No picnics. No mini muffins. And never Adele…

May 9, 2013 by 7 Comments

Boundaries. It can be a bit of an obsession in Christian circles, particularly with regard to men, women, friendships and relationships. Essentially, this post is part 6 of my Eternal Problem series – but I thought I’d give it a rather more interesting title.

A few weeks ago, current favourite sitcom New Girl featured a scene in which one male character outlined to another the things a guy could and could not do for a female friend. Not familiar with New Girl?  (Why wouldn’t you be? It’s all kinds of awesome!) Three guys (Winston, Schmidt & Nick) and one girl (Jess) share an apartment; the guys learn all sorts of things from their quirky female flatmate; one guy (Nick) and the girl have something of a will they/won’t they friendship; and it’s very, very funny.

New Girl titlesI basically want to be Jess. Or Zooey Deschanel. Or a hybrid of both…

The scene in question takes place when Winston confronts Nick about his friendship with Jess, which appears to be rather more complicated than it ought to be. Winston basically creates a list of ok and not ok things to do with or for a friend who happens to be a girl:

It’s because you don’t have boundaries! 
As a friend, you can lift a heavy object, but you cannot drive her to the airport.
You can hold the elevator, but only if you see her coming down the hall saying “hey man, can you hold the elevator?”.
No picnics. No mini muffins. 
And never Adele. Never Adele.
Most importantly, you will not help her build that dresser. It’s furniture that implies that one day you will share it with her. And that’s not going to happen.

It sounds ridiculous, but are such rules necessary in our relationships with others? Is it reasonable to expect people to respect or initiate boundaries? Are Christians (especially) over-obsessed with the idea of boundaries, particularly in male/female friendships?

If boundaries help to prevent us from getting hurt, then they’re a good thing. If they stop us from ever drawing close to people we should be close too, they’re a bad thing. But I think that there can be a happy balance between the two.

Personally, I know that there are friendships in which I should have applied the picnic boundary early on – perhaps I wouldn’t then have found myself having to specify boundaries several years later, when trying to move on from a complicated friendship. (“You can laugh with me, but you’re not to laugh at me – or encourage others to do so…”) Then again, I think of the male friend who helped me build my bed a few years ago, and know that it didn’t mess with either of our heads!

Asking the question “is this helpful?” in a situation in which you know that there are feelings or complications is definitely sensible – on the part of both parties. Of course, it’s also hard to say no when you really want to be spending time with someone. Who wouldn’t want to have a picnic on a sunny day with a nice person? Or to help someone out with their newly purchased Ikea flatpacks? Or to listen to Adele… (Maybe not!)

Talking over the New Girl plot with a friend, we realised that this was possibly the only time we’ve seen the concept of boundaries feature in a TV show. There’s a long history of ‘will they/won’t they’ plots throughout TV history, but I’m virtually certain that this conversation has never happened before. A quick look at some of the obvious subjects would suggest this:

  • Ross & Rachel in Friends – Joey warns Ross about the “Friends zone” but boundaries were invisible! (To everyone in that rather incestuous friendship group, actually.)
  • Joey & Dawson in Dawson’s Creek – Much theorising about relationships and teenage angst takes place, but boundaries never crop up. Again, things might have worked out better for all concerned if they had.
  • Lorelai & Luke in Gilmore Girls – Lorelai just doesn’t do boundaries!

There are many, many other examples, but these were the first that came to mind. In fact, as our conversation progressed, I pondered the fact that I always root for these relationships to work out. Just the other week, I was re-watching the end of Gilmore Girls season 4 – the episode in which Lorelai & Luke finally get together. I first watched it on a train and found myself clapping when they kissed. Commenting on Twitter that “Would you just stand still!” are the best words Amy Palladino ever wrote, I received several replies from people who felt the same as me. For four seasons we’d been rooting for that relationship to happen. In TV, will they/won’t they friendships always end positively, at least for a while – Rachel got off the plane; Dawson eventually slept with Joey; Luke kissed Lorelai – you never have a situation in which it doesn’t work and they have to come up with a set of boundaries in order to move on.

