Women/Wives

[jmjZelie]

I thought Roseanne was a sweet and touching show. I hated it as a kid, I think because I confused Roseanne Barr with Rosie O’Donnel. A couple of years ago hubby and I were stuck at home with whooping cough and we binged a couple of seasons and I really enjoyed it.

But I never thought she “ruled the roost” and that he rolled over and played dead 98% of the time to “earn the right to be manly” every two years. I actually cringe at the thought any husband acting that way. I saw them as blue collar couple who were very much a team in getting through poverty in their own quirky way. Yeah, she made most daily household decisions. She also did most of the cooking and cleaning - so what was she going to do, run those things by Dan?

He was consistently a strong husband and father who did often put his foot down, protect his family, and keep everyone in line. He also encouraged his wife to be the best she could be. And he took pride in it. He’s kind of the archetype of the small town, old school, Midwestern guys I have experience with. There’s a reason that obese, curly haired John Goodman was something of an everyman sex symbol in the 90’s.

I am probably a bad person to ask about that show then, because all I can remember is that Roseanne Barr has a serious potty mouth and that I hated the show as a kid. I never watched it as an adult. I liked her costar, though, and enjoyed several of his films. Oh, and I saw Roseanne in that film, Shedevil, and I could never see her in anything else after that without recalling that horrible witch. So my objection had more to do with personal distaste for the actress and her other roles and her standup comedy. Plus, there was a whole lot of teen rebellion happening in that show, if I recall correctly. So just a lot of “very bad things” to a child’s perspective.

Oh and I am from the Midwest and my dad looked like John Goodman, so…eeew.

I like your description of the show much more than I liked the show itself.

 

[jmjZelie]

yes, that fits the we agree, than later disagree lol.

I agree with the Sarcelle who wrote #234

 

[Xantippe]

I shall use an example to hopefully my version of submission.

With my ex gf she was the first to deny a request. Despite being overall “submissive” she was not desiring to listen to me. In response according to what you think is “strong submission” I should have ordered her to do it (not sure how that would have gone lol) But I did not make any kind of demand of it, I expressed my mild displeasure and left her to her individual rights.

Now this was in the context of something fleeting in the sense that we could procede with life without it. But this context is to show how expecting submission doesn’t equate to “orders”. Now when we come to major life decisions I will admit it gets trickier, but the reality is someone HAS to submit in that sense eventually.

People can give all of the two people can agree stuff all they want, but at some point you have two options, stop being married, or someone yields. In most cases I would say to defer to the man IF said decision is at the point of no option other than divorce or yield and ONLY IF said decision is within all moral parameters. That differment at that point is the difference between what God wants and what secularist should call divorce time. Because without God at that point there is no differment and only divorce.

SO basically the only time the wife truly submits in giving up her “will” would be to literally save the marriage IF what she is submitting to is morally good.

How I see any submission with the exception of the above. Is Christ is head to me and I go to mass on Sundays while he was tortured and killed. A bit of a difference huh? The man can not expect a submissive wife if he is not willing to do for her. as I said with the ex gf she was submissive yet she always got what she wanted complex huh?

I can say with her while it is funny since she is the ex gf, and much was a bit of an act playing at proper. The best part was MY ability to lead in something Christlike. MY ability to serve her. And despite the heartache, having gotten to taste something as sweet as what a realationship looks like biblically and it tasted so sweet nothing can compare to it except to experience it again. To be able to give yourself to someone completely (or as much as imperfect humanity will allow) is beyond amazing.

Just a note: I get really queasy at the idea of “submissive” girlfriends.

I have a feeling that being a “submissive” girlfriend would tend to go hand in hand with having an inappropriately sexual relationship. I really, really don’t want my daughters being “submissive” with future boyfriends. EWWWW.

If it’s a make-or-break life-and-death decision and there’s an impasse, I feel like a third party ought to be called in as a tie-breaker. If it’s that important, it’s worth getting right.

It is true, though, that a lot of things that initially look important really aren’t. But that’s where I would suggest just back burnering it for a while and see if it doesn’t look different in a day or two or a week. There are few decisions of the sort that provoke major marital disagreement that have to be resolved NOW. Most things can wait. Plus, better ideas pop up if you give them time to sprout.

I seriously suggest you talk to a therapist or priest about your relationship histories. I see a lot of red flags in the situations you describe.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I don’t feel like there’s a lot of disagreement on the basic principles being espoused on this thread.

