^

Bob and George...

if you would....

go back to my 1st post on this thread and re-read the book quote, especially the "sexy" bit... only this time.... remove all the physical sexuality from your mind and read it as a description of the relationship between a man and a woman.

Tell me what reaction you have....

Bob.... when you re-read, imagine yourself "rising to the occasion" when you took the daring step to expose the affair and to face the marriage issues head-on, yes, but also with a gentle loving spirit.... How truely HEROIC and daring is a solid Plan A ????

Pep

Smur,

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I think this is an interesting point. As i understand it, this "hero" or "knight" figure, the masculine type, often derives a lot of their sense of worth from being able to help others, ... - often they are out of touch with their needs and their vulnerable sides.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">But that is the point of the book exactly. There are various wounds to a man's "manliness." They come from different sources and take different forms resulting in "wrong" behavior. Wrong in quotes because the net result to society might not be wrong. Case in point, this helpful knight who does not know how to ask for help. In general, the actions of this man would be good for society - he is helpful.

The books point is that he will not be complete and NOT be the man he should be. More for himself than anyone else. A void was formed in the development of his masculinity and it was filled with the approval for helping others. He thinks that is WHO he is, or probably WHY he is. When he should be thinking that is only one of the things he DOES. He IS just an man, and in and of itself it is a wonderful thing. Created in God's image, COMPLIMENTED and AUGMENTED (not DEFINED) by a woman.

The goal of the book is to help men realize THAT. That they are wonderful because they are men. Society almost forces men to define themselves by their performance, just as is forces women to define themselves by their service.

NCW

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">
Bob.... when you re-read, imagine yourself "rising to the occasion" when you took the daring step to expose the affair and to face the marriage issues head-on, yes, but also with a gentle loving spirit.... How truely HEROIC and daring is a solid Plan A ????</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Interesting. I have described Plan A as a "heroes Gig" on here previously. It is how it seemed to me when wise heads like yourself laid out the rules for success. Deliberately emasculating yourself, choking down the fight/flight instinct, choking back righteous indignation in the hope ( it seems vain hope at the time) that our WS will return to us.

It is truly brave to deliberately humble yourself under fire IMO. I do not say I am a hero, but I see heroism in many of the stories on here.

I am as proud of my Plan A as I have been of anything in my life , ever. I have been what my kids, my FWW my GOD needed me to be against all my instinct, and rationalizing. A true expression of faith in love.

If I had chosen my instinctibve path now, I may be in prison, OMmay be in hospital and I would feel liek dirt when my kids looked at me. And my FWW would feel vindicated in her affair.

As it is FWW tells me she "is in AWE of what I have done for her: for us ". And I cried at that. Like baby as she held me.

I have said before that I have felt that a husband/father can have no higher state of grace that to be what his family needs in a crisis, and I have been that through the grace of God.

I am not sure if those attributes are masculine-defined or not. There are ferocious mothers and wives on here every bit as selfless and heroic in their efforts to recover a life for their kids and themselves as I was or any of the other Plan -A BHs.

I am proud of what I have done, and what I am becoming, pep. And my FWW tells me she is in AWE of my efforts. My kids adore me again.

I'm doing something right.... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

When I read these passages, it suggests to me that the responsibility for harmony in a marriage lies with the man, primarily.

That women simply respond to our husbands behavior...it is his position as leader; as head that dictates our response.

Much in the same way that a childs behavior is influenced by their parent.

If a husband treats his wife with tenderness, understanding, consideration...if he honors her...she will respond with affection etc.

I can take my natural place as a woman when my husband takes his place as leader, provider.

It was when he didn't take responsibility for providing , for example, when he abdicated, that things fell apart.
I needed his leadership in these things.

We were designed to be a mans companion, a 'help meet for him'. To complement him...

God said it is not good for man to be alone. I think a womans differences complete a man, but he has to let us be a woman, and we have to let him be a man.

I felt that I had no 'husband'. The very word 'husbandry', suggests responsibility for the wellbeing of the creatures being 'husbanded'.

Maybe this is not very liberated thinking, but for me it would be liberating to be allowed to be a woman.


Shul

OK, what if a man feels comfortable in his own skin, marries, then his wife "rejects" him for an OM? He wasn't looking for her to make him whole, but her rejection of him as he is does make him feel less than a hero.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

Originally posted by RAG:
OK, what if ....

</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I am never certain if the intent is a question or a statement when the sentence begins this way..."What if..."

Are you asking a hypothetical question? Are stating your opinion? Are you simply describing your situation?

