How Practical is it for Women to be Submissive to Their Husbands in Modern Society

  • Thread starter Thread starter MargaretofCortona
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Stingyness is not a great trait to bring to marriage. Frugality, on the other hand is essential. Even if you are wealthy, you don’t get that way by throwing your money around.
Yeah. I strongly recommend Dave Ramsey’s approach to couples who are having trouble agreeing about money–doing a monthly budget together, both spouses having a vote, agreeing on it, sticking to it, making sure that both spouses have “fun money.”

A lot of stingy people don’t even do a budget.
 
It’s not in the eye of the beholder when the husband is appealing to his extended family members for financial help. it’s in all of our eyes then.
I said “can.”

Sometimes, as you mentioned, people are just stingy with their spouse and kids.
 
It’s not at all. I zealously agree that compromise is the primary method of solving problems.

I’m just defending the reality of the ultimate headship of the husband over his family; an unpopular stance in these modern times, but still the absolute truth.

Husbands and wives are absolutely partners and both are due equal dignity. Compromise should be sought whenever possible. But in those 0.01% of situations where it’s not, “Abraham’s gotta go to Canaan, sorry Sarah”.
Do you accept that your wife is a person, equal in dignity to you, and capable of independently using her reason?
 
You flatter yourself. Abraham was directly commanded by God - it’s not like he had much choice in the matter either.
As Carl Doss said, “That’s right, shove the responsibility for this one off on God.” 😃

(I’m not expressing a position one way or the other in this debate, I just use that Carl Doss line a couple times a month)
 
40.png
Vonsalza:
It’s not at all. I zealously agree that compromise is the primary method of solving problems.

I’m just defending the reality of the ultimate headship of the husband over his family; an unpopular stance in these modern times, but still the absolute truth.

Husbands and wives are absolutely partners and both are due equal dignity. Compromise should be sought whenever possible. But in those 0.01% of situations where it’s not, “Abraham’s gotta go to Canaan, sorry Sarah”.
Do you accept that your wife is a person, equal in dignity to you, and capable of independently using her reason?
Of course. The question edges on nonsensical.
 
But the bottom line is that when one person is making the money, then the other person doesn’t just get their way about spending it.

I didn’t work for a couple years because I was in school, on my own loan in my own name that I paid off myself and did not expect my husband to pay off in any way, shape or form because it would have been unfair and burdensome on him. Nor did he (or my parent) co-sign for my loan. During that time, my husband paid for my groceries and other necessities, and carried me on his medical insurance. I did not go out and buy cars, go on vacation, or pay my massive tuition bills on his dime. Once I was out, I assumed responsibility for my own debt, including structuring it so that if I died he would not have to pay it, and making sure he knew that.

I realize couples have different ways of working these things out, but I personally think that each half of a couple should make the effort to not burden the other with avoidable debt.
Dave Ramsey would say that it’s both–neither spouse gets to just do their own thing with money, no matter who is earning money.

I’m happy that what you’re doing works for you, but I wouldn’t do it, and I wouldn’t recommend it to non-DINKs or couples without a large income. Financially struggling families cannot afford to have either spouse doing their own thing. Here are the rules that I would use:

–the budget is a joint agreement
–we don’t spend money outside or beyond the budget
–we don’t borrow money without both spousal approval and ideally, we don’t borrow at all
–any debt is family debt
–we make financial decisions together and don’t move forward on major decisions without consensus
–all spousal earnings and income are a family resource–if I make money, it goes into the family pot
 
Oh we can always rebel. Abraham against God, Sarah against her husband.
I meant that it’s really egotistical to equate anything you could demand of your wife with Abraham following an ordinance straight from the mouth of the Almighty.
 
Why would you marry someone you couldn’t trust to make decisions for you? Someone you can’t make decisions with?
Bear in mind that there are a couple single ladies on the thread.

They are actually thinking about the question, do I want to sign up for this?
 
You can always find people to help you justify your sin. I am sure your husband had no problem finding people who justice his purchases your family could ill afford. I choose the car as an extreme example to make a point but it did actually happen to a couple I knew. You would be surprised how many of our friends defended the wife’s purchase.

In my opinion a religion who names women like Joan of Arch and Catherine of Siena saints cannot support the idea women are expected to be meek door mats. The Blessed Mother didn’t check with Joseph before giving her yes to God. Proverbs 31 doesn’t describe a wife incapable of independent decisions.

So that’s obviously not what “submit” means in this context.

Yes, men and women have goofy ideas about marriage those are usually tempered once you face a living spouse with hopes, fears, needs and wants of their own.

Discussions like these often prey on women’s insecurities. These discussions encourage women to make chores a power play (what do you mean he won’t do his half?) or pushes them to make crazy decisions just to prove they can.

Also, there is a lack of empathy for men in these discussions. They have their own problems and issues. They feel the “burden” of marriage every bit as much as we do. It isn’t like they get to make all their decisions independently either. Many decisions are made by circumstances.

