Times are a’changin’. During the l950s, more than a million women were asked who would comprise the ideal husband. The answer, in part, was: . . . . behave like a sheik. . . . keep some mystery about himself. . . . tell his wife that he loves her. . . .lie a little white lie if he feels it might buck her up. . . talk and listen to her. . . . stay out of the kitchen. . .do what he promises to do. . . . make enough money so she does not feel compelled to go out and work. . . . help with the gardening and the lawn. . . . take her out once a week, without the children . . . . give a flower or candy token now and then. . . . share the information or management of the family income. . . . accompany his wife on visits to family members and friends. . . . perform a detestable job just to give his wife a break (like cleaning the basement). And so the list was lengthened in what may be thought of as practical points for making a happy marriage for the early 1950s. It is interesting that most evaluators thought the points were obvious to the sensitive and serious husband. Obvious? That obvious some decades ago is now perceived partly as prejudicial and gender demeaning.
Today, so the analysts inform us: the husband belongs in the kitchen as much as the wife; he need not use any tokenism (especially in matters of conduct like opening a door for a lady); husband and wife may have separate financial accounts; eating out may become more routine than eating in; hire someone to do the yard work or live in a condo where no gardening of any kind is part of the family ritual; and, a job outside the home is as much a right for the wife as for the husband. The contrasts of the years could be expanded, but clear contrasts appear. Current writers argue that these too should be obvious. Obvious? The question is raised: What is a sensitive and sensible man or woman to do in matters related to wives particularly, and women or men relative to wives generally? Obviously, what was sensitive and caring in one generation may not be so in another. And no helpful purpose is served by placing guilt upon one gender or the other. Some vocal activists appear to want to attribute guilt. That attribution makes for considerable tension, even despising, between genders. Results are unpleasant, reducing the partnership of the genders in and out of marriage. Society needs families of equal persons practicing equality changes.
Times do change, whether the persons living through change like it or not. Flexible men and women learn how to adjust and build lives, either as singles or as marrieds, with a sense of goodwill and love which leads to consideration for all others. My nearest neighbor is my mate, or my parent, or my child, or whoever is present in need of legitimate consideration. So, with good grace I should fill a cup with cold water, visit the man in prison, comfort a weeping child, and do whatever I can to make life better for anyone in my view – even cook a meal. By better we usually mean meeting the appropriate needs and expectations of other persons. If a person prefers being self-oriented that person has the right, but it denies the call of God to verify the meaning for us. Under God a person’s meaning is to love God and prove it by serving mankind.
It is no wonder then that Jesus fed hungry people, even when they resisted his purposes. He healed ten men at one event. Only one expressed thankfulness. He loved the people of his community, but they would have taken him by force and thrown him from the ridge. This conduct carried over to his death when, on the cross, he urged in prayer, that this monstrous deed of his own crucifixion should not be held against the perpetrators: Father, forgive them, they know not what they do. We are called to give, no matter the consequences. (1 Peter 2:19-20) It is well within possibility that hostility between mates, family members, colleagues and friends, will decline, letting in sunshine of human joy, if we treat relationships as Jesus managed his life so long ago. What does all this mean to us? It suggests that we will prefer change with some gradualism allowing for those who found a former context quite comfortable even if changed from that of the parentage of their period, to bring a bit of humor to the old and the new, to find ways to make shifts and changes that truly express love and consideration for each other especially in that so many of the changes are related to our comfort zones not to distractions from unity. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020