I don't know how to respond... yet <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

Pep

Pep, as always, you are awesome. Heidi is right, "Wild at Heart" is one of my all time fav books. I haven't read all 86 responses to your original post so I hope I'm not being redundant when I ask if you have read some of Eldredge's other works. My next fav is "The Journey of Desire" followed by "The Sacred Romance" which IMO is his most chick book. I also enjoyed "Waking the Dead".

I recently found a series of messages delivered by David T. Moore which are partly derived from Eldredge's works. Here's the link to "Maximum Personhood, The Alpha Male" http://resources.christianity.com/m...=42625&JServSessionIdroot=9oees4y991

And I'd like to add, Thank you Pep, for the way you have helped Hiedi and I.

Pep, I am reading the sexy bit in your first post and reading as a description of a relationship between a man and a woman.........still digesting it. I will let you know what I come up with.


George

Shul,

Your post flowed really well. I enjoyed reading it. Not sure where your faith is at, but from a Christian perspective I felt I needed to make a few comments.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">When I read these passages, it suggests to me that the responsibility for harmony in a marriage lies with the man, primarily.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Not primarily, DEFINITELY. The whole Christ to Church thing is a model of Man to Family thing. The responsibility of the man is MORE than just harmony. It is the material and spiritual welfare of the home. But this does NOT mean the woman is free to sow discord, either. We all answer for our own actions, but the head answers for those under him as well.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">That women simply respond to our husbands behavior...it is his position as leader; as head that dictates our response.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">When it is working well, probably the case. But in truth, you are to serve your husband as Christ served the church. The BEST you can. For when you do, you are truly honoring God. Even if your husband is a PIG, you must serve your best. For by that light, God may just change his heart. But God is merciful and gives us an out in extreme cases. What is the extreme case? Infidelity.

Having a pig for a husband doesn’t make the service easy, but does NOT mean you do not do your best. You do that for YOU.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Maybe this is not very liberated thinking, but for me it would be liberating to be allowed to be a woman.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Actually, VERY liberating. What freedom is greater than a happy home? The enemy LOVES it when a woman has the reins in the house. Even if she is great at it, it is not in God’s model. And it will thus never be free. The woman is to submit to the man. (Here comes the flak, I can feel it). But the man is to lead as a servant-leader. If he is doing this, submission isn’t really as bad as it “sounds.”

NCW

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> OK, what if a man feels comfortable in his own skin, marries, then his wife "rejects" him for an OM? He wasn't looking for her to make him whole, but her rejection of him as he is does make him feel less than a hero.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">RAG,

You have a causality hole in your argument. It is the difference between if-then and if-and-only-if.

IF you beat me up, THEN I feel pain

does NOT imply the converse that

IF I feel pain, THEN you beat me up

nor the extended converse that

IF I beat YOU up, THEN I feel pleasure

A woman’s rejection can tarnish the hero status of a man, but the definition of it MUST come from within. Then it will still be intact.

NCWalker – feeling pretty raucous and sowing his symbolic logic oats.

Thank you so much for starting this thread Pep - I am learning so much from this discussion, and from the book! I bought it on Monday and I am almost done with it! Hubby said he would read it when I am done, but I am thinking of just buying another copy of it today so we can read it together.

I read the first chapter and started bawling. There were things in the OM that I saw, that I want to see from my husband. I absolutely realize that they are two different people and OM wasn't really being true with himself in front of me. I guess what I am trying to say is that I would love for my husband to live for himself, not for his work, not for me, not for the house, dogs, etc. For himself, for God. And I want to be along right next to him, on his adventure.

The analogy in the book about the lion in the cage, I see my hubby as the lion and I don't want him to be caged!!! God wants him to LIVE!!! I just only hope my hubby will see that.

God bless!

Originally posted by chackler:
Thank you so much for starting this thread Pep - I am learning so much from this discussion, and from the book!

Me too.

I bought it on Monday and I am almost done with it! Hubby said he would read it when I am done, but I am thinking of just buying another copy of it today so we can read it together.

I bought it for my H... he read it, then he read it again, aloud, to me... in other words, we read it together, and discussed it.... a really great way to grow closer is to read aloud to each other, not silently side-by-side.


I read the first chapter and started bawling. There were things in the OM that I saw, that I want to see from my husband. I absolutely realize that they are two different people and OM wasn't really being true with himself in front of me.

ANY OM is not a hero to the lady. He is playing the part... a player. OM is robbing WW of something precious, her honor and self-respect. A hero will not make his lady less worthy before God. He respects her too much to hurt her in that way.

I guess what I am trying to say is that I would love for my husband to live for himself, not for his work, not for me, not for the house, dogs, etc. For himself, for God. And I want to be along right next to him, on his adventure.

I think this is do-able!

Good luck on this journey! God bless you.

