The turn of history has its imperatives, imperatives that we cannot ignore. From a man’s world, the world has evolved into our world. It has evolved into a world where determinism is not just based on sexuality but also on life’s choices. As time passed, female disadvantage quickly turned to female aggression, making reservations and coquettishness antiquated in one fell swoop. Thus, while the 18th and 19th centuries talked about courtships in male-female relationships (with full expectations that their relationship would inevitably advance towards marriage), the early 20th and 21st centuries witnessed the advent of the word “dating” and its dynamics. In our milieu, there have been classifications of this particular concept that would rationalize the existence of phrases like “casual dating”, “blind dating” and “serious dating”.
The corruption of the concept of relationship has succeeded in perverting the concept itself, with relationship meaning anything from “sex partner” to “sex acquaintance”. It is with this corruption that confusion appears. The confusion raises questions out of necessity. Questions surrounding the rectitude of dating and its moral implications have become the topic of debate in our generation. Socially speaking, the inter-mingling of both sexes is unavoidable; if anything, it is vital for human progress and its survival. It is also spiritual in the sense that God configured humanity in such a way that, pending serious aberrations of nature, no human being can undertake the full process of reproduction without the help of the opposite sex. However, the moral implications of dating are an ideological pendulum that swings back and forth depending on individual perspectives.
A logical being would tell you that the commandments warned against sex, not relationships. But we have come to observe that morality and logic are strange bedfellows. Simply put, what is normal is not always logical, and vice versa. Still, the question remains: is Dating, as the 21st-century relationship is called, wrong?
Intrinsically, dating is not wrong, socially, spiritually, or even morally, because “dating” is not “sex”. The wrongness” is in the effects of dating, which are always unpredictable owing to hormonal volatility.
Male-female relationships are not always wrong insofar as they are morally healthy and conform to moral and societal conventions.
However, the line between a healthy relationship and immorality continues to blur as it has been crisscrossed with alarming regularity. This criss-crossing is partly due to the inability of the 21st century religious to pointedly address the trajectories and the dynamism of the 21st century as they present themselves. The Ten Commandments provide all the answers in their timelessness, but their specificity may have hampered their application to contemporary situations.
The sixth commandment explicitly warned against fornication, but a lot of immorality can still occur in a relationship that may not be referred to as fornication.
Biblically, Jesus Christ added a lot of clarity when he said “Anybody that looks at a woman with lust in his heart has already committed adultery with her”. In this biblical passage, Jesus Christ advises that all forms of lust must be eschewed from dating, and rightly so because lust is the beginning of the sixth commandment. While Jesus Christ managed his male-female relationship with clarity and purity, the task is much more difficult for human beings in the milieu. While Jesus Christ would manage a cordial relationship with Mary, Martha, and, to a lesser extent, Susanna, it becomes an arduous task for a 21st century couple to stay in a confined pace without company and avoid succumbing to a rather negative and inventive means of staying occupied. It is also difficult to imagine a 21st century youth who was a subject of feminine attention, be it contrition (As Jesus Christ encountered the Lady who was ready to wash his feet, anoint them, and dry them with her hair) or emotion; not fall into second-guessing the lady’s actual motive and furtively importing sexual innuendoes into every gesture or touch.
Consequently, it is easy to appreciate the confusion of these religious exponents. The issue of human relationships seldom has a straightforward nature as it gravitates from necessity to the downright bizarre as issues of homosexuality, bestiality, and pedophilia continue to engulf public consciousness with desensitizing consequences. It is not easy to “immortalize” male-female relationships without going against spiritual and scriptural principles, nor is it any easier to moralize male-female relationships without risking leading people into sin. The legend of St. Valentine offers a clear example of this dilemma. It was said that St. Valentine oversaw the marriage of many young lovers for fear of risking their sin. It should be observed that the saintly Valentine appreciated the unpredictable and volatile trajectories of romantic relationships and proceeded to proactively manage the situation using matrimony. In the case of human relationships, we must accept that religion has some of the answers, but by no means does it have all the answers. The moral-immoral dilemma is the biggest challenge facing this issue and consequently blurs the line between a healthy relationship and immortality.
Hormonal volatility adds to the already disturbing mixture. It may be right to advance male-female relationships as inherently innocent, but they are not always that predictable. Male and female hormones are not entirely patterned. The rush of testosterone at a crucial moment may just prove the difference between a sinner and a righteous man. While it may be apt to follow the instance of St. Benedict and avoid the occasions of sin, that is not to say that temptations are not present. Cases of rape, ICT ridiculed immorality, and in-transit sexuality (sex in buses) continue to befuddle in their stark reality.
This progressively blurring line produces a lot of effects. First of which is the justifiable suspicion that must persuade any human relationship. Most girls interpret and sometimes misinterpret any male interest as being sexual in orientation. Whether they welcome this attention or reject it, it has needlessly frustrated many meaningful inter-gender interactions that may prove vital to the advancement of society. Conversely, the males themselves have often thought of their female counterparts as sex objects, which would be well explained when we criticize how queer it sounds when a guy tries to explain that he is just cordial with a member of the opposite gender. This is because lexicography has made the word “girlfriend” one-dimensional.
This blurring line has led to many unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases. There have been cases where platonic friends succumbed to hormones to yield to a moment that was not pre-planned, thus producing a situation that was unwanted. Other times, people have been manipulated by their friends to yield to their basic instincts. This has also led to a loss of trust when a seemingly healthy relationship based on respect is corrupted by either of the two parties. Friends have been known to become enemies due to this.
At this juncture, it is pertinent to ask, Is dating wrong? What then is a healthy relationship in context? And lastly, is sex wrong? In answering these questions, this piece is summarized. First, dating is not wrong in itself; the demands of the 21st century and technological advancements have made it unavoidable, but dating needs to be managed by ensuring that any relationship it produces is healthy.
When we talk about a healthy relationship in our context, we mean the kind of relationship that is built on trust and respect. Above all, trust in God and respect for his commandments are critical requirements. A healthy relationship must possess self-control and imbibe the value of delayed gratification. Hormones must be kept under constant check and control. The real evidence of love is patience. If one’s partner blackmails you because you are not yielding to carnality, then most definitely he does not love you.
He or she cannot claim to be unable to live without you while threatening to discard you because you are not submissive to his whims. Since he cannot live without you, does he want to die? Or is he lying in the first place? A marriage is the only license to have a sexual relationship with one’s spouse; sex itself can wait. Furthermore, sex is not wrong, nor is it a sin; premarital is.
Finally, the blurring line between a healthy relationship and immorality lies in sex and its management.
– Joseph Seyi Victoria
300L Student, Mass Communication Department,
Prince Abubakar Audu University, Anyigba, Kogi State.
