I really appreciate this article. I've begun using that moment of arousal as a means for worship (Lord, thank you for letting me behold a glimpse of your beauty in this woman) and praying for the gift of honor and curiosity (Help me know that this is only the beginning of her glory, and that her glory is not mine to behold in full).
I think both this article, the above practice, and your book have surfaced some of the malformation of masculinity I've experienced. That sense of being overpowered still feels shameful because of a script I've learned. It's something I've begun to explore and feel curious about.
Woohoo! Greg, it's so good to hear you reflect back your growth and the healthy process you've adopted. That sounds so honorable. I especially like the line about "Help me know this is only a glimpse of her glory and that her glory is not mine to behold in full." LOVE THAT!
SO good, thanks for sharing and having a rich convo about this. It's so good, how you're differentiating and I wish/hope she is one of the readers of this newsletter! We are all learning this together, and thanks for bring brave, knowing it a clumsy work to be a human trying to parce this out. It's good you're allowing yourself to notice this woman at Sam's Club was more than about beauty, but the caring of oneself and doing good social things - that's a good desire and it's just part of being human to sometimes want what we don't have in the moment to moment. There's no getting around that, but it may bring hope and inspiration to see someone dressed up well, and in light of what Sheila Wray Gregoire suggests, hope in not having to look away in shame because we were moved. It's a good word for us as spouses also but we do desire to clear territory so it's complex!
Thank you for this article! I just finished reading your book and I’m looking for material to share with my 16-year-old and my 22-year-old sons as I am seeking to support their journey in healthy masculinity.
I am sad that some of our journey as a couple has wounded them and want to help support my son’s in their journey as they grow as men.
I am pondering if your book is the best option to share with them or if there is something better to share with young men that are not married yet? I would appreciate your input and thank you again for this amazing book and this article!
Thank you so much for the feedback Cindy! Means a great deal. And I am honored you read my book. From the feedback of other young men that have reached out to me, yes I do believe my book would be a gift to them. And I love that you are thinking about and caring for their well-being!
I really like your explanation of how awe is becoming power-less while lust is feeling emboldened in power. Such a good explanation of the difference. I want to practice emptying myself of power in awe of things!
I love your last sentence. That's such a statement of true security, a solid sense of self, and real empowerment... that you long to give up power on behalf of awe! So good!
Hi Sam and all-thank you for the space to reflect. Where I’m unsettled in the idea of telling men *not* to look away is that it seems to take away a right of choice or self protection. When a woman is dressed in an intentionally revealing way walks in front of me, do i lose my consent? I am all about learning to honor and become faithful in the presence of beauty (not consume it)-and i like the idea of being able to turn away if someone is using their sexual energy and freedom in a way that feels uncomfortable for me. Just as i have the ability to cover my eyes and fast forward a sex scene in a movie, i want to hold the right to not engage with what i see as an intention to provoke a reaction.
Here’s the thing i am uncomfortable saying: this line of thinking seems to state that whatever a woman does regarding her body and choice of how to clothe it should be ok with me - i need to accept it as good - or else I risk creating shame in her.
The other thing that your article and Sheila’s article brought up in me was that many women feel threatened when interacting with unknown men. (I reference “the bear or the man” experiment.) How do i know what will seem the safest for a woman i encounter? I choose to be present for eye to eye contact or prepared to look down or away if that’s the vibe i get from the woman walking toward me.
I like that there is no final word on this. For me, It is an issue of the heart not behavior.
Jeff, man, sorry if the sentiment was to FORCE you to look. Your face is a gift and you get to decide when and where to give that gift. I do believe I mentioned in the article that you may need to look away. That is good and necessary at times. I am simply acknowledging that "bouncing your eyes" as the only and ultimate solution to lust is not healthy.
I think your reviewer is drawing the line in the wrong place. It's not OK for her husband to be looking at *other* women with lust, but ideally he should learn not to look at *her* with lust either!
Lust, as I understand it, happens when some animal part of our brain perceives that sex is available and says, "You need to make that happen right now!" It's inherently objectifying because it reduces the other person to thing-I-can-have-sex-with.
If I find myself slipping into that lust mode with my wife, I find that noticing and appreciating her body is a very reliable way to get *out* of that mode and back into a human relational mode. It feels like swimming up from somewhere deep in, well, my nether regions, and taking a big breath of fresh air. Very much the same feeling I get when I'm stressed out about something and go out for a walk, and halfway down the street I suddenly notice that the sunlight is in the trees and the birds are singing.
