T
ToeInTheWater
Guest
So…in some Evangelical or Fundamentalist circles, there is this idea that a husband actually has a strange quasi-parental role in his relationship with his wife. They interpret ideas of Biblical submission, as actually requiring the wife to “get permission” from the husband for actions such as getting a job, making certain shopping choices, etc., much as a child would get permission from a parent.
And one aspect that I hadn’t really questioned before, is the idea that a wife should run her clothing choices past her husband, and defer to his opinions.
For example, one of the married Bates girls, Alyssa Webster, has taken to dressing in tank tops and jeans since her marriage. Some Bates fans have questioned these choices, which are not considered “modest” by Mrs. Bates herself, none of the unmarried daughters dress that way. But interestingly, many have defended her by stating, “Alyssa is married now, if her husband is okay with it, then who are you to judge?”
Now, some may merely be stating this meaning that Alyssa is likely considering her husband’s opinions, and charitably deciding to dress in a way the husband prefers, and would not be one to wear clothes that her husband considers immodest. (She’s still more “modest” than Amy Duggar, though I know Amy never followed the Duggar rules anyway.) But I think some actually believe, that the husband does have the right to unilaterally demand that his wife, say, wear only long skirts, or not wear pants. And that a submissive wife would follow those demands without question.
Interestingly, some have also twisted the idea of wifely submission to state that if the husband demands a wife wear revealing clothing, either for his own visual pleasure, or so he can display her as a trophy, then the wife is obligated to follow that as well — that any sin of immodesty falls on the husband, not the wife.
I doubt that is Catholic teaching, but I’d be interested to know, do any of the women on CAF run their clothing choices by their husbands?
And one aspect that I hadn’t really questioned before, is the idea that a wife should run her clothing choices past her husband, and defer to his opinions.
For example, one of the married Bates girls, Alyssa Webster, has taken to dressing in tank tops and jeans since her marriage. Some Bates fans have questioned these choices, which are not considered “modest” by Mrs. Bates herself, none of the unmarried daughters dress that way. But interestingly, many have defended her by stating, “Alyssa is married now, if her husband is okay with it, then who are you to judge?”
Now, some may merely be stating this meaning that Alyssa is likely considering her husband’s opinions, and charitably deciding to dress in a way the husband prefers, and would not be one to wear clothes that her husband considers immodest. (She’s still more “modest” than Amy Duggar, though I know Amy never followed the Duggar rules anyway.) But I think some actually believe, that the husband does have the right to unilaterally demand that his wife, say, wear only long skirts, or not wear pants. And that a submissive wife would follow those demands without question.
Interestingly, some have also twisted the idea of wifely submission to state that if the husband demands a wife wear revealing clothing, either for his own visual pleasure, or so he can display her as a trophy, then the wife is obligated to follow that as well — that any sin of immodesty falls on the husband, not the wife.
I doubt that is Catholic teaching, but I’d be interested to know, do any of the women on CAF run their clothing choices by their husbands?
Right there with you. My husband wears clothes until they are in shreds it seems. 
