Things women do that disappoint their boyfriend

[Sarcelle]

How to avoid “emasculating”
You avoid being rude or vulgar and never name-call or express contempt, since rudeness is gives him a thin line of response that is both dignified and charitable. You instead control yourself like a lady so he can treat you like one without embarrassment or duplicity.
You never disapprove of his choice or preference by implying it is a choice that is OK for a woman but not a man.
You let him make decisions that are his to make as a matter of course; you don’t tell him what to do when he has not asked for advice.
You do not presume to choose friends for him, but only for yourself.
You do not nag him and you especially do not take his mother’s side when she does.
You don’t marry him if you don’t respect his judgment.
You do not treat him like a fixer upper or a rescue puppy.

 

[macstar]

Didn’t say that.

Yes, you did. “it is not the wifes place to determine what is an abuse or not”

It’s post #43 on the thread, posted yesterday at 3:08 pm.

 

[AdamP88]

Holey moley…I go away for two days and we have another submission thread.

 

[Sarcelle]

Yes, you did. “it is not the wifes place to determine what is an abuse or not”

It’s post #43 on the thread, posted yesterday at 3:08 pm.

Thanks.

I remember reading that but I could not seem to find that post.

 

[NonTimendum]

Yes, you did. “it is not the wifes place to determine what is an abuse or not”

It’s post #43 on the thread, posted yesterday at 3:08 pm.

And in what context did I say that and what caveat in parenthesis did I add after for even further clarification?

Classic deflection, whenever a person brings up wifely submission the immediate reactions are usually to bring up abuse in an attempt to poison the well and regain ground without having to actually argue the point. No reasonable reading of my comment could possibly place me in the position of defending physical or “emotional” abuse. But since I didn’t add seventeen thousand caveats and beg apologies I left myself open to the straw-man.

So I’ll ask you: does the husband have the duty to love his wife as “Christ loves the Church” or is that negotiable too?

 

[DarkLight]

Holey moley…I go away for two days and we have another submission thread.

Somehow even when the threads don’t start on that, they end up on that.

 

[Sarcelle]

And in what context did I say that and what caveat in parenthesis did I add after for even further clarification?

Classic deflection, whenever a person brings up wifely submission the immediate reactions are usually to bring up abuse in an attempt to poison the well and regain ground without having to actually argue the point. No reasonable reading of my comment could possibly place me in the position of defending physical or “emotional” abuse. But since I didn’t add seventeen thousand caveats and beg apologies I left myself open to the straw-man.

So I’ll ask you: does the husband have the duty to love his wife as “Christ loves the Church” or is that negotiable too?

Why don’t you enlighten us further on what it means for a husband to live his wife as “Christ loved the Church”?

 

[NonTimendum]

In fundamental Protestant thinking, this would never happen as the fiancé (male) has NO authority over his fiancée (female) until they are married. She is overseen by her father and answers to him, and she is protected by her father especially in instances like this. A fiancé who does this has no place in usurping her father’s authority and it is seen as calling the shots in his future father-in-law’s household, a huge faux pas. An engagement would likely be broken very quickly.

1. I’m not a Protestant
2. I was assuming the modern lifestyle choices of most people where independent woman and man pretend to be married for ten years before they actually get around to “making it official”
3. I seriously doubt you’ll find more than five or six Protestant parishes where Biblical marriage is actually taught. Most of them play at it but end up being like the good women here and pretending “submit” means “co-equal feminism”.

 

[NonTimendum]

Why don’t you enlighten us further on what it means for a husband to live his wife as “Christ loved the Church”?

How about first you answer my question, and then apologize for lying about what I said?

 

[Sarcelle]

And in what context did I say that and what caveat in parenthesis did I add after for even further clarification?

Classic deflection, whenever a person brings up wifely submission the immediate reactions are usually to bring up abuse in an attempt to poison the well and regain ground without having to actually argue the point. No reasonable reading of my comment could possibly place me in the position of defending physical or “emotional” abuse. But since I didn’t add seventeen thousand caveats and beg apologies I left myself open to the straw-man.

So I’ll ask you: does the husband have the duty to love his wife as “Christ loves the Church” or is that negotiable too?

You did mention that wives did not have authority to determine what is abuse.

What do you mean by this exactly?

 

[Sarcelle]

How about first you answer my question, and then apologize for lying about what I said?

What was the lie I said?

 

[NonTimendum]

You did mention that wives did not have authority to determine what is abuse.

What do you mean by this exactly?

In what context did I say it and what caveat in parenthesis did I add after I said it?

You keep leaving that part out because you already know the answer to the question you’re asking, which means the answer isn’t what is important, but the question itself. The question serves as a shaming tactic where a choice portion of a quote is first taken out of context, and then further abandoned to where you don’t even both quoting it, but instead just use the editorialized version of it. Now any observer will think I’m stuck trying to defend “slapping (women) around” and you get the cover you need to move the ball out of the court where you’ll lose (biblical teaching and tradition) and into the only court where you can win: gaslighting and shaming.

Which is a textbook case of bearing false witness on your part. I don’t think its intentional, per se, but just a learned behavior that has become instinct.

 

[Sarcelle]

In what context did I say it and what caveat in parenthesis did I add after I said it?

You keep leaving that part out because you already know the answer to the question you’re asking, which means the answer isn’t what is important, but the question itself. The question serves as a shaming tactic where a choice portion of a quote is first taken out of context, and then further abandoned to where you don’t even both quoting it, but instead just use the editorialized version of it. Now any observer will think I’m stuck trying to defend “slapping (women) around” and you get the cover you need to move the ball out of the court where you’ll lose (biblical teaching and tradition) and into the only court where you can win: gaslighting and shaming.

