1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. We are holding our 2022 Angel Ministry Drive now. Please consider signing up, or if you have any questions about being an Angel, use our staff application form. The world needs more prayer now, and it is a great way to help other members of the forums. :) To Apply...click here

'manly' man

Discussion in 'Singles (Only*)' started by knownbeforetime, Jan 29, 2006.

  1. JPPT1974

    JPPT1974 October Skies

    +9,752
    United States
    Baptist
    Single
    CA-Conservatives
    I agree with you my friend
    As I don't like age, sex, nor racial stereotypes
    You can blame one "thing" over it
    HOLLYWOOD!!
    Because they try to do all of that, which is unfair
    As there is only one race on this earth
    The Human Race!!
     
  2. Irascible

    Irascible garrulous, loquacious, occasionally multiloquent

    +205
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Republican
    I'm not certain about how wise it is to interject myself into a discussion between two ladies. But here goes. :)

    I don't really see a conflict in how jealousy is being discussed, just a difference in what arena of life is being discussed. God certainly is a jealous God. He's jealous of the love and affection we owe him as creator. He wants no other gods before him and is not interested in sharing me with any other idol. That's a righteous jealousy. I can most certainly apply that to husband and wife relations. There are certain aspects of my personhood that belong to her and her alone. My longing glances of desire, my affection, and other things unique to a husband/wife relationship are hers. She should be jealous of those things because they are unique to ONE relationship, just as my devotion to God as creator is to be a singular relationship.

    When jealousy manifests into other things then it's problematic. When a husband doesn't want his wife to ever hang out with girlfriends because he wants her home with him 24/7, then that's wrong. When a wife goes nuts because her husband has female coworkers then that's the type of jealousy that's wrong.

    So either I just made a lot of sense or I just stepped in it. I might have even done both. As for the definition of manly, I leave that one alone this time. :^)
     
  3. mina

    mina Brown Eyed girl

    +3,750
    Christian
    Married
    Guys can be men and still love God. Likewise women can be women and still love God. I don't think it offends God for men to be "manly" or for a woman to be feminine.
    I've often thought of King David as a "manly" man, and he was a man after God's own heart.
    I think the OP is confusing manliness and jerkiness. There is a difference. Real men don't beat their wives or get drunk to the point of ruining their families lives or abuse others or make everyone sick of their course joking- that is weakness not manliness. It's called being a jerk.
     
  4. LOVEthroughINTELLECT

    LOVEthroughINTELLECT The courage to be human

    +380
    Christian
    Single
    US-Democrat
    When women and men start talking about "manly man", "Godly man", masculinity and feminity, I want to :sick: .

    Everybody knows how it degrades and insults women when men objectify them and talk about them like they are nothing but the sum of certain body parts. Well, this whole "provider"/baritone voice/"not afraid of his own shadow" garbage is equally degrading and insulting. In fact, it is downright repugnant.

    I used to work in an office where I would have to listen to women talk about their fantasies, what guys at the office they liked, what male celebrities they liked, what features they like in men, etc., etc. Barf bag, please!

    One of those women was supposedly "interested" in me. I have been told that I was naive if I did not see the signs. Well, maybe I was naive. But maybe I was also turned off by her objectifying overtures. Believe it or not, some men want to be treated with dignity too.

    And the "Godly man" business is as insulting and degrading as any other objectification. It is as disgusting to hear Christian women talk about how they want a "provider" as it is to hear women at the office talk about their fantasies. If a woman told me that she likes the "Godly man" in me, I would not be flattered.

    I think that "masculinity" and "femininity" as they are now popularly used are negative, destructive stereotypes foolishly disguised as positive identities. It is kind of like the redneck phenomenon. Redneck is a negative stereotype, but it has gotten twisted so that people wear the redneck label like a badge of honor. You're darn right they are rednecks! And they are proud of it! Masculinity and femininity aren't much different, I think. This whole "Godly man" business strikes me as nothing more than people being insecure in themselves and having to turn to constructed stereotypes in order to cope.

    If one is secure in who he/she is, then he/she does not have to hide behind stereotypes and look for stereotypes to relate to.

    I don't relate to stereotypes. Period. I am not perfect, of course, so I am sure that there are times when I do subconsciously relate to a category rather than to the real person. And I am sure that there are times that I present myself as a category rather than presenting who I really am. But as much as possible I consciously avoid relating through social constructs such as "Godly man".

    My closest friend falls into many sociological categories that I do not. She is older than me and therefore there is a generation difference. She is a woman while I am a man. She is married while I have never been married. She is a parent while I have never had children. Etc., etc. But you can't tell that we have those categories. We know the parts of each other that transcend sociological categories. We know the parts of each other that defy stereotype and categorization--we know each other as the unique individuals who we are. And we relate to and as the unique individuals who we are. What a beautiful way of relating to people! More intimate relationships such as dating and marriage should not be any different.
     