TV gives us unrealistic expectations that the same will be true of our own ‘will they/won’t they’ scenarios, which sucks.

It dawned on me that I always root for these TV relationships to work out because it hasn’t (yet?) worked out in my own will they/won’t they scenarios. Luke was always my favourite of Lorelai’s boyfriends, because they were just meant to be together. Ever since New Girl began, I’ve had a thing about Nick – yes, he’s a bit of a loser and rather depressed but there’s a part of me that finds those to be endearing qualities in a man. Plus, he clearly cares for Jess and was doing things that ticked all the boxes I’d want a man to tick in my life – picnics, furniture building, mini-muffins and heavy object lifting…

Then Winston dropped the boundaries bombshell. TV finally got real.

Nick & Jess

I’ve no idea what happens next with Nick and Jess (I know the second series is nearly over in the US, but I like to avoid spoilers). I suspect they’ll get together, at least for a while. I hope it doesn’t end badly because my romantic sensibilities couldn’t handle it.

Boundaries. They can be a total reality check, but I think that’s why we need them.

Filed Under: Eternal Problem, Highlights Tagged With: , , , ,

The Eternal Problem…part five

October 18, 2012 by Leave a Comment

As is so often the way, the immediate aftermath of the most recent post on this topic spawned a great deal of further thought – so much thought that another post was clearly necessary…

First off, I’ve been really touched by the number of positive comments this series has received. It’s a subject that’s very close to my heart, so I’m glad that it’s provided food for thought and sometimes a comfort for others that have pondered this question. I even discovered the other day that my mother was distributing it amongst her friends! (Interestingly, her opinion is that men and women can’t be friends – I need to do some more digging as to why.) And thanks too to Danny – quoted in Part 4 – who linked to my posts in his recent article on the subject on Threads. (It’s essentially a condensed version of his own blogpost, but still well worth a read.)

Secondly, less than 24 hours after Part 4 was published, I found myself discussing the question with two male friends who had very different views on how to answer it. One was 24 and has been in a relationship for 5 years; the other is my age and single. When I proposed the question: “Can men and women be friends without it getting complicated?” The younger man answered “Yes!” at the precise moment my contemporary answered “No!”. [Which does beg the question, in what capacity was I having dinner with this guy if we couldn’t be friends? Casual acquaintances? Colleagues? I jest…]

Basically, the younger guy was coming at it from the perspective of being in a relationship and having grown up with lots of female friends – but he did acknowledge that if he now acquired a best friend who was female, his girlfriend might have quite a lot to say about the matter. The older guy was speaking from many years experience in the Christian world and from a position of having to have awkward conversations with several female friends. He now has (an extremely sensible and admirable) set of boundaries he puts in place to try and ensure that he doesn’t hurt girls inadvertently. I was really encouraged to hear him talk about his experiences as it gave me a certain amount of hope in the remaining single Christian men in London…

What was particularly great about this conversation is that provided a perfect basis to clear up a slightly embarrassing situation that emerged the following day. The three of us were having dinner prior to going to a party that the older guy had persuaded us to go to. We ended up staying out far later than planned (particularly as I had an 8.30am start at Vicar School the following morning) and I tweeted something to the effect (at 2am) that the older guy was entirely responsible for this state of affairs – which he admitted to. This tweet – its mention of a single guy and no one else – prompted no fewer than 3 people to ask me the following morning if we were now seeing each other. Because clearly, men and women can’t mention each other in tweets without it meaning something! Happily, both of us found this a totally ridiculous state of affairs and were able to laugh it off and I did not look like a crazy stalker lady (which I am not).

People, I know you mean well, but something that would massively help the complicated nature of male-female friendships is if you would stop jumping to conclusions; making unhelpful comments; or generally teasing people. It creates false hope, anxiety and even more complication which is never helpful!

******

If you look back at Part 4, you’ll notice that there’s not one but three comments on it from the same author (apparently Blogger now limits the amount of text that can be written in a comment – another brilliant move from the increasingly irritating platform). This particular writer is one of my main sparring partners on this issue, it’s cropped up on his blog a few times, and it’s a bugbear for both of us – but for different reasons. Like Danny, Andy sees huge value in the time you spend getting to know someone of the opposite sex, regardless of whether the attraction you’re exploring is a sexual one or a purely platonic one. On this point, I agree with both of them.

Particularly in Christian circles, society has a terrible fixation upon sex, relationships and marriage. If a girl meets a single guy, the general beliefs are:

1. She’ll be checking him out as potential husband.
2. He’s assuming she’s checking him out as a potential husband.
3. She knows he’s assuming she’s checking him out and doesn’t want him to think that she is.

It’s bizarre. You know what? We can meet members of the opposite sex and not be thinking this way! In fact, Andy (many, many years ago) wrote what I consider one of his best blog posts on the issue of singleness and church. It’s well worth reading, saving and using it whenever you have to deal with such situations. (I work in student ministry – I quote from it all the time.)

We don’t do ourselves any favours.

We need to get better a platonic relationships, of not reading too much into things, of putting boundaries in place to guard our hearts, and most of all, we need to get better at being honest. I know I’m repeating things I’ve said before, but that’s what it boils down to. Different people will have different opinions on how and what to do, but the bottom line is that we need to try and enjoy friendships without getting hurt.

******

Harry Sally NYE

Finally, something that brings us right back to the original source of the question: When Harry Met Sally. [Ok, yes, I’m sure men and women were having this debate before that film was made, but it’s what prompted the original conversation that resulted in this blog series.] Last week I discovered an article about the film and this question that rocked my world…

‘When Harry Met Sally’ Is Bad For Ladies revealed that the ending of the movie had been changed. ‘Before the question is even asked, we know whether Harry and Sally can be friends; they can’t. They inhabit a rom-com, and so they ultimately have to end up together romantically.’ In fact, Nora Ephron had intended to end the film with Harry & Sally remaining friends, thus demonstrating the reality that she herself had friendships with men where sex hadn’t become an issue, just like many women across the world.

All of a sudden, the basis of my romantic tendencies had been shattered! That scene, right at the end, on New Year’s Eve, when Harry races to find Sally before midnight and utters that speech – that is the reason why I am almost certainly going to disappointed every single year as the clock strikes midnight – and that scene should never have been in the film! Every time I watch it, it moves me to tears (embarrassingly, the last time this happened was on a flight home from Texas – weirdly, the very night Ephron died), it gives me unrealistic expectations and is ridiculously far-fetched.

The article outlines all the ways in which changing the ending has minimised Sally’s side of the argument and makes Harry look like he was right all along – it has something of a feminist rant, which I can sympathise with a bit. However, it concludes brilliantly that:

Its necessarily romantic ending guarantees a massive audience for its thematic question. By simply posing that question, When Harry Met Sally allows the viewer to have the debate in her own life, where the answer is not predetermined.

So here we are, right back where we began, having a debate that will stretch on into eternity…

Filed Under: Eternal Problem, Highlights Tagged With: , , , ,

The Eternal Problem…part four

October 4, 2012 by 4 Comments

Ah, the Eternal Problem. It’s been a while. Over two and a half years in fact. As usual, I’m re-visiting it in response to some things that have come up recently – specifically via Threads, a new website that’s effectively an online magazine with a cracking Twitter account. [I’ll admit I may be a bit biased, I did get commissioned to write something for their launch this summer.]

Anyway, they tweeted two articles, both by guys, both regarding the issue of male/female friendships. My attention was caught by both of them, given my prior interest in the topic, and it got me thinking – a lot. Then, to top it off, on Thursday I was tweeted by Threads asking if I had any advice to give in response to their first ever Agony Aunt/Uncle letter – in which a woman in her late 20’s bemoaned the fact that what seemed to be a blossoming relationship with a guy had turned out to be nothing more than a guy who was an idiot and had led her on. Oh dear… [And oh, the irony. No, I didn’t write the letter myself.]

xkcd 'Friends!'Another bit of xkcd genius – check out the rest of this cartoon.

The first article was interesting, in that its writer in some ways shared a similar opinion of the Eternal Problem as the male friend with whom I have argued for several years. It was also fascinating because the thoughts stemmed out of the Theos lecture the Archbishop of Canterbury gave on Monday, in which he reportedly said: “I am neither a machine of a self-contained soul, I am a person, spoken to, seen, loved into existence” As Danny, the author of the blogpost reflected:
“So whether the relationships are clarified, confused, distorted or direct, it is the patchwork quilt which we inhabit that makes up much of what defines as a person rather than any anatomical structure.”

In other words, relationships are important – full stop.

Danny goes on to talk about his own friendships with women and how they might have been mis-interpreted by those involved, leaving the conundrum of how to approach things in the future:

“I could seek clarity from every friendship I form with a girl. We could have a contract, it could be laid out whether or not we were pursuing anything other than friendship. There could be defined steps and processes, it could be recorded and audited, inspected and refined. It would remove the confusion that haunts as you lie in bed at night and wonder the precise meaning of the final words, or intent behind the body language you thought might convey something approaching affection.

It would also destroy the beauty that forms as you approach someone else, hesitant, faltering, nervous. If I knew all the answers I would ask no questions, and if I did not question the nature of the other I would not know just how different it is yet how alike we are. If I am only affirmed in my personhood by relationships with others, that relationship, whatever form it might take has to come before any determination of where it might end.

Ambiguity is part of the fun. Let’s enjoy it, and not run away scared.”

Let’s not run away scared. Like I’ve said before, having friendships with the opposite sex has got to be possible, otherwise we’re denying ourselves of the pleasure and right of engaging with half the world’s population. But what about when ‘the sex thing’ gets in the way? As someone who has been haunted at night by the confusion of a male/female friendship that seems as though it ought to be something more, I would love more clarity. I’d love men to realise the impact their actions have. I’d love women (ok, me) to be able to guard their hearts more. I would love men who are interested in something more to be intentional in their actions and I’d love those who just want to be friends to think about what they say or do before they do it.

But it isn’t easy. Boundaries are hard and often seem unreasonable. There can’t be set rules for everyone, because different situations need to be dealt with in different ways. But you have to know yourself, to know how you respond in such situations and try and work out what you need.

Which is what made the second article, earlier this week, all the more interesting. It was all about boundaries – specifically, the ones a male, married, pastor puts into place when meeting with women that are not his wife. Sammy Adibiyi has a set of rules he’s put in place to ensure that there are clear boundaries between him and other women – including never eating or riding a car alone with a woman who he is not married to. He also copies his wife into emails with other women.

I totally understand why he’s doing this – he wants to be clear, accountable and removed from even the slightest temptation. He’s not the first Christian guy I’ve come across who works in that way and I know of some churches (even in the UK) where similar (though slightly less extreme) rules are enforced. But really, do we seriously live in a society where such behaviour is necessary? I’m not sure that I’d want my husband to behave in such a way – I’d want to be able to trust him to make wise decisions on his own, knowing what the consequences of his actions would be. Yes, I have my own rules about meeting with single men in my work with the church, but as a single female vicar-to-be, that’s essential.

[Now might be an appropriate moment to share a distressing/amusing exchange during one of my BAP interviews:
Pastoral Adviser: “So, you’re single. How will you deal with being single in a parish and potentially wanting to date one of your parishioners?’
Me: “Well, I’m hoping I might not still be single by the time I’m ordained…”
Pastoral Adviser: “Let’s assume you will be.”
Ouch.]

Sammy and Danny are both writing about rules. Sammy has them; Danny thinks that they would destroy ‘ambiguity’. Neither is wrong and neither is right. We need a combination of rules, sense and ambiguity – but it’s seemingly almost impossible to find the right balance.

