"We're men (MANLY men)..." part two

Last time, I talked about the expectations of men in society today, and how I feel I don't measure up. Today, I wonder how right or wrong those expectations are, and perhaps what they mean in my life.
I recently read a book titled "Why Men Hate Going to Church". The author proposes and defends his theory that the church has become too femanized and wimpy for most men, so they are leaving the church in droves, and that it is having a negative effect on the church. It is an interesting idea, and it articulated thoughts and feelings I had been experiencing in my life for a long time but had never been able to put into words. Basically his assertion was that men were not able to be men at church, that everything was geared towards the general attitudes, aptitudes, and abilities of women as opposed to men (despite the fact that the majority of clergy or pastoral staff are men). The church is a female institution, he claims.
I bring up this book because it actually defends a more traditional view of men, and because thinking about what that book had to say along with what I have experienced and felt in my own life has brought me to the conclusion that the traditional expectation of men is not without merit. Men were created to be a certain way, and that is not wrong.
I keep coming back the picture of Jesus as presented in the Gospels and wondering how he has been turned into this nice, friendly man. That may be largely a fault of the middle century Christians, or around the reformation era. I do not know specific dates, but I know that many artists displayed Jesus and his apostles as very feminized men. The whole debate around who is beside Jesus in the Leonardo da Vinci painting The Last Supper is a classic example. Some say it is the apostle John, and others say it is Mary Magdeline because it looks like a woman is beside him. There are many other paintings and depictions of Jesus as a very effeminate man, always crying and looking smooth skinned and, well, girly. But when I actually read the Gospels, this was a man who was not kind and gentle. He was a rebel, constantly going against cultural norms. He did not get killed because he was nice. He was killed because he grabbed the religious leaders by the metaphorical ears, gave them a stern shake and told them to get their heads out of their asses and actually help people for once in their lives. Saint Peter was a brash, loud-mouthed fisherman who cut off someone's ear. You don't cut off someone's ear on purpose - you swing for his head and miss. John was called the son of Thunder. I'm pretty sure you don't get that nickname for being meek and quiet.
But today, Jesus is usually portrayed as a kind, gentle man, someone you could go to and hug, who would cry with you over your problems, patting your hand and telling you that everything would be okay, and as a man, that is how I am supposed to be in the church.
I am coming to the meat of my dilemna, and the dilemna of Christian men. I feel that I now sound like I am supporting those attitudes and expectations I was critical of last time, and in some ways I am. I think part of the reason I have been struggling with this issue is because I grew up in the church and I was presented with a very unmanly example of a perfect man. I have lived my life in conflict between what a man is according to the world, and what it is according to the church. There was no balance.
The world says that men should be crude, violent (in a physical/sporty way, not a wife-beating way), loud, aggressive, womanising, big, buff, and burly. The church says that men should be gentle, kind, sacrificial, humble, meek, caring, quiet, and submissive. Those two lists are full of good things, but they tend to be mutually exclusive. To make things worse, men are under attack in many ways even by society in general.
This is a confusing issue at times because even in a secular setting there is a dichotomy. Men are portrayed as all of those things I mentioned before, but at the same time it is becoming harder to be those things because they are being viewed as barbaric and old-fashioned. Things are becoming tough because supporting traditional views of men instantly brands someone as a mysogynist fool who clearly does not understand that men are inherantly evil and disgusting. It is a case of woman's equality becoming woman's sameness. It is politically incorrect to say that men and women are different, even though they clearly are. People can be equal without being the same. Think of a math equation: 3x=12. In this equation, 'x' equals 4, yet when you count, you would not count '1,2,3,x,5...' because 'x' and 4 are not the same. 2x=30 is still true because now 'x' equals 15. So being equal does not being the same.
But even while the roles of men are being reduced, it seems that the stereotypical expectations of men are continuing to be propagated, especially in movies and music. Much of the rap scene is about having big guns, more money, and plenty of women. Movies feature mostly muscle bound men who are tough and take no nonsense, except in comedy roles where men are allowed to be doofuses. That is obviously a generalisation - there are plenty of movies and songs where men are portrayed differently, but I think those are the minority. I feel that the big, buff, manly hero is making a big comeback, largely because it is good business.
Added to that is the expectation for men in the church, which I have already covered.
So what does it all mean. What is a man supposed to be in the modern world? That is not an easy question to answer, partly because it is easy to take any pro-male comments and rebrand them as anti-female, which is not my intention at all. But, as I said, men and women are different, and that is not a bad thing.
All right, so what is a man? The challenge, I think, is to define men in a way that balances between emasculating him and turning him into a neanderthal who exists only to fight, scratch and smell bad. I think the key is where to focus. The physicality of a man should not matter. Short, tall, thin, fat, hairy, hairless, whatever - that all needs to be taken out of the equation because that is beyond anyone's control (to an extent - there is always working out, eating healthy, but that is not what makes a man a man). What should matter is the qualities a man exhibits. A man should be a leader - though there are many ways to lead, and not all are from the front. A man should be a defender of the weak - Jesus, without being weak or soft himself, constantly exhorted those around him to protect the poor, the widows, the children. And he put his money where his mouth was, so it is a clear example worth following. A man should be straightforward, honest, and fair. A man should protect women and their honour. Ladies, I know you can take care of yourselves and be self-sufficient and all of that. Fine. But I truly believe that it is a man's role to protect women, if not physically then spiritually and emotionally. Men should be as outraged if not moreso about porn and domestic abuse and all the crap that women go through, even though much of it is our fault. We, as men, should be trying to protect and uphold women and we are doing a piss-poor job of it and not getting any better, I'm afraid. A man should be emotionless. There is nothing wrong with showing emotion - even Jesus cried. But only once. I believe that is in the Bible not just as something to show that tears are okay, but also to show that, despite the trials and tribulations he went through, Jesus only cries once. Men express themselves differently than women - they are more prone to flashes of anger and dissatisfaction than to tears and being touch feely. That is not wrong. Men can cry, but to expect a man to be constantly in tears of sorrow or tears of joy is not necessary either. A good firm handshake and pat on the shoulder can be as good as a hug - but I feel that society is trying to force us to become huggers (an odd thing for me to say because I have nothing against a good hug...I'm just saying that in general, that is not necessary for men).
I guess I will wrap this up now. I hope no one reads this and gets offended, that is not my intent. But I stand by what I say. I still believe that it is easier in many ways to be a man than a woman, especially in body and self image. But that does not mean that it is a walk in the park either.