Why is being gay considered outside the manbox?\u00a0 To answer this question it\u2019s important to understand what is meant by the \u201cmanbox.\u201d\u00a0 Many people think of the manbox as a compilation of characteristics which are commonly found in men. For example, strength, deep voices, and a general lack of emotion are typical traits which are thought of as \u201cmanly.\u201d\u00a0 So, when some individuals look at gay people and do not see these traits, but rather potentially see a frail physic, high voice, and high capacity for emotion, they label them as un-manly.\u00a0 This characterization may accurately describe many persons who identify as homosexual. The problem, however, is that the characterization does not describe all such persons.\u00a0 It is possible to identify as gay and yet still be strong, have a deep voice, and generally lack emotion.\u00a0 Point being, I would not fairly label anyone as feminine if they simply lacked strength or a deep voice.<\/p>\n
Now, is there anything inherently un-manly about the practice of homosexuality itself? I believe this is a different question. I would answer yes. I understand this is not a popular belief. In no way is my intent, in making this claim, to shame anyone who identifies as gay. I would never, as many wrongly do, claim that homosexuals are abominations or less than human. They are people, made in the very image of God and worthy of full rights and respect. However, as a Christian, I submit all my opinions and thoughts about truth to the Bible, which I believe are the very words of God. And if this is true of the Bible, I have no choice but to shape my understanding of masculinity and femininity according to it.<\/p>\n
From the Bible, I see that right after woman is created, Adam says, \u201cThis at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken of Man.\u201d The following verse states that, \u201cTherefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh\u201d (Genesis 2:23-24). Here I see that God\u2019s original intention for man was to be joined with a woman, and a woman with a man. At the heart of homosexuality is a rejection of God\u2019s design for mature masculinity and femininity.<\/p>\n
There are also passages in the Bible which describe the way men and women are to relate to one another, each with differing roles\/responsibilities. One such passage is found in Ephesians 5. Addressing women, the author writes: \u201c22\u00a0<\/sup><\/strong>Wives,\u00a0submit to your own husbands,\u00a0as to the Lord.\u00a023\u00a0<\/sup><\/strong>For\u00a0the husband is the head of the wife even as\u00a0Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.\u00a024\u00a0<\/sup><\/strong>Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit\u00a0in everything to their husbands.\u201d Many hear the word \u201csubmit\u201d and assume it means that women are to be considered less valuable and simply servants to men. This however is shown to be false in the following verses, \u201c25\u00a0<\/sup><\/strong>Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and\u00a0gave himself up for her,\u00a026\u00a0<\/sup><\/strong>that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by\u00a0the washing of water\u00a0with the word,\u00a027\u00a0<\/sup><\/strong>so\u00a0that he might present the church to himself in splendor,\u00a0without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish.\u00a028\u00a0<\/sup><\/strong>In the same way\u00a0husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself.\u201d<\/p>\n The point of this complimentary relationship between man and woman is to display something that is bigger than both of them, the love of Jesus Christ for his church. The man displays servant like leadership in order to nourish and strengthen his bride while the wife joyfully affirms and submits to that leadership. It is a picture of how Christ laid down his own life to purify and sanctify his church.<\/p>\n Lest you think I have gone off on a tangent, I give these teachings from the Bible to show that, (1) I am not speaking according to my own made up opinions and (2) homosexuality is un-manly because it rejects God\u2019s purpose for both man and women. When men and women relate to one another, as God intended, it paints a beautiful picture of the gospel and his love. Homosexuality, however, tries to fit two identical puzzle pieces together. It doesn\u2019t fit, it doesn\u2019t come together to picture what it was meant to. And as a result, the relationship between Christ and his church, the gospel, is not portrayed but distorted.<\/p>\n In concluding I want to again state that while I hold these views, I do not view homosexuals as any greater sinners than I myself am. While the Bible teaches homosexuality is sin, it is not taught as being a greater sin than others. I need grace just as much as any individual who practices homosexuality. Thanks to anyone who read this far.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Why is being gay considered outside the manbox?\u00a0 To answer this question it\u2019s important to understand what is meant by the \u201cmanbox.\u201d\u00a0 Many people think of the manbox as a compilation of characteristics which are commonly found in men. For example, strength, deep voices, and a general lack of emotion …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2230,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[29790],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-167","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-fall-2015","column","twocol"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/masculinities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/masculinities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/masculinities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/masculinities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2230"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/masculinities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=167"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/masculinities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/masculinities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=167"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/masculinities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=167"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.richmond.edu\/masculinities\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=167"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}