When I read the letter this person had sent in to Threads’s problem page, I could have cried. She wanted to know, at the end of her letter, “How will I know another time if a guy really does like me or he thinks we’re ‘just friends’?” If only I/we knew, the world would be a much happier place! I don’t know, but I have learnt things I can apply to future situations, bits of advice I can (and do) give friends in similar situations, and I pray that I won’t make the same mistakes again.

Right at this moment, the idea of ambiguity makes me angry. I don’t want yet another woman to lose months or even years waiting for clarity on a friendship that could be something. Nor do I want what could be amazing friendships lost because of the risk of what might be construed. But it’s hard. Really hard. The problem really is an eternal one…

Filed Under: Eternal Problem Tagged With: , ,

The eternal problem…part three

May 19, 2010 by 1 Comment

I’m not usually in the habit of doing long-winded or long-running blog posts, but there appears to be an issue that keeps cropping up, both in real-life conversations and the blogosphere – that of male-female friendships. [In the last week, it’s even featured on national radio – there’s a long debate on last week’s Chris Moyles podcast.]

It’s the eternal problem of whether (in the words of Harry, of When Harry Met Sally fame) a man and woman can be friends ‘without the sex thing getting in the way’. I’m wondering if perhaps the amount of thought being put into it makes it a book-worthy subject, perhaps with chapters authored by men and women alternately – could be an idea…

Also unusually, this post is going to require some background reading on your part (if you care that is, if you don’t you’ll probably be fine, but I like to give people the option!). You’ll also need a working knowledge of the movie, if you haven’t seen it, there are useful YouTube clips within the links that follow. Last summer I wrote on this topic twice (on consecutive days in fact), inventively entitled The Eternal Problem and The Eternal Problem Part Two – I’m going to try not to repeat myself and in some instances my thoughts back then have now changed. Those posts prompted some interesting conversations in various circles and for one particular blogging friend it’s a question that he’s pondered quite considerably. Last week he wrote at length on the subject and this post is intended as something of a response to his thoughts – a female perspective if you will. (Originally, this was drafted under ‘Rebuttal’ but that’s actually too strong a term when I don’t really intend to argue with him.) I was already beginning to collate some thoughts when a mutual friend suggested in the comments that perhaps I might weigh in with my views, so here they are:

Friends and Teenage Angst
It’s not particularly surprising that friendship between the genders is subject to such a question, when the idea that sex has to be involved somewhere is perpetuated throughout society. Take TV for example, the classic Generation X ideology of Friends shows that no friendship group is without its complications. On the one hand you have the marriage that emerged from Monica & Chandler’s friendship and the on-off relationship that defined a generation – Ross & Rachel. But if you look more closely (and being the Friends geek that I am, I know this without having to check) every friendship had sexual attraction (or something similar) thrown into it at some point. Monica fancied Joey when he first moved in; Ross and Phoebe nearly made out in a flashback episode; Rachel & Joey had a dalliance; Ross and Joey couldn’t cope when they realised how good napping together was… Using a different example, what about the incestuous nature of Dawson’s Creek? The un-ending saga of Dawson and Joey – sexual tension between two friends of different genders at its most potent.

Joey & Dawson

The prevalence of such relationships would suggest that it’s something that everyone will struggle with at some point eventually – so maybe Harry is right? But in fact, in the examples above, it didn’t actually spell the end of the friendships. My own theory is that Harry is wrong, not because sex isn’t an issue, but because it doesn’t have to prevent good friendships from developing and lasting.

