Women/Wives

[Xantippe]

Have you ever been part of a team or crew with a leader? Does the team or crew always follow as lemmings? Or do they have (name removed by moderator)ut?

Are said teams successful? I would wager the lemmings team would fail and the team that has (name removed by moderator)ut succeeds. I have a boss at work. I do my job making hundreds of decisions a day without his approval or involvment. I am still not the boss. My boss is bound by laws and union contract, he cannot tell me to do much that I dont already do.

A husband is less of a “boss” than my boss at work, he is more like the presiding leader of a round table of equals. He is bound by God, laws, hopefully a conscience on what he can be “in charge” of.

The best defense is a good offense. Women fear men will be a tyrant and as such become tyrants or demand the rights of a tyrant to protect themselves.
Men fear their women will demand to be a tyrant and as such attempt to be one to protect themselves. It is circular.

As I said in a previous post, stop thinking of leadership like Ceasar, and think of it like Jesus.

The greatest lesson I have learned in relationships is to not protect myself. Even if it fails… it was still better than when I was protected. Truly even when I suspected my ex of being up to no good I treated her 99% without any protection for myself (I am human I am not perfect when scared). When the relationship failed it hurt my heart in one sense, but there was a freeing in having acted right for a change. There was an amazing ability to not hate her after and to actually pray she find happiness rather than be excessively bitter and angry. It is truly freeing to give yourself to someone with as few reservations as our imperfect nature allows. But I also find giving ourselves to one on a human level is not possible until you can give yourself to trusting God more than fear. It was only with her that I had seen to drop many of my guards and trust in doing things God’s way in life in general… my life keeps getting better in so many ways.

1. I have been married a long time, you know. I also started out being zealously in favor of wifely submission, but without having put enough thought into exactly what that meant.

Also, I eventually realized that the Church’s teaching is more nuanced than I had initially thought (for instance in Casti Connubii).

1. The pragmatic benefit of having a more collaborative approach is that it means that a married couple together can be smarter and more effective than either one of them individually–one spouse’s strengths can cancel out the other’s weaknesses. That helps to explains why married couples are more prosperous than singles.

Dave Ramsey’s example of this was that as a young married man, he built a paper fortune on leveraged real estate with little to no (name removed by moderator)ut from his wife, who was disengaged from the business. Once that collapsed and they started getting hounded by collectors, sued for debts and went through bankruptcy and foreclosure, he and his wife started doing things differently. He started asking her (name removed by moderator)ut and taking it. They’ve done OK since then.

1. I notice that in your work examples, you imagine a group larger than two not being able to come to a decision…Two people can generally work things out much more easily.
2. If you don’t like your boss, you can quit. A temporary situation where everybody is free to leave at will is not a good analogy for a life-long relationship. Also, you don’t live with your boss and have sex with your boss (hopefully) and have to have Christmas dinner with your boss’s mom. And you get vacations from work, and maybe even maternity or medical leave. A bad marriage is much more intimately and unrelentingly horrible than a bad workplace.
3. A wife and a mother is a leader in the family if she is doing her job.

 

[pensmama87]

My biggest problem with humans is the need to be nuanced. No matter what point a person makes nor its validity, if they use even one word that the other person dislikes a human will nullify the entire point.

In a convo with a muslim friend we were discussing the similarities/differences of our religions and branches thereof. He was more interested in seeing us as different.
He luterally came to the conclusion that since we often use the word “works” and islam uses the term “deeds” that we believed in doing vastly different things… with the human mind capable of that it is nearly impossible to make a point without being nullified.

Are you not a human?

I am not nullifying your entire point, nor do I agree with your Muslim friend.

I just think it’s important to be clear, and that as people gain more experiences and knowledge most things will become grayer (though perhaps also more clear - a person may see “submission” as a big concept with an easy answer, when really the idea becomes more clear as you go along, but you apply it differently in smaller situations you didn’t know existed before.)

There’s a big difference between large black and white splotches in one’s vision and one being able to see sharp outlines of things. When most of us enter into marriage, we may have some idea what we are getting into, but it takes time to learn the particulars.