It seems like, while insensitive to the potential for abuse, LM is saying that in an ideal world things would go smoothly if a submissive wife and a leading husband did everything perfectly. But if things aren’t ideal, women shouldn’t be pressured to tolerate abuse or demands for sinful or damaging things. He’s also said that women should be treated equally by civic and social institutions.

Everyone else seems to be saying that things go wrong with that all the time and there need to be very sound protections and the freedom to have a more egalitarian situation if it’s shown to be needed.

LM is saying that although that’s true, it doesn’t change the ideal.

If all of this is the case, then pretty much everyone agrees. If I misrepresented anything, let me know. But it really looks like everyone is getting caught up in inflammatory tangents.

LM is arguing what should be while everyone else is debating what is. Wires are crossed.

And LM, I do believe you have the best intentions, but your ideas just don’t come across very clearly and I think you say things in a more harsh or exaggerated way than you mean to. Like the Dan and Roseanne example.

Now can everyone please start being nicer and stay on topic so this thread isn’t closed???

 

[LethalMouse]

Just a note: I get really queasy at the idea of “submissive” girlfriends.

I have a feeling that being a “submissive” girlfriend would tend to go hand in hand with having an inappropriately sexual relationship. I really, really don’t want my daughters being “submissive” with future boyfriends. EWWWW.

If it’s a make-or-break life-and-death decision and there’s an impasse, I feel like a third party ought to be called in as a tie-breaker. If it’s that important, it’s worth getting right.

It is true, though, that a lot of things that initially look important really aren’t. But that’s where I would suggest just back burnering it for a while and see if it doesn’t look different in a day or two or a week. There are few decisions of the sort that provoke major marital disagreement that have to be resolved NOW. Most things can wait. Plus, better ideas pop up if you give them time to sprout.

I seriously suggest you talk to a therapist or priest about your relationship histories. I see a lot of red flags in the situations you describe.

The problem is I see the flags too, I am just prone to chemicals and hormones.

A few years ago I sat with a priest and had a long talk, I stopped going to Church for a long time after that. He didn’t tell me anything I didn’t already know, or anything I wouldn’t have said to someone myself.

I am a divorced guy with a kid, I have the personality of the boondock saints as I mentioned. I attract a certain type of woman. They are really pretty…but even when they seem to have a soul, they don’t really. I try some CatholicMatch and such but I get the whole “divorced, kid” rejection… so yeah.

 

[Xantippe]

Then it seems we are still in agreement, even though I objected to a couple of your examples as being not relevant. Thank you for clarifying.

I have visited To Love, Honor, and Vacuum several times before, so even though I couldn’t find any specific link in this thread (I probably just overlooked it), I am familiar with her perspective. With the exception of some of her stuff on married sexual ethics, which if I recall allows for sexual behavior and family planning choices that are against Catholic teachings, I have appreciated much of what she has to say. Although I find it best to read her in small doses, because so many of the people who reach out to her for advice, which therefore impact the types of blog posts she puts up, are seriously broken and hurting. It can give a reader a rather dim view of marriage very quickly. I don’t know how she is able to stay so upbeat with the type of correspondence she receives!

I’m glad you like her! I love her daughter’s videos.

Here’s the blog post I especially liked:

tolovehonorandvacuum.com/2015/05/on-submission-wedding-showers-and-choosing-a-mate/

Some quotes:

"There’s an intellectual problem with the idea: we are to submit to our husbands, EXCEPT in cases of abuse and alcoholism and weird sex stuff. Either the Bible is true or it’s not.

"Except that we know that women aren’t supposed to go along with sin.

"So how do we reconcile it?

“I think the problem is that we define submission wrong. We define submission as in going along with someone’s WILL. Letting him make the decisions, and following him in that. But that makes no sense as the definition of submission because of the verse immediately before, in Ephesians 5:21: Submit to one another. How can we all be letting someone else make the decisions? Then no one would make decisions!”

“Maybe submission is about something else. Maybe submission means that we consider other’s welfare before our own. If that’s the case, then we DO always submit–even in cases of alcoholism or adultery or abuse.”

 

[LethalMouse]

I don’t feel like there’s a lot of disagreement on the basic principles being espoused on this thread.

It seems like, while insensitive to the potential for abuse, LM is saying that in an ideal world things would go smoothly if a submissive wife and a leading husband did everything perfectly. But if things aren’t ideal, women shouldn’t be pressured to tolerate abuse or demands for sinful or damaging things. He’s also said that women should be treated equally by civic and social institutions.

