May I speak my heart and say that to use the word "neutered" for a group of people who battle their flesh everyday and attempt to be kind and just in a hateful world, and love others beyond their own aspirations in accordance to the Word of God is inflammatory and downright hurtful.

I don't see it that way. At my church they did the Wild at Heart series for 2 years and the men poured in. I think Neena or Susan's point is that men can be godly, including kind, sensitive and caring but that fire, testosterone, adventurer, protector, and many other things that makes a man a man (neurted) the church has encourage men to repress. Not all churches and not all men. But considering millions of Christians read the book and it was really popular says that they could relate. My husband certainly did.

Not everyone agrees with Wild at Heart or identifies with it. But our churches are void of so many men. Often times those who surrender to God unfortunately let go of more than themselves than they have to. Sometimes its not only the church, but also their wives who squelch the passion instead of letting God transform it.

"If Christian men are going to change from a pitiful, wimpy bunch of "really nice guys" to men who are made in the image of God, they must reexamine their preconceptions about who God is and recover their true "wild" hearts," writes bestselling author John Eldredge in Wild at Heart.

hi neenah!

I'm a friend of Susan's, and just discovered your blog/project. I think it's great! I'm only 26 (and single) but can relate to a lot of what you've shared with us about your purposes and goals and your experiences thus far. I sincerely hope your project is successful, will be following the updates! Meredith.

I unfortunately am not familiar with "Wild at Heart" and yes I will agree that it is possible for a man to lose his passion and fire over the years. But isnt that true of anyone, whether they be in the church or the world? Who of us can say that although we dont like to admit it we carry varying amounts of emotional baggage that some people will grow stronger from, but some will be unable to assert themselves in the relationship realm and live up to what they could possibly be. Does this unfortunate soul deserve to be labeled neutered and rejected? And as far as guys that are nice being unattractive, what does "nice" mean? Well just to make sure I didnt interject my own ideas I went to Merriam Webster online dictionary, and it says "Agreeable,well bred, virtuous, respectable. Wow this lines up with the fruits of the Spirit.
And this is what christian ladies are finding repulsive? I am so confused if I may be honest.
What I believe is that christian women are making the same error christian men make. We want our partner to be like Jesus--but please not too much like Jesus. Heaven forbid a man turn the other cheek. Nay be it a man forgive anothers debt or pray for those that use him. His woman better not hear anything like that. Why this person must be wimpy or something to do these things. We as christians are allowing our flesh to dictate the people we choose and we refuse to see it. Then when things fall apart down the road we want to point our finger at God. I know cuz I have done it myself. I can only speak for myself but if I am not prayerful I will catch a glimpse of a bikini clad babe and choose her over a Proverbs 31 prayerful woman if I am not careful and let my flesh make all of my choices.

I don't think any person, church-going or not, finds nice repulsive. I don't think Susan does (as she married a very nice man), nor do I.

What I find attractive, and I believe many people feel the same way - male and female, is the idea of multi-dimensional - not one dimensional, but layers.

A Jesus-type partner is a great. The way I see Jesus is that he is nice, as well as passionate, extremely clever, I even think witty and I dare say rugged also describe him. Many layers, one man.

I do feel unfortunately, that the church unintentionally watered many of us down (not all churches and not all people). But we are water-down versions of ourselves because the church doesn't do complexed well. It's easier, less messy, for the church to teach the men to be nice, but not highlight other wonderful attributes like rugged or clever (and a host of other attributes).

I went shopping with friends a while back and bought some really sexy shoes - 3 inch heels. They are awesome. Years ago, I probably wouldn't have used that term because I would be so afraid of being judged by Christians. She used "sexy" which means she must be loose. But they are not "pretty" shoes, they are "sexy" and I love the way they shape my legs. It doesn't mean I want men to look at me and want to have sex with me. Not having to put everything in a simple, comfortable box is wonderful.

It goes both ways. Christian women, especially those who are married, have been referred to as uptight. They get married and aren't comfortable with their sexuality. It's why so many churches are starting women groups where they finally get to talk about sex. Does it mean that singles need to have more sex in order to be more sexual creatures? No. It just means there is more to being a good wife then taking care of the kids and loving God, and saying "yes" to sex only when he asks for it. A good, nice wife can and should be more.

Finally, I think that even Christian men may not find a woman described only as "nice" as the most attractive of the bunch. It's certainly not a negative quality, but a little something more goes a long way.

"So tell me about her."
"She's really nice."
"Oh. That's great. But what else? Does she have a sense of humor?"
"No. But she's nice"
"Well, is she passionate?"
"No. But she is really nice."
"How about fiesty?"
"Nope. I wouldn't describe her that way. She is nice, though."
"Is she easy to talk to? How about playful? Or maybe soft, or compassionate?"
"No. No. No. But she is a nice girl. I'm sure you'll love her."

Hi Neenah thank you for your comment. I absolutely misinterpreted the video to the point I am a little embarrassed at my over-simplistic take on the subject. In retrospect in my life when it would filter back to me that a woman said I was nice I would think to myself "What she didnt mention my George Clooney looks and lionheartedness lol.
Have a great weekend nice, but also intelligent, multi-dimensional and spiritual lady.

jm

i agree about the statement of "neutering" men but part of me wonders who is doing the neutering? it seems like today men CAN'T be men since women keep trying to be. don't get me wrong, I know a lot of good came out of the women's movement but one bad thing that seems to persist is the idea that women need to reject feminine things for the sake of becoming gaining worldly power and becoming more manly, including their own fertility. on my own personal journey, this came down to analyzing the issue of birth control. in the interest of full disclosure, i was not originally catholic but I did become catholic once learning of the church's teaching (and others) on contraception and the literal neutering of ourselves. whether or not you agree with what the church teaches is not the point, but there is wisdom in recognizing the biological origins of sexuality. i've been married over 6 months (and no children - check out "natural family planning"(NFP) which respects and empowers women to know more about their bodies) and both my husband and i are at peace knowing that we are respecting and honoring the way God made us and allowing each other to be both male and female in the fullest sense. i know that my husband loves me fully, which includes my fertility.
there are many other reasons to be against contraception besides spiritual, including environmental (i'm an environmental engineer) and societal.
I think it would be interesting if you interviewed couples practicing NFP and learned more about their relationships on this blog. Some stats i've seen says only 2-3% divorce rates among those couples.