Wife won't let husband be spritual leader of house?

[Bannan]

That has nothing to do with the question of whether it is spiritually healthy for a husband to be preoccupied with submission.

I get the impression you think I’m preoccupied

I could try and get you to believe that I, personally, am not overly concerned with submission. But I won’t.

To add to this, I think your right! Especially if the preoccupation with submission is one-sided.

 

[pensmama87]

I’ve avoided responding to this thread, but now I can’t help myself. I got too emotional, I suppose.

Bannan, you are digging yourself an enormous hole. I find myself really irritated with your posts, and you are not doing your side any favors by telling the women who have responded on this thread to “calm down,” as you just did to petitfleur, among the other pseudo-psychoanalysis you’ve done on the other female posters and their supposed failures in their marriages (which you’d need a heck of a lot more info to actually gauge fairly.)

Basically, despite all your protestations to the contrary, you’re doing a bang-up job of reminding me why I’m so suspicious of this utter fascination with male headship that pops up occasionally on this forum and elsewhere in Christian Internet land. Men who are good leaders, lead. They don’t insist that everybody at all times know what their place is, and unfortunately that seems to be all that I (and several other posters) are getting from you.

I suggest to you that it might be you who is having the communication problem, and that you might falsely be projecting onto us, rather than (as you say) that we are projecting onto you.

 

[jlc2k2]

Anyone who talks about wifely submission does a dis-service to all women at large, is a misogynist, and causes all women to believe they’ve no right to speak in public, or in private for that matter. Women are so weak, they even believe it!

You judge all women as weak based on this topic and you wonder why you might be mistaken for a misogynist?

 

[petitfleur]

petitfleur, I can see you are frustrated, please calm down. I should clarify some things about how I feel, and I don’t want you to be in a state of anger especially.

I do not think feminism is bad, though bad feminism is extreme feminism.

There’s a difference between a woman giving her husband a free pass when he domineers her, and giving in to his demands when she agreed with them. In my mind, a “free-pass” meant to sacrifice without actually second-guessing it.

I’m sorry for the confusion, but this was in response to Xantippe who had painted “all” men as the culprits, and so it was an honest mistake.

All women I know are beautiful creatures who’s minds I won’t pretend to fathom, but your reading my response to Xantippe. I didn’t mean to say that all women were self centered, or never gave anything to their husbands, not even close.

Most especially, I was not pretending to know the dynamics of your marriage, what I’ve been giving lately were negative examples. Those examples were simply demonstrations of how a marriage can go awry when we ignore the dynamics between a man and a woman.

I’m not saying that you you have ignored those dynamics in your marriages, what I’m saying is that you’ve ignored them on this forum. Big difference.

I am not even slightly frusterated or perturbed in any way. I am way more amused than I should be. I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. You keep talking in circles and back pedaling. If anybody makes a point you can’t logicaly respond to you make statements like it’s just a simple misunderstanding on our part, and you did not mean what you very clearly stated. There is actually a name for that behavior. It is called ‘gaslighting’ and it is a real term. When people say things like ‘all women are…’ It’s like saying all black people…I never thought you were a mysoginist until recently. I thought we were just arguing semantics. i never really believed I would change the way you think. I am very comfortable with my views and don’t take disagreements personally.
I stand firmly by my original point being that if anyone feels the other persons lack of submission is the problem, then there are other problems. No healthy people have lengthy discussions on this, because they don’t need to. I also did purposely use a broad generalization here.

 

[Bannan]

You judge all women as weak based on this topic and you wonder why you might be mistaken for a misogynist?

I was restating something Xantippe said to show how absurd it was. Please read more carefully next time.

 

[Bannan]

I am not even slightly frusterated or perturbed in any way. I am way more amused than I should be. I am genuinely enjoying this conversation. You keep talking in circles and back pedaling. If anybody makes a point you can’t logicaly respond to you make statements like it’s just a simple misunderstanding on our part, and you did not mean what you very clearly stated. There is actually a name for that behavior. It is called ‘gaslighting’ and it is a real term. When people say things like ‘all women are…’ It’s like saying all black people…I never thought you were a mysoginist until recently. I thought we were just arguing semantics. i never really believed I would change the way you think. I am very comfortable with my views and don’t take disagreements personally.
I stand firmly by my original point being that if anyone feels the other persons lack of submission is the problem, then there are other problems. No healthy people have lengthy discussions on this, because they don’t need to. I also did purposely use a broad generalization here.

The generalization of all women came from Xantippe, not me. You are currently having a lengthy conversation on this :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:. Thank you for clarifying your emotional state, I sincerely wouldn’t want to be the cause of another’s anger and I was honestly worried about having offended you personally. I’m curious now, where have I back pedaled?

 

[Xantippe]

Men who are good leaders, lead.

Yes.

 

[Xantippe]

I’m sorry for the confusion, but this was in response to Xantippe who had painted “all” men as the culprits, and so it was an honest mistake.

**Nope. I don’t think all men are invariably abusive, but I think that there are definitely near occasions of sin for abuse and that even good men can wind up hurting their wives if they aren’t careful.

One issue that comes to mind is that if a husband is the sole breadwinner in a family, he is going to have a lot of leverage over his wife just by virtue of the fact that she is his economic dependent, even if he doesn’t remember that fact or explicitly hold it over her head. I think that in that case in the case of a SAHM, a husband ought to be particularly careful to be respectful, to treat her like a partner, and not to make her feel like a child or to do stuff like buying himself expensive treats while leaving her and the rest of the family to struggle financially.
**

 

[Xantippe]

The generalization of all women came from Xantippe, not me.

Nope. I didn’t say that. I probably said something along the lines that an excessive emphasis on submission hurts women.

 

[Bannan]

I’m curious now, where have I back pedaled?

Cancel that, I’d rather not even take the time.

 

[Bannan]

People want wives to submit more and more and more and more (and there’s no end to what is asked of women), but the need to love a wife and to care for her as if she were yourself, and to give up your life for your wife is a considerably less popular topic.

Here is where you generalized men Xantippe. I merely turned the tables and generalized women back to you. Just because you said people when you meant men doesn’t make it any less of a generalization.

To continue the generalization…

When christian men hear that they must love their wives as they love themselves, they agree this is correct, and likely feel guilty for having failed in this endeavor. When they hear they should sacrifice themselves for the family, no time is spent clarifying how or when.

When women hear they must submit to their husbands, they roll their eyes, cast judgement on the speaker, and insinuate an evil agenda is at play.

 

[petitfleur]

The generalization of all women came from Xantippe, not me. You are currently having a lengthy conversation on this :grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes:. Thank you for clarifying your emotional state, I sincerely wouldn’t want to be the cause of another’s anger and I was honestly worried about having offended you personally. I’m curious now, where have I back pedaled?

I was referring to the statement that “all women you know are beautiful, whose minds you cannot pretend to fathom” what does that mean? Women are all mysterious creatures? We are not from a different planet. We have the same DNA. Some women are good at math and science, others are good at more creative things. Some like the domestic arts, some can run successful businesses. There are women traders, and doctors, even police officers and firefighters! Women are as diverse as men.
I do appreciate you taking On the burden of explaining to the countless rebellious women here God’s will.

  I really wish people got this passionate about other parts of the bible like "The golden rule" or The Good Samaritan. How they live this out in their daily lives.

      Last question. Is English your second language?

 

[Xantippe]

  I really wish people got this passionate about other parts of the bible like "The golden rule" or The Good Samaritan. How they live this out in their daily lives.

I feel like “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” has some fairly obvious applications to the submission discussion.

It’s funny, we’ve got the entire Gospels at our fingertips, and it’s like they have no application at all to women.

 

[petitfleur]

Here is where you generalized men Xantippe. I merely turned the tables and generalized women back to you. Just because you said people when you meant men doesn’t make it any less of a generalization.

To continue the generalization…

When christian men hear that they must love their wives as they love themselves, they agree this is correct, and likely feel guilty for having failed in this endeavor. When they hear they should sacrifice themselves for the family, no time is spent clarifying how or when.

When women hear they must submit to their husbands, they roll their eyes, cast judgement on the speaker, and insinuate an evil agenda is at play.

All women do? Not true! Check out the Duggar women, Debi Pearl has written enthusiastically and extensively on the subject.

   Do you think marriages that are egalitarian are less Godly than a submissive marriage?

Do you think a woman who is actively submissive is more virtuous? If her husband insisted she signed tax papers where the husband was cheating what is worse not submitting to her husband or cheating on your taxes?

 

[Xantippe]

Here is where you generalized men Xantippe. I merely turned the tables and generalized women back to you. Just because you said people when you meant men doesn’t make it any less of a generalization.

To continue the generalization…

When christian men hear that they must love their wives as they love themselves, they agree this is correct, and likely feel guilty for having failed in this endeavor. When they hear they should sacrifice themselves for the family, no time is spent clarifying how or when.

When women hear they must submit to their husbands, they roll their eyes, cast judgement on the speaker, and insinuate an evil agenda is at play.

So, mothers are never told to sacrifice and do without for their families?

Really?

Really?

I think the thing that you’re missing is that in our theological neck of the woods women get both messages (sacrifice AND submit) whereas men only get at most the sacrifice message.