 

[Xantippe]

LethalMouse,

I read your JenniferFulwiler. I think you should read the article I posted earlier:

iprefercaptain.com/2014/07/15/

It’s a woman’s story of how badly a “strong” view of submission worked for her and her husband, how it hurt her, and how it hurt their marriage.

 

[LethalMouse]

1. I have been married a long time, you know. I also started out being zealously in favor of wifely submission, but without having put enough thought into exactly what that meant.

Also, I eventually realized that the Church’s teaching is more nuanced than I had initially thought (for instance in Casti Connubii).

1. The pragmatic benefit of having a more collaborative approach is that it means that a married couple together can be smarter and more effective than either one of them individually–one spouse’s strengths can cancel out the other’s weaknesses. That helps to explains why married couples are more prosperous than singles.

Dave Ramsey’s example of this was that as a young married man, he built a paper fortune on leveraged real estate with little to no (name removed by moderator)ut from his wife, who was disengaged from the business. Once that collapsed and they started getting hounded by collectors, sued for debts and went through bankruptcy and foreclosure, he and his wife started doing things differently. He started asking her (name removed by moderator)ut and taking it. They’ve done OK since then.

1. I notice that in your work examples, you imagine a group larger than two not being able to come to a decision…Two people can generally work things out much more easily.
2. If you don’t like your boss, you can quit. A temporary situation where everybody is free to leave at will is not a good analogy for a life-long relationship. Also, you don’t live with your boss and have sex with your boss (hopefully) and have to have Christmas dinner with your boss’s mom. And you get vacations from work, and maybe even maternity or medical leave. A bad marriage is much more intimately and unrelentingly horrible than a bad workplace.
3. A wife and a mother is a leader in the family if she is doing her job.

Since we are doing the nitpicking “nuance” thing (see my post on nuance above, funny you used that word) I will apply the principle to your example. In your example the wife was a lemming per my post. The lemming that I specifically stated was a failure and would not work nor is what is asked.

You employ my “boss” comparison but ignore my own debunking of the husband as a “boss”

Most importantly see EasterJoy’s post as it seems to me to be “nuanced” better than my explainatons, I try to make the same point in a more earthly way, but then in comes with earthly nuance…

Truly if you and your husband work together so well I would say you probably both submit to eachother as you should. Human pride allows you to refuse to accept “submission” as a word to describe it because you view the word as synonymous with slavery. If you truly submit to him and he to you you would have what appears to be the most collaborative team ever, but you would in reality both be in submission.

Perhaps I am a rarity and perhaps as the modern narrative holds, all men are really wife beating psychopaths?.. but when I am with a woman who submits to me I by default have to submit to her. It is an amazing thing to spend your time seeing the other person’s view without prejudice and to take your pride and have it washed away and be able to do something her way. We become more collaborative in truth.

The perverted version of this was a woman who I dated that would only be nice to me when I employed rather questionable dominion… I broke up with her because I had no interest in being forced to be a tyrant, and feared the day I didn’t value her opinion anymore… which was quite near. Though if I were seeking the wifely submission most woman think wifely submission is, she would have been great. For right or wrong if I stopped debating and issued an absolute “order” on the subject she would settle into doing what I said, and be nicer to me than if I was actually right and showed her something with facts and stuff. Any decent man worth marrying does not want this, I promise you.

 

[LethalMouse]

LethalMouse,

I read your JenniferFulwiler. I think you should read the article I posted earlier:

iprefercaptain.com/2014/07/15/

It’s a woman’s story of how badly a “strong” view of submission worked for her and her husband, how it hurt her, and how it hurt their marriage.

A strong view of slavery, not wifely submisson. And “letting someone lead” who was not leading. Ever see that meme on the internet

boss/leader

Biss is sitting on a block while his people pull it.

Leader is in the front of the line pulling the block.

She never let him “lead” she let him “boss” and that is from her side.

I had an ex gf who told me the horrors of her ex. She had no respect for him as he was not deservibg of his place as a leader or man.

My ex gf mother had 5 marriages and cheated on every husband multiple times.

