The first song is about the goodness of God and all the kind things God has done for us and for the needy (the orphan etc), showing mercy and love and forgiving us. Is that why you love him so much? Also if God took everything away from you and you ended up being a persecuted Christian would you still love him? We can’t just love God because he does nice things for us, we have to love him when things get tough too. Okay, the second song is about forgiveness in Jesus, because he makes us new. Are you trying to say that since he’s remade and forgiven us we need to change for him, or he changes us as well? Is this part of the growth of a new creation, of being a new creation, in him? Did I understand the messages of the songs well? Does this song reflect a relationship with God in your opinion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKdn3xGCnsw It’s called Heaven’s Legacy by BrunuhVille; please listen to it especially as BrunuhVille happens to be one of my favourite composers. I thought that it would represent at least one aspect of a relationship with God, angels, spirits, and nature – the peace that God and angels bring with their presence. Here’s another one by BrunuhVille: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV0E2c4CsnU It’s called Wonder; it made me think, do you feel such wonder for the love and the mercy and the grace of God or for God’s creation – trees, fields, etc – that you want to keep your relationship alive? Does it reflect the wonder of knowing God in person and the marvels of such a relationship? Would this represent your feelings for the wonder you have for God or for nature which God created, in musical form? However I plan to discuss my favourite composers more on different pages as I have no wish to get terribly off-topic; Josh has indulged us quite a bit as it is.
Hi Averagjo, my response as follows: “Yes I have been hurt both emotionally and physically” I know and it hurts my heart to read that. “but at the same time God is the ultimate healer” He sure is, isn’t he? Sometimes I feel like God is not hearing me, yet when I pray my prayers more often than not are answered. Do you pray a lot? “he has strengthened me in my weakness and helped me to be a better person because of it” That is so good. I wish you hadn’t had to suffer, but I am so happy you have become a better person because of it. “Thank you for your concern though I really appreciate it” Thanks for accepting it, and I’m sorry my previous note was so curt, although I meant it well. “I pray your rest and dreams were pleasant and that you have a wonderful day :)” Same here! “much love and hugs to you from Carolyn and I :)” Hugs returned, and thank you because your note is so encouraging :) Could you please keep me in your prayers? I want to beat the OCDs and mild schizophrenia (only voices, thankfully!) that plague me from time to time; I am recovering and keeping a positive attitude but sometimes it’s hard. I can say honestly but for the grace of God I might have been much worse. I’ve been inspired by watching this awesome movie called A Beautiful Mind, a true story which deals with mental illness (schizophrenia) and it’s given me the strength to go on; it has such an inspiring conclusion. I recommend you watch it. Not to take the forum off-topic but I feel for anyone with a mental illness.
I apologise for the length! “To bring some clarification about my first point let me put it another way, a male is the biological evidence of manhood, that it physical outward appearance as a male, there are some exceptions but all children are usually born outwardly male or female.” In regards to exceptions, are you referring to hermaphrodites, transpeople, or both? “Just because someone is born as a male though does not make him a man.” From an egalitarian POV I disagree, if the person’s biological gender matches with their mental gender, in other words they are cis people. If, however, they are trans, I agree; transmen exist. Your illustrations of fishing and of guitar playing are very interesting analogies as regarding the “rite of passage”. Are you trying to say that a young guy spending time with older men as he grows to be a man is a “rite of passage” of sorts? Because I think that is your point, correct me if I’m wrong here. If that’s the case, that would imply that a man needs not only to hear that good men behave a certain way but to see it modelled in action. You said that “there is a part of becoming a man that happens as a result of observing how other men are, learning from them and putting what you learn into practice” which I think is your point. Then you go on to say, “That said just because you learn the rudimentary basics of what being a man is, you have to decide which parts are good and which parts don't work for you according to your experience.” What if the masculinity modelled for this guy ridiculed gardening as “too feminine” and he has heard that all his life? How is he to decide that he doesn’t need to abide by that standard? Also, supposing this “guy” is actually a transwoman and does not want to undertake the rite of passage, how is that going to go? This would be why I think the way we relate to people and behave with character would be so much better to spend time on than the activities we enjoy or the identities we are, or perceive ourselves to be. Do I agree with your analogy? Yes, in the sense that men need to be shown how to behave properly as people and to know their place in the world as people and as men, and no in the sense that being human is more important than your gender role, and I want to tease this question out further. Have you ever thought that this “rite of passage” should be rather a series of teachings from the time this guy is a tot? I mean, from a young age, he is taught that being a good person and being a man means he is honourable, kind, chivalrous, egalitarian, etc? Also, can’t women do the exact some things – honourable, protective, providers, etc? From a child I remember reading things about the way young men should conduct themselves and I think that such teaching would be helpful to make boys feel they belong in society again. Yet at the same time I think that it’s important they receive these teachings as people more than as prospective young men; in other words I am a little conflicted in this area and don’t know how to reconcile the two views I have on the issue. I am curious, can women join in this mentoring relationship, and learn or teach how to be good people too? In other words, if we are to take your fishing illustration at face value does that exclude female pupils? Please let me explain a little where I am coming from here. From a child, I have always believed in girls being equal to boys. I believed girls should be heroes in novels and girls should lead things. I especially loved the idea of a girl getting in with a group of boys and being mentored by an older man, and relished the idea of camaraderie between this girl and her male friends. In other words, if I watched a male-oriented movie, like movies with soldiers etc, I would replace one of the male characters with my female character in my mind; she would bond and act as one of the team, preferably as leader, and it was special because she was a girl. I was thinking this way at eight years old, long before I had heard the terms “feminism”, “egalitarianism”, and “equality” and saw how gendered our society is. I think, also, that having such a strong relationship with my father influenced my thinking in some ways. I am very fond of the younger woman learning from the older man scenario, because this brings to me the idea that as a man, he is passing on his knowledge to a woman, mentoring and guiding her; what an honour that is! I think my question is, why is it being called “being a man”? Why it is not referred to as “being a good person”? Yet in a way I understand, because men are – generally speaking – built stronger etc, so they need to be taught to protect females while at the same time society needs to recognise that women need to be encouraged to protect themselves. At the same time men stronger than women is a potential stereotype because there are plenty of physically strong women out there, some stronger than their partners! On the one hand I think being human is the highest priority; on the other hand I recognise that men have something missing in their lives in that they have never been taught the importance of good relationships with people and I think that needs to change. In the olden days there was definitely more emphasis on the way men conducted themselves in society, and they were always expected to be honourable and good; that gap needs to be filled again somehow, not by what sports men play or by what subjects men excel in but rather in how men act. In short I do think social conditioning has a lot to do with the way men and women behave; what say you? Speaking of which, those whiners at Return of Kings cried and boo-hooed yet again about how feminism has ruined their lives (again, I will spare you the article); they claimed that feminism insisted they do not ever hit a woman. Sorry, but AFAIK that rule has been around in the old-fashioned men’s roles books long before feminism came along. Is their role too hard for them to bear; is it such a cross around their necks? Sometimes I understand those rare situations where a man has to hit a woman, like if they are having a fair fight in a boxing ring but generally it has been viewed as a very unchivalrous thing to do, long before it was viewed as a woman’s rights issue. Boy they are really getting their knickers in a twist, aren’t they, if they’re not willing to abide by the old-fashioned chivalry playbook; I wonder if those rules about not hitting women were invented by a traditional understanding of men’s roles or feminism? “To your point on the relationship between men and women outside marriage, it is a different relationship…” Firstly, I would like to acknowledge your belief that being the leader of the home indicates more responsibility, rather than more power. In my opinion, that is a start in a good direction – because it means that you personally do not want to use your leadership skills or your manliness to oppress the people in your household. In that sense, your intention is to be commended, as at least you are consistent in what you believe, in the sense that men leading the home have the responsibility to look after the people they are leading as well and to be accountable for their safety and their lives as well as mentoring them. Do I agree with your position? No, because I believe that leadership is based on skill and abilities rather than a desired gender. What I recognise is your desire for intellectual honesty and your willingness to understand that with leadership comes responsibility rather than just an excuse to beat people up. It sounds to me like a functionally egalitarian arrangement (in the sense that the guy makes the final decision on some matters while the girl makes them in others) in principle, although it is complementarian in some of the outcomes (the guy is responsible for the way his family goes). Now, I do have some questions, and some slight disagreements. However, I hope in my words I am showing that I am not misreading nor wilfully misunderstanding your position. Furthermore I do acknowledge that you believe in ezer kenedgo so I hope you remember that as you read my questions. To be honest I am unsure how more responsibility works without more power; could you explain that one? Also, if he is responsible for the outcome, then won’t he be more vigilant in regards to decision making, to what he allows his family to participate in? What if there is something in the outcome he couldn’t foresee, is he responsible for that? I am highly unsure how the relationship between you and your wife is any different from the relationship between you and another woman, as regards equality of position and abilities. As for his being a servant, leaders don’t usually think of themselves as servants, especially if God gave them this awesome position to “do things” for people and sometimes make a bunch of rules. Please explain how you think it is possible to be a leader (especially with the responsibilities you described) and a servant at the same time, because the two seem so opposite to each other. Why is it that God wants men to have this position; is it not more practical that ability should rule in these cases rather than gender, I do not understand. If the relationship of friendships leads to marriage, how can it be a different relationship from all others? Rationally speaking I would have thought that if friendships paved the way to marriages that the friendship in marriage would have been an extension of the friendship of the platonic. In other words, friendships are generally equal, for in this case people choose their leaders; but employment opportunities are generally hierarchical in that there is a boss and down the ladder it goes. Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying here? Furthermore I’m unsure how chaos would ensue if equality ruled affairs? Please let me explain what this means. Having been on the receiving end of this kind of governance, I can only say in some ways aspects of my life that should very much have been under my control were ruled by the whims and fancies of others. In some ways, I’ve been totally at the mercy of another gender – unable to walk alone down the streets, or to go certain places by myself without another person with me, because I am a woman. Also I know what it is to have everything approved by everyone before I could read or participate in it, because guys had better spiritual discernment than myself. Don’t mistake me, I’m not bitter over it at all and I realise the intentions for such governance were for my benefit rather than my detriment. I just think things could have been done better under a more egalitarian arrangement, especially as I am trying to regain parts of my spiritual road and independence that such arrangements block. I would like you to acknowledge this in your response (or to at least consider what I am saying here), what is your opinion of the arrangement I described? (BTW I’ve never been married so this is not a husband-wife thing). I said, “I believe that leadership is based on skill and abilities rather than a desired gender.” I say this because everyone is a unique individual with different strengths and weaknesses. From what I have observed, gender has nothing to do with it (you might disagree with that and if so please explain why). Some men really do have the temperament to follow rather than lead too, and some women know how to lead well; I am unsure how this fits into your belief that men should lead in the home? If a man is given such authority and power might he not be more likely to feel entitled to special perks as befitting his position? What I mean by that is that I am concerned that such a level of intense power opens the door to a man abusing such power. I question this because most men DON’T see it that way. They perceive it as an opportunity to have more power, rather than more responsibility. Does not more power flow with more responsibility? Also do you really think it is fair to you to have more responsibility, if you don’t have more power that goes along with that responsibility? I mean, if things turn out really rotten and it wasn’t your fault, would you still bear responsibility for that? If so, how would God handle it, and how would you handle it? “As far as other women go, how can I lead them? They are not in my family unit…” Firstly, I appreciate the fact that you genuinely care about, encourage, and love women outside your family unit rather than use and abuse them, and that you consider women to be your sisters and equals. That is to be commended and I respect you for it. That being said, this is the part that bugs me – how can you have an equal relationship with women when you believe you, as the head of the home should lead one, or possibly a few, women? Wouldn’t the way you treat the women in your family unit trickle out to the way you treat women outside the family? Also, you mentioned that you believe women are the “weaker vessel”; do you still believe this and if so why? How far does equality go for you? I mean by this, do you generally see women as comrades or as delicate little flowers in need of protection, or does it depend on the situation? Is there ever a certain point that you will start treating a woman outside your family differently just because she happens to be female, and if so, what is that point? “I will have to look more into the theories of egalitarianism…” In regards to your research on roles, don’t be afraid to ask questions. Ever. Also I would encourage you not to make a firm decision until you have all the facts before you. Here are a few articles to help you on the journey: http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/4-common-misconceptions-egalitarianism http://juniaproject.com/confusing-equality-sameness-complementarian-misconception/ http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/complementarianism-for-dummies http://www.theopedia.com/complementarianism http://www.theopedia.com/egalitarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_egalitarianism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarianism Do I agree with complementarianism? No, I don’t. But I believe in seeking to be fair and unbiased in the way I represent myself. However as we keep talking I have no problem in critiquing complementarianism, and in being open to hearing critiques about egalitarianism as well. Last but not least, I’m curious to know if you’ve ever heard of the term “benevolent sexism”? “I unfortunately know all to well the pitfalls of other men putting down the idea of men and women being friends.” Well, it is in the culture to see women as sex objects rather than people. That’s what equal rights activists have been fighting for, like, centuries. BTW you’re absolutely right, very succinctly put mate. Would you personally believe that men behave like this because all their male role models are negative, and biased against women? I tend to. Unfortunately when people try to lift up the contributions of women others will cry “Feminism is creeping in, we have to put a stop to it!” or “Men’s contributions need to be recognised too!”* Why are people so afraid of Wonderful Observant Mystical Earnest Nymphs Or, alternatively, you could spell it Wondrous Intense Merciful Masterful Incredible Nymphs BTW this is true, but not at the cost of putting women down I think “I however do agree that man woman friendships are crucial to the continuation of the species as much if not more so than husbands and wives.” I do too, because if they are friends and a relationship breaks up, I think they can still keep the relationship – as friends – while discarding the more intimate one. Very well put, I think. “Because as we lose understanding of one another from a friendly perspective and become poisoned into believing that the other is the "enemy" then how many generations are we away from the idea of men and women living completely separately from each other?” Again, brilliantly put! It would definitely be better if we could have a perception of the opposite sex as people to be trusted rather than feared. Unfortunately, however, this is not the world we are living in. We live in a world of gender segregation which thrives on sexism and prejudice, exacerbated by bad behaviours that encourage us to dislike the opposite sex as a whole. For instance, a personal confession – due to the behaviour of a significant minority of the population of mankind I generally feel very averse to trusting anyone presenting as male. A way for men to turn such a trend is simply to treat women with respect, as PEOPLE. That’s it, nothing more is required. I remember the feminist sayings “All men are oppressors” and “All women are sisters” which could be explained and interpreted from a feminist standpoint but in my mind are completely false, for two very simple reasons: some men are good people and try to treat human beings with respect – how can they be oppressors (there is such a thing as privilege but that is not for this discussion)? Also some women believe that oppression of their sex is perfectly acceptable, in some cases mandated by their “god” – how can they be sisters? If you are going to say “All women are your sisters” then you need a common goal, an enemy, and sometimes women become that enemy, either in ignorance or in favour of keeping the status quo alive. This is how I see it – I don’t care what sex or gender you present, or what label you use (except in rare and exceptional circumstances) – if you wish to treat people as people, I will respect that and don’t believe in demanding ideological purity out of anyone. In short, I would rather be friends with a more old-fashioned man who was respectful and kind to my sex (and to other people) than with a pro-feminist man who gave lip service to feminist values but demeaned and abused me. From your perspective do you think that, in the way they treat men, women could do anything to turn such a trend and if so, what? In short, men and women need each other for the propagation of the human race, especially if technology fails. To do this, it is essential they build friendships and the type of camaraderie that is gender-blind and that lasts a lifetime. What needs to be done – have everyone grow up together and view each other as comrades and people from a young age, and as people grow older and sex drives kick in, teach them to navigate these drives while maintaining respect for the sex they are attracted to, as people. I’m not against dating, however I think friendships should be seen as more important than chasing people for intimate relationships. It’s no wonder boys are uncomfortable approaching a girl they hardly know for a date, because they *don’t know this girl and it is, IMHO, ridiculous to start your relationships with a romantic or sexual bent so quickly because if things go wrong your heart tends to be broken. However the societal pressure is so great that young people do these things before they have seriously considered what they are doing with themselves. “Men are already highly addicted to pornography and women have found the ability to find love and understanding from one another, is it too far a stretch to say that if we don't close the divide it will only get worse?” Yeah, porn is a curse, despite other people claiming otherwise. Feminism is torn on the issue of pornography – some against, some for. And the widespread culture is so openly pushing it that young men feel pressured to get involved, or start their addiction from curiosity or a desire for education, else they are not seen as a “real man”. As for women finding the ability to find love and understanding from one another, could you expound on that point please? “I think it is vital for men and women to understand respect and love one another only in this will we turn the tide and find common ground between the sexes.” I totally agree! “Also yes you've hit the nail on the head, if we are to continue to be together as man and women as a species we need to at least "like" one another to be able to "love" one another.” Another area of complete interest, I think part of the reason that men and women struggle to relate to each other is the artificial gender gap created by our society. Boys and girls are taught from day 1 to participate in different activities and to enjoy different things associated with their gender. It is only natural for people to bond quickly with other people that share their common interests while tending to avoid the ones that do not. To be honest, it is very clever the way it is done. I believe since boys and girls are taught to view each other as an opposite kind rather than as a slightly different person biologically, and to pursue only interests that society has deemed acceptable for their sex, the gender gap will grow bigger. However, encouraging people to embrace activities nonconventional for their sex might just increase common ground with the opposite sex and help men and women to bond faster, whether over hobbies or even over shopping. However, feel free to disagree, and if so please explain why. “Through the process of being friends with the opposite sex, I believe we do learn to be friends with our future spouse and for those who are already married we learn how to be better friends to our spouse.” Most definitely; simply put though, how can this be achieved with roles? I can understand to a certain extent why men should protect women and that sort of thing, but generally speaking I’m unsure how roles can be helpful to this process of common understanding and love. I believe the area of male/female friendships is intimately tied with gender roles, social constructs, and all other manner of societal frameworks. It is only one dynamic out of many but it is a seriously underscored dynamic, yet could be the very chord that either makes or breaks the harmony of a future society. In regards to David and Jonathan, I love that story a lot. Personally I am a little unsure, but I tend to lean toward a more traditional interpretation of the passages. I like the idea that men can bond like that, although I am curious as to why you don’t think their relationship was gay but rather a very close friendship? As for the comparison to marriage I consider it apt, for marriage partners should love one another like this; however why would you compare such a close friendship to a marriage? Sometimes I would ask myself, is such a thing possible between two different sexes? The answers I tended to get were “no” and “only in marriage”. That left me feeling very disappointed, to the point where I was considering writing a novel on the subject. “To see it explained that clearly tells me there is room for a man to love a women that deeply and have no sexual desire for her, which I hope dispels the myth that "man and women can't be just friends"” I also think this way, that it is possible. However society ridicules and scorns the ideal so much that men are discouraged from creating such intimate bonds with women. I am curious though, if David said that Jonathan’s love was better to him than the love of women, why wasn’t he intimate with him? I mean, I think sometimes it is hard for me to overcome the idea that sex = love, because as I see it, isn’t sex a natural outworking of the bonds of friendship and love (I speak of enthusiastically consenting adults only here)? Yet at the same time I understand that love can be expressed, and close emotional and spiritual ties can be formed, without sex (between, for instance, animals and humans, children and adults, children and children, married/committed people and someone other than their spouse/partner, etc), so I’m unsure how that goes because sex between adults in a consenting relationship, to me, seems to be the cherry on the icing.