Which is a textbook case of bearing false witness on your part. I don’t think its intentional, per se, but just a learned behavior that has become instinct.

Sigh.

Believe it or not, I am actually on board with women submitting to the spiritual authority of their husbands.

What took me aback, was the assertion you said about wives not being given the authority to determine what is abuse or not.

I did not mean to cast you in the light of defending abuse and so I apologize for that.

Again it is not intentional on my part.

So in the interest of ending out the Lord’s Day on a good note, I offer you the white flag along with an apology.

 

[NonTimendum]

Sigh.

Believe it or not, I am actually on board with women submitting to the spiritual authority of their husbands.

What took me aback, was the assertion you said about wives not being given the authority to determine what is abuse or not.

I did not mean to cast you in the light of defending abuse and so I apologize for that.

Again it is not intentional on my part.

So in the interest of ending out the Lord’s Day on a good note, I offer you the white flag along with an apology.

I’m sorry for being rude too.

I meant that the wife doesn’t have the authority to determine when he is abusing his authority, not abusing her. Ans I aaid within reason. If his abuse OF AUTHORITY is egregious, then she obviously can tell that this is out of bounds and not just her pride speaking. The husband has no authority to abuse his wife so abuse of that type is not an abuse of authority but just straight up inexcusable abuse.

 

[on_the_hill]

I’ve never been emasculated by a woman disagreeing with me in public.

Tell me, does it hurt much?

After the emasculation, Is one expected to learn to cook and knit? I’ve never knitted before. I hope it’s not hard to learn how.

My wife didn’t vote for Trump. Am I in a state of mortal sin for not having enough command of her to compel her to vote for him? Whose sin is worse? Mine or hers? Can I ever regain leadership over her or is it lost forever?

Can it be cured by taking one of those red pills?

 

[NonTimendum]

I’ve never been emasculated by a woman disagreeing with me in public.

Tell me, does it hurt much?

Okay? And I don’t know, I think it would depend on the nature of the disagreement and the way it was expressed.

After the emasculation, Is one expected to learn to cook and knit? I’ve never knitted before. I hope it’s not hard to learn how.

Do whatever you want, man. I’m already said every man has his own limits and preferences. Not my business how you and your wife live your life, that’s kind of my whole point actually. It is not the public’s business to be playing referee between a husband and his wife. So if there is a disagreement they should settle it in private and in public it would be best in most cases for the wife to defer to her husband. If thats not how you roll than you do you.

My wife didn’t vote for Trump. Am I in a state of mortal sin for not having enough command of her to compel her to vote for him? Whose sin is worse? Mine or hers? Can I ever regain leadership over her or is it lost forever?

Can it be cured by taking one of those red pills?

Well see I’m not interested in trying to prove my manhood by emasculating other men so you’ll notice (if you care to be honest) that I have not a single time made the statement or implied that men who don’t do things my way are less for it or that they aren’t real men or they are whipped or anything like that. I don’t care who your wife voted for and I’m not sure why you feel I need to be told anything at all about your wife. None of my business.

 

[Zzyzx_Road]

I’ve never been emasculated by a woman disagreeing with me in public.

Tell me, does it hurt much?

I take it you’ve never been with a woman who unleashed her temper on you in public and it got so bad you had someone coming up to you and telling you “to get her under control”. It is dang near impossible for the target to shake it off. I know I couldn’t. Ok, that is exceptional, not an everyday occurrence, but I have seen it happen, such women do exist and I pray that I don’t marry one of them.

My parents practiced public and private faces. I thought it was hypocritical growing up, but later I came to understand it, embrace it and model it in my own relationships. I want my disagreements and arguments in private, not in public. I’ve come to understand over the years that civility in public is a good thing while at the same time I understand it means that things are not necessarily going well for people we know casually. That unless one knows a couple very well, it’s best not to assume anything.

 

[Xantippe]

Why don’t you enlighten us further on what it means for a husband to live his wife as “Christ loved the Church”?

I have to say, I haven’t seen a lot of sinless men crucified for their wife’s sake.

I sometimes wonder if the whole “lay down your life” for your wife stuff isn’t the wrong place to start, when a lot of guys struggle with laying down the remote control, joystick, phone, or mouse. It’s easy to think, sure I’d lay down my life for my wife when that’s not what’s currently asked for or needed. I’ve even seen some people (for example Red Pill Christian guys online) whose idea of “laying down” their lives is making sure to boss their wives around and keep them on a tight leash. (Fortunately, that’s a minority view.)

Not that women are perfect, but that it’s often the little things where guys fail–poor hygiene, ignoring children, dawdling about home responsibilities, financial carelessness, etc.

I do know a lot of good Christian guys, but I don’t think that it’s obvious that they “lay down” their lives any more than their wives do.

In fact, as I’ve pointed out before, “laying down your life for” and submitting are essentially the same thing.

 

[Xantippe]

I’ve never been emasculated by a woman disagreeing with me in public.

Tell me, does it hurt much?

After the emasculation, Is one expected to learn to cook and knit? I’ve never knitted before. I hope it’s not hard to learn how.

My wife didn’t vote for Trump. Am I in a state of mortal sin for not having enough command of her to compel her to vote for him? Whose sin is worse? Mine or hers? Can I ever regain leadership over her or is it lost forever?

Can it be cured by taking one of those red pills?

I believe purple pills are more helpful.

 

[NonTimendum]

@Xiantippe

“Lay down your life” obviously means a lot more than just dying for your wife…