Bringing Plato back from the dead
I think a big part of the problem that society has is that it seems to have forgotten or ignored the existence of platonic love. We seem to be so conditioned to look for romantic love that when we feel the emotion of attraction we assume that it’s that, not simply a genuine filial love. I can remember feeling distraught when moving cities and leaving my (first of several) gay best friend behind. For quite a while I couldn’t work out if what I felt meant that I liked him too much, even though I knew he wasn’t interested in me that way. After much soul searching, I realised it was simply a case of having formed a close platonic bond that I was genuinely sad to be changing. A year later when a close female friend left the country I was similarly upset, yet wouldn’t ever have wondered if I felt something more – because she was female! In his post, Andy talks about the role of attraction in friendship and he’s right, there has to be some attraction there in the first place for any kind of friendship to begin. We’re just rubbish at understanding that different forms of attraction are just as valid as sexual attraction.

It’s not the end – it’s only the beginning
Realising that you have feelings for a friend (and not having those feelings reciprocated) also needn’t mean the end of a friendship. Harry seems to assume that this is the case – given the utterly immature way in which both he and Sally respond to their one night stand, this is unsurprising – but he’s wrong. Yes, there will always be people who either can’t deal with knowing someone likes them or that their feelings aren’t returned, but in mature, open and honest friendships this really shouldn’t be an issue. You need healthy boundaries and plenty of honesty, but it is doable. Personally, I’ve struggled with this. There have been incidences where I’ve been terrible at ‘guarding my heart’ (a classic Christian cliché) and got badly hurt in the process, but I’m making progress. Things will never be perfect, but just lately I’ve learned a lot of important lessons that I think will result in a healthy, long-lasting friendship.

It’s deeply disappointing that being open and honest doesn’t always work – it’s cases like those that make Harry seem right, but I think they’re exceptions to the rule. I honestly don’t think that God intended for the two sexes to remain separate from each other in this way. The idea that women shouldn’t be close friends with men exists in certain Christian circles, but why be restricted to just half the population? Being friends with the opposite sex is of vital importance. Whatever some might say, the genders usually process things differently – for example, I’ve often found male friends’ relationship advice more useful than women’s.

It’s all Enid Blyton’s fault
Many of us are screwed up in this area because their formative years were spent in a single-sex environment (Part 1 explored this a little). Educationally I’m of the opinion that this is beneficial and I know that the decision to go to a girls’ school age 11 was my own, but it really doesn’t do you many favours socially. I’m now 28 and only really began having good male friends when I was at university. My mid-20’s were overshadowed by a deeply complicated friendship and only now am I starting to make better judgements. Just a couple of weeks ago a good friend at church discovered that I’d attended a local girls’ school and her response – “well that explains a lot” – says it all really.

Last summer, in between Part 1 and Part 2, I had a discussion with a male friend on this question. [Fortunately it was online and I saved the text, so now have it for reference purposes – however, just because it’s what we said at that time, doesn’t mean it holds true today.] One thing he said that really irked me was:
I think men can be terrible in how they can behave towards women, but when it comes to friendship, I think the issue falls more with the girls, because most guys can spend time with someone, get to know them a bit, and not automatically assume that this means the girl wants to date them/marry them/take them to bed…”we spent a whole hour at the party just talking! He must like me!”

At the time I insisted he was wrong, or at least that at some point girls go through a stage of thinking that, but we grow out of it. Now however, I’m not so sure. I wonder, because this is an issue so many of my friends have, if women are naturally conditioned to seek out love and affirmation and therefore are more inclined to jump ahead of themselves. My friend Katie and I refer to this as having a ‘Grolsch moment’ (an explanation for this term can be found in this advert). I’m definitely guilty of it – not in the base way in which it’s described above, but I know that affirmation can mean so much to me that a bit of positive interaction or flirting can get me carried away.

However, that’s no excuse for avoiding friendships. We as women need to make sure that we take male friends’ words and actions as they’re intended on a platonic level, rather than desperately searching/hoping for a subtext. At the same time, men need to be careful about how their actions might be interpreted and ensure that they aren’t guilty of leading their female friends on. If you’ve discovered that a female friend has feelings for you, it’s probably not a good idea to place your hand over hers while holding an umbrella, because that just sends out confusing signals. [FYI, that’s a genuine example, hence its specific/random nature!]