  5. ~HopeFloats~

    ~HopeFloats~ Blessed

    +147
    Christian
    Single
    When I was referring to jealousy Ras I was referring to that in which a person is consumed by it and in turn tries to control ones life.

    We are know and have been taught that God is a jealous God and I do not dispute that fact however..I do dispute saying and streotyping all men together..

    Hmm you have left the midrift alone and now the manly man..;) I am so keeping notes
     
  6. intricatic

    intricatic ...a dinosaur... or something...

    +660
    Non-Denom
    Private
    Meh, stereotypes exist because they refer to a facet of reality that does truly exist. Individuality is a watered down illusion these days.
     
  7. Irascible

    Irascible garrulous, loquacious, occasionally multiloquent

    +205
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Republican
    "Husbands are to love their wives like Christ loved the church."

    It's almost cliched to follow that up with the fact that Christ died for the church and therefore husbands are to protect and care for their wives to a similar extreme if ever called to. Did the Bible tell women to do that? Nope. Hmm. It seems the Bible dares to define different roles for wives and husbands. Those roles become what some call a Godly man or a Godly woman. How awful! It appears the very Bible we profess to believe in teaches stereotypical objectifying terms! The Bible must be edited ASAP before the enlightened among us pukes again!!! :eek:

    Here's another objectifying stereotypical term: "One french fry short of a Happy Meal" Don't choke on it. :sick:
     
  8. LOVEthroughINTELLECT

    LOVEthroughINTELLECT The courage to be human

    +380
    Christian
    Single
    US-Democrat


    This is something that a couple of years ago I posted on a discussion board outside of CF:


    Race: Trait, Status, or Identity?


    ...the thread below about single African-American women has me wanting to make a few points.

    Pardon me if I put on my sociologist's cap, but it is my position that we talk too much about "race" when the whole concept is questionable. It could be a trait. It could be a status. It could be an identity. It could be some combination of the three. My position is that it is not a trait. Biologically speaking, there is no such thing as race. Anthropologists have rejected race as a biological trait. Race is now considered, I believe, by most thinkers to be purely a cultural construct.

    It is not a status either. Being fair skinned may lead to certain stations in society, such as being wealthy, educated, or a citizen, but is not a status itself. Being fair skinned, or any other "color", is purely a biological trait.

    Race, it seems to me, is purely an identity. How one identifies himself is voluntary. People can, however, think of another person in terms of identities even if that person consciously rejects them. I do not think of myself as "white"; I reject that identity. But, based on my being fair skinned and my being of European descent, most people think of me as "white".

    Similarly, I am by birth a citizen of the United States of America. That is a status. But, I do not identity myself as an American. I am just a person who happens to be a citizen of the U.S. Alas, if I were to travel to another country people would probably say "You are an American". That would be them assigning to me an identity. They would probably be taking the liberty of assuming that I embrace that identity--and they would be doing it with very little information and, most significantly, without asking me.

    To say that if I don't date any women who we call "African-American" because white men don't want anything to do with such women is hogwash. It is assuming that I consider myself to be "white" and that I consider such women to be "black". Or, it is assigning to me an identity in spite of the fact that I reject it. Or, both. In any case, it is wrong.

    I have been able to interact with people who fall into many sociological categories different from me without such categories ever being given any thought. It is a beautiful thing for two or more people to be able to relate to each other without categorizing each other. It is so rewarding and fulfilling to be able to relate to everything that makes a person unique; to be able to get to know and appreciate the part of people that defies categorization.

    We each have a choice. We can choose to relate to categories, or we can choose to relate to people.

    And if we choose to relate to categories, I think we need to be asking people how they identify themselves before we go rushing to judgement about them or their relationships.
     
  9. ~HopeFloats~

    ~HopeFloats~ Blessed

    +147
    Christian
    Single
    I love your words and typing Ras-- you tell it how it is..and this is what i have been trying to say yet was not able to get it out right...
     
  10. LOVEthroughINTELLECT

    LOVEthroughINTELLECT The courage to be human

    +380
    Christian
    Single
    US-Democrat


    I get it. When Christian women say that they want to marry a "Godly man" they are saying that they want to marry a role.

    Well, I am not a role. I am a person.

    And I don't relate to roles. I prefer to relate to people.
     
  11. ~HopeFloats~

    ~HopeFloats~ Blessed

    +147
    Christian
    Single
    Are you kidding...

    We are all in roles Tim; from a daughter to a son to a mother to a father.. to a husband to a wife.. and with every role there is a expectation.



