Something interesting is that Christ actually made a lot of physical contact with the disciples or people he healed. Take John 13:23, for example. A disciple is cuddled up to Him, just chilling. (For some reason, newer translations say the disciple is "reclining next to" Jesus, but KJV clearly says the disciple was "leaning on Jesus' bosom.") And while, yes, this is a Creator and child bond, it's also a casual, familiar embrace between two friends. (Let's also not forget kissing was a normal thing between friends back then coughJudascough.)
It's sad we've become so disconnected from each other. I shouldn't get nervous to simply lay a hand on someone's shoulder.
I think you're right, although ofc there's the perrenial chicken and the egg question. I expect part of the reason friendship has become less physical is because of a fear that'd the physicality would be seen as sexual. Thus we need to understand our changed view of sexuality and physicality itself that may have contributed to this, and where the worry the physicality indicates sexuality (or at least a risk of) comes from in our culture. I simply don't know enough about this to make any such claim. I can imagine that in victorian times or the like it was not seen as appropriate for a man and a woman to touch eachother in such a way (though I'd actually have no idea, this could easily be some anachronism from our received cultural narratives about the past). If this is the case it may then just be that such sexual codes have simply been expanded. I do expect though that irregardless of historical claims, I think part of the reason why our friendships are less physical now is out of a fear of tthere being something sexual in that. That's part of the reason that our physicalities are largely restricted to family or maybe someone who there's seen to be no risk of anything sexual (like in my case some of the older women at church who serve a sort of mother figure role).
I think you're broadly right though that the view of friendship as two people looking forward together at the same thing rather than looking at eachother like (romantic) lovers do (as CS Lewis describes it in the four loves) goes hand in hand with the decreased physicality of friendships. We know from previous centuries that close emotionally intimate friendships were alot more common than they are now. Once again there's the ultimate question of the chicken and the egg. I guess though more important than that is how do we change that, how do we provide space for more physicality and more intimacy in friendhsips, which I also don't really know how to answer.
Definitely. I'm still figuring out whether I'm Side A/B (which I will write about...eventually) but I know regardless that I am very committed to expanding friendships and pushing back the "physical touch is sexual" bubble.
Something interesting is that Christ actually made a lot of physical contact with the disciples or people he healed. Take John 13:23, for example. A disciple is cuddled up to Him, just chilling. (For some reason, newer translations say the disciple is "reclining next to" Jesus, but KJV clearly says the disciple was "leaning on Jesus' bosom.") And while, yes, this is a Creator and child bond, it's also a casual, familiar embrace between two friends. (Let's also not forget kissing was a normal thing between friends back then coughJudascough.)
It's sad we've become so disconnected from each other. I shouldn't get nervous to simply lay a hand on someone's shoulder.
I think you're right, although ofc there's the perrenial chicken and the egg question. I expect part of the reason friendship has become less physical is because of a fear that'd the physicality would be seen as sexual. Thus we need to understand our changed view of sexuality and physicality itself that may have contributed to this, and where the worry the physicality indicates sexuality (or at least a risk of) comes from in our culture. I simply don't know enough about this to make any such claim. I can imagine that in victorian times or the like it was not seen as appropriate for a man and a woman to touch eachother in such a way (though I'd actually have no idea, this could easily be some anachronism from our received cultural narratives about the past). If this is the case it may then just be that such sexual codes have simply been expanded. I do expect though that irregardless of historical claims, I think part of the reason why our friendships are less physical now is out of a fear of tthere being something sexual in that. That's part of the reason that our physicalities are largely restricted to family or maybe someone who there's seen to be no risk of anything sexual (like in my case some of the older women at church who serve a sort of mother figure role).
I think you're broadly right though that the view of friendship as two people looking forward together at the same thing rather than looking at eachother like (romantic) lovers do (as CS Lewis describes it in the four loves) goes hand in hand with the decreased physicality of friendships. We know from previous centuries that close emotionally intimate friendships were alot more common than they are now. Once again there's the ultimate question of the chicken and the egg. I guess though more important than that is how do we change that, how do we provide space for more physicality and more intimacy in friendhsips, which I also don't really know how to answer.
Definitely. I'm still figuring out whether I'm Side A/B (which I will write about...eventually) but I know regardless that I am very committed to expanding friendships and pushing back the "physical touch is sexual" bubble.