Submission and obedience.

[Paidiske]

It's interesting that you view it that way. If a man does not provide for his family financially or physically protect his wife and children, society will call him a loser, a "deadbeat," or what have you. People will say that a man who does not protect and provide is "not a real man" but I don't think people would call the wife who does not protect and provide "not a real woman." I don't think women have the same type of cultural pressure on them that men carry, in that respect. Perhaps as a woman you haven't experienced things from the male perspective, as we can't see the world through your lenses?

I think this is changing. Men who choose to be the stay at home parent (not providing financially), for example, aren't seen as losers or deadbeats. In fact they're often lauded for it (much more than women are!)

Sure, someone who doesn't pull his weight in the marriage/household in any way isn't likely to be respected, but that's not the same as saying it's his job by default to make the money.

Another example is that if a man decides to stay single into his 40's folks will say that he has "Peter Pan Syndrome" or whatever and refuses to grow up and take on responsibility of a family. If a woman does it she may be lauded for focusing on her career.

I've never seen a man derided for staying single. Women, however, are often demeaned, especially if they choose not to have children.

Men go and fight wars, sacrificing their physical well being.

Well, it's not as if war is anything that is to be praised. Nobody should go and fight wars, making senseless "sacrifices" for nationalism and economic exploitation.

Men for the most part do all of the most hazardous and dangerous jobs that need to be done.

It's true that men are over-represented in workplace death statistics. The reasons for that are, I think, complex; but that is an argument for better workplaces, not an argument for why women should be submissive at home.

Even before marriage, many women consider it the man's duty to pay for dinner and other things during courtship. To hold doors open for you. To come to your assistance in physically demanding tasks, to give up our seats on a train, etc, for you.

I think a lot of this is a cultural hangover from the days when women didn't earn their own money. Today, I think few of us would expect things like having meals paid for by the man. I certainly wouldn't.

At least from my perspective, it seems that men are the modern day servants of women, when you consider the cultural privileges and responsibilities on both sides.

I'd guess you view it different, but I don't think that wedge on the chart is fair. I think it is only viewing the situation from one viewpoint. I would say that if both viewpoints are not considered men will view terms like "male privilege" as a power grab sold under the guise of equality.

But what that wheel is talking about is patterns of domestic violence. Situations where physical and sexual violence, and a range of the activities listed in the wheel, are used to control a partner. In that context, that wedge is an important part of the picture (it's highlighting exactly what's happening in this thread, where men are arguing that they should have the right to control their wives because it is God-given; talk about a sense of privilege!)

It's not talking about anything outside that context. Although there is male privilege outside that context, and we could talk about how it plays out in education, in the workplace, and so on; but that's not the point of including it in that particular diagram, and would probably belong in a thread of its own.

 

[bèlla]

Hahaha Exactly. And what was even more disturbing to me was that, a lot of people are actually doing this. Ignorance is bliss. xD
I could not deal with it. xD I guess what they say is right, when you're a child you want to be an adult, and when you're an adult, you want to go back to being a kid.....
Shutting His eyes!

You can flush your eyes now.

Some things are best left unsaid.

~Bella

 

[Swag365]

I think this is changing. Men who choose to be the stay at home parent (not providing financially), for example, aren't seen as losers or deadbeats. In fact they're often lauded for it (much more than women are!)

Sure, someone who doesn't pull his weight in the marriage/household in any way isn't likely to be respected, but that's not the same as saying it's his job by default to make the money.

I've never seen a man derided for staying single. Women, however, are often demeaned, especially if they choose not to have children.

Well, it's not as if war is anything that is to be praised. Nobody should go and fight wars, making senseless "sacrifices" for nationalism and economic exploitation.

It's true that men are over-represented in workplace death statistics. The reasons for that are, I think, complex; but that is an argument for better workplaces, not an argument for why women should be submissive at home.

I think a lot of this is a cultural hangover from the days when women didn't earn their own money. Today, I think few of us would expect things like having meals paid for by the man. I certainly wouldn't.

