Why The Oblique Face?

WARNING: The following may cause some readers' monocles to fall out as they gasp, "Well- I never!"

If I say so and so is a pussy to mean so and so is weak or lame, I don't mean so and so is like a vagina- I don't know if that's what you think it's supposed to mean- but that's not what I mean. I mean someone is weak and lame. I also don't mean the "weak and lame someone" is womanlike by being weak and lame or that womanlike is weak and lame.

It might be that someone or someones used pussy to mean weak and lame because they thought vaginas were weak and lame and so connected the two ideas. Or it might be that some men identified all women as weak and lame, and since women have vaginas- perhaps it is vaginas that make women women- some men decided to call someone- most likely another man- weak and lame by identifying them as that which they thought made a woman a woman. So for some, pussy may be shorthand for "woman," which is itself shorthand for "weak and lame." I don't think there is anything essential to women that is weak and lame, so for me that connection doesn't make sense. I understand it, but it doesn't make sense.

Or maybe someone or someones used pussy to mean soft and effete and some other one or ones used it to mean vagina so they needn't be explained in relation to each other. Oh homophones- the confusion you can cause.

If vagina's the only thing pussy could mean then I wouldn't use it. I would instead say pansy. Of course I wouldn't mean a flower when I say pansy- I would mean someone who is weak and lame- and by that you may think pussy. And if you're still thinking vagina- I can't do anything about that. In fact, you should probably avoid the interwebs if your mind so quickly goes to vagina.

I also don't mean penis if I say dick, or anus if I say asshole.

So, I will purposefully say pussy, and you might take issue with it. If you do, I think it perfectly appropriate that you say something- only make sure you're saying something about my use of the word and not something else.

That said:

I finally brought myself around to trying to finish John Eldredge's Wild at Heart. I started it a long time ago when a friend of mine said it had changed her life. This change was evident by the fact that she continued looking for romantic relationships to provide her some sense of worth, only now she would no longer try to convert gay men and instead focus on finding fulfillment in the comic book masculinity of Eldredge's Christian men. I still couldn't do it- read it that is.

I looked up bullet ants after reading a pain scale for bug bites on BOING. They're the worst. I've been bit by fire ants and didn't think they were so bad- now I know why. They actually aren't so bad. Here's what I found about bullet ants though:

"Bullet ants are used by some indigenous people in their initiation rites to manhood (Bequaert, 1926). The ants are first knocked out by drowning them in a natural chloroform, and then hundreds of them are woven into sleeves made out of leaves, stinger facing inward. When the ants come to, boys slip the sleeve down onto their arm. The goal of this initiation rite is to keep the sleeve on for a full ten minutes without showing any signs of pain. When finished, the boys' (now men) arms are temporarily paralyzed because of the venom, and they may shake uncontrollably for days."

That's some expectation isn't it? Being a man means being bitten and poisoned by ants. I don't think that I could do that- I also don't think that has anything to do with being a man. But then, I'm afraid of bees.

So some five years later and I still haven't finished Wild at Heart and I don't think I ever will. That being the case perhaps I am not qualified to say if you think being a man is about being a literary type while somewhere else in the world children become men by being bit thousands of times by bullet ants, you're a pussy. But I'll say it anyway; if you think being a Christian man is about being a literary type while somewhere else in the world children become men by being bit thousands of times by bullet ants, then you're a pussy.

It's not that being bit by ants is more manly than wanting to be Batman. If you're a Christian, it makes as much sense to become a man by being Batman as it does being bit by hundreds of bullet ants. So in addition to the above, I should say if you think being a Christian man is about being a literary type even if nowhere else in the world children became men by being bit thousands of times by bullet ants, then you're a pussy.

Of course stoically being bit by bullet ants for ten minutes is more painful and requires more self-control than trying to be the movie character William Wallace. And post-ant-bites, there's probably strong connections from the shared experience that only the ant-bitten know that is stronger and likely more meaningful than the men who share the desire to be Robin Hood. But I wouldn't say it's more "manly." I would say it's more painful, requires more self-control and a sense of trust before and, builds camaraderie after.

I certainly think we should be able to endure much more than we do without complaining, and I'm all for the "spirit of camaraderie that exists between men, like you'd find only in combat maybe or in a pro-ball club in the heat of the peenant drive," but it's nothing to do with manliness.

But then, my point is not to compare the two. It's about what it might mean to become a man in light of being a Christian- or if it can even make sense to pose the question like that in light of being a Christian.

There is a difference between an adult and a child- there is some becoming involved but is it the Christian man's calling to become manly let alone more manly? Or, El Guapo, could it be that once again we are using words and categories that do not make sense for us as Christians to use?

I'm sure I am way behind the curve on this whole Eldredge nonsense, but the gender roles we idolize and the meanings Christians give to words like masculine and feminine are timelessly stupid, as are the things we say and do in light of these concepts. Our ideas of what makes someone a good leader or how one might perceive their own leadership could be a couple of those stupid things.

And now, true to form- I will leave this idea hanging there- underdeveloped. Ha ha.

You Say You Love Your Wife- You're Such a Woman
This Guy's In Love- Burt Bacharach
Adagio for Strings- Munch, Boston Symphony
Who Made You So Smart- The Briefs
I Wish I Had An Evil Twin- Magnetic Fields
Red Rain- The White Stripes
Island In The Sun- Weezer
Gimmie Some Salt- Clap Your Hands Say Yeah
Misty Mountain Hop- Led Zeppelin
Blue In Green- Miles Davis
'Tis Autumn- Stan Getz
Painter Song- Norah Jones
How Could I Just Kill a Man- Rage Against The Machine
It's Magic- Sarah Vaughan
3 Speed- Eels