"Also it says that with the beautiful women the best way to get the exorcisms to work was through canning" Where did it say that? I have more thoughts about it but they would be off-topic so I think if we're going to discuss misogyny extensively let's go to the page I told you about before, the one on the I fight bullies website; I've tried and tried to load the link but it wouldn't go through. If you surf through my comments though you will find it and we can pick up our misogyny discussion there.
I share your opinion, and I think that's just horrible that they abuse women like this myself. In regards to caning, some prefer that while others prefer to terrorise the women in other ways. In other words, women that wanted to be themselves or have suffered stresses in their lives were punished rather than helped. Disgusting I say, and also very sadistic and cruel, and an excuse to torment women that don’t fit the party line. This is nothing more than using religion to beat down people with legitimate needs or desires - as usual.
I read it. Is it saying that attractive women are more likely to be exorcised because they are more likely to suffer from symptoms of abuse and stress because they have been stigmatised for being women by society? I think these women need therapy rather than drugs or exorcisms. Also, is the article saying the majority of victims of forced exorcisms are more likely to be female, and that people could make up charges against them to get them exorcised of rebellious behaviour? Sorry for the questions but I want to understand what I just read.
I know but you've been so hurt and I'm so concerned for you :*( For you and Carolyn - I hope the moon beams on you, gently gathers her maidens the stars around you, and that they all smile enfolding you in their loving embrace.
I can't stand RoK myself. It's tied up with the MRA (men's rights activist) movement - sometimes known as red-pill, have you ever heard of it? You said, "I think yes a man should always be willing to evaluate the path he is on and make sure what he is doing is to glory and not to dishonor." Could you please expound on this concept from your POV? I know how you feel about RoK but here's something to cheer ya up then, mate: http://www.popsugar.com/fitness/Runner-Gets-Catcalled-Little-Boy-Stands-Up-her-39176232 "I do take that part of the Bible seriously and it is a good way to look at it." You'll see that in action in the story; I think you'll like it, please read. As my friend said, clearly his parents are raising a good man. Here's the full comment here and please especially read the first part, you will find it helpful in being a better friend and man, and I hope one day you receive the privilege of making the commenter's better acquaintance, as I have had: https://disqus.com/home/discussion/friendlyatheist1/nine_dead_in_charleston_church_shooting/#comment-2390343104 "The same would apply with my mother, but truthfully I have never had a good relationship with anyone I saw as a motherly figure in my life, so I am happier to consider them all sisters because this makes it easier for me to love and respect them." Sometimes it must be very difficult for you to be respectful to womankind when some of my sex hurt you so very badly, but I'm proud of you for being so brave and so willing to do the right thing. I'm sorry to hear you never had a good relationship with mother-figures; that really breaks my heart. May I ask why this was the case, if it wouldn't hurt too much for you to answer? Also crones are wise and ancient, passing wisdom down to younger people. In regards to calling all women sisters and finding it easier to respect them that way, thank you for doing the best you can with the limited knowledge you have and the pain you are in; I honestly disbelieve you deserve to be in so much anguish. As I've said before, words are all I have to offer and I hope they gently touch and heal the brokenness in your heart. I love you deeply and there is nothing more I would delight in than to give my big six-foot-ten friend a big bear hug (but only if you want it). I hope I didn't make your wife feel excluded or offended by what I just said (and if I did I apologise!) because I love her and want to embrace her (if she wants that) just as much as I do you, not only for her own sake but also as she is your life partner and is helping you to be a better man. In short, <3 and Xs for the both of you. I really appreciate that you took the time to respond to all my comments and I think it's time I started responding to some of yours. Also if ever I'm in terrible trouble and you're around I will send you a line; I look forward to seeing how such a confrontation would play out though I don't want you hurt emotionally because of my messes.
To be honest I never thought about it the way you said - about being "a man" versus "the best man I can be" - that is incredibly thought-provoking and I agree with your point although I hope you don't mind if I ask you to expound on how a woman cannot influence a man to be "a man." I do agree that women - and men - can influence a man to be a better man, however, and your reply on this topic is excellent. Also how is being "a man" different from being male? I find that concept a little foreign to my egalitarian mind. I am also curious to know how, if a man is to be the head over the woman (his wife), that he can be equals and friends with other women? I ask because if men are the God-ordained leaders over women how can they perceive themselves on the same level playing-field; I am not sure how this works to be honest. From my limited knowledge, as we've talked I think you tend to be leaning more and more to a complemegalitarian viewpoint. I say limited, because there isn't much out there about complemegalitarianism - the two main viewpoints discussed at length are complementarianism and egalitarianism. In short complemegalitarianism teaches the roles without the hierarchy, if you understand what I mean. I read this horrible article on RoK - don't worry, I will spare you this time because they seem to have a negative effect on your digestion - on how men and women should not spend so much time together, and how boys were socialised to be sissies because they interacted so much with girls. I would have thought that people wanted men and women to interact more for the sake of male/female friendships; what do you think? Also I believe male/female friendships are invaluable to society for so many reasons, not the least of which, they strengthen marriages. As Mary Wollstonecraft, Mother of Modern Feminism, points out again and again in her book A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (a book I recommend you read BTW), friendships are imperative for a good marriage. For instance on page 94, Penguin Classics version: "Personal attachment is a very happy foundation for friendship; yet, when even two virtuous young people marry, it would, perhaps, be happy if some circumstances checked their passion; if the recollection of some prior attachment, or disappointed affection, made it on one side, at least, rather than a match founded on esteem. In that case they would look beyond the present moment, and try to render the whole of life respectable, by forming a plan to regulate a friendship which only death ought to dissolve. Friendship is a serious affection; the most sublime of all affections, because it is founded on principle, and cemented by time. The very reverse may be said of love. In a great degree, love and friendship cannot subsist in the same bosom; even when inspired by different objects they weaken or destroy each other, and for the same object can only be felt in succession. The vain fears and fond jealousies, the winds which fan the flame of love, when judiciously or artfully tempered, are both incompatible with the tender confidence and sincere respect of friendship." I could provide more quotes but I think the theme of this work is to teach us that, if women are to be wives and mothers and pursue other sensible occupations as people, they need to be prepared for these things by sound education, good morals, a love of intelligence, and a willingness to create a friendship with the future spouse. Thank you for your reassurances too. I would never want to drag you down but rather to build you up in your desire to be a decent human being (which should come even before being a good man, why I say that is because all those things men should be encouraged to do are human duties, in reality; yet I think it's important for guys to hear these things because they need to know they belong) and to be the leader, protector, and provider guy that you are (and I know some guys are more artsy, academic, creative, etc - whatever you were I would support that as long as it was good). It really hurts to think I could have stopped you from fulfilling those qualities as a good person or as a man; I can't stand Roosh V and his buddies and I think they have nasty chips on their shoulders (although I love French fries on occasion, so that's not what I mean when I say chips). I think if more men saw guys they respected modelling proper male-female friendships then they would find it easier to relate in a healthy fashion to the opposite sex. Last but not least I appreciate your taking your Bible seriously when it says to treat all older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters. That is the way it should be; such a statement makes perfect sense to me and I don't know why more people follow it. I am deeply saddened that men don't have the example of a man before them doing the things they claim guys should be doing; it leads them wrong especially if they have a bad guy role-modelling for them. Thanks for offering to be my protector as well, I suspect I might need it in the coming days and I would appreciate the input of a strong man having my back. One online acquaintance has said of me that I am, in his opinion, really sweet, and don't know how to look after myself nearly as well as other people (he particularly referenced someone he was debating but I think, knowing his mind, he would think most people can look after themselves better online). Another very close friend of mine said that I feel responsible for the well-being of others, and that she thinks it's both my strength and weakness. I'm not telling you that to brag but rather to state that I find being attacked online highly disconcerting and I tend to wilt under it.