My ex gf was up to 2 marriages… she wanted so desperately to be nothibg like her mother, but could not avoid it. She would always find an excuse of why a man was unworthy. Just as her mother always had an excuse to cheat.

Hard working man with money? I am lonely

Poor man who spends time with you? He isnt supporting me well enough

Isnt a tyrant? Foesnt have the leadership qualities of a real man

Is a tyrant? Doesn’t have a soft sensitive side

Human psychology is to the point where we can’t trust anyone’s account of anything lol.

 

[LethalMouse]

Are you not a human?

I am not nullifying your entire point, nor do I agree with your Muslim friend.

I just think it’s important to be clear, and that as people gain more experiences and knowledge most things will become grayer (though perhaps also more clear - a person may see “submission” as a big concept with an easy answer, when really the idea becomes more clear as you go along, but you apply it differently in smaller situations you didn’t know existed before.)

There’s a big difference between large black and white splotches in one’s vision and one being able to see sharp outlines of things. When most of us enter into marriage, we may have some idea what we are getting into, but it takes time to learn the particulars.

I did forget to answer your human question…

There are numerous scientific metrics that measure humans.in almost all of them I fall into a small category of loneliness… that is most things run 70% of people. There is a top 20% and a 10% that is inbetween the top and normal.

Interesting note via, IQ normal people cannot relate to mentally handicap people. There can be an only 10 point diff between “normal” and handicap. There is a 40 point segment of normal. Then a 10 point gap to above normal. It makes relating to people difficult. It may sound arrogant, but it is actually lonely. Imagine being in a room with 10 people including yourself, now 7 are mentally challenged and 2 are albert einstiens… have fun understanding them all and what makes them tick and being the only one who understands yourself.

 

[Bookcat]

“Wifely submission” is not a Catholic teaching. .

Huh?

See the Letters of Paul! and Peter!
and the rest of the Teachings of the Church on the matter…

It depends on the translation one is using of the Scriptures - some have “submit” others have “be subject”.

In any case one must understand properly what is meant…and what is not meant.

Oh and the husband is to sacrifice himself for the wife…to love her as Christ loved the Church!

 

[pensmama87]

I did forget to answer your human question…

There are numerous scientific metrics that measure humans.in almost all of them I fall into a small category of loneliness… that is most things run 70% of people. There is a top 20% and a 10% that is inbetween the top and normal.

Interesting note via, IQ normal people cannot relate to mentally handicap people. There can be an only 10 point diff between “normal” and handicap. There is a 40 point segment of normal. Then a 10 point gap to above normal. It makes relating to people difficult. It may sound arrogant, but it is actually lonely. Imagine being in a room with 10 people including yourself, now 7 are mentally challenged and 2 are albert einstiens… have fun understanding them all and what makes them tick and being the only one who understands yourself.

I am sympathetic to your plight of loneliness, but I don’t think this information is particularly pertinent. Even if you really are the smartest person on the thread, that doesn’t make you right and anyone who disagrees wrong - even if they would measure less intelligent than you on one of these metrics. I have young children, and while objectively I know a lot more than they do, they are quick to catch me when I’m wrong.

I notice you are a new poster. Many of the people who have been contributing to this thread have been around a while, and so even though we’ve never met face to face we do have a kind of rapport with each other, and know bits and pieces about each other’s lives (see Xantippe’s post to me about buying candy in bulk as an example). We’ve also seen so many threads about this. It gets hashed to death. And not infrequently a new poster comes on and is aghast that we don’t seem to know the simplest stuff. But we do. Even though it’s a new thread, it’s a continuing conversation - going back years.

I’ll also note that, even though you are saying (mostly about female experiences) that they are unreliable and not correct, then you say we should trust you and your sources. But we don’t know you from Adam, regardless of what you say about yourself. Social intelligence is important too, even on Internet forums.

Welcome to CAF.

 

[Xantippe]

Since we are doing the nitpicking “nuance” thing (see my post on nuance above, funny you used that word) I will apply the principle to your example. In your example the wife was a lemming per my post. The lemming that I specifically stated was a failure and would not work nor is what is asked.