We'll I agree that none of the above should be reasons why women should be submissive at home. Setting the interpretation of the Bible aside, I would be fine with an "equal" relationship. But at least from my perspective most women do not want equality. They want their cake and to eat it too (as do men). When it is things that seemingly benefit men, they are to be denounced. When it is things that benefit women, they are to be neatly explained away, rejected, or minimized, as you did. I think both genders are guilty of that but if you are really looking for equality I think that has to stop, and for both genders to accept and try to understand the legitimate experiences of the other. Men are not inclined to budge if you dismiss our experiences. Men and women will simply remain at war as we have been.

As for the way that you have experienced some of the things you mentioned above, I will not go tit-for tat with you on those, because I don't think you'll give any ground on them. I'll just say that men experience things in a way that are may be unfamiliar to you as a woman. The same is true for me, I don't have your perspective of being a woman. It was interesting that you basically sought to dismiss or explain away every single point that I made. You did not even really give much ground at all or seem to contemplate that anything I wrote could be legitimate. It really seemed to me to be the same sort of thing as when men outright dismiss and minimize the legitimate concerns of women without really considering them.

But what that wheel is talking about is patterns of domestic violence. Situations where physical and sexual violence, and a range of the activities listed in the wheel, are used to control a partner. In that context, that wedge is an important part of the picture (it's highlighting exactly what's happening in this thread, where men are arguing that they should have the right to control their wives because it is God-given; talk about a sense of privilege!)

I think the wedge is important, but to attribute that portion of the wedge to being a male pattern or male conduct by identifying it as "using male privilege" seems to be wrong, because the specific conduct noted in the wedge is something that is done by both men and women. There is nothing uniquely male about the conduct that is mentioned in the wedge, and that is the case with domestic violence generally. Many men are physically and mentally abused by women in relationships, although not attention is given to it. Domestic violence is not merely a problem caused by men, if you look at the actual numbers. Many women are also violent both physically and mentally. So I do not think that it fair to have a wedge that implies that this is a male problem.

It's not talking about anything outside that context. Although there is male privilege outside that context, and we could talk about how it plays out in education, in the workplace, and so on; but that's not the point of including it in that particular diagram, and would probably belong in a thread of its own.

Well, men and women both have privileges in all of these areas, but you are right, a new thread would be the place for it.

 

[Paidiske]

But at least from my perspective most women do not want equality. They want their cake and to eat it too (as do men). When it is things that seemingly benefit men, they are to be denounced. When it is things that benefit women, they are to be neatly explained away, rejected, or minimized, as you did. I think both genders are guilty of that but if you are really looking for equality I think that has to stop, and for both genders to accept and try to understand the legitimate experiences of the other. Men are not inclined to budge if you dismiss our experiences. Men and women will simply remain at war as we have been.

You're talking to me in a world where far more women than men lack access to education, far more women than men bear the burdens of the worst of poverty, far more women than men lack agency in their own lives, and so on. What you say would be fair if we started from a level playing field, but we don't. We live in a world where the facts are well documented, and we see the effects play out in every area of life.


I'm not trying to explain away the experiences of men, and it's not a matter of denouncing what benefits men, but we have to look at the whole picture and the overall trends. And in that picture, men are still enormously privileged compared to women. That's a truth we have to be able to confront and work to rectify together.

It was interesting that you basically sought to dismiss or explain away every single point that I made. You did not even really give much ground at all or seem to contemplate that anything I wrote could be legitimate. It really seemed to me to be the same sort of thing as when men outright dismiss and minimize the legitimate concerns of women without really considering them.

It's not that what you said wasn't legitimate, as far as it went; but it was like taking one tiny piece of the puzzle and saying, "See? Here's the whole picture!"

No. The whole picture has to include things like these:

Women ED facts and figure | United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

Why the majority of the world’s poor are women | Oxfam International

Quick facts

I think the wedge is important, but to attribute that portion of the wedge to being a male pattern or male conduct by identifying it as "using male privilege" seems to be wrong, because the specific conduct noted in the wedge is something that is done by both men and women. There is nothing uniquely male about the conduct that is mentioned in the wedge, and that is the case with domestic violence generally. Many men are physically and mentally abused by women in relationships, although not attention is given to it. Domestic violence is not merely a problem caused by men, if you look at the actual numbers. Many women are also violent both physically and mentally. So I do not think that it fair to have a wedge that implies that this is a male problem.

I've been on CF for something over four years now, and I have never, ever seen a thread here in which men are called to submit to and obey their wives, in the way that this thread calls for women to submit to and obey their husbands.

Tell me again how the way this plays out is not a gendered problem?

 

[lovelife34]

You can flush your eyes now.

Some things are best left unsaid.

~Bella

I need some Holy Water!!!! Scratch that, I need the blood of Jesus Himself!

 

[lovelife34]

I need some Holy Water!!!! Scratch that, I need the blood of Jesus Himself!

Cleanse me, Lord! Hahahaha!

 

[Swag365]

You're talking to me in a world where far more women than men lack access to education, far more women than men bear the burdens of the worst of poverty, far more women than men lack agency in their own lives, and so on. What you say would be fair if we started from a level playing field, but we don't. We live in a world where the facts are well documented, and we see the effects play out in every area of life.

The fact that one thing is unfair does not justify allowing another thing to be unfair, does it?

I won't deny that what you wrote is true worldwide. When I wrote I did not intend to speak in the worldwide context because there are vast differences around the world in that regard. I was speaking only of the society in which I was raised and have personally experienced. So when I wrote that men seem to be the servants of women, to be precise I was speaking of here in the USA, where I live.

There might even be some significant differences between the USA and Australia in that regard, I have never been there.

What you wrote about generally hasn't been my experience here. For example, if we are talking education, basically at all levels here in the USA women are objectively doing much better than men, in terms of academic performance, college admissions, graduation rates, etc. Women actually outnumber men in college education in the US, although men still dominate in certain majors. That's just one example I think of how we are seeing things differently although I am not disputing your point that women seem to have it pretty bad in many societies (As do many men in many of the same societies, FWIW. In a lot of places the vast majority of people, men and women, are not doing well, and there are only a few privileged members who dominate all aspects of society. I would say that those are mostly men, but it is a select few men, while the average man in many of those countries lives in a very terrible state as well.).

I'm not trying to explain away the experiences of men, and it's not a matter of denouncing what benefits men, but we have to look at the whole picture and the overall trends. And in that picture, men are still enormously privileged compared to women. That's a truth we have to be able to confront and work to rectify together.

I do not see men here as being enormously privileged. I am guessing from your perspective you may see me as just a privileged member of society who is in denial or oblivious to the things that women face, but I have thought about it. At least to me, I think that when power is considered in it's various forms (not just power in the workplace or politics) it's difficult to demonstrate that men are enormously privileged in comparison to women, at least here in the USA.

It's not that what you said wasn't legitimate, as far as it went; but it was like taking one tiny piece of the puzzle and saying, "See? Here's the whole picture!"

No. The whole picture has to include things like these:

Women ED facts and figure | United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

Why the majority of the world’s poor are women | Oxfam International

Quick facts

Absolutely. Well, I did not mean to indicate that that was the whole picture. Naturally I am a man so I see issues from my own immediate perspective first, as do most people.

Yeah, all of that is legit and should be considered. Like in the second link it talks about how women work longer hours for lower pay. I don't doubt that's the general case around the world, although that is not what I intended to refer to in my comments. Where I live, men work longer and harder hours than women. We work more late nights, overtime, weekend shifts, etc. than women do. Then, when we go out and make this extra money, to provide for our families and live up to the cultural expectations of a man I alluded to in my previous post, we are told that we are privileged in the workplace. The burden of extra work that we carry is actually sold to us as though it is to our benefit, when in fact many of those times we hate those jobs, the extra hours, and are just doing it to provide for our families.

But yes it's true that women face many things, both here in the US and abroad, that are unjust, and many of them are very serious things that should be addressed. I just don't think the situation is as embarrassingly biased in favor of men as you seem to think. Not to get into a tit-for-tat of "who has it worse" but I'll give you one example. I think that women live about 5 years on average longer than men. I personally would consider an extra 5 years on the planet a significant privilege. Sure, one might explain that difference in some manner that minimizes it (men are more prone to violence or what have you) but that difference between the genders is not even part of the discussion. At least here in the US I can name many things like that. There are domestic violence shelters for women. There are none for men. Medical funding for certain forms of cancer research that affects women is multiples higher than funding for diseases that affect men more prominently. I think we commit suicide at much higher rates. As mentioned before we work the dangerous jobs, we die there much more often, we are injured there much more often. These are serious things. They are just as serious as the things that you mentioned. Maybe the way that many men are oblivious to the things that women face, the opposite is also true.

But at least here in the US the reaction to the two sets of issues is very different, because we are socialized to accept that men have a massive privilege, without questioning it. If men are working dangerous job and dying, the fact that women are not expected to work those jobs is not considered a female privilege. Instead, it is seen as an indicator that we need better workplace safety measures in society. But if the issue is that women lack decent work or have low wages (as indicated in the second link you posted) then it is an example off male privilege and an important consideration in the overall picture that should be taken into account. To me it seems like a bit of a double-standard.

I've been on CF for something over four years now, and I have never, ever seen a thread here in which men are called to submit to and obey their wives, in the way that this thread calls for women to submit to and obey their husbands.

Tell me again how the way this plays out is not a gendered problem?

I won't deny that. I haven't seen a thread in which men are called to submit to and obey their wives, either. I do find the topic to be a bit uncalled for, and I would say generally that seems to be a thing among certain groups of Christian men. So I would not deny that is a gendered problem. I actually dated an Anglican priest here in the USA for a bit, and naturally she was not too keen on the idea of submitting to me! In some sense I do think that there is a Biblical requirement for "submission" but I wouldn't interpret it as "The man says the woman does" or something along those lines. I don't think that is how the verses were meant.

I mainly took issue with that one wedge and that one photo in particular. If you are going to say that the "submission" issue is unfair and that we want equality, then I think you have to actually put forth things that are fair. I do not think that picture (and that wedge in particular) is fair when women are guilty of the things as well as men.

I do understand your point that the general context of this thread is one in which some men are trying to assert that women should be submissive to them, but I don't think that justifies posting something that seems to insinuate generally that domestic violence is a male problem. If you could kindly admit that more gender neutral-language would be better in that wedge, rather than calling it "using male privilege" then I don't think we would have much of a dispute (at least insofar as this thread is concerned).

At a higher level, I think that if women want to advocate for "equality" where it benefits them, but then ignore or minimize issues that men raise, then not many men are going to take you seriously. I understand that from your perspective you feel that the issues that you have identified are more serious and more deserving of attention (and they may be) but if the game is gonna be "men and women are gonna jointly get together and improve the lives of women, and dismiss any issues that men raise because they are not as important" I don't think many men are going to sign up to play.

Just my 2 cents on it.

 

[Paidiske]

The fact that one thing is unfair does not justify allowing another thing to be unfair, does it?

No, but nobody is arguing for that, either.

I won't deny that what you wrote is true worldwide. When I wrote I did not intend to speak in the worldwide context because there are vast differences around the world in that regard. I was speaking only of the society in which I was raised and have personally experienced. So when I wrote that men seem to be the servants of women, to be precise I was speaking of here in the USA, where I live.

I'm not in America, I've never been to America, and when I write about these issues, uppermost in my mind is a more global picture.

That said, I don't buy the idea that "men seem to be the servants of women," even in America.

There might even be some significant differences between the USA and Australia in that regard, I have never been there.

People who've lived in both places tell me each has its strengths and weaknesses in this regard. I gather that it might be fair to say that America has more extremes; where things are good, they are better than here, but where things are bad, they are much worse.

I do not see men here as being enormously privileged. I am guessing from your perspective you may see me as just a privileged member of society who is in denial or oblivious to the things that women face, but I have thought about it. At least to me, I think that when power is considered in it's various forms (not just power in the workplace or politics) it's difficult to demonstrate that men are enormously privileged in comparison to women, at least here in the USA.

The thing is, privilege will often be about the things you don't experience. Nobody will likely have ever tried to tell you that "men don't belong in [whatever field you're studying]". Nobody will likely have bullied you out of your workplace because "it's not appropriate for a man to do this job anyway." Nobody is likely to have put obstacles to you participating in church life because you're a man. And so on. Those are everyday realities for so many women, even in first-world countries like yours and mine.

Yeah, all of that is legit and should be considered. Like in the second link it talks about how women work longer hours for lower pay. I don't doubt that's the general case around the world, although that is not what I intended to refer to in my comments. Where I live, men work longer and harder hours than women. We work more late nights, overtime, weekend shifts, etc. than women do. Then, when we go out and make this extra money, to provide for our families and live up to the cultural expectations of a man I alluded to in my previous post, we are told that we are privileged in the workplace. The burden extra burden of work that we carry is sold to us as though it is to our benefit.

This also runs the risk of derailing, and might deserve a thread of its own if you want to explore it, but I think this isn't really about men or women being more privileged. Most employers will exploit their workers any way they can; often men can be more easily exploited in the ways you describe, often women can be more exploited through precarity of work, underpaid work, and so on.

Neither is good or right, and there are socio-cultural gender issues there that play into how each group tends to be exploited; but as I see it, the real problem for both there is exploitative employers.

But the thing about privilege doesn't necessarily mean you aren't also being exploited; clearly you are. But again, you're privileged relative to women in the sense that in general, nobody is trying to prevent you from even being able to work!

I think that women live about 5 years on average longer than men. I personally would consider an extra 5 years on the planet a significant privilege. Sure, one might explain that difference in some manner that minimizes it (men are more prone to violence or what have you) but that difference between the genders is not even part of the discussion.

I'm not sure what does explain it - although I've seen some theories over the years, some more behavioural and some more to do with basic biological causes - but this sort of thing definitely is part of the discussion. Men's poor health outcomes, physical and mental health, are a big part of the discussion, because they're part of showing that our current patriarchal system harms men as well as women.

There are domestic violence shelters for women. There are none for men.

The lack of adequate emergency accommodation is a big problem, and I agree that in my experience it disproportionately affects men. But that's not really the sort of thing that was being identified in the point you originally picked up on, which is cultural assumptions about gender roles.

I won't deny that. I haven't seen a thread in which men are called to submit to and obey their wives, either....So I would not deny that is a gendered problem.

And that was what that part of the diagram was talking about. Exactly that kind of very real gendered problem.

I do not think that picture (and that wedge in particular) is fair women are guilty of the things as well as men.

I do understand your point that the general context of this thread is one in which some men are trying to assert that women should be submissive to them, but I don't think that justifies posting something that seems to insinuate generally that domestic violence is a male problem. If you could kindly admit that more gender neutral-language would be better in that wedge, rather than calling it "using male privilege" then I don't think we would have much of a dispute (at least insofar as this thread is concerned).

I think you need to look at the diagram again. It uses both male and female pronouns, and is deliberately gender-neutral in its presentation of the problem in many ways.

But for that wedge, it can't be entirely gender neutral, because the problem isn't gender-neutral, as we are having neatly demonstrated for us in this very thread, which highlights the cultural issues around male privilege very neatly. There's no female-dominant equivalent in our culture.

And while some women do commit DV, the vast majority of DV is committed by men. The vast majority of people who are killed by an intimate partner are women. We need to also not pretend that these problems play out in absolutely equal ways in our society, either.

At a higher level, I think that if women want to advocate for "equality" where it benefits them, but then ignore or minimize issues that men raise, then not many men are going to take you seriously. I understand that from your perspective you feel that the issues that you have identified are more serious and more deserving of attention (and they may be) but if the game is gonna be "men and women are gonna jointly get together and improve the lives of women, and dismiss any issues that men raise because they are not as important" I don't think many men are going to sign up to play.

Nobody is dismissing issues men raise. This thread is illustrating problems of control and abuse. I posted that diagram after another member was discussing financial abuse, in part to illustrate that that definitely is abuse and is one part of a much larger set of behaviours which constitute abuse.

Now abuse is not the only social problem worth working on. But if we can't ever discuss it without men trying to derail that discussion with whataboutery, don't be surprised if that gets given short shrift.

I can't link to it here because of the profanity rules, but if you google Dr. Jessica Eaton's blog post, Stop asking me 'what about men?' you'll see en example of exactly why that's so frustrating.

 

[Junia]

Some people use religion to justify fetishes their conscience won’t accept. Its all the same.



There has never been a time when I spotted Depends and imagined myself in them. That was the first warning sign.



Where is Christ in all of that? Probably shutting His eyes.

~Bella

where was Christ? weeping, i think. weeping at what this woman and others in degrading marriages (and their children), have to endure

 

[bèlla]

where was Christ? weeping, i think. weeping at what this woman and others in degrading marriages (and their children), have to endure

Using religion to justify sexual appetite is unwholesome. While the marriage bed is sacred, sharing your proclivities with the world is another matter. Its possible to minister to others about physical intimacy without providing a play-by-play of your sex life.

I don’t believe God expects men to discipline their wives in that manner or encourage others to do the same on the Internet. It isn’t edifying.

~Bella

 

[Junia]

Using religion to justify sexual appetite is unwholesome. While the marriage bed is sacred, sharing your proclivities with the world is another matter. Its possible to minister to others about physical intimacy without providing a play-by-play of your sex life.

I don’t believe God expects men to discipline their wives in that manner or encourage others to do the same on the Internet. It isn’t edifying.

~Bella

yes, it made me feel a bit nauseous reading about this weird discipline thing. the thought of doing that to a grown woman. urgggh

 

[Swag365]

That said, I don't buy the idea that "men seem to be the servants of women," even in America.

That's fair. I don't buy all of your assertions.

People who've lived in both places tell me each has its strengths and weaknesses in this regard. I gather that it might be fair to say that America has more extremes; where things are good, they are better than here, but where things are bad, they are much worse.

Fair enough. I can't say comparatively not having been there. Overall, it seems likely that most of us here, both male and female, have a large amount of privilege compared to most people in the world.

The thing is, privilege will often be about the things you don't experience. Nobody will likely have ever tried to tell you that "men don't belong in [whatever field you're studying]". Nobody will likely have bullied you out of your workplace because "it's not appropriate for a man to do this job anyway." Nobody is likely to have put obstacles to you participating in church life because you're a man. And so on. Those are everyday realities for so many women, even in first-world countries like yours and mine.

Absolutely. I won't deny that there are unique forms of discrimination that women suffer and that men are privileged in the sense that they do not experience them. Can you think of any unique forms of discrimination in this same sense, that are only suffered by men?

This also runs the risk of derailing, and might deserve a thread of its own if you want to explore it, but I think this isn't really about men or women being more privileged. Most employers will exploit their workers any way they can; often men can be more easily exploited in the ways you describe, often women can be more exploited through precarity of work, underpaid work, and so on.

Neither is good or right, and there are socio-cultural gender issues there that play into how each group tends to be exploited; but as I see it, the real problem for both there is exploitative employers.

I think that is a fair point.

But the thing about privilege doesn't necessarily mean you aren't also being exploited; clearly you are.

Well that is an interesting take on it. The "privilege" of being less exploited than another. I suppose that is one way of looking at it.

But again, you're privileged relative to women in the sense that in general, nobody is trying to prevent you from even being able to work!

I assume that here you are speaking more generally and not with respect to me specifically. I don't see much of that here (in my own particular demographic women have higher employment rates then men, it appears).

I'm not sure what does explain it - although I've seen some theories over the years, some more behavioural and some more to do with basic biological causes - but this sort of thing definitely is part of the discussion. Men's poor health outcomes, physical and mental health, are a big part of the discussion, because they're part of showing that our current patriarchal system harms men as well as women.

That's cool, except that I reject the notion that the society in which I live is a patriarchal system (defined here as a system that is currently designed to favor men to the detriment of women). I am open to that being the case, however. I have not seen a convincing argument made in favor of it.

The lack of adequate emergency accommodation is a big problem, and I agree that in my experience it disproportionately affects men. But that's not really the sort of thing that was being identified in the point you originally picked up on, which is cultural assumptions about gender roles.

Well, the conversation kind of dove-tailed I think. Initially I only wanted to point out that the particular wedge in question was unfair. It kind of went in different directions from there, but that is fun sometimes.

I think you need to look at the diagram again. It uses both male and female pronouns, and is deliberately gender-neutral in its presentation of the problem in many ways.

I actually had a close look at the diagram before writing and did notice the use of both male and female pronouns. I though that was fair. The problem with it is the particular wedge that I mentioned. I don't think its unreasonable to assert that the language used in that wedge was purposefully inserted to imply that the problem is a male problem. Perhaps whoever made the wedge can make one that is not unfairly biased. It would then be a more effective tool, in my view.

But for that wedge, it can't be entirely gender neutral, because the problem isn't gender-neutral, as we are having neatly demonstrated for us in this very thread, which highlights the cultural issues around male privilege very neatly. There's no female-dominant equivalent in our culture.

Well one thread or one issue is not a very strong argument that the things mentioned in the wedge are particular to men, or that that justifies calling the things mentioned in the wedge "male privilege." You could just as easily have called it "using controlling behavior" or something else. There are plenty of women who use controlling behavior in relationships.

And while some women do commit DV, the vast majority of DV is committed by men.

Now to this I must disagree. I think we are looking at different data on that. I would say that the numbers are skewed in favor of men, but the difference is not as drastic as you make it seem, at least based on the data I have studied. My mother was a manager of a women's domestic violence shelter in my hometown, so I'm somewhat familiar with the situation. Naturally people dispute the data, of course. It is difficult to measure accurately because there is vast under-reporting by both women and men.

The vast majority of people who are killed by an intimate partner are women.

Yes, that is true.

We need to also not pretend that these problems play out in absolutely equal ways in our society, either.

Yes, I would also say that that is true. I would not try to make the argument that the situation is equal. But I don't think that a disparity justifies using language that generalizes. For example, it is true that black people in the USA commit crime at a disproportionate rate in comparison to other ethnic groups. That would not justify a flyer that implies that crime is a black problem. It would not be fair to call murder "Black violence" even though black people murder at a higher rate than white people.

Nobody is dismissing issues men raise. This thread is illustrating problems of control and abuse. I posted that diagram after another member was discussing financial abuse, in part to illustrate that that definitely is abuse and is one part of a much larger set of behaviours which constitute abuse.

Fair enough. I think I already specified the problem that I had with the diagram.

Now abuse is not the only social problem worth working on. But if we can't ever discuss it without men trying to derail that discussion with whataboutery, don't be surprised if that gets given short shrift.

I can't link to it here because of the profanity rules, but if you google Dr. Jessica Eaton's blog post, Stop asking me 'what about men?' you'll see en example of exactly why that's so frustrating.

Thanks. I'll check that article out later. To say "what about men" was not my initial intention. That is kind of where the conversation dovetailed based on your response, I think. Nor was it my intention to dissuade you from working on any specific social problem that should be addressed. My issue was that the materials that you used to make the point were inappropriate, in my view.

I thought use of the wedge was in-congruent because earlier in the thread you seemed to indicate that treatment between the genders should be equal. In my view, that wedge unfairly characterizes the problem as a male problem, which makes the picture a less effective tool than what it could be. The reality is that if someone posts a flyer with respect to some social issue (let's say domestic violence, for example) but the flyer contains language that is racist, people are going to reject the flyer, even if it otherwise is a good flyer. If you had responded to my question by saying "more gender neutral language in that wedge would have been more appropriate" I image that would have been the end of the discussion. I think your response to the question was something along the lines of "women are trained to be the servants of men," which I disagreed with, so the conversation kind of went off in a different direction from there I think.

I will confess that I did not read the entire thread before I posted. I kind of skimmed through parts here and there, before I came upon the picture. So I may have missed some of the context.

 

[Mr. M]

Submission and Obedience is not a gender issue. It is an authority issue. When I was questioned on this by my sister not long after she had gotten married, I explained it this way.
In the command structure of a submarine (where I had served) the executive officer is second in command to the commanding officer. Obviously, the XO is a man or woman of considerable ability, and is in line for a command position. A good CO values the XO's opinions, as well as others under his or her command, but the buck stops here. The CO has to make the final decision. If something goes wrong, the CO can't make the excuse that the XO's recommendation was followed.
It is a question of granted authority. The Son was granted all authority in heaven and on earth by the Father. The one who honors the Son, honors the Father also. (John 5).
God's word speaks to wives differently than to women. When you enter into the sacred covenant of marriage, you do so under God's terms. The wife is not instructed to submit to the husband once she feels that he is meeting God's standards, based on her understanding of the matter. She must submit, in recognition of the one who places the expectations of authority. To not do so is to oppose God. The man has a higher degree of accountability, based on the authority he has been tasked with as a sacred trust.

