Saturday, December 11, 2004

Sweet by Design...

As the flow of our blog discussions go, I'm probably a little late in posting this. But I want to weigh in with my personal (as opposed to theological, which, of course, informs my personal) opinions about this whole man/woman thing. My thoughts were spurred on by the discussions on Myles', Aaron's, and Starrla's blog, but they are by no means an attempt to discredit. I just think you should know my dilemma.

I hesitate to critique John Eldredge's "Wild at Heart," because of Blake and Robert's endorsement, and because of the fact that I've never actually sat down and read the entire thing from front to back. But I think I've got the general idea-- Men are, by nature, wild at heart. They are the bread winners. They are the one's who go out and slaughter the animals to bring home to feed the women. They have a passion burning in their belly. Men are chivalric warriors, leaders. Women are, by nature, nurturing. They support their husband who is the head of the family. They take care of the husband by cooking the slaughtered meat. They are sweet.

Women like Pretty Woman, fairy tales. Men like westerns, action movies, and Braveheart.

Here's my problem. I fell asleep in braveheart. I am not, by nature, wild at heart. My ideal wife is an independent woman. (Perhaps this is why I've been so slow in matters of love.) In looking for a spouse I want a partner, not a follower. I am, to put it bluntly, a "sweet boy."

So the question is, in your "man=warrior, woman=princess" Christian world, where do I fit in? My guess is that your assumption is I have either been tamed by my mother or society or that I am gay. Well, neither is the case. I am, by nature, not "wild at heart." I'm sensitive, by nature. As long as my wife will clean, I'll cook every meal for the rest of our lives. My ideal movie is never one that depicts a warrior whose obstacle to overcome is a physical enemy, like Braveheart, but rather one that depicts a flawed individual whose main obstacle to overcome is himself, ala Rocky 1-4. I am not gay and no one has "tamed" me. This is who I am. So what do you do with people like me?

In every description of this way of thinking I've been exposed to there is an interesting word that pops up even in the most diehard Eldredge fans. That word is most. MOST men are by nature "chivalric warriors," and most women by nature are delicate and nurturing. So again, I ask, what do you do with those who require the use of that word?

The tone of my post will probably be interpreted as an attack on Starrla's comments. But I can assure you they aren't. I am personally very happy that she, and millions of other women, have found just the right person to complement their needs and desires. I'm am sincerely glad there is a world of nurturing women who have found the warrior husband they are looking for.

My issue is with taking a general tendency that may be true for a whole lot of people and building it up as the standard for all male-female relationships and human development.

No comments: