Inappropriate Behavior?

[CuriousInIL]

Madame
Your example is right on what I was getting at and your answer is interesting. Would your take be different if X was skydiving?

 

[ALLGIRLS]

Ok, how about this real life (my life) situation:

My husband HATES Crocs (the shoes). He has “forbid” them in our house. I’m not sure how serious he is about it, as I don’t care about the shoes one way or the other, so I’ve never tried to buy any. In discussing Crocs w/ various people (IRL, on CAF, for some reason those shoes become the topic of conversations!), I usually mentioned how I’ve never worn them b/c dh doesn’t like them. I’ve been told many times that I should “just buy a pair”, regardless of dh’s feelings, b/c I’d love them, they are so comfy, SINCE it’s not anything sinful, dh doesn’t have the “right” to “forbid” them.

I, like the op example, never ask the person or persons’ opinion on dh “rule”, or even complain about it (like I said, I don’t care), just mention it as to why I’ve never worn Crocs, so is it wrong for them to offer it?

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

I love how everyone on here immediately jumped in the OP’s face, and tried to make this yet ANOTHER debate about romance novels. If only action movies for men were held to the same scrutiny!! Gotta love double standards…

As to the situation, I understood what the OP was talking about (can’t we just take what people say at face value?), it wasn’t really that vague. These kind of things happen all the time. My husband doesn’t like me driving alone in the city, or going fishing when he is at work and I have a day off. Yes, it makes me bored, but I respect his request for the sake of marital unity. However, if it were a major hobby of mine (like my artwork, scrapbooking, music, or reading) and my husband was asking me to give up something harmless like that, and a friend told me that I needed to talk to my husband about it and stand up for myself more because he was being unreasonable, that would be a good friend. If we aren’t standing up for ourselves in our marriages, we become doormats, and doormats eventually feel neglected and walked on (no pun intended) and will, because they are doormats, never say anything until they are so upset, they just up and leave.

In this case, I believe the friend would have been genuinely helping the other friend to see that such a request is unreasonable, and maybe she needs to talk to her husband about it, let him know what her hobby means to him, so there is no resentment.

 

[whatevergirl]

I answered the question as relating to the inappropriate behavior of the friend, but the OP might not have seen it as it got lost in the sea of romance novel posts. lol

 

[JanetF]

The friend’s response is inappropriate. She wasn’t asked her opinion about whether husband was justified or not. She was asked about other activities…she didn’t answer that question. And her response encouraged the wife to defy her husband, keep secrets from him…bad advice!

 

[CuriousInIL]

I answered the question as relating to the inappropriate behavior of the friend, but the OP might not have seen it as it got lost in the sea of romance novel posts. lol

I found that boat floating in the sea. Thanks for your reponse.

 

[bcuster]

I think we get to my point easier without debating the activity. But, for those who need it, assume X is reading fiction. And no, not 24/7 reading that is leading to any neglect or the like.

I think you were right about this. A wife and husband should have the ability to talk openly about how they feel about certain activities. I think wife should go back to husband and find out what is behind his request. Does he feel he needs more personal time with wife? Is there an activity “Z” that they would enjoy doing together? Is he a control freak? There is probably more to this issue that just the activity.

Also, sharing personal issues between husband and wife with friend could be inappropriate in itself. If wife has a problem, husband should be consulted first. That is the way I would want it to be.

 

[rpp]

Or, another possibility is that if you don’t feel you can answer a question, you just don’t post in that thread, rather than criticizing the question and questioner. Frankly, essentially telling me that I’m not welcome to post is quite uncharitable. Also, in many areas, and unlike you I believe here also, hypothetical questions can be the most useful device for testing issues and answers.

Or as another poster pointed out, you are engaging in activity which you despereately want to belive, by lying to yourself, is not sinful and your husband, wise as he is and concerned for your soul, knows is both harmful and sinful and wants you to stop. The example given by a previous poster was reading trashy romance novels which are just a nother form of pornography. You don’t like the answers so you attack those who realize your initial question is far too vague. You made it vague so as to justify activity which your husband knows to be sinful and you really hope is not, despite the fact that your conscience seems otherwise. That seems more likely to me rather than me being uncharitable.

 

[CuriousInIL]

Or as another poster pointed out, you are engaging in activity which you despereately want to belive, by lying to yourself, is not sinful and your husband, wise as he is and concerned for your soul, knows is both harmful and sinful and wants you to stop. The example given by a previous poster was reading trashy romance novels which are just a nother form of pornography. You don’t like the answers so you attack those who realize your initial question is far too vague. You made it vague so as to justify activity which your husband knows to be sinful and you really hope is not, despite the fact that your conscience seems otherwise. That seems more likely to me rather than me being uncharitable.

Swing and a miss.
If you think the question is too vague, no problem. Say so and move on.

But, there still is no reason to tell me I have to stop posting because you, unlike many others, can’t seem to understanding the question as set forth.

Also, your assumptions are way off base. As I already noted (reading is a skill), I am not the husband (although I am male), I am not the wife (because I am not–and I am male) and I am not the friend.

And, so, I am interested in the answers but have no preconceived notions of what they will be. And no matter what they are, they don’t relate to the sinfulness of my behavior as I am none of the three actors in this hypothetical drama…

So the things you thought more likely are all untrue–perhaps time again for you to review your charity level. And again, I have no problem at all with you saying that you think the question is unanswerable as is or needs more fact. My complete problem, is your dismissal of ME, as a person, who apparently needs to meet your level of specificity, or stop posting.

Please try to read questions and answer them (or not) as they are stated. There is no justification from my question for:

1. assuming I am a female,
2. assuming I am engaging in an activity that is “harmful and sinful” (when the question specifically said it wasn’t)
3. assuming I have a “wise” husband that wants me to stop
   4 assuming my husband knows the activity to be sinful
4. assuming I really hope the activity is not a sin
   6 assuming my “conscience seems otherwise” and
5. assuming I am “lying to myself” because I’m desperate.

Really, you think all those assumptions are appropriate and charitable (and more likely than what i noted)? From one hypothetical question? It is time to look inward.

I will pray for you.

 

[rpp]

Swing and a miss.
If you think the question is too vague, no problem. Say so and move on.

But, there still is no reason to tell me I have to stop posting because you, unlike many others, can’t seem to understanding the question as set forth.

Also, your assumptions are way off base. As I already noted (reading is a skill), I am not the husband (although I am male), I am not the wife (because I am not–and I am male) and I am not the friend.

And, so, I am interested in the answers but have no preconceived notions of what they will be. And no matter what they are, they don’t relate to the sinfulness of my behavior as I am none of the three actors in this hypothetical drama…

So the things you thought more likely are all untrue–perhaps time again for you to review your charity level. And again, I have no problem at all with you saying that you think the question is unanswerable as is or needs more fact. My complete problem, is your dismissal of ME, as a person, who apparently needs to meet your level of specificity, or stop posting.

Please try to read questions and answer them (or not) as they are stated. There is no justification from my question for:

1. assuming I am a female,
2. assuming I am engaging in an activity that is “harmful and sinful” (when the question specifically said it wasn’t)
3. assuming I have a “wise” husband that wants me to stop
   4 assuming my husband knows the activity to be sinful
4. assuming I really hope the activity is not a sin
   6 assuming my “conscience seems otherwise” and
5. assuming I am “lying to myself” because I’m desperate.

Really, you think all those assumptions are appropriate and charitable (and more likely than what i noted)? From one hypothetical question? It is time to look inward.

I will pray for you.

Please DO NOT under any circumstances pray for me. Such a comment, in this context, is meant as a personal attack and demonstrates such a profound lack of charity as to actually be an expression of hate.

So since we have established that you hate me for not oither reason that you desire to make sweeping moral generalizations and I say that that is unwise, it would seem to me that the only person here who is being uncharitable is the only person who is expressing hate and also the only person making personal attacks. Thus your prayers, because they motivated by hatred, would not be efficacious anyway and may, in fact, be an occasion of sin.

I suggest that you cease the personal attacks and stop falsely assuming that peoiple are attacking you.

And, no, I did not bother reading most of the post. I just read the first couple of sentences and the last line. I had better things to do like floss my teeth.

 

[CuriousInIL]

Please DO NOT under any circumstances pray for me. Such a comment, in this context, is meant as a personal attack and demonstrates such a profound lack of charity as to actually be an expression of hate.

So since we have established that you hate me for not oither reason that you desire to make sweeping moral generalizations and I say that that is unwise, it would seem to me that the only person here who is being uncharitable is the only person who is expressing hate and also the only person making personal attacks. Thus your prayers, because they motivated by hatred, would not be efficacious anyway and may, in fact, be an occasion of sin.

I suggest that you cease the personal attacks and stop falsely assuming that peoiple are attacking you.

And, no, I did not bother reading most of the post. I just read the first couple of sentences and the last line. I had better things to do like floss my teeth.

I do not hate you at all. I don’t believe that I am being uncharitable or making personal attacks.

Having said that, I apologize to the extent that it appeared either of those is true.

Please refrain from instructing me to stop posting and stop praying (for anyone including you). It is most disconserting.

I would suggest that you read whole posts if you are going to reply to them–especially so where you are assuming things such as that I am a sinning wife in the original question.

 

[Pray4Life]

I think it is probably inappropriate for the friend to advise the hypothetical wife to act against her husband’s wishes. At that point, she (or he or whoever) is sticking her nose where it doesn’t belong. Even if the activity in question appears to be perfectly innocent, she doesn’t know the relationship between wife and husband, and she doesn’t know the husband’s true motivations (to be fair, the wife might not, either- but that is a communication issue between herself and her spouse, still not any of the friend’s business.) The husband may have reasons the friend knows nothing about. The wife might be giving her side only and overlooking- whether out of convenience or just because even she isn’t fully aware of it- why her husband asked her to stop doing activity x in the first place. There are two sides to every story, and I think we as Christians are obligated towards viewing the actions of others in the light of charity, as there is no compelling reason in this hypothetical case to assume the husband “must” be some sort of tyrant for asking his wife not to do whatever (or that the wife “must” really be doing something wrong if her husband disapproves of it).

I did see the “romance novel” thread this thread has reminded others of (it reminded me of it as well) and posted in it also- twice because I started out making assumptions that could have, incorrectly in my view, encouraged the original poster to go against her husband’s wishes, and that is not what I wanted or meant to do. This may be a topic for a separate thread, I don’t know, but I do not believe there is anything automatically wrong with honoring a spouse’s wishes even if it is along the lines of refraining from an enjoyable but seemingly harmless activity that they don’t approve of. There may not be anything wrong with eating meat, but most people who have friends who are vegetarians/vegans of the sort deeply offended by the consumption of meat will not put cheeseburgers on the menu when they have such persons in their home, out of simple respect. If we would do that for a friend, why is this idea of honoring a spouse’s wishes so repugnant? Is there anything in the world and of the world that we should be so deeply attached to that our lives are a famine of misery if we do not do it/have it? If those requests of a husband (or wife) really are unreasonably limiting, or grounded in no reason of any substance, then that is something that needs to be worked out between the spouses, and it would suggest there are deeper issues at play than whether a husband disapproves of a certain genre of fiction (for example). In which case, taking a well-meaning friend’s advice and simply doing whatever she pleases could make the situation far worse than dealing with it like a sensible adult in the first place. Does that make sense?

So I guess it comes down to, in my own opinion, the appropriate thing for a friend in that situation, if she is truly concerned about the issue and unwilling to just offer the requested alternatives, is to encourage the wife, in this case, to communicate with her husband, offer suggestions for broaching the subject perhaps, etc.- but not to just tell her, without even knowing the whole story, to do something deliberately which will offend her husband and make trouble between them. If there is some question of a possibly controlling/abusive spouse, it is all the more dangerous to encourage someone to take actions that could inflame, rather than actually address, what the real situation is. It is very easy to give advice, but very hard to give WISE advice (and harder still to take it when we receive it!)

Again, just my two cents.

 

[CuriousInIL]

Thanks Pray4Life, there’s a lot packed in that response that gets to many points. A quite thought-provoking response.

 

[Gerard_Nadal]

Please DO NOT under any circumstances pray for me. Such a comment, in this context, is meant as a personal attack and demonstrates such a profound lack of charity as to actually be an expression of hate.

So since we have established that you hate me for not oither reason that you desire to make sweeping moral generalizations and I say that that is unwise, it would seem to me that the only person here who is being uncharitable is the only person who is expressing hate and also the only person making personal attacks. Thus your prayers, because they motivated by hatred, would not be efficacious anyway and may, in fact, be an occasion of sin.

I suggest that you cease the personal attacks and stop falsely assuming that peoiple are attacking you.

And, no, I did not bother reading most of the post. I just read the first couple of sentences and the last line. I had better things to do like floss my teeth.

**I’m with rpp on this thread. (Yes rpp, this time it’s bold face type for a reason )

CuriousInIl, your entire disposition here can only be described charitably as sophomoric. People have seen right through your questions and their pretexts. This section of the forum is about moral theology. If you knew even the fundamentals of how moral theology addresses situations, then you would understand that specifics are needed. The algebraic variable x simply does not suffice when asking about a specific couple and whether their behaviors comport with the moral norms of sacramental marriage.

Your steadfast refusal, in the face of growing calls, to identify the behavior in question leads one to one of two conclusions.

1. This is about you and you know that the behavior in question isn’t very kosher, or,
2. This is a game.

Whatever the case, telling rpp to move on off the thread has sealed your standing in my eyes that you are into self-deception and only desire to hear what you want to hear. You can get that on tons of secular blogs. You will not get away with that here.

Don’t bother offering to pray for me either. You need the prayers more that I do. Start by asking for the gift of being honest with yourself. Then this thread becomes moot.**

 

[Jon_in_Charlott]

What is the motivation of the OP in proposing the scenario?? Is is a sincere attempt at understanding the truth, or, is it an effort to incite debate?

The OP stated that they (he) were not a character within the scenario, thus it is not an issue that they are affected by personally. They could, however, know someone who is a character in the scenario and would like to provide considerate advice to them. Logically, if the scenario affected them personally they would willingly work with posters if an effort towards resolving the matter. If the scenario is purely hypothetical then the OP should be reasonably receptive to all thoughts, opinions and criticisms regarding the post, but, the OP has instead made an effort to debate the (name removed by moderator)ut by other posters.

What would be Inappropriate Behaviour is to solicit interest and efforts by others towards accommodating a question, presumed to be sincere, and rather than thank those who took the time to respond they attempt to deflate or defeat those who responded.

What if the X in the scenario was something that was argueably an extraordinarily noble efffort (e.g. counselling outside of abortion clinics or working on a cure for cancer)? Would it provide greater justification for the friend to provider advice in contradicting the wishes of the husband??

The scenario provided by the OP is in essence playing the devil’s advocate in the debate as to what is sinful. Imagine if the wife were Eve, the husband were God, and the friend Satan. Activity X is the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of Good and Bad. Is the fruit sinful?? No. Having knowledge, whether it be discernably good or bad, in not a sin. Learning is not sinful, however, bad information and lessons can lead one to make sinful choices.

What is sinful is the disobediance. It is what seperated Man from God and given the OP’s scenario be the inevitable outcome between the husband and wife, if the wife were to adhere to the advice of the friend. That friendly suggestion could be the catalyst towards unwinding a good marriage.

The friend in stating the Husband as being unreasonable is similar to Satan’s effort to suggest that God was unreasonable to suggest that Eve not eat the forbidden fruit, “Certainly you will not die.” The friend’s pride in their own interpretation of the scenario promotes a self justificaton towards providing “sound” advice. Upon receiving the advice the wife/eve questions the directive of the husband/God. In questioning the directive it allows doubt to be seeded. Why has the directive been questioned? It is due to fear, the fear of being without the stated desire, activity x/forbidden fruit. The friend/satan exploits this fear by feeding it through justification. So, now that fuel has been added to the fear the protagonist in the scenario, the wife/Eve, feels a compulsion towards alleviating the fear. Rather than accept the burden of the fear (living with the desireable) we often, depending on the degree of the compulsion, aggressively choose to alleviate the fear. This action is our failure and the sin which leads to our demise.

 

[maryjk]

I am the only one that thinks the wife should have just asked her friend for ideas of new things to try?

Details about her personal life, like the fact that her husband doesn’t like something she does, should not even be mentioned. That should remain between the couple.

I used to have a friend that rehashed every little detail about her married life with me. After a couple of times, I told her that it really isn’t any of my business and I really didn’t want to hear about it.