Start at 0:30 to see the end of a loving relationship because of differences in conceptions of happiness and love. One cannot "set up a rival good to God's" in an attempt to find happiness on Earth.
Recently I wrote a piece advising women to take care when looking for their Mr. Darcy either in the online world or real world. Truth is stranger than fiction and this case is no exception. Searching for one’s soul mate requires extreme patience, hope and grace. Men and women have different and unique roles to play, and we have to be understanding and loving to each other in order to build beautiful and lasting friendships, relationships, and marriages.
This article is addressed to the men, to the would-be Darcys who are searching, as ever, for their Elizabeth Bennets to tame and love them. To you I speak with hesitation and caution, since I cannot relate to your experiences or struggles, but I do think I have some valuable advice that you may find useful. My first missive for you is – be open to love. I cannot emphasize this enough. Women are delicate, mysterious creatures, as wont to be open with their hearts as they are to guard them. They must be protected and cherished, receptacles of your love, for they are the mothers of your children, the loving and supporting wives that you desire and need. They are, in short, your key to sainthood. Love us, cherish us, let us into your hearts. We will be here to stay.
Unfortunately the advent of the sexual revolution threw all notions of separate gender roles and traditional protocol for dating and marriage out with the bathwater. The upheaval that spread among public morality, societal norms, politics, and even music and art was reflected in the way men and women began to relate to one another. No longer was sex sacred; it became as casual as a handshake or kiss on the cheek upon meeting. C.S. Lewis was right to say, “Don’t throw incense on the marriage bed,” but this bed is indeed holy and worthy of respect and worship. It houses a blessed sacrament, a wedding gift from God to newly married couples that merits a sort of holy hush when spoken of or thought about. Public animosity towards anything to do with the Church, what she allows – and what is forbidden – became so strong that it was abandoned altogether. “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried,” Lewis reminds us. We are physical creatures, are we not? We crave the emotional bond that sex provides. . . but wouldn’t it be nice if we could have the pleasure without the responsibility? The advent of the pill and widespread usage of condoms made this irresponsibility not the exception but the norm. Women were expected to “be in control” of their fertility – again, a sin of pride against God that it is our plan and not His that is to be implemented. Just as we choose which vegetable to buy at the grocery store for supper, we can choose when and how we bear children. Children thus became not a gift but a burden; an outcome to be avoided at all costs until one’s career settled down, one’s traveling shoes were left by the bed well-worn, on our time instead of God’s.
This enormous shift in the morality of marriage and children warped the way men and women meet and court. In a sense, it produced a selfish “me” generation, where men were stuck in an arrested development while women gained increasing levels of power and influence in the working world. It became perfectly acceptable for the woman to ask a man out, pay for dinner, even propose marriage. I am no stranger to authentic feminism and the exhilarating power of modern woman, but essentially this allowed the men to remain boys during “the chase” – no longer did a man have to risk his pride and heart in tentatively asking a woman out. That was now the woman’s prerogative. If a woman can open a door for herself and sustain herself on a comfortable income, why should she not risk her own heart in pursuing a man she is interested in? Thus the arrival of the “man-eater syndrome,” of cougars and women that reek of the husband hunting smell.
The simple answer is that women are fashioned differently than men. Theological arguments aside for the moment, women are prone to wear their hearts on their sleeves, being too open and emotionally available and forgetting to “guard their hearts.” A woman’s rejection by a man wounds her far more than a man being passed over. Why? Women are made to receive love, not to give it. Even our biological systems reflect this; the woman’s uterus is the chalice in which she receives her husband’s organ during sexual intercourse. Her arms are open, her heart is ready to be held and protected, her body fits in the groove of the man as they lie in bed on a Sunday morning holding each other.
To use biological terms, the hormonal balance of women is a delicate spectrum of alternatively preparing for fertility and adjusting her behavior to either encourage or postpone it. The release of oxytocin – the powerful hormone that literally bonds the woman to the man during any kind of sexual contact, or the mother to her child once she gives birth – is far greater than the release in the man’s body. I would add that women secrete progesterone monthly in the second part of the cycle after ovulation (releasing an egg) which is solely intended to receive an embryo in utero and sustain the placenta for 6 -10 weeks until HCG kicks in. Therefore each month, from an evolutionary point of view, women are geared towards receiving a child (again men do not have this at all – no monthly progesterone since they lack a uterus). My Catholic friends always roll their eyes when I bring up this evolutionary argument, but the man is, deep down, wired to “spread his seed,” while the woman has the nesting instinct as soon as she becomes sexually mature. It is futile to reject this in light of the “Wonder Woman” phenomenon; it is what it is, and it’s better to accept it – and its implications for gender relations – rather than insist on the artificial equality of men and women. We are different. We have different roles. We don’t “parent”: we “mother” and “father” our children. Our capacity for love is unique, and that is a beautiful thing, not something to be bemoaned or swept aside.
