Men: Gender as the Symmetry of God

Last entry was about the woman's role as a reflection of God. We saw that many have found it necessary to become advocates to the liberation of women cause. This is because the majority social hierarchy tends to be patriarchal, across the globe.

When I began considering this, one of the main points that I was thinking about is the place that society, especially western society seems to be moving into where gender is concerned. In the previous entry focusing on women, I talked about how we were at risk of arguing for equality to the point that we make the genders indistinguishable from each other. For women, we discussed how the care-taking, softer, nurturing stereotype was an important social role and how we could see those traits in the character of God. My next thought considered the male stereotype, and I wondered about the masculine characteristics that could inform about the persona of God.

The statue of David by Michelangelo is perhaps the quintessential portrait of masculinity. McCullouch (2007) suggests that the image of the biblical figure David, who fought a much larger, stronger entity in Goliath, the giant, became an important beacon for Florence, Italy during the 1500s when it was first publicly revealed. When I think of the word masculine, I do think of strength, of position, and I also hold a certain expectation for his position. McCullouch discusses how the statue of David became a political figure in Florence and I think this is a good parallel to the generic expectation society has for males. Even today, there is still much expectation for what men will achieve outside of the home. Men are seen as the pioneers, and the expectation is that they will go out and be the champion for their household. They are strong, and brave and hard-working and they fight giants for their people. Of course, I am speaking in cliché and (arguable) idealism. Nevertheless, men are still being paid more in the workplace at this point; perhaps because there are oppressive motives attempting to "hold women down" or perhaps because there is still an expectation that women's presence in the workforce is only temporary.

And so, what I've come to wonder is if there isn't beauty and worth in the traditional roles. Now let me be clear - my discussion is for the worth of the collective humanity (as a picture of God). It is not about whether women should stay home or not. I actually see how God depicts humanity in a way that transcends gender, almost as though this becomes irrelevant. Not that the male role and the female role are unimportant, but that the actor of each loses their position, and the focus is on the behaviour rather than the individual and the result is good. Consider this passage of scripture:

Ephesians 5:22-33

The Message (MSG)

 ^22-24Wives, understand and support your husbands in ways that show your support for Christ. The husband provides leadership to his wife the way Christ does to his church, not by domineering but by cherishing. So just as the church submits to Christ as he exercises such leadership, wives should likewise submit to their husbands.
 ^25-28Husbands, go all out in your love for your wives, exactly as Christ did for the church—a love marked by giving, not getting. Christ's love makes the church whole. His words evoke her beauty. Everything he does and says is designed to bring the best out of her, dressing her in dazzling white silk, radiant with holiness. And that is how husbands ought to love their wives. They're really doing themselves a favour—since they're already "one" in marriage.
 ^29-33No one abuses his own body, does he? No, he feeds and pampers it. That's how Christ treats us, the church, since we are part of his body. And this is why a man leaves father and mother and cherishes his wife. No longer two, they become "one flesh." This is a huge mystery, and I don't pretend to understand it all. What is clearest to me is the way Christ treats the church. And this provides a good picture of how each husband is to treat his wife, loving himself in loving her, and how each wife is to honour her husband.

At first, I critiqued the idea of making the genders indistinguishable from each other, and perhaps in terms of their very functional, human and physical roles I still consider this to be my position, but in terms of a spiritual and emotional position, I see that scripture and I feel as though all of it is applicable to me. I read the first paragraph as a future wife, learning of good biblical ways to relate to my future husband; I read the second as a good expectation to hold for my future husband, and I read the third as an assurance of God's role to the genderless church. It is at this point I come to consider that in the emotional and spiritual sense God relates to humanity from both angles. A part of what makes His love so complete, so satisfying is the fact that He provides the strength, the protection, the shelter and the cherishing as well as the nurturing understanding and support. Perhaps we can learn something about how to satisfy each other in love by utilising His symmetry.