Gender roles

I've been indulging my morbid curiosity and reading John McNeil's blog; He was a Jesuit who was removed from the Society because of his outspoken views on homosexual relations, which are mainly what he writes about on his blog.

I've noticed that his writings vacillate between the laughably misguided (Didn't you know the centurion's servant was actually his gay lover? Or that Martha, Mary, and Lazarus were an LGBT "family"?) and profoundly insightful.

Case in point, his post on "how gay marriage will save straight marriage!" [yes, re: the exclamation point, sic. Italics mine]:

Another major problem with heterosexual marriage is that it is based on gender-identity images. . . . They result in seeing the human individual, whether male or female, as essentially partial and incomplete. No human person is seen as complete in him or her-self, but as essentially dependent on the opposite sex for her or his completion. The male is required to suppress all the feminine in himself and seek the feminine outside himself in a woman. Women, in turn, must suppress all the masculine in themselves and seek the masculine outside themselves in the male.

It is this shift in consciousness that has caused the enormous amount of breakdown and divorce when heterosexuals try to follow the traditional patterns of male dominance and feminine submission. Both genders are being called on to develop the fullness of their own humanity, so that they can approach each other as complete, independent persons and not remain essentially dependent on the other gender for their completion.

Now he tries to take this whole gender roles theme and turn it into inequality, self-suppression and misogyny, hence destructive of any true love; But at the end of the day, ignoring all the commentary, he seems to be doing a pretty good job describing the complementarity of the two genders, and recognizing that this complementarity is at the heart of traditional marriage.

The problem--of course--is that he rejects this complementarity (he'd rather we all be more or less androgynous, transcending sex). To his rejection I can only ask, It is really bad when a man feels like half a person without his wife? Does that feeling really render true love impossible? Is the family more stable and more relevant when the two people are utterly independent and self-satisfied, having no need for one another?

Back the the original point: Leave it to a gay man to get (albeit in a very gay way) heterosexuality.