I do have a brother, and am one to three finer folks, so I have an opinion about 'brother' - the relationship the reality the responsibility. I have always had trouble labeling another man, human male as a brother. I understood, a little, what a brother in Christ would be, but that never moved me to call anyone brother.
Gets easier if you capitalized it, Brother Thomas, Brother Mike. Seems almost like one of the monks - oops, they already do that don't they? Well, in the stories they do. More than one, they become the Brethren, that could be a good thing. Band of Brothers, term and title of honor, associated with battle, combat and trials not suffered by the many that weren't there on Saint Crispin's Day. Brothers in Arms, brotherhood of war, and still I would have trouble calling someone my brother. Motorcycle gangs use the term, motorcyclists often use it. I could be alone, so alone.
This whole blog post came from this poster, from DV6 on Facebook. And I was more understanding, until it hit me, that all Men are my brothers and that was why I should respect them, not because they earned it. I might never be anyone's brother if I have to earn it, which was probably why I am most certain I am the brother of my sibling - they knew I didn't earn it, I got it the easy way - just born to it.
But the poster nudges me to acknowledge all men are my brothers, be they good, evil or awesome or hidden in a dark corner of time and trouble - all brothers. I should respect them for being born, it isn't getting easier, I should respect them for their abilities and promise of a better person as they grow, respect them for the power they will wield for their future. Funny, I have for a long time respected my enemies, especially on the field of combat, if for no other reason than they could kill me if I wasn't paying attention. But also for the fact that in that basic struggle to kill each other - we were equal and risking all we had for our cause. I had little respect for those that sent us there... but they were my brothers, too. So much more to accept as truth. So little time.
One more strange thing on Facebook to gnaw upon. So my real question was: "I am really having trouble understanding the
idea that a man never having sexual activity is a virgin, and especially
why it would matter." But then I still have this idea that words have meanings, and males can never be virgins, and that somehow not having had sexual relations would make a grown man cry. This remains proof that the American culture, or all civilization has lost its senses... or it is all a bad dream? Go back and remember that all men are my brothers, and that laughing even a little is good for the heart, and more male virgins just prove the enlightened education and entertainment systems of the digital age won't change biology enough to notice.