Everyone else seems to be saying that things go wrong with that all the time and there need to be very sound protections and the freedom to have a more egalitarian situation if it’s shown to be needed.

LM is saying that although that’s true, it doesn’t change the ideal.

If all of this is the case, then pretty much everyone agrees. If I misrepresented anything, let me know. But it really looks like everyone is getting caught up in inflammatory tangents.

LM is arguing what should be while everyone is wise debating what is. Wires are crossed.

And LM, I do believe you have the best intentions, but your ideas just don’t come across very clearly and I think you say things in a more harsh or exaggerated way than you mean to. Like the Dan and Roseanne example.

Now can everyone please start being nicer and stay on topic so this thread isn’t closed???

As a divorced guy I hate courts and lawyers with the exception of my lawyer and YOU

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I am probably a bad person to ask about that show then, because all I can remember is that Roseanne Barr has a serious potty mouth and that I hated the show as a kid. I never watched it as an adult. I liked her costar, though, and enjoyed several of his films. Oh, and I saw Roseanne in that film, Shedevil, and I could never see her in anything else after that without recalling that horrible witch. So my objection had more to do with personal distaste for the actress and her other roles and her standup comedy. Plus, there was a whole lot of teen rebellion happening in that show, if I recall correctly. So just a lot of “very bad things” to a child’s perspective.

Oh and I am from the Midwest and my dad looked like John Goodman, so…eeew.

I like your description of the show much more than I liked the show itself.

She did speak abrasively, I’ll give you that. But…so do I.

It really bothered me as a kid. I think the things the teenagers were dealing with and the honest, if unglamorous relationship between the parents was just too much. As an adult, I see a lot of my own family of origin in it and I appreciate the honest but very sweet relationship between the parents, and the parents and kids. The show should have been called ‘Doing the Best You Can With What You Have’. I’d recommend giving it another shot.

Actually, I found ‘King of the Hill’ very disturbing as a kid too. The show is really written for people who relate to the adults and as a kid I was just troubled by the whole thing. My husband made me watch it again a year or so ago and I loved it. It’s another one of those painfully unsexy but very sweet and endearing family shows.

 

[Xantippe]

I pose a question, have you even done something pure leap pf faith out of love?
(within the confines of a clearly moral situation)
Have you ever trusted anyone enough to go along with them without question?

Some have mentioned they have no relationships like this, marital or otherwise. I made a previous post (obviously ignored by some) about how mutual respectful submission can take place in friendships. and that truly only pity can be felt for someone who has not experienced such a thing.

1. Yeah, I married my husband when we were both graduate students, didn’t use birth control, have done NFP throughout our marriage, and have been pregnant four times, the last time with lots of complications. I had my youngest at 37 after years of dealing with my autistic oldest child as well as a late miscarriage. That’s nearly 18 years of leaps of faith.
2. If my husband said, “Leave the house right now!” I would assume there was an emergency and leave immediately, but in non-emergency cases, that just isn’t necessary or desirable. Good, sensible people don’t expect instant compliance from other good, sensible people in non-emergency situations. I like to be told what’s going on.

 

[Xantippe]

Yes. Such is the nature of CAF. Especially the Family Life forum. It does get rather lively around here at times.

It seems then, based on some of your latest responses, that we do not perhaps disagree in theory about the goodness of the Church’s teachings on spousal relationships, but we definitely express ourselves differently. I tend to be as precise and exacting as possible, both in online communication and in my day-to-day life. I do tend to be rather exasperating to my friends and family who are more lax in their communication style. However, I still say that telling someone they misunderstand love is not as helpful as simply asking them how they understand love.

Right.

 

[jmjZelie]

The problem is I see the flags too, I am just prone to chemicals and hormones.

A few years ago I sat with a priest and had a long talk, I stopped going to Church for a long time after that. He didn’t tell me anything I didn’t already know, or anything I wouldn’t have said to someone myself.

I am a divorced guy with a kid, I have the personality of the boondock saints as I mentioned. I attract a certain type of woman. They are really pretty…but even when they seem to have a soul, they don’t really. I try some CatholicMatch and such but I get the whole “divorced, kid” rejection… so yeah.

