David and Jonathan: Soul Friends

A good friend of mine is convinced there is such a thing as "Soul Friends" and that they are almost the same thing as "Soul Mates". These are people, either gender, in our lives who we aren't physically attracted to, but if it wasn't for that factor we would be the elusive "soul mates". She says this goes beyond just being "good" or "best" friends, but it is a connection on the deepest level possible of the human conscience. These are the individuals we say "they just get me" or "I'd marry them if I 'swung' that way (same gender)".  In her mind, physical connections are not necessary for 'soul friends' to be just as connected to one another as we deem soul mates to be.

In my mind, David and Jonathan were 'soul friends' (first Bromance!), and that they weren't merely just 'friends'. I think David and Jonathan had everything that we would associate with 'soul mates' minus the physical attraction part. *Now, I'm not willing to 'die in the ditch' that they were or were not engaging in homosexual behavior because it truly does not matter to me. I'm leaning towards the side that they did not, but whether that was because the physical attraction simply wasn't there or they didn't act on it according to cultural norms is irrelevant to my argument.* My argument is that I don't think David and Jonathan had to be physically intimate to have a deep, truly intimate relationship with one another.


Does the dynamics of a physical relationship change things, I don't actually know nor can I claim to know. However, I do know that physical intimacy does not always lead to a deeper level of knowing, feeling connected to another individual. I also believe that while physical intimacy can lead to a deeper level, I don't think committed couples necessarily need it. My examples for these two are any of the "hook-ups" on the Jersey Shore (not having deep emotional connections after physical intimacies), and the relationship between Dana and Christopher Reeve (not needing physical intimacies to have deep, emotional connections). While I mourn the first example of both men and women being so causal with their lives and bodies, I deeply admire the second example of two individuals not allowing the apparent lack of physical contact to deny them from having a deeply connected relationship. Dana Reeve died within a year of her husband from lung cancer, she was a non-smoker...

Granted, I'm not married, nor am I anywhere near that state of being! but I don't think the concept of 'soul mates' and 'soul friends' are necessarily in competition with each other. I'll allow that it is easier to cultivate a stronger relationship when you can use all levels of connection: physical, emotional, spiritual, etc, but I don't think physicality is the strongest way to bind/connect. This is also presupposing that the only "physical connection" that exists is sexual intercourse rather than including any form of human, physical contact, such as hugging or hand holding.

In closing, one of my 'soul friends' and I joke occasionally that whoever marries us is getting a twofer, that we come together as a pair. Trying to separate the two of us from each other would be an impossible task that no man should even consider trying to do...