"As for me, I have a simple rule - treat your cross-sex friends the same way you'd treat your opposite-sex friends, unless circumstances dictate otherwise." Opposite-sex friends should have been same-sex friends, and now the sentence will read this way: "As for me, I have a simple rule - treat your cross-sex friends the same way you'd treat your same-sex friends, unless circumstances dictate otherwise." I apologise for my mistake!
"I thought of you yesterday , as you from NZ. Watching a comedy news thing and they mentioned the incident with Steven Joyce ! The presenter John Oliver was having fun with him" Thank you, that was most kind of you. Oh my gosh, please tell me about what happened with this Steven Joyce fella, LOL. I never heard this story before! "That's cool, I will take a look. It's always refreshing to see another's views and take on things ." Thanks very much. We don't agree on everything but I personally find him to be amazingly open-minded even to ideas he disagrees with. If you want to add your contributions to our conversation by all means please do so, it would be fun to hear your POV on some of the stuff we talk about. Last but not least, you ever heard of that website Return of Kings? A nasty, rubbishy place to stay away from - Roosh V the pro-legal rape guy has ties to that place, ugh! They wrote this horrid article about how men and women couldn't be friends because of the guy's sex drive. Men using the wrong head to think with again :( As for me, I have a simple rule - treat your cross-sex friends the same way you'd treat your opposite-sex friends, unless circumstances dictate otherwise.
Hi, I'll respond to this comment properly later. I'm sorry but I've tried and tried to load my response onto the page it was intended for and it wouldn't work. Here's what you said: http://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/responding-to-the-astute-observation-that-i-am-a-man/#comment-2515732849 and this is my response to it: Oh, I know. Well, it is a men’s rights activist site after all. On some issues I can at least have an open mind on some of the complaints of pro-men’s rights guys but when I do it’s pretty rare and it has to be for a good reason. Most of the time I can’t be bothered with what they have to say because it’s not about women suppressing them, it’s about their not getting their way with women, and I think that’s just terrible. Wow, you have to wonder if half the stuff they put out is meant to be satire :( I have friends who disagree with me on the life issue that would be highly appalled by this stuff because they really believe that no one should be forced not to have or to have an abortion (I should show them; I suspect it would make for interesting discussion and you could join in if you wanted). Funny how it projects itself as pro-family and pro-father! I suppose I have to agree yet again with the legal abortion advocates when they say that abortion is only seen as societally unacceptable when WOMEN do it voluntarily for themselves. It should not be that way at all. Another point - if men are allowed an opinion against abortion will not some men assume they have a right to have an opinion FOR abortion? Which is a potential downside to Josh's arguments I think. As a PL person I am appalled because abortion is morally reprehensible regardless of the sex of the person pushing the "procedure". I'm really upset because I've seen PL friends of mine comment there in the past, although I'm thrilled to say some PL folks tore the turf off this one! I say boycott this site, because this is just so disgusting that a man would dream up this confounded crp, and the forced murder of his own child (I understand the legal implications but I speak in the moral sense in this case). You do realise that there are some people claiming to be PL but will slip their female relatives or lovers in for an abortion, don’t you? Even guys who think it should be illegal will do this – pastors, in some cases, while preaching from the pulpit about it. Such hypocrisy! "I am appalled and astounded as I have been for their other articles, which I will comment on as well" - which ones do you mean? Sadly there's little pieces of diamonds in there, but the vast majority of them are fly crp IMHO and I haven't the spoons to wade through their hate-speech. I'm betting guys like Doug Phillips, Doug Wilson, and Mark Driscoll would LURVE them some of that stuff, BTW. Oh, the precious irony - pro-family leaders. Although I remember on my research in the odious perversion of Valentines Romance that is commonly known as Fifty Shades, in the third book Christian Grey tries to pressure his new wife Anastasia Steele to get an abortion, no kidding. No, this is compromise, and the pro-family crowd should stand up to these guys and make them behave, call out the bull in their own back yard and force them to properly abide by pro-family standards - if indeed pro-family people like to read RoK. Also, just curious - do you think the PL movement could take stronger stances on certain subjects? Last but not least, how would you counsel a man who wanted to do this kind of thing on his girlfriend? PS: I did leave a few comments on the adoption rates spiking article; would you mind responding to them please (although I will understand if you can’t respond immediately, or if you’d rather not)? Also I apologise for not getting to the comments I haven’t responded to yet but I will ASAP, fair is fair.
That's awesome, Hypatia. I also believe that friendships between men and women are possible but our society discourages this so very much. Even in the articles promoting cross-sex friendship there are generally a lot of discouraging hints of how cross-sex friendships generally don't work out. You have it right - be faithful to your spouse and the rest will work itself out just fine. Although I presently am single that is the plan I will stick to if ever I have male friends after I am married. Speaking of which, I have made a new online friend - a married man that deeply loves his wife but is very good at making female friends at the same time, no less - and I am excited about this new friendship. His comments, and my responses, are a little further below if you would like to read them.
I totally agree with your points, and with Josh Brahm's article. It is one of the few on the web of its kind, as many articles seem to write negatively about male/female friendships. I'd have to look - there are a few positive ones out there and if I find them I'll bring them to you. I think that in regards to male/female friendships I tend to follow one simple rule unless circumstances demand otherwise - however you treat your same-sex friends, treat your cross-sex friends exactly the same way. If it's not an activity or a way to touch that you would feel comfortable doing on your same-sex friends it's probably not a good idea to do it on your cross-sex friends. Platonic ideals are the focus here, not sex. Although I have heard of close friends having sex yet remaining friends. I had a conversation once with a bunch of online friends about male-female friendships; I'd have to dig it up and show you and ask you what you think of it. That being said, I would like to ask two things of you: In regards to the things I have expressed to you about how men can treat women better, etc, I read this very disturbing article at Return of Kings. I've mentioned this website before as something to stay away from, as Roosh V the rape promoter has ties to this site. Here's a quote from it that I wanted your opinion on: "No woman can offer a man advice on how to be a man. Period. Thou shalt not accept advice from a woman on manliness. There are no exceptions to this rule. It doesn’t matter if her intentions are noble. It doesn’t matter if she means well. The inescapable fact is that the art of being a man is a subject outside of her range of experience. If I tried to write for a women’s blog on the arts of child bearing and child rearing, I would be laughed at. And justifiably so. But only in feminized America can a woman presume, with her infinite arrogance, to offer advice to men on how to be a man. And it is just when a woman is trying to be helpful, trying to “save” a man, that she is at her most dangerous. Beware that woman who wants to “save” you. She may truly believe it, and she may sincerely want it. But beware her just the same. Because deep down, in her innermost heart, the most secret and cherished desire of every woman is to see a man dethroned, and rolled in the muck. She’ll never admit this, of course. Ask her, and she’ll get furiously indignant in her denials. But it is true just the same. You can just feel it. On this path of struggle that we men must walk, our woman cannot carry our burdens. We are, each of us, alone. And this is the first law of masculinity. And it is the most important law." Please be honest: do you think this is what I have done? Also, I know you said that I haven't suppressed or oppressed you personally but do you think what I believe encourages oppression or suppression of men and masculinity in any way? If either question can be answered in the affirmative please, tell me now and explain why this is and I'll consider your points. Furthermore, they put out this article about why male/female friendships are just absolutely 100% totes impossible: http://www.returnofkings.com/24101/its-impossible-for-women-and-men-to-be-friends Please tell me what you think of that one by the time you've finished reading. Secondly, I hope you don't mind if I ask not only for your friendship but also for your protection online. Part of the reason is that I am honoured to know you but there's more to it than that. Honestly, I think I am being stalked. The comments are occasional but when they come they are incredibly nasty. All I ask is for you to watch my back but please don't say or do anything unless I ask you to, as although I would prefer to handle it myself if possible I am a little scared and if things get absolutely horrible I will write and tell you.