You employ my “boss” comparison but ignore my own debunking of the husband as a “boss”

Most importantly see EasterJoy’s post as it seems to me to be “nuanced” better than my explainatons, I try to make the same point in a more earthly way, but then in comes with earthly nuance…

Truly if you and your husband work together so well I would say you probably both submit to eachother as you should. Human pride allows you to refuse to accept “submission” as a word to describe it because you view the word as synonymous with slavery. If you truly submit to him and he to you you would have what appears to be the most collaborative team ever, but you would in reality both be in submission.

Perhaps I am a rarity and perhaps as the modern narrative holds, all men are really wife beating psychopaths?.. but when I am with a woman who submits to me I by default have to submit to her. It is an amazing thing to spend your time seeing the other person’s view without prejudice and to take your pride and have it washed away and be able to do something her way. We become more collaborative in truth.

The perverted version of this was a woman who I dated that would only be nice to me when I employed rather questionable dominion… I broke up with her because I had no interest in being forced to be a tyrant, and feared the day I didn’t value her opinion anymore… which was quite near. Though if I were seeking the wifely submission most woman think wifely submission is, she would have been great. For right or wrong if I stopped debating and issued an absolute “order” on the subject she would settle into doing what I said, and be nicer to me than if I was actually right and showed her something with facts and stuff. Any decent man worth marrying does not want this, I promise you.

1. How are we supposed to tell the difference between being a “lemming” and being a submissive wife? I bet Mrs. Ramsey thought she was being a good, submissive traditional wife when she let her husband (who, after all, had a degree in finance) take out millions of dollars in loans while she took care of the babies.

It does kind of seem like it’s a lose-lose proposition–either a wife is being a “lemming” or she’s being unsubmissive.

1. The analogy is–a boss makes final decisions with employee (name removed by moderator)ut, so a husband ought to be able to make final decisions with wife (name removed by moderator)ut. If a husband isn’t like a boss, then that analogy doesn’t work, and a husband shouldn’t invariably make final decisions.
2. I feel like you (and Mrs. Fulwiler) are assuming the best possible marital situation, which is cheating a bit.

As I often say, we’re all stupid and selfish some of the time. If a system only works when people aren’t ever stupid and selfish, it’s a bad system.

1. Again, I like this lady’s reading of submission:

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

“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.”

1. Please don’t take this personally, but you haven’t been married, right? What you are describing is an early phase of love. It is natural, in the early stages of a romantic relationship for this all to be very easy, for each to be very eager to please the other, to drop our preferences in favor of the other and to actually enjoy it. C.S. Lewis talks about this as a phase in the Eros chapter of The Four Loves–it is possible (at least temporarily) to love the other as we love ourselves.

The problem, as C.S. Lewis points out, is that these feelings are (while excellent while they last) only typical of the early stages of a romantic relationship, and do not carry on very far into marriage. Romantic love only carries us so far–at some point we have to go on doing the heavy lifting of marriage all by ourselves.

Earlier, I mentioned how when I was a new bride, it never occurred to me that either I or my husband could be selfish or stupid. But not too many years later, I realized that we could both be very selfish and very stupid. I hadn’t realized that previously because I had been very young and very much caught up in the pink haze of LOVE.

I still love my husband (and I’m rather a better wife than I used to be), but I don’t believe that either of us ought to be making major decisions without getting approval from the other.

 

[on_the_hill]

Oh and the husband is to sacrifice himself for the wife…to love her as Christ loved the Church!

Yeah…it’s not that I disagree with the idea that a husband ought to sacrifice, but it always struck me as being one-sided from the perspective that the men are determining which is the heavier burden. It’s been repeated over and over again, “To love someone is more difficult than to submit to someone.” Which is necessarily followed by, “Take my word for it.”

 

[Xantippe]

A strong view of slavery, not wifely submisson. And “letting someone lead” who was not leading. Ever see that meme on the internet

boss/leader

Biss is sitting on a block while his people pull it.

Leader is in the front of the line pulling the block.