That sense of Awe seems to be what allows us to return to fully occupying our own bodies and our own senses, and that's diametrically opposed to the narrow, stifling, objectifying focus that is lust.
Yes, lust period is wrong. Agreed. Somehow the same word can mean "eagerly desire" and that would be a good thing. I love your reflections on how you've moved your own body and heart back into awe mode.
For that matter, the Song of Songs really models that "awe" approach to bodies, and also argues that even sex itself ought to be embodied and relational rather than lustful and narrowly sexual.
Consider the parallel sex scenes in 3:1-5:1 and then in 5:2 to 5:7. In the first, the woman initiates (probably not an arbitrary choice), they are lying side by side (full-body relaxed skin contact), there is prolonged foreplay with them very attentive to each other (I love the "let's go hiking together" metaphor of 5:8; consider how attentive you are to your partner when climbing together on tricky terrain), and despite not opting for sex in the narrow sense of intercourse (her request in 5:16 is usually understood to be for oral stimulation), they both seem to have a great time.
Then in 5:2 *he* comes banging on *her* door, clearly in a more urgent and less relational mood, doesn't take "I'm asleep" for an answer, and starts fumbling into the latch trying to force the door open. And then she finally gets out of bed, grabs the latch, flings the door open -- and where did he go? And why is my hand *slimy*? And why is this latch *dripping*? Clearly he went charging ahead with a narrowly genital approach, with no regard for her lack of interest or even consent, and now he's finished up and left, and we end up with a picture of pain and alienation rather than connection.
What if all the lavish erotic description in the Song of Songs, the detailed attention the lovers pay to each other's full bodies, isn't meant just to be sexy and arousing, but is actually modeling how to be present in our bodies -- and therefore present to each other -- in sex? What if all that "noticing" of bodies is actually the *antidote* to banal, lustful, narrowly-defined sex?
I really appreciate this article. I've begun using that moment of arousal as a means for worship (Lord, thank you for letting me behold a glimpse of your beauty in this woman) and praying for the gift of honor and curiosity (Help me know that this is only the beginning of her glory, and that her glory is not mine to behold in full).
I think both this article, the above practice, and your book have surfaced some of the malformation of masculinity I've experienced. That sense of being overpowered still feels shameful because of a script I've learned. It's something I've begun to explore and feel curious about.
Woohoo! Greg, it's so good to hear you reflect back your growth and the healthy process you've adopted. That sounds so honorable. I especially like the line about "Help me know this is only a glimpse of her glory and that her glory is not mine to behold in full." LOVE THAT!
SO good, thanks for sharing and having a rich convo about this. It's so good, how you're differentiating and I wish/hope she is one of the readers of this newsletter! We are all learning this together, and thanks for bring brave, knowing it a clumsy work to be a human trying to parce this out. It's good you're allowing yourself to notice this woman at Sam's Club was more than about beauty, but the caring of oneself and doing good social things - that's a good desire and it's just part of being human to sometimes want what we don't have in the moment to moment. There's no getting around that, but it may bring hope and inspiration to see someone dressed up well, and in light of what Sheila Wray Gregoire suggests, hope in not having to look away in shame because we were moved. It's a good word for us as spouses also but we do desire to clear territory so it's complex!
Beautiful comment, Christa. Full of grace.
This being human is SO complex, indeed. Thank you so much Christa for your kind words here.
Thank you for this article! I just finished reading your book and I’m looking for material to share with my 16-year-old and my 22-year-old sons as I am seeking to support their journey in healthy masculinity.
I am sad that some of our journey as a couple has wounded them and want to help support my son’s in their journey as they grow as men.
I am pondering if your book is the best option to share with them or if there is something better to share with young men that are not married yet? I would appreciate your input and thank you again for this amazing book and this article!
Thank you so much for the feedback Cindy! Means a great deal. And I am honored you read my book. From the feedback of other young men that have reached out to me, yes I do believe my book would be a gift to them. And I love that you are thinking about and caring for their well-being!
I really like your explanation of how awe is becoming power-less while lust is feeling emboldened in power. Such a good explanation of the difference. I want to practice emptying myself of power in awe of things!