Well said Josh. I've met a lot of Christian men and women who go out of their way to avoid friendships with the opposite sex. I find that mentality to be very unhealthy. How can anyone expect to relate to the opposite sex in marriage, if they can't do so in friendship? Like you said, boundaries are important.
"I’m making a few minor adjustments" Saying that you love a certain woman, and following that up by quoting Love says that it is good that you exist and insofar as I am able I will contribute to your happiness, your existence, your flourishing, I thought had a lot of educational value in speeches of yours I've heard. I hope that part is still there.
That's staying. There's a few other words I've used that I think are accurate by definition, but because they are often used in more romantic or sexual contexts, it's better to replace them with other words. In other words, I want to do every single thing I can do on my end to help prevent misunderstanding.
Josh, thanks for writing this article. You give me hope with it. I've read so much about male/female platonic friendships being impossible but they ARE possible if they're done right. I appreciate this so very much, thanks again.
that why you love him so much? Also if God took everything away from you and you ended up being a persecuted Christian would you still love him? We can’t
just love God because he does nice things for us, we have to love him when things get tough too.
Okay, the second song is about forgiveness in Jesus, because he makes us new. Are you trying to say that since he’s remade and forgiven us we need to change for him,
or he changes us as well? Is this part of the growth of a new creation, of being a new creation, in him?
Did I understand the messages of the songs well?
Does this song reflect a relationship with God in your opinion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKdn3xGCnsw
It’s called Heaven’s Legacy by BrunuhVille; please listen to it especially as BrunuhVille happens to be one of my favourite composers. I thought that it would represent at least one aspect of a relationship with God, angels, spirits,
and nature – the peace that God and angels bring with their presence.
Here’s another one by BrunuhVille:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qV0E2c4CsnU
It’s called Wonder; it made me think, do you feel such wonder for the love and the mercy and the grace of God or for God’s creation – trees, fields, etc – that you want to keep your relationship alive? Does it reflect the wonder of knowing God in person and the marvels of such a relationship? Would this represent your feelings for the wonder you have for God or for nature which God created, in musical form?
However I plan to discuss my favourite composers more on different pages as I have no wish to get terribly off-topic; Josh has indulged us quite a bit as it is.
“Yes I have been hurt both emotionally and physically”
I know and it hurts my heart to read that.
“but at the same time God is the ultimate healer”
He sure is, isn’t he? Sometimes I feel like God is not hearing me, yet when I pray my prayers more often than not are answered. Do you pray a lot?
“he has strengthened me in my weakness and helped me to be a better person because of it”
That is so good. I wish you hadn’t had to suffer, but I am so happy you have become a better person because of it.
“Thank you for your concern though I really appreciate it”
Thanks for accepting it, and I’m sorry my previous note was so curt, although I meant it well.
“I pray your rest and dreams were pleasant and that you
have a wonderful day :)”
Same here!
“much love and hugs to you from Carolyn and I :)”
Hugs returned, and thank you because your note is so
encouraging :)
Could you please keep me in your prayers? I want to beat
the OCDs and mild schizophrenia (only voices, thankfully!) that plague me from time to time; I am recovering and keeping a positive attitude but sometimes it’s hard. I can say honestly but for the grace of God I might have been much worse. I’ve been inspired by watching this awesome movie called A Beautiful Mind, a true story which deals with mental illness (schizophrenia) and it’s given me the strength to go on; it has such an inspiring conclusion. I recommend you watch it. Not to take the forum off-topic but I feel for anyone with a mental illness.
“To bring some clarification about my first point let me put it another way, a male is the biological evidence of manhood, that it physical outward appearance as a male, there are some exceptions but all children are usually born outwardly male or female.”
In regards to exceptions, are you referring to hermaphrodites, transpeople, or both?
“Just because someone is born as a male though does not make him a man.”
From an egalitarian POV I disagree, if the person’s biological gender matches with their mental gender, in other words they are cis people. If, however, they are trans, I agree; transmen exist.
Your illustrations of fishing and of guitar playing are very interesting analogies as regarding the “rite of passage”. Are you trying to say that a young guy spending time with older men as he grows to be a man is a “rite of passage” of sorts? Because I think that is your point, correct me if I’m wrong here. If that’s the case, that would imply that a man needs not only to hear that good men behave a certain way but to see it modelled in action. You said that “there is a part of becoming a man that happens as a result of observing how other men are, learning from them and putting what you learn into practice” which I think
is your point. Then you go on to say, “That said just because you learn the rudimentary basics of what being a man is, you have to decide which parts are good and which parts don't work for you according to your experience.” What if the masculinity modelled for this guy ridiculed gardening as “too feminine” and he has heard that all his life? How is he to decide that he doesn’t need to
abide by that standard? Also, supposing this “guy” is actually a transwoman and does not want to undertake the rite of passage, how is that going to go? This would be why I think the way we relate to people and behave with character would be so much better to spend time on than the activities we enjoy or the identities we are, or perceive ourselves to be. Do I agree with your analogy? Yes, in the
sense that men need to be shown how to behave properly as people and to know their place in the world as people and as men, and no in the sense that being human is more important than your gender role, and I want to tease this question out further.
Have you ever thought that this “rite of passage” should be rather a series of teachings from the time this guy is a tot? I mean, from a young age, he is taught that being a good person and being a man means he is honourable, kind, chivalrous, egalitarian, etc? Also, can’t women do the exact some things – honourable, protective, providers, etc? From a child I remember reading things about the way young men should conduct themselves and I think that such teaching would be helpful to make boys feel they belong in society again. Yet at the same time I think that it’s important they receive these teachings as people
more than as prospective young men; in other words I am a little conflicted in this area and don’t know how to reconcile the two views I have on the issue.
I am curious, can women join in this mentoring relationship, and learn or teach how to be good people too? In other words, if we are to take your fishing illustration at face value does that exclude female pupils? Please let me explain a little where I am coming from here.
From a child, I have always believed in girls being equal to boys. I believed girls should be heroes in novels and girls should lead things. I especially loved the idea of a girl getting in with a group of boys and being mentored by
an older man, and relished the idea of camaraderie between this girl and her male friends. In other words, if I watched a male-oriented movie, like movies with soldiers etc, I would replace one of the male characters with my female character in my mind; she would bond and act as one of the team, preferably as leader, and it was special because she was a girl. I was thinking this way at eight years old, long before I had heard the terms “feminism”,
“egalitarianism”, and “equality” and saw how gendered our society is. I think, also, that having such a strong relationship with my father influenced my thinking in some ways. I am very fond of the younger woman learning from the older man scenario, because this brings to me the idea that as a man, he is passing on his knowledge to a woman, mentoring and guiding her; what an honour that is!
I think my question is, why is it being called “being a man”? Why it is not referred to as “being a good person”? Yet in a way I understand, because men are – generally speaking – built stronger etc, so they need to be taught to
protect females while at the same time society needs to recognise that women need to be encouraged to protect themselves. At the same time men stronger than
women is a potential stereotype because there are plenty of physically strong women out there, some stronger than their partners! On the one hand I think being human is the highest priority; on the other hand I recognise that men
have something missing in their lives in that they have never been taught the importance of good relationships with people and I think that needs to change. In the olden days there was definitely more emphasis on the way men conducted themselves in society, and they were always expected to be honourable and good; that gap needs to be filled again somehow, not by what sports men play or by
what subjects men excel in but rather in how men act. In short I do think social conditioning has a lot to do with the way men and women behave; what say you?
Speaking of which, those whiners at Return of Kings cried and boo-hooed yet again about how feminism has ruined their lives (again, I will spare you the article); they claimed that feminism insisted they do not ever hit a woman. Sorry, but AFAIK that rule has been around in the old-fashioned men’s roles books long before feminism came along. Is their role too hard for them to bear; is it such a cross around their necks? Sometimes I understand those rare
situations where a man has to hit a woman, like if they are having a fair fight in a boxing ring but generally it has been viewed as a very unchivalrous thing to do, long before it was viewed as a woman’s rights issue. Boy they are really
getting their knickers in a twist, aren’t they, if they’re not willing to abide by the old-fashioned chivalry playbook; I wonder if those rules about not hitting women were invented by a traditional understanding of men’s roles or
feminism?