She never let him “lead” she let him “boss” and that is from her side.

I had an ex gf who told me the horrors of her ex. She had no respect for him as he was not deservibg of his place as a leader or man.

My ex gf mother had 5 marriages and cheated on every husband multiple times.

My ex gf was up to 2 marriages… she wanted so desperately to be nothibg like her mother, but could not avoid it. She would always find an excuse of why a man was unworthy. Just as her mother always had an excuse to cheat.

Hard working man with money? I am lonely

Poor man who spends time with you? He isnt supporting me well enough

Isnt a tyrant? Foesnt have the leadership qualities of a real man

Is a tyrant? Doesn’t have a soft sensitive side

Human psychology is to the point where we can’t trust anyone’s account of anything lol.

It doesn’t sound like you have a lot of good role models of marriage in real life.

How about some counseling and talking more to happily married men?

 

[Xantippe]

Yeah…it’s not that I disagree with the idea that a husband ought to sacrifice, but it always struck me as being one-sided from the perspective that the men are determining which is the heavier burden. It’s been repeated over and over again, “To love someone is more difficult than to submit to someone.” Which is necessarily followed by, “Take my word for it.”

Funny!

 

[Xantippe]

A strong view of slavery, not wifely submisson.

Well, that’s a bit of a problem, isn’t it, if it’s so easy for wifely submission to turn into something horrible?

 

[LethalMouse]

I am sympathetic to your plight of loneliness, but I don’t think this information is particularly pertinent. Even if you really are the smartest person on the thread, that doesn’t make you right and anyone who disagrees wrong - even if they would measure less intelligent than you on one of these metrics. I have young children, and while objectively I know a lot more than they do, they are quick to catch me when I’m wrong.

I notice you are a new poster. Many of the people who have been contributing to this thread have been around a while, and so even though we’ve never met face to face we do have a kind of rapport with each other, and know bits and pieces about each other’s lives (see Xantippe’s post to me about buying candy in bulk as an example). We’ve also seen so many threads about this. It gets hashed to death. And not infrequently a new poster comes on and is aghast that we don’t seem to know the simplest stuff. But we do. Even though it’s a new thread, it’s a continuing conversation - going back years.

I’ll also note that, even though you are saying (mostly about female experiences) that they are unreliable and not correct, then you say we should trust you and your sources. But we don’t know you from Adam, regardless of what you say about yourself. Social intelligence is important too, even on Internet forums.

Welcome to CAF.

1. The info was a simplified answer to your “are you not human” question which I quoted…

2.my stated statistics would not make me the smartest person on the thread, just a mental minority.

3.with the nuanced human factor you give me some nullity and discredit due to my newness while disregarding the many (I assume some veteran posters?)
Who are not in line with the thinking you attribute to your special class of veterans.

1. No you should not trust me or the females, everyone is equally insane. I believe I state truth as much as you do and that is all we have to go on. But I take and advise to take many things with a degree of a grain of salt. Even if I am “right”.
2. My entire issue with the human factor has litttle to do with right or wrong. I defend people who are wrong when the reason someone disagrees with them is folley. I may be wrong and never preclude it is not possible, but I want to hear substance based debate and not be told I lack nuance or tact. Or have only part of my story addressed while leaving out the relevant info. Like every news blurb on a politician, never actually showing the context of what was said…

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I’m really impressed with how this thread has gone. Normally, there are two camps: one that regards the role of women in marriage as comparable to a master-slave relationship, and one that regards a man’s desire to be the head of his family as abusive (and a woman’s desire for her husband’s leadership as indicative of a self esteem or mental health issue).

Personally, over the past 6 years my husband and I have gradually shifted from modern egalitarianism to a much more traditional, husband-led arrangement. Neither of us could be happier. I really don’t want “equal say” or “equal responsibility”, and I find that I like my husband a lot more when he hears me out and makes a decision than when we negotiate everything to death. I think a lot of CAFers would be shocked at what my marriage looks like.

