Wifely Submission

[Lanakila]

Well, of course I can admit myself to be wrong. Of course I can be convinced. Why would I listen to her in the first place if I couldn't admit that? There is a difference between authority and being always right.

But, but, but why do you get to be the authority? You have no right to demand that of your adult wife.

 

[The_Horses_Boy]

Even when the couple agrees to it before marrying, its not healthy for the relationship and is an archaic family structure based on a male dominated society that we don't live in in the west any longer. As a former submissive wife whose submission destroyed my marriage I have lots to say on this subject. Being submissive makes the relationship into a parent/child instead of a husband/wife and being in love with your father is unhealthy.

We have come so far in this culture in making society equal, but until we get rid of the ancient patriarchal societal struction in marriage we women will never achieve true freedom. Men in these kind of homes have a hard time taking orders from a woman boss, if not find it impossible.

I think that the problem is that you've experienced a submissive relationship, but not a Christian relationship (I can't tell, you haven't elaborated). It is nothing like a parent/child relationship. It's not at all like a employer/employee relationship. In the manner of a Christian marriage, "the two become one flesh." The husband is the head of the household, but the head is attached to and a part of the body. The head can exercise control over the body but if the head does not listen to the body then the two cannot function and will cease to exist - but imagine the body without a head.

Wifely submission will not destroy a marriage, it will only do so in the case of a bad husband, which doesn't need a submissive wife to destroy the marriage.

 

[Lanakila]

I think that the problem is that you've experienced a submissive relationship, but not a Christian relationship (I can't tell, you haven't elaborated). It is nothing like a parent/child relationship. It's not at all like a employer/employee relationship. In the manner of a Christian marriage, "the two become one flesh." The husband is the head of the household, but the head is attached to and a part of the body. The head can exercise control over the body but if the head does not listen to the body then the two cannot function and will cease to exist - but imagine the body without a head.

Wifely submission will not destroy a marriage, it will only do so in the case of a bad husband, which doesn't need a submissive wife to destroy the marriage.

I was a Christian when I was a submissive wife. I submitted exactly the way the Bible says and when I got out of line my ex reminded me of the Biblical injunction to be a Godly submissive wife. Trouble was and comes when the man's idea of submitting means changing me into something I am not. Yes we were poorly matched from the start, and I'll never have a relationship like that again. But, the submitting in the name of God was what destroyed whatever love was there in the beginning.

There is no reason for a woman to submit in a healthy marriage. The archiac teachings from the Bible and the Patriarchal society it creates is very similar to what is in the middle east.

Men who are in charge because it is their right by reason of their gender alone will not do well working with and for women in the working world.

 

[gwenmead]

The doublespeak is beginning to get to me.

If you have a marriage wherein one partner must submit to the other, for whatever reason (in the case of this thread, by virtue of gender), you don't have an egalitarian relationship. You can give lip service to equality all you want, and claim that it's really fair and balanced, but in the end, it does no good to call a dog a cat: your relationship is one of dominance and submission. It could be healthy and work well, or it could be abusive, but it's still unequal.

On the flip side, if you make the claim that one of you submits, and give lip service to, say, religious injunctions making one of you the head of the household by default, and yet you really do treat your spouse with respect in practice, and she makes as many decisions as you do, then you do have an egalitarian relationship. You can claim that you're following the command that one of you submit, but you aren't really. If partners yield to one another on a more or less equal basis, regardless of what any kind of scripture says about it anyway, your relationship is equal.

I don't give a schmooty which model any couple decides to use. Either can work, well or poorly. Just depends on the couple. I choose one model for my own relationships, but that means squat all for any other couple. Ya just gotta do whatever works.

I honestly get cranky when I see people trying to pretend that their relationship is equal when it isn't, or is dominant/submissive when it really isn't. Favor either one, I don't care, just be honest about it, please.

 

[Athene]

Is there actually a bible verse which states that the husband will be accountable for all the decisions made within the household? This whole argument about men being the leaders because they are the ones held accountable crops up time and time again but I am yet to see solid scriptual evidence, does it exist?

Horses_boy, let me ask you something, are you married?

 

[flicka]

Well I'm not a submissive person. Never have been, never will be. The thing is thought there are actually people who WANT to be is a submissive role. Really. It's not limited to women either. Some people are happier with someone else making the decisions for them. It may not be my ideal, or even someone elses idea of "healthy" (whatever that means) BUT if it works, and each party is respectful of the other, so be it.

 

[Futuwwa]

But, but, but why do you get to be the authority? You have no right to demand that of your adult wife.

Because it's God's model for a marriage?

Are equality and wifely submission mutually exclusive? I insist that they are not, for my religion teaches both.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

Because it's God's model for a marriage?

See, that's the trouble with authoritarian religions worshipping gender-biased, personal patriarch gods.

Are equality and wifely submission mutually exclusive? I insist that they are not, for my religion teaches both.

If it works for you, fine. Just don't try to force it upon me, ookoo?

 

[TheMissus]

If the Biblical model of marriage is so superior to every other model, why do Christians have the highest divorce rates?

 

[Futuwwa]

Because the threshold to marry is lower for Christians?

Oh, and why would people failing to live up to an ideal invalidate the ideal itself? People failing only tells something about the people themselves.

 

[christalee4]

Because it's God's model for a marriage?

Are equality and wifely submission mutually exclusive? I insist that they are not, for my religion teaches both.

Again, more double-speak. One can't have equality in a marriage, in which one partner "has authority" over the other partner. The "separate but equal" argument has been used to justify racial superiority laws as well.

I hear over and over again by proponents of fundamentalist Islam that women are treated as being equal, and yet the women also prefer to be covered, don't mind not being allowed to drive or vote in countries like Saudi Arabia, which is a theocracy, because they say it makes them feel "protected". If equality is defined as something as flimsy as a sentiment being expressed that one "feels equal", so therefore equal rights amendments aren't needed, then it's a lie to say that equality exists. Tell the victims of honor killings, wife beatings, and of overbearing husbands and fathers who take their authoritarian duties a bit too seriously, that if these wives only felt more equal, then being killed, battered or harangued wouldn't feel so wrong.

Better to be honest and voice the truth that those believe that men must have authority over women want to do so, because they believe that women are the weaker sex, who need guidance, and who aren't bright enough to make decisions for themselves. And the fact that people use the excuse that God told them to set up this rigid hierchary that way, don't have a shred of logical reason to back up their claim. Faith and scripture are matters of interpretation, and if everyone interpreted their religious scripture literally down the letter, we'd be stoning and burning people to death for sins such as adultery, witchcraft and heresy. But we don't.

 

[TheMissus]

Because the threshold to marry is lower for Christians?

What threshold are you talking about?

Oh, and why would people failing to live up to an ideal invalidate the ideal itself? People failing only tells something about the people themselves.

People consistently failing to live up to the model that they espouse suggests that the model doesn't work. If the model worked, it would stand to reason that it would have a higher success rate.

 

[jak]

I think the most sensible way of interpreting those "submission" passages is to start where they do...with mutual submission!

If only that was stressed, this whole (stupid!) pre-occupation with wifely submission would cease.

jak (my husband submits to me!) (and I to him!)

 

[Mary_Magdalene]

i guess im the crazy one here.

I believe in biblical submission. it was difficult for me in the beginning of my marriage 8 yrs ago as i am a very independent, take charge person.

but it became much easier when i knew that those decisions my DH was making, he was on his knees praying for God's guidance first. Knowing that he was looking to God before making decisions made me able to let go of the stuff i would have typically tried to "take charge" of.

in addition, he also has enough sense as the leader of our home to know that there are certain things i am better at (finances, etc.) than he is so i take care of these things. He is not going to jepordize our homelife or finances or anything else just so he can say "he's the man" or "wears the pants".

personally, there is nothing more attractive or sexier as to know my husband is in charge of our family and home and is not afraid of that challenge. To me, that is what makes him a man-that he has the courage to be in the position he is in.

ooo la la! baby!

 

[christalee4]

I recall this subject was also touched upon in a thread that was shut down a while back on Domestic Discipline, which is a practice carried out in secret by many Christian couples, who enjoy the b&d aspect of domination and submission. Some women get really turned on by knowing that their man is in charge, and can exert his manly authority over them by apply punishing or "maintenance" spankings. What was fascinating was that some of the actual proponents of this practice actually denied that it was what it is, which is classic B&D, but without the accoutrements of leather and handcuffs. That was dirty. But Domestic Disciple was cited to be biblically-sound and made their marriages work in harmony.

I think that when couples have to artificially implement a structured system in which he has authority, and she has to submit, what does that say about their own perceptions and confidence in and of their masculinity and femininity? Isn't a husband still a man, even though the wife may be earning more of a salary and has a better understanding and talent for handling financial decisions? Isn't a wife still a woman even though her husband may be a better cook and housekeeper? Why should a man or woman have to artificially prop up their masculinity or femininity in order to keep up a system of role-playing? Why not be themselves and work in tandem, to best of his and her own ability?

 

[Futuwwa]

What threshold are you talking about?

Well, Abrahamic religions value monogamous marriage, and their followers are ideologically encouraged to marry. While, on the other hand, a secular couple would usually get there gradually, after a time of cohabiting. Of course this is not universal, but on average religious couples would get married earlier during their relationship. Which for some means too early, before the relationship has stabilized into what it will be for the rest of their lives.

There are many ways to read statistics.

 

[Futuwwa]

Again, more double-speak. One can't have equality in a marriage, in which one partner "has authority" over the other partner. The "separate but equal" argument has been used to justify racial superiority laws as well.

I hear over and over again by proponents of fundamentalist Islam that women are treated as being equal, and yet the women also prefer to be covered, don't mind not being allowed to drive or vote in countries like Saudi Arabia, which is a theocracy, because they say it makes them feel "protected". If equality is defined as something as flimsy as a sentiment being expressed that one "feels equal", so therefore equal rights amendments aren't needed, then it's a lie to say that equality exists. Tell the victims of honor killings, wife beatings, and of overbearing husbands and fathers who take their authoritarian duties a bit too seriously, that if these wives only felt more equal, then being killed, battered or harangued wouldn't feel so wrong.

Better to be honest and voice the truth that those believe that men must have authority over women want to do so, because they believe that women are the weaker sex, who need guidance, and who aren't bright enough to make decisions for themselves. And the fact that people use the excuse that God told them to set up this rigid hierchary that way, don't have a shred of logical reason to back up their claim. Faith and scripture are matters of interpretation, and if everyone interpreted their religious scripture literally down the letter, we'd be stoning and burning people to death for sins such as adultery, witchcraft and heresy. But we don't.

If you want to argue with me, you'll have to stop doing irrelevant and inflammatory guilt by accusation fallacies.

 

[Mary_Magdalene]

I recall this subject was also touched upon in a thread that was shut down a while back on Domestic Discipline, which is a practice carried out in secret by many Christian couples, who enjoy the b&d aspect of domination and submission. Some women get really turned on by knowing that their man is in charge, and can exert his manly authority over them by apply punishing or "maintenance" spankings. What was fascinating was that some of the actual proponents of this practice actually denied that it was what it is, which is classic B&D, but without the accoutrements of leather and handcuffs. That was dirty. But Domestic Disciple was cited to be biblically-sound and made their marriages work in harmony.

so, if a woman feels secure and happy in her marraige that is based on the biblical definition of marraige, the above scenerio is the reason why? they must be a bunch of perves? just being happy in the marraige isn't a good enough reason?

I think that when couples have to artificially implement a structured system in which he has authority, and she has to submit, what does that say about their own perceptions and confidence in and of their masculinity and femininity?

i agree here. if a couple has to "artificially implement a structured system..." there is probably other issues there in the marraige (which would probably be the case in non-Christian households practicing submission). However, if a couple goes into a marriage knowing they are going into the marriage submissive to Christ and God's will, then there shouldnt ever be an issue of "artificially implementing" anything. It isn't artificial, it is real.

 

[Athene]

so, if a woman feels secure and happy in her marraige that is based on the biblical definition of marraige, the above scenerio is the reason why? they must be a bunch of perves? just being happy in the marraige isn't a good enough reason?

You said that you find your husband sexy in submissive/dominant marriage situation - you said it, nobody else.

i agree here. if a couple has to "artificially implement a structured system..." there is probably other issues there in the marraige (which would probably be the case in non-Christian households practicing submission). However, if a couple goes into a marriage knowing they are going into the marriage submissive to Christ and God's will, then there shouldnt ever be an issue of "artificially implementing" anything. It isn't artificial, it is real.

No it's an artificial system implemented by men who thought they were the bees knees and all of God's creation should bow down to them including their wives, conservative christians have the highest divorce rates, 'traditional' marriages are unhappier and have greater incidences of domestic violance then egalitarian marriages. If it was natural for women to want to be submissive then surely we would find the opposite to be true, why isn't God blessing all these womens who are being the biblical ideal of a wife, chaste, docile and submissive - why are they unhappy,

http://www.godswordtowomen.org/studies/articles/Preato3.htm

 

[gwenmead]

Any religion that advocates both equality and submission is speaking with a forked tongue. The two states are mutually exclusive.

Note that by "submission" here I mean the religious requirement that one spouse, by virtue of their gender, must ultimately yield to the other's authority. I do not mean the kind of bargaining that egalitarian couples have, where there is no such gender-based requirement, and sometimes one partner makes a final decision, sometimes the other does, and sometimes they both compromise. (And I'm not talking a BDSM relationship either, which is a whole 'nuther ballgame.)

Since the requirement is usually that the woman must submit to the man's authority, I do find the position misogynist. (I would find it misandrist if the man was required to submit to the woman, exclusively.) I could not live with it in my own marriage.

At the same time, it isn't my place to tell anyone else how to structure their own marriage. If a male-dominant marriage works for you, fine. If it makes you both happy, great! More power to ya. If your religion says to do it that way, and that's your priority, go for it.

Just don't impose the same model on everybody else. (Which I don't think anybody in this thread is really doing, it's just the point at which this'd stop being an exchange of opinions for me, and start being a point of activism.)

Um... and have a nice day.