“To your point on the relationship between men and women outside marriage, it is a different relationship…”
Firstly, I would like to acknowledge your belief that being the leader of the home indicates more responsibility, rather than more power. In my opinion, that is a start in a good direction – because it means that you personally do not
want to use your leadership skills or your manliness to oppress the people in your household. In that sense, your intention is to be commended, as at least you are consistent in what you believe, in the sense that men leading the home have the responsibility to look after the people they are leading as well and to be accountable for their safety and their lives as well as mentoring them. Do I
agree with your position? No, because I believe that leadership is based on skill and abilities rather than a desired gender. What I recognise is your desire for
intellectual honesty and your willingness to understand that with leadership comes responsibility rather than just an excuse to beat people up. It sounds to me like a functionally egalitarian arrangement (in the sense that the guy makes the final decision on some matters while the girl makes them in others) in principle, although it is complementarian in some of the outcomes (the guy is
responsible for the way his family goes).
Now, I do have some questions, and some slight disagreements. However, I hope in my words I am showing that I am not misreading nor wilfully misunderstanding
your position. Furthermore I do acknowledge that you believe in ezer kenedgo so I hope you remember that as you read my questions.
To be honest I am unsure how more responsibility works without more power; could you explain that one? Also, if he is responsible for the outcome, then won’t he be more vigilant in regards to decision making, to what he allows his
family to participate in? What if there is something in the outcome he couldn’t foresee, is he responsible for that? I am highly unsure how the relationship between you and your wife is any different from the relationship between you and another woman, as regards equality of position and abilities. As for his being a servant, leaders don’t usually think of themselves as servants, especially if God gave them this awesome position to “do things” for people and sometimes make a bunch of rules. Please explain how you think it is possible to be a leader (especially with the responsibilities you described) and a servant at the same time, because the two seem so opposite to each other. Why is it that God wants men to have this position; is it not more practical that ability should rule in these cases rather than gender, I do not understand. If the relationship of friendships leads to marriage, how can it be a different
relationship from all others? Rationally speaking I would have thought that if friendships paved the way to marriages that the friendship in marriage would have been an extension of the friendship of the platonic. In other words, friendships are generally equal, for in this case people choose their leaders; but employment opportunities are generally hierarchical in that there is a boss and down the ladder it goes. Or am I misunderstanding what you are saying here? Furthermore I’m unsure how chaos would ensue if equality ruled affairs?
Please let me explain what this means. Having been on the receiving end of this kind of governance, I can only say in some ways aspects of my life that should very much have been under my control were ruled by the whims and fancies of others. In some ways, I’ve been totally at the mercy of another gender – unable to walk alone down the streets, or to go certain places by myself without another
person with me, because I am a woman. Also I know what it is to have everything approved by everyone before I could read or participate in it, because guys had better spiritual discernment than myself. Don’t mistake me, I’m not bitter over it at all and I realise the intentions for such governance were for my benefit rather than my detriment. I just think things could have been done better under a more egalitarian arrangement, especially as I am trying to regain parts of my spiritual road and independence that such arrangements block. I would like you to acknowledge this in your response (or to at least consider what I am saying here), what is your opinion of the arrangement I described? (BTW I’ve never been married so this is not a husband-wife thing).
I said, “I believe that leadership is based on skill and abilities rather than a desired gender.” I say this because everyone is a unique individual with different strengths and weaknesses. From what I have observed, gender has
nothing to do with it (you might disagree with that and if so please explain why). Some men really do have the temperament to follow rather than lead too, and some women know how to lead well; I am unsure how this fits into your belief that men should lead in the home?
If a man is given such authority and power might he not be more likely to feel entitled to special perks as befitting his position? What I mean by that is that I am concerned that such a level of intense power opens the door to a man
abusing such power. I question this because most men DON’T see it that way. They perceive it as an opportunity to have more power, rather than more responsibility. Does not more power flow with more responsibility?
Also do you really think it is fair to you to have more responsibility, if you don’t have more power that goes along with that responsibility? I mean, if things turn out really rotten and it wasn’t your fault, would you still bear
responsibility for that? If so, how would God handle it, and how would you handle it?
“As far as other women go, how can I lead them? They are not in my family unit…”
Firstly, I appreciate the fact that you genuinely care about, encourage, and love women outside your family unit rather than use and abuse them, and that you consider women to be your sisters and equals. That is to be commended and I
respect you for it.
That being said, this is the part that bugs me – how can you have an equal relationship with women when you believe you, as the head of the home should lead one, or possibly a few, women? Wouldn’t the way you treat the women in your family unit trickle out to the way you treat women outside the family? Also, you mentioned that you believe women are the “weaker vessel”; do you still believe this and if so why?
How far does equality go for you? I mean by this, do you generally see women as comrades or as delicate little flowers in need of protection, or does it depend on the situation? Is there ever a certain point that you will start treating a woman outside your family differently just because she happens to be female, and if so, what is that point?
“I will have to look more into the theories of egalitarianism…”
In regards to your research on roles, don’t be afraid to ask questions. Ever. Also I would encourage you not to make a firm decision until you have all the facts before you.
Here are a few articles to help you on the journey:
http://rachelheldevans.com/blog/4-common-misconceptions-egalitarianism
http://juniaproject.com/confusing-equality-sameness-complementarian-misconception/
http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/complementarianism-for-dummies
http://www.theopedia.com/complementarianism
http://www.theopedia.com/egalitarianism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_egalitarianism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complementarianism
Do I agree with complementarianism? No, I don’t. But I believe in seeking to be fair and unbiased in the way I represent myself. However as we keep talking I have no problem in critiquing complementarianism, and in being open to hearing critiques about egalitarianism as well.
Last but not least, I’m curious to know if you’ve ever heard of the term “benevolent sexism”?
“I unfortunately know all to well the pitfalls of other men putting down the idea of men and women being friends.”
Well, it is in the culture to see women as sex objects rather than people. That’s what equal rights activists have been fighting for, like, centuries. BTW you’re absolutely right, very succinctly put mate. Would you personally believe
that men behave like this because all their male role models are negative, and biased against women? I tend to. Unfortunately when people try to lift up the contributions of women others will cry “Feminism is creeping in, we have to put a stop to it!” or “Men’s contributions need to be recognised too!”* Why are
people so afraid of
Wonderful
Observant
Mystical
Earnest
Nymphs
Or, alternatively, you could spell it
Wondrous
Intense
Merciful
Masterful
Incredible
Nymphs
BTW this is true, but not at the cost of putting women down I think
“I however do agree that man woman friendships are crucial to the continuation of the species as much if not more so than husbands and wives.”
I do too, because if they are friends and a relationship breaks up, I think they can still keep the relationship – as friends – while discarding the more intimate one. Very well put, I think.
“Because as we lose understanding of one another from a friendly perspective and become poisoned into believing that the other is the "enemy" then how many generations are we away from the idea of men and women living
completely separately from each other?”
Again, brilliantly put!
It would definitely be better if we could have a perception of the opposite sex as people to be trusted rather than feared. Unfortunately, however, this is not the world we are living in. We live in a world of gender segregation which
thrives on sexism and prejudice, exacerbated by bad behaviours that encourage us to dislike the opposite sex as a whole. For instance, a personal confession – due to the behaviour of a significant minority of the population of mankind I generally feel very averse to trusting anyone presenting as male. A way for men to turn such a trend is simply to treat women with respect, as PEOPLE. That’s
it, nothing more is required.
I remember the feminist sayings “All men are oppressors” and “All women are sisters” which could be explained and interpreted from a feminist standpoint but in my mind are completely false, for two very simple reasons: some men are good people and try to treat human beings with respect – how can they be oppressors (there is such a thing as privilege but that is not for this discussion)? Also some women believe that oppression of their sex is perfectly acceptable, in some cases mandated by their “god” – how can they be sisters? If you are going to say “All women are your sisters” then you need a common goal, an enemy, and sometimes women become that enemy, either in ignorance or in favour of keeping the status quo alive. This is how I see it – I don’t care what sex or gender you present, or what label you use (except in rare and exceptional circumstances) – if you wish to treat people as people, I will respect that and don’t believe in demanding ideological purity out of anyone. In short, I would rather be friends with a more old-fashioned man who was respectful and kind to my sex (and to other people) than with a pro-feminist man who gave lip service to feminist values but demeaned and abused me.
From your perspective do you think that, in the way they treat men, women could do anything to turn such a trend and if so, what?
In short, men and women need each other for the propagation of the human race, especially if technology fails. To do this, it is essential they build friendships and the type of camaraderie that is gender-blind and that lasts a lifetime. What needs to be done – have everyone grow up together and view each other as comrades and people from a young age, and as people grow older and sex drives kick in, teach them to navigate these drives while maintaining respect for the sex they are attracted
to, as people. I’m not against dating, however I think friendships should be seen as more important than chasing people for intimate relationships. It’s no wonder boys are uncomfortable approaching a girl they hardly know for a date, because they *don’t know this girl and it is, IMHO, ridiculous to start your relationships with a romantic or sexual bent so quickly because if things go
wrong your heart tends to be broken. However the societal pressure is so great that young people do these things before they have seriously considered what they are doing with themselves.
“Men are already highly addicted to pornography and women have found the ability to find love and understanding from one another, is it too far a stretch to say that if we don't close the divide it will only get worse?”
Yeah, porn is a curse, despite other people claiming otherwise. Feminism is torn on the issue of pornography – some against, some for. And the widespread culture is so openly pushing it that young men feel pressured to get involved, or start their addiction from curiosity or a desire for education, else they are not seen as a “real man”. As for women finding the ability to find love and understanding from one another, could you expound on that point please?
“I think it is vital for men and women to understand respect and love one another only in this will we turn the tide and find common ground between the sexes.”
I totally agree!
“Also yes you've hit the nail on the head, if we are to continue to be together as man and women as a species we need to at least "like" one another to be able to "love" one another.”
Another area of complete interest, I think part of the reason that men and women struggle to relate to each other is the artificial gender gap created by our society. Boys and girls are taught from day 1 to participate in different activities and to enjoy different things associated with their gender. It is only natural for people to bond quickly with other people that share their common
interests while tending to avoid the ones that do not. To be honest, it is very clever the way it is done. I believe since boys and girls are taught to view each other as an opposite kind rather than as a slightly different person
biologically, and to pursue only interests that society has deemed acceptable for their sex, the gender gap will grow bigger. However, encouraging people to embrace activities nonconventional for their sex might just increase common
ground with the opposite sex and help men and women to bond faster, whether over hobbies or even over shopping. However, feel free to disagree, and if so please explain
why.
“Through the process of being friends with the opposite sex, I believe we do learn to be friends with our future spouse and for those who are already married we learn
how to be better friends to our spouse.”
Most definitely; simply put though, how can this be achieved with roles? I can understand to a certain extent why men should protect women and that sort of thing, but generally speaking I’m unsure how roles can be helpful to this process of common understanding and love.
I believe the area of male/female friendships is intimately tied with gender roles, social constructs, and all other manner of societal frameworks. It is only one dynamic out of many but it is a seriously underscored dynamic, yet
could be the very chord that either makes or breaks the harmony of a future society.
In regards to David and Jonathan, I love that story a lot. Personally I am a little unsure, but I tend to lean toward a more traditional interpretation of the passages. I like the idea that men can bond like that, although I am curious as to why you don’t think their relationship was gay but rather a very close friendship? As for the comparison to marriage I consider it apt, for marriage partners should love one another like this; however why would you compare such a close friendship to a marriage? Sometimes I would ask myself, is such a thing possible between two different sexes? The answers I tended to get were “no” and “only in marriage”. That left me feeling very disappointed, to the point where I was considering writing a novel on the subject.
“To see it explained that clearly tells me there is room for a man to love a women that deeply and have no sexual desire for her, which I hope dispels the myth that "man and women can't be just friends"”
I also think this way, that it is possible. However society ridicules and scorns the ideal so much that men are discouraged from creating such intimate bonds with women.
I am curious though, if David said that Jonathan’s love was better to him than the love of women, why wasn’t he intimate with him? I mean, I think sometimes it is hard for me to overcome the idea that sex = love, because as I see it, isn’t sex a natural outworking of the bonds of friendship and love (I speak of enthusiastically consenting adults only here)? Yet at the same time I understand that love can be expressed, and close emotional and spiritual ties can be formed, without sex (between, for instance, animals and humans, children and adults, children and children, married/committed people and someone other than their spouse/partner, etc), so I’m unsure how that goes because sex between adults in a consenting relationship, to me, seems to be the cherry on the icing.
http://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/responding-to-the-astute-observation-that-i-am-a-man/#comment-2527609026
Please go to that link to reply so we can keep on topic with the ideas of the threads (the only reason I dragged my first comment here was that it wouldn't load properly on its intended page), thank you for understanding.
http://ifightbullies.blogspot.ru/2015/12/banned-from-rok.html
Where did it say that?
I have more thoughts about it but they would be off-topic so I think if we're going to discuss misogyny extensively let's go to the page I told you about before, the one on the I fight bullies website; I've tried and tried to load the link but it wouldn't go through. If you surf through my comments though you will find it and we can pick up our misogyny discussion there.
For you and Carolyn - I hope the moon beams on you, gently gathers her maidens the stars around you, and that they all smile enfolding you in their loving embrace.
You said, "I think yes a man should always be willing to evaluate the path he is on
and make sure what he is doing is to glory and not to dishonor." Could you please expound on this concept from your POV?
I know how you feel about RoK but here's something to cheer ya up then, mate:
http://www.popsugar.com/fitness/Runner-Gets-Catcalled-Little-Boy-Stands-Up-her-39176232
"I do take that part of the Bible seriously and it is a good way to look at it."
You'll see that in action in the story; I think you'll like it, please read. As my friend said, clearly his parents are raising a good man. Here's the full comment here and please especially read the first part, you will find it helpful in being a better friend and man, and I hope one day you receive the privilege of making the commenter's better acquaintance, as I have had:
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/friendlyatheist1/nine_dead_in_charleston_church_shooting/#comment-2390343104
"The same would apply with my mother, but truthfully I have never had a
good relationship with anyone I saw as a motherly figure in my life, so I
am happier to consider them all sisters because this makes it easier
for me to love and respect them."
Sometimes it must be very difficult for you to be respectful to womankind when some of my sex hurt you so very badly, but I'm proud of you for being so brave and so willing to do the right thing. I'm sorry to hear you never had a good relationship with mother-figures; that really breaks my heart. May I ask why this was the case, if it wouldn't hurt too much for you to answer? Also crones are wise and ancient, passing wisdom down to younger people. In regards to calling all women sisters and finding it easier to respect them that way, thank you for doing the best you can with the limited knowledge you have and the pain you are in; I honestly disbelieve you deserve to be in so much anguish. As I've said before, words are all I have to offer and I hope they gently touch and heal the brokenness in your heart. I love you deeply and there is nothing more I would delight in than to give my big six-foot-ten friend a big bear hug (but only if you want it). I hope I didn't make your wife feel excluded or offended by what I just said (and if I did I apologise!) because I love her and want to embrace her (if she wants that) just as much as I do you, not only for her own sake but also as she is your life partner and is helping you to be a better man. In short, <3 and Xs for the both of you.
I really appreciate that you took the time to respond to all my comments and I think it's time I started responding to some of yours. Also if ever I'm in terrible trouble and you're around I will send you a line; I look forward to seeing how such a confrontation would play out though I don't want you hurt emotionally because of my messes.
From my limited knowledge, as we've talked I think you tend to be leaning more and more to a complemegalitarian viewpoint. I say limited, because there isn't much out there about complemegalitarianism - the two main viewpoints discussed at length are complementarianism and egalitarianism. In short complemegalitarianism teaches the roles without the hierarchy, if you understand what I mean.
I read this horrible article on RoK - don't worry, I will spare you this time because they seem to have a negative effect on your digestion - on how men and women should not spend so much time together, and how boys were socialised to be sissies because they interacted so much with girls. I would have thought that people wanted men and women to interact more for the sake of male/female friendships; what do you think? Also I believe male/female friendships are invaluable to society for so many reasons, not the least of which, they strengthen marriages. As Mary Wollstonecraft, Mother of Modern Feminism, points out again and again in her book A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (a book I recommend you read BTW), friendships are imperative for a good marriage.
For instance on page 94, Penguin Classics version:
"Personal attachment is a very happy foundation for friendship; yet, when even two virtuous young people marry, it would, perhaps, be happy if some circumstances checked their passion; if the recollection of some prior attachment, or disappointed affection, made it on one side, at least, rather than a match founded on esteem. In that case they would look beyond the present moment, and try to render the whole of life respectable, by forming a plan to regulate a friendship which only death ought to dissolve.
Friendship is a serious affection; the most sublime of all affections, because it is founded on principle, and cemented by time. The very reverse may be said of love. In a great degree, love and friendship cannot subsist in the same bosom; even when inspired by different objects they weaken or destroy each other, and for the same object can only be felt in succession. The vain fears and fond jealousies, the winds which fan the flame of love, when judiciously or artfully tempered, are both incompatible with the tender confidence and sincere respect of friendship."
I could provide more quotes but I think the theme of this work is to teach us that, if women are to be wives and mothers and pursue other sensible occupations as people, they need to be prepared for these things by sound education, good morals, a love of intelligence, and a willingness to create a friendship with the future spouse.
Thank you for your reassurances too. I would never want to drag you down but rather to build you up in your desire to be a decent human being (which should come even before being a good man, why I say that is because all those things men should be encouraged to do are human duties, in reality; yet I think it's important for guys to hear these things because they need to know they belong) and to be the leader, protector, and provider guy that you are (and I know some guys are more artsy, academic, creative, etc - whatever you were I would support that as long as it was good). It really hurts to think I could have stopped you from fulfilling those qualities as a good person or as a man; I can't stand Roosh V and his buddies and I think they have nasty chips on their shoulders (although I love French fries on occasion, so that's not what I mean when I say chips). I think if more men saw guys they respected modelling proper male-female friendships then they would find it easier to relate in a healthy fashion to the opposite sex.
Last but not least I appreciate your taking your Bible seriously when it says to treat all older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters. That is the way it should be; such a statement makes perfect sense to me and I don't know why more people follow it. I am deeply saddened that men don't have the example of a man before them doing the things they claim guys should be doing; it leads them wrong especially if they have a bad guy role-modelling for them.
Thanks for offering to be my protector as well, I suspect I might need it in the coming days and I would appreciate the input of a strong man having my back. One online acquaintance has said of me that I am, in his opinion, really sweet, and don't know how to look after myself nearly as well as other people (he particularly referenced someone he was debating but I think, knowing his mind, he would think most people can look after themselves better online). Another very close friend of mine said that I feel responsible for the well-being of others, and that she thinks it's both my strength and weakness. I'm not telling you that to brag but rather to state that I find being attacked online highly disconcerting and I tend to wilt under it.
way you'd treat your opposite-sex friends, unless circumstances dictate
otherwise."
Opposite-sex friends should have been same-sex friends, and now the sentence will read this way:
"As for me, I have a simple rule - treat your cross-sex friends the same
way you'd treat your same-sex friends, unless circumstances dictate
otherwise."
I apologise for my mistake!
Steven Joyce ! The presenter John Oliver was having fun with him"
Thank you, that was most kind of you. Oh my gosh, please tell me about what happened with this Steven Joyce fella, LOL. I never heard this story before!
"That's cool, I will take a look. It's always refreshing to see another's views and take on things ."
Thanks very much. We don't agree on everything but I personally find him to be amazingly open-minded even to ideas he disagrees with. If you want to add your contributions to our conversation by all means please do so, it would be fun to hear your POV on some of the stuff we talk about.
Last but not least, you ever heard of that website Return of Kings? A nasty, rubbishy place to stay away from - Roosh V the pro-legal rape guy has ties to that place, ugh! They wrote this horrid article about how men and women couldn't be friends because of the guy's sex drive. Men using the wrong head to think with again :(
As for me, I have a simple rule - treat your cross-sex friends the same way you'd treat your opposite-sex friends, unless circumstances dictate otherwise.
http://blog.equalrightsinstitute.com/responding-to-the-astute-observation-that-i-am-a-man/#comment-2515732849
and this is my response to it:
Oh, I know. Well, it is a men’s rights activist site after all. On some issues I can at least have an open mind on some of the complaints of pro-men’s rights guys but when I do it’s pretty rare and it has to be for a good reason. Most of the time I can’t be bothered with what they have to say because it’s not about women suppressing them, it’s about
their not getting their way with women, and I think that’s just terrible. Wow, you have to wonder if half the stuff they
put out is meant to be satire :(
I have friends who disagree with me on the life issue that would be highly appalled by this stuff because they really believe that no one should be forced not to have or to have an abortion (I should show them; I suspect it would make for interesting discussion and you could join in if you wanted). Funny how it projects itself as pro-family and
pro-father! I suppose I have to agree yet again with the legal abortion advocates when they say that abortion is only seen as societally unacceptable when WOMEN do it voluntarily for themselves. It should not be that way at all.
Another point - if men are allowed an opinion against abortion will not some men assume they have a right to have an opinion FOR abortion? Which is a potential downside to Josh's arguments I think.
As a PL person I am appalled because abortion is morally reprehensible regardless of the sex of the person pushing the "procedure". I'm really upset because I've seen PL friends of mine comment there in the past, although I'm thrilled to say some PL folks tore the turf off this one! I
say boycott this site, because this is just so disgusting that a man would dream up this confounded crp, and the forced murder of his own child (I understand the legal implications but I speak in the moral sense in this case).
You do realise that there are some people claiming to be PL but will slip their female relatives or lovers in for an abortion, don’t you? Even guys who think it should be illegal will do this – pastors, in some cases, while preaching from the pulpit about it. Such hypocrisy!
"I am appalled and astounded as I have been for their other articles, which I will comment on as well" - which ones do you mean? Sadly there's little pieces of diamonds in there, but the vast majority of them are fly crp IMHO and I haven't the spoons to wade through their hate-speech.
I'm betting guys like Doug Phillips, Doug Wilson, and Mark
Driscoll would LURVE them some of that stuff, BTW. Oh, the precious irony - pro-family leaders. Although I remember on my research in the odious perversion
of Valentines Romance that is commonly known as Fifty Shades, in the third book Christian Grey tries to pressure his new wife Anastasia Steele to get an abortion, no kidding. No, this is compromise, and the pro-family crowd should stand up to these guys and make them behave, call out the bull in their own back yard and force them to properly abide by pro-family standards - if indeed pro-family people like to read RoK. Also, just curious - do you think the PL movement could take stronger stances on certain subjects?
Last but not least, how would you counsel a man who wanted to do this kind of thing on his girlfriend?
PS: I did leave a few comments on the adoption rates spiking article; would you mind responding to them please (although I will understand if you can’t respond immediately, or if you’d rather not)? Also I apologise for not getting to the comments I haven’t responded to yet but I will ASAP, fair is fair.
Speaking of which, I have made a new online friend - a married man that deeply loves his wife but is very good at making female friends at the same time, no less - and I am excited about this new friendship. His comments, and my responses, are a little further below if you would like to read them.
http://www.returnofkings.com/25876/art-of-manliness-is-poisoning-the-concept-of-masculinity-with-disney-lifestyle-advice
I don't usually reference this site but I did quote from it so I owe the publisher of these rotten articles common courtesy, I know.
I think that in regards to male/female friendships I tend to follow one simple rule unless circumstances demand otherwise - however you treat your same-sex friends, treat your cross-sex friends exactly the same way. If it's not an activity or a way to touch that you would feel comfortable doing on your same-sex friends it's probably not a good idea to do it on your cross-sex friends. Platonic ideals are the focus here, not sex. Although I have heard of close friends having sex yet remaining friends. I had a conversation once with a bunch of online friends about male-female friendships; I'd have to dig it up and show you and ask you what you think of it.
That being said, I would like to ask two things of you:
In regards to the things I have expressed to you about how men can treat women better, etc, I read this very disturbing article at Return of Kings. I've mentioned this website before as something to stay away from, as Roosh V the rape promoter has ties to this site. Here's a quote from it that I wanted your opinion on:
"No woman can offer a man advice on how to be a man. Period. Thou shalt not accept advice from a woman on manliness. There are no exceptions to this rule. It doesn’t matter if her intentions are noble. It doesn’t matter if she means well. The inescapable fact is that the art of being a man is a subject outside of her range of experience. If I tried to write for a women’s blog on the arts of child bearing and child rearing, I would be laughed at. And justifiably so. But only in feminized America can a woman presume, with her infinite arrogance, to offer advice to men on how to be a man.
And it is just when a woman is trying to be helpful, trying to “save” a man, that she is at her most dangerous. Beware that woman who wants to “save” you. She may truly believe it, and she may sincerely want it. But beware her just the same. Because deep down, in her innermost heart, the most secret and cherished desire of every woman is to see a man dethroned, and rolled in the muck. She’ll never admit this, of course. Ask her, and she’ll get furiously indignant in her denials. But it is true just the same. You can just feel it.
On this path of struggle that we men must walk, our woman cannot carry our burdens. We are, each of us, alone. And this is the first law of masculinity. And it is the most important law."
Please be honest: do you think this is what I have done? Also, I know you said that I haven't suppressed or oppressed you personally but do you think what I believe encourages oppression or suppression of men and masculinity in any way? If either question can be answered in the affirmative please, tell me now and explain why this is and I'll consider your points.
Furthermore, they put out this article about why male/female friendships are just absolutely 100% totes impossible:
http://www.returnofkings.com/24101/its-impossible-for-women-and-men-to-be-friends
Please tell me what you think of that one by the time you've finished reading.
Secondly, I hope you don't mind if I ask not only for your friendship but also for your protection online. Part of the reason is that I am honoured to know you but there's more to it than that. Honestly, I think I am being stalked. The comments are occasional but when they come they are incredibly nasty. All I ask is for you to watch my back but please don't say or do anything unless I ask you to, as although I would prefer to handle it myself if possible I am a little scared and if things get absolutely horrible I will write and tell you.
Saying that you love a certain woman, and following that up by quoting Love says that it is good that you exist and insofar as I am able I will contribute to your happiness, your existence, your flourishing, I thought had a lot of educational value in speeches of yours I've heard. I hope that part is still there.
In other words, I want to do every single thing I can do on my end to help prevent misunderstanding.