But this isn’t something that I would tell anyone else to do. The fact is, allowing someone else to be the final authority can be dangerous physically, mentally, financially, socially, etc. Not everyone’s husband is safe, sober, good with money, good with kids, and unselfish. A blanket policy of “the man rules the family” is ripe for abuse, as history has shown. When it works, it works beautifully. When it doesn’t, women and children get hurt - or worse. Every couple has to work out their own dynamic, and it may be different from yours. While I encourage people to at least consider a marriage similar to mine, the fact is that sometimes, the well-being of the family prohibits it.

 

[pensmama87]

1. The info was a simplified answer to your “are you not human” question which I quoted…

2.my stated statistics would not make me the smartest person on the thread, just a mental minority.

3.with the nuanced human factor you give me some nullity and discredit due to my newness while disregarding the many (I assume some veteran posters?)
Who are not in line with the thinking you attribute to your special class of veterans.

1. No you should not trust me or the females, everyone is equally insane. I believe I state truth as much as you do and that is all we have to go on. But I take and advise to take many things with a degree of a grain of salt. Even if I am “right”.
2. My entire issue with the human factor has litttle to do with right or wrong. I defend people who are wrong when the reason someone disagrees with them is folley. I may be wrong and never preclude it is not possible, but I want to hear substance based debate and not be told I lack nuance or tact. Or have only part of my story addressed while leaving out the relevant info. Like every news blurb on a politician, never actually showing the context of what was said…

Sorry, I was just trying to be nice. If you want to think I’m being mean to you, then that’s fine, but that wasn’t my intention. Your method of discussing is very different, and I won’t speak for everyone but I find it less effective than you might want. I won’t enumerate on the reasons here.

 

[LethalMouse]

It doesn’t sound like you have a lot of good role models of marriage in real life.

How about some counseling and talking more to happily married men?

Not my life, this was the reasons my ex gf’s mom gave for cheating on and leaving her husbands… context

 

[Bookcat]

Yeah…it’s not that I disagree with the idea that a husband ought to sacrifice, but it always struck me as being one-sided from the perspective that the men are determining which is the heavier burden. It’s been repeated over and over again, “To love someone is more difficult than to submit to someone.” Which is necessarily followed by, “Take my word for it.”

The wife too will sacrifice…both as wife and mother. She too is to love…

The husband often will “submit” to his wifes requests…(or to-do- lists!)…happens every day.

 

[pensmama87]

I’m really impressed with how this thread has gone. Normally, there are two camps: one that regards the role of women in marriage as comparable to a master-slave relationship, and one that regards a man’s desire to be the head of his family as abusive (and a woman’s desire for her husband’s leadership as indicative of a self esteem or mental health issue).

Personally, over the past 6 years my husband and I have gradually shifted from modern egalitarianism to a much more traditional, husband-led arrangement. Neither of us could be happier. I really don’t want “equal say” or “equal responsibility”, and I find that I like my husband a lot more when he hears me out and makes a decision than when we negotiate everything to death. I think a lot of CAFers would be shocked at what my marriage looks like.

But this isn’t something that I would tell anyone else to do. The fact is, allowing someone else to be the final authority can be dangerous physically, mentally, financially, socially, etc. Not everyone’s husband is safe, sober, good with money, good with kids, and unselfish. A blanket policy of “the man rules the family” is ripe for abuse, as history has shown. When it works, it works beautifully. When it doesn’t, women and children get hurt - or worse. Every couple has to work out their own dynamic, and it may be different from yours. While I encourage people to at least consider a marriage similar to mine, the fact is that sometimes, the well-being of the family prohibits it.

Yep.

 

[LethalMouse]

Sorry, I was just trying to be nice. If you want to think I’m being mean to you, then that’s fine, but that wasn’t my intention. Your method of discussing is very different, and I won’t speak for everyone but I find it less effective than you might want. I won’t enumerate on the reasons here.

1. Don’t think you’re being mean.
2. I specifically addressed my poor ability to relate nuances.
3. It was never touched by anyone because it was so good? But I referenced EasterJoy’s post as the point I am trying to make in a more human way… I guess I am actually trying to do what she says “can’t be done” lol I am dumb…
4. Hugs