Why do I encourage wives to let their husbands have the final say as much as possible? Because like it or not the male ego thrives in such circumstances. Let him be king of his little corner of the world and he will move mountains for you and your children. That’s the best father you can give your kids.
 
Other people can have whatever “rules” they like. No two couples are exactly alike.

i think the bottom line on this is there is no one size fits all approach to this, but couples need to have consideration for each other when planning big expenditures. My way is one way to solve. Your way is one way to solve. There may be other good ways out there. If a couple is staying married for decades using whatever their approach is, it’s obviously working for them and that’s great. It doesn’t mean everybody else has to do the exact same thing to have a successful marriage. I’m even willing to concede that I apparently have an “unusual” marriage based on the number of people who don’t think a Catholic married to a Protestant will work at all.

I do wish that more husbands AND wives would be fiscally responsible in terms of their expenditures, because I see a lot of people who just aren’t. If you don’t like that your spouse doesn’t make enough money, then make some yourself, or else learn to live on what they make. Unfortunately, many people will choose to overspend or complain or both.
 
Bear in mind that there are a couple single ladies on the thread.

They are actually thinking about the question, do I want to sign up for this?
C’est moi. I really don’t see what I could stand to gain.
 
40.png
Vonsalza:
Oh we can always rebel. Abraham against God, Sarah against her husband.
I meant that it’s really egotistical to equate anything you could demand of your wife with Abraham following an ordinance straight from the mouth of the Almighty.
Non sequitur.

Sarah didn’t have to follow Abraham to Canaan because God ordered him to go. She may or may not have known (or believed him).

She was his wife and he her husband. The rest of scripture practically drips with more of the same.
 
C’est moi. I really don’t see what I could stand to gain.
I thought the exact same way as a single lady. Marriage just looked like a big pain in the neck because of all the expectations applied to it, most of which seemed to involve expecting the woman to act some particular way. I remember at age 16 being lectured by an optometrist (of all people) when I said if I married, I did not plan to take my husband’s name.

When I met my husband, it seemed like a lot of these “problems” just weren’t going to be problems.
May you meet someone who makes you feel the same way.
 
Last edited:
In the case where husband is supporting a large family, I would rely more upon his judgment in selecting a car.
Why?

If mom is going to be driving it 80% of the time and wants a minivan with sliding doors, why doesn’t mom get a minivan? Why would we want her husband to pick out an SUV or a sedan for her that she doesn’t even want? (Assuming we are staying within a budget, etc.)
 
Why?

If mom is going to be driving it 80% of the time and wants a minivan with sliding doors, why doesn’t mom get a minivan? Why would we want her husband to pick out an SUV or a sedan for her that she doesn’t even want? (Assuming we are staying within a budget, etc.)
Because husband has taken on the huge responsibility of providing for 8 people or whatever, and maybe he can’t afford a minivan with sliding doors. I would hope he discusses it with his wife and they mutually agree on something they both like, but if he’s paying for it, at the end of the day he gets more of the say.
 
40.png
Vonsalza:
Of course. The question edges on nonsensical.
Well then why would you treat her as anything less than equal in the family decision making process?
I don’t, as a rule.

The invocation of the God-given role of headship is a rarity in my marriage. Even more so as time goes on.
 
Wow! She’s got some pretty high standards for functionality. She didn’t go into details, so I’m not sure what she considers functional, but I guess I’m probably not it. My husband is a teacher who makes considerably less than $100,000 a year. We live in California, certainly not the cheapest place to live. We have six children, ranging in age from 15 to 2. The 15 year old and 13 year old are in school now, but they were home-schooled up until last year, when we made the decision to put them in school. The other four are still at home and I’m home schooling all but the two year old. The house is frequently a mess. I can’t remember the last time I deep cleaned anything except the bathrooms and kitchen, but I keep up on the laundry and everybody gets fed. I would certainly hire household help if I could afford it. I’ve had somebody come in to clean a couple of times and it is amazing. We do have family nearby, but except for emergencies, babysitting is usually on their terms, not ours. It is usually more trouble than it is worth to take the kids to my mom’s house, because I have to both drive them there and pick them up, which usually involves close to two hours of driving. These days, since we have teenagers, we can get out on a semi-regular basis. since we don’t have a lot of money, sometimes getting out means a walk together or grocery shopping. My husband is extremely helpful with the kids. He’s less helpful with the house, but will do anything I ask him to do. His big strength is that he can rally the kids to help in a way that I cannot. I tend to take it personally when people don’t see that I’m overwhelmed and step up to help on their own. I certainly do get overwhelmed. But overall, we’re very happy. 16 years ago, I left a professional job that I loved. I have not looked back. I love this life that we have chosen together and I know that we’re in it together. The struggles are not mine or his, they are ours. I guess I’m just bothered by the assertion in the article that a stay-at-home mom cannot be functional unless she has a small family and her husband makes more than $100,000 a year. That’s just ridiculous and shows a particular blindness to the everyday lives of people who do not have significant means. I don’t think it’s deliberate, I think the writer must be blissfully unaware that there are families with two working parents who make significantly less than that and are happy and functional.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top