And so to the men out there, I say one last thing. Pursue women. Risk your heart. Be chivalrous and kind. Revive traditional notions of the chase and relationships, and eventually marriage. No matter how adamantly we may insist on going Dutch for dinner, or refuse gifts on St. Valentine’s Day, deep down we do want and need your protection and frequent expressions of your love for us. First and foremost we are children of God, and we imitate His love for us in our love for each other, be it friendships or marriage. That’s the way we were created by our Father, so if you seek her heart, you must seek God first.
There is a beautiful image in one of Lewis’ novels in which he pictures the man and woman both looking towards God as they go through life. On their joint journey towards God, they become closer to each other; as they fall away from God’s grace, they part ways. Looking out to the same conception of the good – how to live life in what the renowned philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre calls “narrative unity” – unites us and provides the sustenance on which we maintain our marriages, friendships, and methods of child-rearing. This is why it is so important to have similar beliefs. It becomes much easier to agree on how to raise children, what traditions to pass on, what to forbid, how to explain the “why” questions that children raise other than the infuriating parental explanation of “because I said so.” Praying together, eating together, playing together: this is the recipe for a happy and holy marriage and a family that stays together in a sacred bond of unconditional love.
And so if you desire the woman of your dreams, don’t search for her in bars. Join a weekly Catholic fellowship. Go to Adoration at your local parish. Become part of a Jane Austen book club with your sister’s friends. In future you may even go to “agape restaurants,” a brilliant idea coined by Alain de Botton in his recent novel Religion for Atheists in which strangers gather in restaurants intended for discussion of the important things in life – like virtue, struggles in our pursuit of it, and how we see human nature and our role in the universe. You will eventually find her, for she is looking for you, too. Perhaps in a different way than you, but it is nevertheless complementary. You may be lucky enough to find her matching key to unlock that beautiful enchanted garden in which to nurture marriage that lasts a lifetime.
Octavia is Assistant Director of Operations at The Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, NJ. This piece is a follow-up to her previous article on women and online dating and searching virtually for Mr. Darcy. She is seriously reconsidering her dream to enter academic philosophy and become a journalist in DC in the future. Contact her with questions or comments at [email protected].
This article is addressed to the men, to the would-be Darcys who are searching, as ever, for their Elizabeth Bennets to tame and love them. To you I speak with hesitation and caution, since I cannot relate to your experiences or struggles, but I do think I have some valuable advice that you may find useful. My first missive for you is – be open to love. I cannot emphasize this enough. Women are delicate, mysterious creatures, as wont to be open with their hearts as they are to guard them. They must be protected and cherished, receptacles of your love, for they are the mothers of your children, the loving and supporting wives that you desire and need. They are, in short, your key to sainthood. Love us, cherish us, let us into your hearts. We will be here to stay.
Unfortunately the advent of the sexual revolution threw all notions of separate gender roles and traditional protocol for dating and marriage out with the bathwater. The upheaval that spread among public morality, societal norms, politics, and even music and art was reflected in the way men and women began to relate to one another. No longer was sex sacred; it became as casual as a handshake or kiss on the cheek upon meeting. C.S. Lewis was right to say, “Don’t throw incense on the marriage bed,” but this bed is indeed holy and worthy of respect and worship. It houses a blessed sacrament, a wedding gift from God to newly married couples that merits a sort of holy hush when spoken of or thought about. Public animosity towards anything to do with the Church, what she allows – and what is forbidden – became so strong that it was abandoned altogether. “Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried,” Lewis reminds us. We are physical creatures, are we not? We crave the emotional bond that sex provides. . . but wouldn’t it be nice if we could have the pleasure without the responsibility? The advent of the pill and widespread usage of condoms made this irresponsibility not the exception but the norm. Women were expected to “be in control” of their fertility – again, a sin of pride against God that it is our plan and not His that is to be implemented. Just as we choose which vegetable to buy at the grocery store for supper, we can choose when and how we bear children. Children thus became not a gift but a burden; an outcome to be avoided at all costs until one’s career settled down, one’s traveling shoes were left by the bed well-worn, on our time instead of God’s.