You remind me of my brother quite a lot. That is a good thing btw. One of his favorite movies is Boondock Saints (I have never seen it yet) and he has quite the potty mouth, though he restrains himself for my sake. He is an idealist, but has had a very hard time finding a stable relationship. He is divorced. She cheated on him and left him and he tried so hard to save the marriage. No children though. Anyway, I think you would like him. The way you express yourself is a lot like his way.

 

[jmjZelie]

I’m glad you like her! I love her daughter’s videos.

Here’s the blog post I especially liked:

tolovehonorandvacuum.com/2015/05/on-submission-wedding-showers-and-choosing-a-mate/

Some quotes:

"There’s an intellectual problem with the idea: we are to submit to our husbands, EXCEPT in cases of abuse and alcoholism and weird sex stuff. Either the Bible is true or it’s not.

"Except that we know that women aren’t supposed to go along with sin.

"So how do we reconcile it?

“I think the problem is that we define submission wrong. We define submission as in going along with someone’s WILL. Letting him make the decisions, and following him in that. But that makes no sense as the definition of submission because of the verse immediately before, in Ephesians 5:21: Submit to one another. How can we all be letting someone else make the decisions? Then no one would make decisions!”

“Maybe submission is about something else. Maybe submission means that we consider other’s welfare before our own. If that’s the case, then we DO always submit–even in cases of alcoholism or adultery or abuse.”

Oh right! Absolutely spot on. Thanks for reminding me.

 

[jmjZelie]

She did speak abrasively, I’ll give you that. But…so do I.

It really bothered me as a kid. I think the things the teenagers were dealing with and the honest, if unglamorous relationship between the parents was just too much. As an adult, I see a lot of my own family of origin in it and I appreciate the honest but very sweet relationship between the parents, and the parents and kids. The show should have been called ‘Doing the Best You Can With What You Have’. I’d recommend giving it another shot.

Actually, I found ‘King of the Hill’ very disturbing as a kid too. The show is really written for people who relate to the adults and as a kid I was just troubled by the whole thing. My husband made me watch it again a year or so ago and I loved it. It’s another one of those painfully unsexy but very sweet and endearing family shows.

After our earlier exchange, I mentioned your description to my husband. He liked the show somewhat as a kid, but also never watched it in adulthood. Now we are both intrigued and are thinking we might go back and watch some of it if we can get it on Netflix.

 

[Xantippe]

The problem is I see the flags too, I am just prone to chemicals and hormones.

A few years ago I sat with a priest and had a long talk, I stopped going to Church for a long time after that. He didn’t tell me anything I didn’t already know, or anything I wouldn’t have said to someone myself.

I am a divorced guy with a kid, I have the personality of the boondock saints as I mentioned.** I attract a certain type of woman.** They are really pretty…but even when they seem to have a soul, they don’t really. I try some CatholicMatch and such but I get the whole “divorced, kid” rejection… so yeah.

I bet you do.

It sounds like you attract high drama women because you’re a high drama guy.

I don’t have to tell you that for long term happiness, that’s a very serious problem.

 

[LethalMouse]

I bet you do.

It sounds like you attract high drama women because you’re a high drama guy.

I don’t have to tell you that for long term happiness, that’s a very serious problem.

Thanks! Love you too

 

[Xantippe]

By the way, I’d like to bring up a quote that’s been floating around the internet recently:

“Submission is ducking so that God can hit your husband.”

I really dislike that one. Wow, lady–wouldn’t it be more loving to protect your husband from being hit?

 

[LethalMouse]

By the way, I’d like to bring up a quote that’s been floating around the internet recently:

“Submission is ducking so that God can hit your husband.”

I really dislike that one. Wow, lady–wouldn’t it be more loving to protect your husband from being hit?

I feel your quote epitomizes a larger sentiment that is permeated by the secular world and why we have much debates on things like this topic.

When men and a minority of women hear “modern” thinking what we hear is this quote, or actually that the wife will push the husband into harm, not just duck. Because, it feels impossible in our society to turn your head without seeing that narrative.

Years ago when I saw something on TV I assumed it was just a story someone came up with. I found it odd when I heard someone complain.

Later as the information age expands, one comes to realize that every interview with a movie maker involves them mentioning putting in much effort to be an activist. There isn’t a gay couple on every show now because writers “happened” to come up with it, they stopped and figured out how to work one in to make a statement and “normalize” things in their view to affect society.

Same is true for the genders, so many movie makers interviews involving making men and women a certain way to fix the injustices of the past. BUT how does it play out?

