Skip to main content
There's a photo on my shelf from a wedding two years ago. Two very attractive women are posing and smiling next to me. It's the sort of picture I should get rid of. One of the women got engaged to another dude named Jason. Really can't argue with that, am I right? The other lady I'll probably never see again.
Why get rid of the photo, you ask? I can think back on several occasions where young women in a big group decided to do the Ladies' Picture With JK. Now, at the time, I was probably gratified. Now, I'm not so sure. It probably means I am A) safe, and B) pitied. Those are two things I do not want to be. Romance is supposed to be scary and a little dangerous. There's a kernel of truth in the opinion that women like "bad boys." You can't control them, or predict what will happen. That's eros, man. That's how it's supposed to be.
Now, I know that when women gain a little maturity, they think about the future. And this is good. Everything the Bible and the Church teach us about our sexuality is geared toward the future. More precisely, it is geared toward the Other. This is the nice guy's time to shine.
But let's get it straight: I don't need your pity. I'm just a guy. In fact, I'm a girlfriend-stealing, sports-watching, beer-drinking, guy. There's nothing "safe" about me. The real me is about as asexual as a rabbit. Not impure, by any means. But if you think you can share your secrets with me, ask me to share mine, and not expect some kind of romantic overture, you are out of your bloody mind. This is not "Will & Grace." And by the way, I'm a cripple, not a eunuch.
And that's what this culture in its perversion has done to us. Sexuality is divorced from emotions, so that somehow, who you have sex with and who has your heart can be two different people. Stupid.
Who we give our bodies to is EXACTLY who has our hearts, for good and for ill. Marriage is maximum friendship, I heard someone say, and that's exactly right. I know that many evangelical leaders are lamenting the loss of opposite-sex friendships; forget that. Lament the loss of marriage, REAL MARRIAGE, and work on that. Friendship takes care of itself. You've got a bunch of thrice-married adulterers running around still in the prime of life, and you're wondering why they don't want to embrace Christian friendship? Are you kidding? First off, someone should get in a dude's face and say, "Fred, I know this is a bit troublesome, but you're still married to Nancy. Yeah, I know she's remarried. THERE IS NO DIVORCE." And stop hectoring 20-somethings about Christian friendship. You know what kind of friendship they need? Marriage. Most of them. Some of them may be called to something else. It'd be easier to help them figure that out if you were all Catholic, BTW. We have categories for these things.
At the risk of sounding crass, there needs to be a lot more sex, and a lot less talking about it. Less planning, economizing, waiting, delaying, careering, and more sex. Self-giving love. We are rational animals, but we're still animals. Just sayin'.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p
My wheelchair was nearly destroyed by a car last night. That's a bit melodramatic, I suppose, because it is intact and undamaged. But we'd left my power chair ("Red Sam" in the official designation) in-between the maze of cars parked out front of Chris Yee's house for Bible Study. [Isn't that a Protestant Bible study?--ed.] They are good friends, and it is not under any official auspices. [Not BSF?--ed.] They're BSF guys, but it's not a BSF study. Anyway, I wasn't worried; I made a joke about calling the vendor the next day: "What seems to be the problem, sir?" 'Well, it was destroyed by a car.' As it happened, a guy bumped into it at slow speed. His car got the worst of it. And this only reinforces what I've said for a solid 13 years [Quickie commercial coming] If you want a power wheelchair that lasts, get a Quickie. They're fast, obviously, and they're tanks. Heck, my old one still would work, but the batteries ar