It’s complicated. Last year I was very nearly of the opinion that it was so complicated that it wasn’t worth bothering with – I think I meant the question as opposed to cross-gender friendships – but now I think it’s something to be borne in mind in an effort to reform society’s attitude. Along the way we also need to spend more time considering our friendships and ensuring that they are as healthy as they can be. Maybe, if the two things come to fruition, Harry will forever be wrong…

The thing is, friendship is a beautiful thing. (That’s something else I was scornful of in my discussion last year, thinking it too mundane and every day to be beautiful – I was wrong.) It enhances our lives beyond measure and, while it can be painful at times, we can’t live without it. In the last few weeks I’ve been astounded at how amazing my friends are (that sounds unbearably cheesy and was nearly a truly pathetic Facebook status, but it’s true). Don’t let yourself get so caught up in the difficult aspects of it that you miss out on the opportunities it provides you.

[Incidentally, I don’t think this will be the end of the matter. I’ve got a pile of research now and could rant on forever, but I think that’s enough for today!]

Filed Under: Eternal Problem Tagged With: , , , , ,

The eternal problem…part two

July 21, 2009 by Leave a Comment
What I wrote yesterday effectively opened a can of worms. Actually, that’s a little harsh, it resulted in a long, deep, slightly emotional discussion with another friend who had asked the same question I did to another group of people some months ago. He had some different ideas to me, so I thought the topic was worth re-visiting, in order to present a more balanced point of view.Also, weirdly (following a quick look at Wikipedia) today marks exactly twenty years since the film went on general release. That explains why a number of people I’ve had this conversation with haven’t actually seen the film!

So…last night I had a conversation almost worthy of Harry and Sally, except ‘Harry’ actually disagreed with the theory. Appropriately, he was coming from the viewpoint of a guy with lots of female friends, and I was coming at it as a girl with a limited number of male friends (and someone who’s had their fingers burned in the past).

The argument against Harry went as follows:

  • Christians (especially) should have close friendships with the opposite sex because “if Genesis 2 means anything, surely it means that as human beings, we only fully reflect the image of God together – as two sexes – which is our purpose and that can’t just be about marriage, because otherwise every non-married person would be unable to fulfil that God-ordained purpose”.
  • Women shouldn’t assume (and nor should men for that matter) that just because someone of the opposite sex spends time with them, it ‘automatically’ means something.
  • Apparently, “most guys can spend time with someone, get to know them a bit, and not automatically assume that this means the girl wants to date them/marry them/take them to bed”. Good to know.
  • Ultimately, we’re all human and all messed up, therefore we should remember that – treading carefully and treating people well. We also should remember (and I love this) that “hormones are a bitch”. I think it probably should also be remembered that hormones can turn one particular sex into bitches…

Is it right, therefore, that many women’s conferences and good, mature, Christian friends have told me to avoid forming close friendships with men? That if I do that, I’ll only end up getting hurt in the long run? I’m increasingly thinking they’re wrong. Of course it’s right to warn someone to be careful if boundaries are becoming blurred and feelings get involved, but is banning them all together healthy?

My final conclusion to this part of the discussion was the following, which I think we should all remember:
“Men and women have met, fallen in love, fallen out of love, been friends – whatever – for as long as there have been humans. It’s never going to be perfect and we should just accept that & stop trying to set unattainable standards for the people in our lives.”
[Of course, this was preceeded by ‘ I think I’m probably on the verge of thinking that’s it’s all crap, pointless, and a waste of time worrying over’, but why be so negative?!]

But do you know what. It turned out that the most important aspect of this discussion had nothing to do with whether or not Harry was right. It was its conclusion that ultimately there are many things in this life that we have absolutely no control over – so why worry about tomorrow?

With that kind of attitude to life, who cares if Harry’s right!

Harry, Sally & Katz

One final note: After all the questions about the value of online communication lately, at least it means there’s a written record of complicated discussions, should you need reminders or direct quotes!

Filed Under: Church, Eternal Problem Tagged With: , , , , ,
Next Page »