Well if I knew only of men/women from TV and movies I would know that men are either:

1. Raging evil psychopaths
2. Stupid, inept, and utterly useless
   (actually I would probably want to be a trans if I only knew TV men)

Oh and am interesting thing, my son who is SEVEN, only seven, had a question for me…I didn’t even know how to answer.

“Daddy, why is everything for girls? like shows and toys and they barely show the boys.”

And I have realized that now I can’t barely think of one kids show available to him that isn’t female centric, and generally most of the kids shows have a girl being highly skilled at “male” things and beating all the boys. (I didn’t notice this until my 7 yr old expressed his irritation)

So 7 year old has realized something, perhaps there is really a pattern?

 

[pensmama87]

I feel your quote epitomizes a larger sentiment that is permeated by the secular world and why we have much debates on things like this topic.

When men and a minority of women hear “modern” thinking what we hear is this quote, or actually that the wife will push the husband into harm, not just duck. Because, it feels impossible in our society to turn your head without seeing that narrative.

Years ago when I saw something on TV I assumed it was just a story someone came up with. I found it odd when I heard someone complain.

Later as the information age expands, one comes to realize that every interview with a movie maker involves them mentioning putting in much effort to be an activist. There isn’t a gay couple on every show now because writers “happened” to come up with it, they stopped and figured out how to work one in to make a statement and “normalize” things in their view to affect society.

Same is true for the genders, so many movie makers interviews involving making men and women a certain way to fix the injustices of the past. BUT how does it play out?

Well if I knew only of men/women from TV and movies I would know that men are either:

1. Raging evil psychopaths
2. Stupid, inept, and utterly useless
   (actually I would probably want to be a trans if I only knew TV men)

Oh and am interesting thing, my son who is SEVEN, only seven, had a question for me…I didn’t even know how to answer.

**“Daddy, why is everything for girls? like shows and toys and they barely show the boys.” **

And I have realized that now I can’t barely think of one kids show available to him that isn’t female centric, and generally most of the kids shows have a girl being highly skilled at “male” things and beating all the boys. (I didn’t notice this until my 7 yr old expressed his irritation)

So 7 year old has realized something, perhaps there is really a pattern?

Maybe it’s just because I have boys, but honestly, this is not my experience at all. I have no idea what girls are into these days and I’d be stumped if you asked me. I’m surrounded by boy stuff. There is boy stuff a-plenty (and also a lot of neutral stuff that is quite good at least for the preschool set.)

Then again, for my sanity I turned on a “princess movie” (Sleeping Beauty) for my boys once and they absolutely loved it. And now they re-enact Prince Philip slaying the dragon.

I do have (some) concerns about books for boys, however. I was a voracious reader as a child and most of the books I really remember loving were definitely geared toward girls. Thankfully, my husband was also a reader and he read different things, so we should be okay. I know that in an effort to get more kids reading, there’s a lot of really vapid stuff out there, and I’d prefer to avoid that just like I prefer to avoid mindless TV.

I do agree that there is a crisis of masculinity in Western culture today, and that it’s very hard to be a boy. However, I do not think you have to ignore the ills that feminism (at least in the early days) was trying to correct to see it, and we don’t have to roll back the valid strides that were made culturally. The best thing for the masculinity crisis in boys is strong male role models. We don’t have to beat women down to lift men up, and shouldn’t, because that masculinity is false.

 

[LethalMouse]

… I’d prefer to avoid that just like I prefer to avoid mindless TV.

… We don’t have to beat women down to lift men up, and shouldn’t, because that masculinity is false.

1. It is hard for people who avoid modern culture to weigh in fairly (though I mostly agree with you, so I am speaking more in general). If you avoid much media, than obviously you wouldn’t see as many issues with it.
2. That is so true, and often my issues with talking to people on any such subject is what I feel is the one sided view. Hence during the more argumentative posts I pointed out how there seemed to be a negation of one bad by another. We have to acknowledge all bads and apply all goods to everything has been my theme. Lift all up at once, not just one or the other, or one at a time.

 

[LethalMouse]

Then again, for my sanity I turned on a “princess movie” (Sleeping Beauty) for my boys once and they absolutely loved it. And now they re-enact Prince Philip slaying the dragon.

OH cool idea if they are into slaying dragons, I just ordered some Alligator meat (doing a dragon feast for St. George feast day) So if they are all about dragons get some alligator