Pep

<small>[ September 30, 2004, 10:43 AM: Message edited by: Pepperband ]</small>

George said something that I'm going to change a bit.

I can see where my development as a human needs more time spent in my little cabin (which I actually do have), writing and thinking and developing and growing as a person. I can see why I was SOOOOOOOOO be-smitten with pretty faces and why I could not forgive my ex; I believed that my spouse took my sense of self along on the way out the door, because I believed that my spouse gave me my sense of self in the first place -- by accepting me. I see now that she could not have given me my sense of self, because she is someone else by definition. My sense of self, my self-esteem (as I have come to learn) must come from me, and from me, alone, for that is how God made me.

Armed with this knowledge (and I CHOSE the word 'Armed') I can now go back and edit my original post in this thread, because I no longer need to try to get my self-esteem back from my ex by saying harsh things.

George, I think your statements are utterly valid for you -- and I think the exact same statements have been made many times by women, just with the polarity of the sexes reversed. Some of this is, yes, about the different experiences of men and women. Much, though, is about the experience of Self and Other.

NCW: Even if she is great at it [leading the household], it is not in God’s model. And it will thus never be free. The woman is to submit to the man. (Here comes the flak, I can feel it). But the man is to lead as a servant-leader. If he is doing this, submission isn’t really as bad as it “sounds.”


Mmmmm..... might not be in 'God's' model. Certainly is in Goddess'. And from what I've seen, it makes for some fabulously, well balanced, happy, loving, and committed marriages. Not to mention marriages that are wildly and passionately sexual.

C

Hi, JustJ. I like what you wrote, however it is really as a male person (a MAN) that I am relating to thid, not as an androgynous 'person'. I do not want to be a sexless-genderless person; I want to be the MAN that God created me to be. I feel that the androgyny of the last 40 years in what has gotten us into the mess we are in as a culture.

ncwalker....Right on the money. I know that what you describe is God's plan for us as men and women.

George Bailey, growing into my manhood

<small>[ September 30, 2004, 02:40 PM: Message edited by: George Bailey ]</small>

Ok, Pepper, here is my take on the re-reading of your 1st post;

There is something mythic in the way that a man is with a woman.

Of course; a man being with a woman takes us back to our creation; back to the point and place where God put His stamp on us as men and women. Her femininity is the perfect compliment to my masculinity. My strength to her yielding; her softness to my hardness (not intending sexuality here, btw); her curves to my angularity; my intensity to her depth.

The man comes to offer his strength and the woman invites the man into herself

The man approaches, he peruses, but, as I found out last night, when one of my cats escaped outside, the man cannot force his strength upon her, for if he does, she will retreat, she will run and hide herself from him. His strength must be a made as a gentle offer to her; "See, I am here, I am strong, I am MAN and my strength and manhood are here for you, your protection and love. These arms which can lift great weight, can hold you tenderly and these hands which can defeat my opponent can caress you softly. My spirit, which aggressively goes out into the world, invites your spirit, which is safe in my care, to come along on my travels, adventures and discoveries.

an act that requires courage and vulnerability and selflessness for both of them

Yes. You are vulnerable by yielding to my strength, and I am humbled and made vulnerable by the honor of you trust and company.

Notice first that if the man will not rise to the occasion, nothing will happen. He must move, his strength must swell before he can enter her.

If the man shrinks in the face of the challenge of knowing his woman, or a woman he wants to be his, the he will never be able to enter her spirit, mind and soul. He will never win her, because he refuses to get into the game and at least try. A swing and a miss is more heroic than sitting on the bench.

But neither will the love consummate unless the woman opens herself in stunning vulnerability.

He can step up to the plate all he wants, but if she continues to back away, he will never be able to make contact.
She must look at him and accept his strength as something she needs and wants. She must (especially in this world, where we are trying to de-sex men, and masculinize women) (again) yield to him and his strength if she is ever going to experience herself as fully female in the way God made her. Otherwise she is an impenetrable fortress, closed to him and what he has to offer her.

When both are living as they were meant to live, the man enters the woman and offers her his strength.

When we live as we were built, as God intended, then the man and the woman exchange the gift of themselves; he, his hardness, maleness and strength; she, the warm, soft sanctuary of her femaleness, and her enveloping love.

He spills himself there, in her, for her, she draws him in, embraces and envelops him. When all is over, he is spent, but ah, what a sweet death it is.

The man will give his all for her. He spills his seed into her, gives his dedication to her, and spills his strength, and, if need be, his very life FOR her.

Ok, that is it. Whew...............


GB

<small>[ September 30, 2004, 02:33 PM: Message edited by: George Bailey ]</small>

*George*

I like it!

Thanks soooo much!

Pep

that was beautiful George

Pep & Shul... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />