Shoud this scripture be considered "Patriarchal?"

Dave-W said:

Is that even a thing?

Click to expand...

Of course it is. Women have the same lust for power that men have. They may use different methods to achieve power but they still covet it as much as men do.

Dave-W said:

I differ from the legal definition. I do not see those violations as necessarily sexual.

Click to expand...

(Concerning women using "objects" for sexual abuse)

In this case, wouldn't it be the same as a man sexually abusing another man? Or by your definition, is sexual abuse only possible specifically between men and women?

Dave-W said:

I will refrain from giving specifics in the interest of not getting graphic or gratuitous.

But men CAN sexually abuse other men by using their own sexual equipment. To my understanding using an inanimate object and shoving it into a non-sexual orifice should be considered an assault, but not be considered sexual.

Click to expand...

I've been trying to avoid any graphic descriptions as well.

I would disagree concerning what is considered sexual, but at least I have a better idea of where you are coming from.

Dave-W said:

What would you think of a wife who wants to avoid sex (apparently unheard of in first century Judea) taking authority over her husband's body to command him to lose his libido;based on these verses?

Click to expand...

I would think she's abusive of him. The different behaviours which are experienced as abusive might vary, but whenever they're about power and control, they're abusive.

Dave-W said:

1 Corinthians 7:3
The husband must fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.​

Isn't this just a biblical excuse for a woman to be abused sexually by her husband?

Click to expand...

To be honest I've struggled with this too. I've had traditional Christian men tell me outright that spousal rape within marriage is not rape because getting married in itself is consent. That's a pretty twisted viewpoint since not everybody has the same drive and desire for sex. Consent needs to be given by both parties each time they're having sex.

Fortunately, the Eastern Orthodox stance seems to be along the lines of what I just explained anyway. We take the stance that men and women are equal, but play slightly different roles due to biological differences and stuff. That means nobody should be excusing abuse of the other. Heck, in certain cases of domestic abuse we even permit divorce.

The reason I said it was abusive was because you specified that she commanded him to "lose his libido." That goes beyond what could reasonably be considered to be about her safety; that's about controlling him.

Dave-W said:

OK, I have given this some thought.

I do not think it is abusive. It is a defense against abuse IMO.

Click to expand...

Something that starts as a defense can itself become abusive.

My observation of abuse is that most people who are abusive don't realise that they are.

The husband has power over the wife's body; likewise, the wife has power over the husband's body. When a person gets married, they place their body at their spouse's service in sex. So each spouse has a legit claim upon their spouse's body, and mere passion shouldn't govern such use.

She's as much his person's mistress as he her master. Husband and wife won't deprive each other of marriage's duty ; sex's refusal is forbidden when the other party desires it.

A different thing's abstaining from sex by mutual consent. Such an agreement may be made for a time in order to be engaged in prayer. And be together again, resume sex, lest Satan tempt you because of your self-control's want.

God knows the heart's weakness and guards against a continence which is hypocrisy's form. He has created the sexual inclination, God's familiar with its power since the fall, and God doesn't want spouses to indulge in asceticism.

Ttalkkugjil said:

A different thing's abstaining from sex by mutual consent. Such an agreement may be made for a time in order to be engaged in prayer.

Click to expand...

So, sex is against prayer.

myst33 said:

So, sex is against prayer.

Click to expand...

"Do not ye defraud each to other, but peradventure of consent for a time, that ye give attention to prayer; and again turn again to the same thing, lest Satan tempt you for your uncontinence." - 1 Corinthians 7:5 (WYC).

This discussion about sex "obligation" makes me very glad I've decided that marriage is not for me.

bekkilyn said:

This discussion about sex "obligation" makes me very glad I've decided that marriage is not for me.

Click to expand...

Oh...I "hear" what you're saying.....but the only people that sort of marriage is "for" are abusers.