Plus, aside from the theological neighborhood, sacrifice is built-in to everyday motherhood in a way that it simply isn’t built-in to fatherhood. Among other things, people have much higher expectations for mothers than they do for fathers. When my husband has flown by himself with kids, he gets treated like some sort of rock star when he’s travelling–the expectations for fathers are genuinely very low. (That’s good news for you, by the way–as a guy it’s very easy to impress people with the fact that you are able to spend a whole day with your kids all by yourself.)

 

[petitfleur]

So, mothers are never told to sacrifice and do without for their families?

Really?

Really?

I think the thing that you’re missing is that in our theological neck of the woods women get both messages (sacrifice AND submit) whereas men only get at most the sacrifice message.

I particularly like how men feel guilty for falling short and women are just petulant eye rolling children. All of us. We don’t seem to have deep spiritual thoughts about the sanctity of marriage and God’s Will.

 

[Xantippe]

Yet another problem with submission even in theory is that it is well-established that a lot of men have trouble with intuiting the emotional state of the people they are around. (And I suspect this is particularly the case with men who favor submission in a big way.) On the one hand, they are going to be blind to the distress they are causing because they aren’t good at reading people. On the other hand, their wives believe that they must not speak up and complain about their pain or the children’s pain, because that would be being unsubmissive or “rebellious.” The wives may even think (maybe even incorrectly) that their husbands do know, but are just acting selfishly, because it might not even occur to them that their husbands simply cannot see how much pain they are causing. And yet there can’t possibly be any improvement until the wives speak up.

Again, see Deb and Michael Pearl’s honeymoon story:

patheos.com/blogs/nolongerquivering/2014/07/quoting-quiverfull-michael-and-debi-pearls-honeymoon/

She was meekly submitting to him, right through real bodily harm, and it took her literally collapsing from exhaustion before she finally spoke up and explained to him that he was driving her too hard.

The strong view of submission is maritally speaking, like being blindfolded or having one hand tied behind your back.

 

[jlc2k2]

I was restating something Xantippe said to show how absurd it was. Please read more carefully next time.

I have been following this thread pretty well. Perhaps you could be more clear next time as I don’t seem to be the only person misinterpreting what you are saying.

 

[jlc2k2]

Here is where you generalized men Xantippe. I merely turned the tables and generalized women back to you. Just because you said people when you meant men doesn’t make it any less of a generalization.

To continue the generalization…

When christian men hear that they must love their wives as they love themselves, they agree this is correct, and likely feel guilty for having failed in this endeavor. When they hear they should sacrifice themselves for the family, no time is spent clarifying how or when.

When women hear they must submit to their husbands, they roll their eyes, cast judgement on the speaker, and insinuate an evil agenda is at play.

This tit-for-tat, “you generalized so I’m going to generalize right back” argument style has not played out well in 14 pages of discussion. I don’t think it helps support either side and is obviously impeding communication. Perhaps a different argument style would help?

 

[Bannan]

You took my generalizations and ran away with them again. Surely you don’t think I believe all women roll their eyes every time a man says submit. I even started that with “to continue the generalization”, so don’t even try blaming me for misreading that! I was trying to show how offensive something Xantippe had said was to me personally, how absurd it was.

Instead of going down a comparison of how you speak vs how I speak. I’ll restate my original opinion.

Women should submit to the death, just as a man is expected to.

I think I’ve clarified (I could be wrong) how I feel this is far too high a bar for either a man or a woman to obtain, as we are fallible humans. I’ve stayed away from talking about how a husband should submit to the wife, because to you women, I feel, this will just come off sounding like I’m trying to defend my own integrity. I feel my integrity in this discussion is irrelevant, and so that’s why this seems so one sided. I think it can be safely one sided, because a woman’s submission is distinct from the mans. It isn’t dependent on it, its not a you trust me first kind of situation.

My point though is that in a perfect marriage, a woman submits with her whole being, in its entirety. It is total. She can safely do this because she does so to the perfect man who’s always got her well-being in his eye. The marriage is more beautiful this way, than when there is mistrust in a relationship. Even if the mistrust is necessary with us fallible humans.

When we understand what a perfect marriage is, we can better strive for it. We can be more prepared when we contemplate marriage with another individual.

An American bank teller, when they are starting out, is trained to recognize fake 100 dollar bills. The means by which they are trained is not to recognize the millions of ways that someone can create a fake. They study the authentic 100 dollar bill. This is exactly what I wish we did more with marriage.

I’m sorry I come off so annoying, I’m sorry I’ve agitated you all to no end. I’m not only passionate about a wife’s submission, I’m equally passionate about the husbands submission, and my faith as a whole. I chimed onto this thread at the start merely because I was bored, but I am now invested enough to see this conversation to fruition.