    Saying you are a person and not a role that is a contridiction to the role as a Christian in your Christian walk
     
  12. LOVEthroughINTELLECT

    LOVEthroughINTELLECT The courage to be human

    +380
    Christian
    Single
    US-Democrat



    I did not say that nobody is in a role. I said that I am not a role.

    Being a role and filling a role are two different things.







    Christians make it sound like dating/courting is being a movie producer. People are just trying to get roles filled, apparently. And one's worth depends on his/her filling of roles.

    Well, I am not looking to fill a role. No thank you, ladies. I am not interested in an acting career.

    But if anybody is looking for someone unique with whom to adventurously, spontaneously share this experience called life, feel free to call my agent.

    And I don't think that Jesus did what he did to meet people's "expectations". In fact, it is my understanding that Jesus went against people's expectations. I am not a theologian or a Bible scholar, but it is my understanding that people were expecting some glamorous king. But all we got was a humble carpenter.

    Likewise, I don't do what I do to meet anybody's expectations. Like the Kenny Marks song Heroes says:


    You're a hero
    Not for the glory
    You're a hero
    Not for the rush
    You're the hero
    Of an untold story
    Not for applause
    You did it because
    A man's got to do what he must



    And when most Christian women start talking about what they expect from men I want to :sick: .








    I am not a theologian, but it has always been my understanding that being a Christian is having a relationship with God, not filling any role.
     
  13. Miles

    Miles Well-Known Member

    +3,728
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    US-Others
    I think the term 'manly man' refers to a 'macho macho man'. That strikes me as a kind of cartoonish caricature with little basis in reality. Lots of show, with little go.

    A man doesn't need to be macho to be manly.
     
  14. Irascible

    Irascible garrulous, loquacious, occasionally multiloquent

    +205
    Protestant
    Single
    US-Republican
    post deleted
     
  15. Sketcher

    Sketcher Born Imperishable

    +8,865
    Non-Denom
    Single
    US-Republican
    You are mistaking what a manly man is. Manly does not have to be worldly. In fact, bullying isn't manly at all, it puts on a false guise of being manly. It's really motivated by insecurity - which in all people is a chronic disease, but when people think of a "real man" or a "manly man" they are generally talking about someone who they believe is secure, not insecure.

    Consider this, Jesus stood up for Himself, got angry, and even once got violent. This was all in its proper context, which was refuting the unbelieving Jews, and taking down their hypocrisy. He obviously had none of the garbage in His heart that motivates a lot of us to do the same things and sin - His behavior was somehow consistant with His teachings. It is the job of the Christian man to find where and how they meet and in doing so, know the true meaning of being Christlike.
     
  16. shinbits

    shinbits Well-Known Member

    +264
    Deist
    Married
    US-Others
    That's hilarious. ^_^


    Just an observation: A lot of the great men in the Bible were "manly" men.

    David killed wild animals that tried to attack his sheep; killed a giant; fought in many wars....

    Yet the Bible still refered to him as "a man after God's own heart".

    Moses killed a dude, then defended women from harrasing men;

    Samson was annointed from birth to be a judge of Isreal; he was a strong guy, who ripped apart a lion with his bare hands, killed hundreds of men with only the jawbone of a donkey;

    Elijah, who was a prophet of God, and even apeared with Jesus at the Transfiguration, was a hairy man;

    And even Jesus Himself, was a carpenter---banging wood, building stuff---

    All of these are manly traits.


    In short: Godly men, are manly. :cool:
     
  17. intricatic

    intricatic ...a dinosaur... or something...

    +660
    Non-Denom
    Private
    lol Expectations are natural things in relationships. You can't have a relationship without some kind of expectations, and without having some kind of expectation for the other person involved. Roles in relationships are very important, not because of some arbitrary and impersonal thing, but because the roles themselves are defined by who a person is. That's what compatibility is all about. Afterall, I wouldn't want to be with someone who couldn't enjoy the things I enjoy, or didn't compliment me the same way I should hope to compliment them. You take away roles in relationships and it becomes almost pointless to even date someone. Might as well go marry the first person you see walking down the street.
     
  18. LOVEthroughINTELLECT

    LOVEthroughINTELLECT The courage to be human

    +380
    Christian
    Single
    US-Democrat



    When I think of a Christlike man I think of Martin Luther King, Jr.
     
  19. shinbits

    shinbits Well-Known Member

    +264
    Deist
    Married
    US-Others
    Oh! I almost forgot---
    1. 1 Corinthians 6:9 (Whole Chapter) American Standard Version (ASV)
      Or know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with men,

      "Nor effeminate". No sissy boys in heaven.
    Peace.
     
  20. Sketcher

    Sketcher Born Imperishable

    +8,865
    Non-Denom
    Single
    US-Republican
    Ah, but he wasn't perfect. I want to know what made Christ Himself tick.
     
Loading...