 

[bèlla]

yes, it made me feel a bit nauseous reading about this weird discipline thing. the thought of doing that to a grown woman. urgggh

I was aware of it. You encounter a lot when you counsel and pray for others. The issue isn’t the practice per se. But what’s feeding it. The husband may be blind to his desire for control and the wife may be unaware she’s conditioned to accept degradation or already enjoyed it.

Telling the truth is important. You can’t root out sin or change bad behavior if you camouflage it or call it something else. By acknowledging the desire for control he can pinpoint where its taken him and manifested. That’s what James is referencing.

But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death. —James 1:14-15

Thus, the desire for control birthed a religious principle (correcting the spouse), which led to physical discipline and micromanagement. If the person determines the behavior is inappropriate they must find the root to pinpoint the trigger and begin the healing process (if necessary), address errant thoughts, and discover a better response.

Having someone say the behavior is wrong isn’t enough to evoke permanent change unless you agree. You must believe the same.

~Bella

 

[Tolworth John]

People often say this, but it's simply not true. There are other models of decision making than giving one person "the final say" by default. For example, a couple might agree that they won't make any major decision until they both agree about it. On a scale larger than a single couple, I understand a version of that approach is commonly used by the Society of Friends.

Unfortunately the Bible does not deal in democratic functions, it deals with Kings etc.

 

[Landon Caeli]

My wife can stay meaner and madder than me for a longer period of time than I care to... Because of that, I tend to be the first one to submit out of fatigue.

...Plus she brings up stuff from like 3 years ago.

 

[Endeavourer]

The man has a higher degree of accountability, based on the authority he has been tasked with as a sacred trust.

What verse says a husband has more accountability than the wife? Accountability of what?

What verse says a husband's authority over his wife is a sacred trust?

The Son was granted all authority in heaven and on earth by the Father. The one who honors the Son, honors the Father also. (John 5).

What point does this prove with respect to marriage?

 

[Endeavourer]

. When I was questioned on this by my sister not long after she had gotten married, I explained it this way.
In the command structure of a submarine (where I had served) the executive officer is second in command to the commanding officer. Obviously, the XO is a man or woman of considerable ability, and is in line for a command position. A good CO values the XO's opinions, as well as others under his or her command, but the buck stops here. The CO has to make the final decision. If something goes wrong, the CO can't make the excuse that the XO's recommendation was followed.

1) Where is a military command structure outlined for marriage in God's word?

2) Where does God say the husband is to take unto himself the right to make final decisions over his wife's conscience and liberty?

3) Are wives delivered from the bondage of their own sins just to be placed under the bondage of their husband's sinful nature? Is the liberty Paul demands that we recognize in Christ only for men... did he forget to add a notation for wives to skip over the idea of their freedom from sinful bondage? Where do you find the idea in Scripture that says Christ delivered only men FROM the bondage of sin, and he delivered women TO the bondage of their husband's sin?

4) In which verse does God give husbands the instructions to take steps to usurp authority over their wives?

 

[Mr. M]

What verse says a husband has more accountability than the wife? Accountability of what?

What verse says a husband's authority over his wife is a sacred trust?



What point does this prove with respect to marriage?

Ephesians 5:22-33. Compares marriage to the relationship of Christ to the church.
Ephesians 5:23. For the husband is the head of the wife,
even as Christ is the head of the church: and He is the saviour of the body.

This illustrates authority of Father to Son to His Bride.
1 Corinthians 3:23. And you are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s.

Everything that the Father has ordained for someone comes with an accountability.
"Well done, good and faithful servant".
.
Here is another example of a sacred trust.
1 Peter 5:
1 The elders who are among you I exhort, I who am a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that will be revealed:
2 Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly;
3 nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock;
4 and when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that does not fade away.

 

[Swag365]

My wife can stay meaner and madder than me for a longer period of time than I care to... Because of that, I tend to be the first one to submit out of fatigue.

...Plus she brings up stuff from like 3 years ago.

You seem to say this in jest but to me it seems like the reality of the majority of marriages in the US, nowadays. I see so many relationships where the man seems almost beat into submission by his wife's mental manipulation. In most marriages I see it seems that the wife is firmly the person with more power. At lot of my friends need to get permission from their wives to make significant purchases with money that they earned themselves, which seem ridiculous to me.