I love your last sentence. That's such a statement of true security, a solid sense of self, and real empowerment... that you long to give up power on behalf of awe! So good!
Hi Sam and all-thank you for the space to reflect. Where I’m unsettled in the idea of telling men *not* to look away is that it seems to take away a right of choice or self protection. When a woman is dressed in an intentionally revealing way walks in front of me, do i lose my consent? I am all about learning to honor and become faithful in the presence of beauty (not consume it)-and i like the idea of being able to turn away if someone is using their sexual energy and freedom in a way that feels uncomfortable for me. Just as i have the ability to cover my eyes and fast forward a sex scene in a movie, i want to hold the right to not engage with what i see as an intention to provoke a reaction.
Here’s the thing i am uncomfortable saying: this line of thinking seems to state that whatever a woman does regarding her body and choice of how to clothe it should be ok with me - i need to accept it as good - or else I risk creating shame in her.
The other thing that your article and Sheila’s article brought up in me was that many women feel threatened when interacting with unknown men. (I reference “the bear or the man” experiment.) How do i know what will seem the safest for a woman i encounter? I choose to be present for eye to eye contact or prepared to look down or away if that’s the vibe i get from the woman walking toward me.
I like that there is no final word on this. For me, It is an issue of the heart not behavior.
Jeff, man, sorry if the sentiment was to FORCE you to look. Your face is a gift and you get to decide when and where to give that gift. I do believe I mentioned in the article that you may need to look away. That is good and necessary at times. I am simply acknowledging that "bouncing your eyes" as the only and ultimate solution to lust is not healthy.
Jeff, I edited a paragraph in the article to clarify my sentiment. Thanks for the feedback.
I think your reviewer is drawing the line in the wrong place. It's not OK for her husband to be looking at *other* women with lust, but ideally he should learn not to look at *her* with lust either!
Lust, as I understand it, happens when some animal part of our brain perceives that sex is available and says, "You need to make that happen right now!" It's inherently objectifying because it reduces the other person to thing-I-can-have-sex-with.
If I find myself slipping into that lust mode with my wife, I find that noticing and appreciating her body is a very reliable way to get *out* of that mode and back into a human relational mode. It feels like swimming up from somewhere deep in, well, my nether regions, and taking a big breath of fresh air. Very much the same feeling I get when I'm stressed out about something and go out for a walk, and halfway down the street I suddenly notice that the sunlight is in the trees and the birds are singing.
That sense of Awe seems to be what allows us to return to fully occupying our own bodies and our own senses, and that's diametrically opposed to the narrow, stifling, objectifying focus that is lust.
Yes, lust period is wrong. Agreed. Somehow the same word can mean "eagerly desire" and that would be a good thing. I love your reflections on how you've moved your own body and heart back into awe mode.
For that matter, the Song of Songs really models that "awe" approach to bodies, and also argues that even sex itself ought to be embodied and relational rather than lustful and narrowly sexual.
Consider the parallel sex scenes in 3:1-5:1 and then in 5:2 to 5:7. In the first, the woman initiates (probably not an arbitrary choice), they are lying side by side (full-body relaxed skin contact), there is prolonged foreplay with them very attentive to each other (I love the "let's go hiking together" metaphor of 5:8; consider how attentive you are to your partner when climbing together on tricky terrain), and despite not opting for sex in the narrow sense of intercourse (her request in 5:16 is usually understood to be for oral stimulation), they both seem to have a great time.
Then in 5:2 *he* comes banging on *her* door, clearly in a more urgent and less relational mood, doesn't take "I'm asleep" for an answer, and starts fumbling into the latch trying to force the door open. And then she finally gets out of bed, grabs the latch, flings the door open -- and where did he go? And why is my hand *slimy*? And why is this latch *dripping*? Clearly he went charging ahead with a narrowly genital approach, with no regard for her lack of interest or even consent, and now he's finished up and left, and we end up with a picture of pain and alienation rather than connection.
What if all the lavish erotic description in the Song of Songs, the detailed attention the lovers pay to each other's full bodies, isn't meant just to be sexy and arousing, but is actually modeling how to be present in our bodies -- and therefore present to each other -- in sex? What if all that "noticing" of bodies is actually the *antidote* to banal, lustful, narrowly-defined sex?
This was beautiful, thank you!