So I just finished a book on men's purity called every man's battle. The book has become a staple for men's groups, men's pastors, and really any man who is struggling with purity issues. Aside from its practical content on this subject, the authors also touch on something I have been thinking about lately.
Chapter 17 (Yes, there are seventeen chapters in this 200-page book) is titled "Cherishing Your One and Only." The term "cherish" is explored a bit. To the authors, a wife is a blessing to a husband and should be treated as such. As a picture of the opposite of cherishing, we are told of Nathan's confrontation of King David after he has killed Uriah, Bathsheba's husband. A poor man's precious ewe lamb was taken from him by a rich man who didn't want to slaughter one of his own lambs for to feed a traveler. (2 Samuel 12.1-4) The poor man thought of this lamb as if it were his own daughter, and although the rich man had plenty of livestock, he still took it. The authors say of this story "The rich man in the story represented David, who saw Bathsheba only as someone he could devour to satisfy his sexual longings, but Uriah, "the poor man," saw his "lamb" as the joy of his life, his pet to cherish, to sleep in his arms. Uriah had only one wife; a faithful man like him could have only one. His ewe lamb, Bathsheba, bounced and pranced and frolicked and laughed with him, bringing him great joy."
Now, men and women are not the same. Otherwise, we would be just "humans" and we would all go about our lives much differently. I also realize that egalitarianism, feminism, and the like are recent movements, although proponents cite even Jesus' incredible elevation of the status of women in the first century AD. What I am aware of in the feminist debate mostly is the use of language, since that is the place most of us in the dark on this subject are introduced to it. In my case, of the gender neutral language in the greek texts and how it differs from the english versions of the Bible we have today. Of the Bible scholars who are now rendering "people" or "persons" in translations instead of "all men" in order to capture the neutrality of the universal nature of the original meaning. Of the objection of some feminists to be refered to as "lady" as the term was used originally to refer to the trophy-wife of aristocrats.
I can respect these things, although I understand not all women are to this extreme in their feminist thought. What confuses me is whether wives expect to be treated as they are in their marriage the same way their fathers treated them. Nathan speaks of the poor man's relationship to his ewe lamb - it delighted him as it pranced and played, and he loved it like a daughter. The authors of the book go on to talk about how men should cherish their wives as the poor man, faithful as he was, cherished his ewe lamb. Is this truly how women want to be treated? In my observation of father-daughter relationships I can honestly say I don't see fathers respecting their daughters the way I anticipate my wife will want to be respected - for her creativity, her passion, her intelligence and wit - her captivation of my passion.
Maybe I ponder this (apparent) dichotomy because I am not married. Men - is it all much easier than I imagine? Women - how is it you expect your husbands to love and cherish you?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Good questions. I being a married man with a young daughter maybe can speak with a bit of experience in these mattters. I have been married for 16 years and am still learning what women want. I have found that what women want will vary depending on their life experiences. They are not much different than you or I in what they want. Acceptance, security, stability, honesty, friendship, protection, love and others things that, like I said I am still learning. My Daughter also needs these things and responds to them with affection. One of the differences between a wife and a daughter is that a wife is an equal who is participating in life with you as a partner. A daughter is someone who is dependant upon you in more ways than you can know. To put it simply, a daughter is someone you take care of and the relationship that I have with my wife is one where we take care of each other.
Don't both partners in a marriage promise to cherish their spouses? Here's a feminist perspective: spouses should be cherished. Husbands should cherish their wives, and wives should cherish their husbands.
But to say that a wife wants to be cherished in the same way that a daughter should be cherished, and thereby make a general statement about 'what all women want' is both patronizing and silly. Patronizing, because it infantalized the woman in question, in the same way that it would be patronizing for a woman to treat her husband like her son. Silly, because women don't all want the same thing.
The question oughtn't be 'what do women want,' (or from my perspective, 'what do men want') but 'what does this particular man or woman want.' It's ridiculous to start generalizing from the enormous catagory of 'women' to the specific woman sitting across the breakfast table from you, when you could begin instead by asking the woman what she wants.
Sure, men and women are different. But any given woman is also different from other women, as any given man is different from other men.
Take the hypothetical situation in which you and I get married. (I know, it's an odd one- I'm between classes and papers and I don't have time to construct a better one.) Now, from my early childhood onward I've been constructing a general idea of 'what men want.' Here's some of what it includes: naps, satisfying work, pretty women, time alone, football, good food, fishing, and let's list naps twice because my dad really likes them
If I were to try to cherish you with this image of 'man' in my mind, I answer some of your needs some of the time, because you do have points of connection with my inner image of 'man.' I'd miss a lot too, though, especially when I chase you out of the kitchen to watch football while I do the cooking. You have points of departure from my inner image of 'man,' and truly cherishing you would mean cherishing you for who you are, not you as far as you meet the image in my mind.
This got longer than I expected- if I had time, I'd edit to make it shorter.
Post a Comment