still thrive and that it can teach us something about G-d and about faith.

So what can we learn from same-sex relationships from a Biblical or theological perspective?

The floor is open.

Shalom to you.