This enormous shift in the morality of marriage and children warped the way men and women meet and court. In a sense, it produced a selfish “me” generation, where men were stuck in an arrested development while women gained increasing levels of power and influence in the working world. It became perfectly acceptable for the woman to ask a man out, pay for dinner, even propose marriage. I am no stranger to authentic feminism and the exhilarating power of modern woman, but essentially this allowed the men to remain boys during “the chase” – no longer did a man have to risk his pride and heart in tentatively asking a woman out. That was now the woman’s prerogative. If a woman can open a door for herself and sustain herself on a comfortable income, why should she not risk her own heart in pursuing a man she is interested in? Thus the arrival of the “man-eater syndrome,” of cougars and women that reek of the husband hunting smell.
The simple answer is that women are fashioned differently than men. Theological arguments aside for the moment, women are prone to wear their hearts on their sleeves, being too open and emotionally available and forgetting to “guard their hearts.” A woman’s rejection by a man wounds her far more than a man being passed over. Why? Women are made to receive love, not to give it. Even our biological systems reflect this; the woman’s uterus is the chalice in which she receives her husband’s organ during sexual intercourse. Her arms are open, her heart is ready to be held and protected, her body fits in the groove of the man as they lie in bed on a Sunday morning holding each other.
To use biological terms, the hormonal balance of women is a delicate spectrum of alternatively preparing for fertility and adjusting her behavior to either encourage or postpone it. The release of oxytocin – the powerful hormone that literally bonds the woman to the man during any kind of sexual contact, or the mother to her child once she gives birth – is far greater than the release in the man’s body. I would add that women secrete progesterone monthly in the second part of the cycle after ovulation (releasing an egg) which is solely intended to receive an embryo in utero and sustain the placenta for 6 -10 weeks until HCG kicks in. Therefore each month, from an evolutionary point of view, women are geared towards receiving a child (again men do not have this at all – no monthly progesterone since they lack a uterus). My Catholic friends always roll their eyes when I bring up this evolutionary argument, but the man is, deep down, wired to “spread his seed,” while the woman has the nesting instinct as soon as she becomes sexually mature. It is futile to reject this in light of the “Wonder Woman” phenomenon; it is what it is, and it’s better to accept it – and its implications for gender relations – rather than insist on the artificial equality of men and women. We are different. We have different roles. We don’t “parent”: we “mother” and “father” our children. Our capacity for love is unique, and that is a beautiful thing, not something to be bemoaned or swept aside.
And so to the men out there, I say one last thing. Pursue women. Risk your heart. Be chivalrous and kind. Revive traditional notions of the chase and relationships, and eventually marriage. No matter how adamantly we may insist on going Dutch for dinner, or refuse gifts on St. Valentine’s Day, deep down we do want and need your protection and frequent expressions of your love for us. First and foremost we are children of God, and we imitate His love for us in our love for each other, be it friendships or marriage. That’s the way we were created by our Father, so if you seek her heart, you must seek God first.
There is a beautiful image in one of Lewis’ novels in which he pictures the man and woman both looking towards God as they go through life. On their joint journey towards God, they become closer to each other; as they fall away from God’s grace, they part ways. Looking out to the same conception of the good – how to live life in what the renowned philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre calls “narrative unity” – unites us and provides the sustenance on which we maintain our marriages, friendships, and methods of child-rearing. This is why it is so important to have similar beliefs. It becomes much easier to agree on how to raise children, what traditions to pass on, what to forbid, how to explain the “why” questions that children raise other than the infuriating parental explanation of “because I said so.” Praying together, eating together, playing together: this is the recipe for a happy and holy marriage and a family that stays together in a sacred bond of unconditional love.
And so if you desire the woman of your dreams, don’t search for her in bars. Join a weekly Catholic fellowship. Go to Adoration at your local parish. Become part of a Jane Austen book club with your sister’s friends. In future you may even go to “agape restaurants,” a brilliant idea coined by Alain de Botton in his recent novel Religion for Atheists in which strangers gather in restaurants intended for discussion of the important things in life – like virtue, struggles in our pursuit of it, and how we see human nature and our role in the universe. You will eventually find her, for she is looking for you, too. Perhaps in a different way than you, but it is nevertheless complementary. You may be lucky enough to find her matching key to unlock that beautiful enchanted garden in which to nurture marriage that lasts a lifetime.
Octavia is Assistant Director of Operations at The Witherspoon Institute in Princeton, NJ. This piece is a follow-up to her previous article on women and online dating and searching virtually for Mr. Darcy. She is seriously reconsidering her dream to enter academic philosophy and become a journalist in DC in the future. Contact her with questions or comments at [email protected].
RSS Feed