Effortless

soulthirstjc puts on a clinic in Christian feminist reframing in response to Reframing Christian marriage part 2: rebelling wives aren’t to blame for their own rebellion.

Research shows that husbands who do take part in household chores, cleaning. etc. are actually statistically happier, than those who do not. (It could be because they are taking pride in their living space, and because they are creating some really happy wives…which, even in natural, non-christian marriages, has a chain reaction.

She is getting ahead of the class here, because this is a defense of what I called out in the very next post of the Reframing Christian Marriage series, husbands as helpmeets.

However, she quickly returns to the task at hand, reframing the rebellion of wives as the fault of their husbands.  soulthirstjc explains that the source of women’s temptation to feminist rebellion is unworthy men, and that men are what causes women to rebel against God and the order He has established (emphasis mine):

Now- I am- as a woman- called to “submit” (I know this. Even most unbelieving women have heard this.. We’ve ALL been hearing this for decades. LOL),  It IS very encouraging to me that there are ministries out there that do place responsibility on the husband of LEADING the home in a LOVING manner (Ie. being the ultimate example of Christ).  That one thing gains soooo much respect from women- women long to be loved like Christ loved the church (unselfish leadership). I think this one thing can SAVE a wife. And I feel the absence of that is what created the women’s “liberation” in the first place. I don’t feel my love for my husband is contingent on these things (as a believer- it’s called to be beyond that)- But let me tell you- if your husband is constantly totally unloving (calls you names, flips you off, acts superior, etc.)…it can lead a wife to a place of feeling total injustice and naturally wanting to rebel- not just against him, but GOD. Now that’s a dangerous place to be.  I can see how having a Christian husband working on his 110% and a wife working on her 110% would greatly improve the marriage. I can’t speak for all women, in general, i think we are wired to respond well to Christ like love- “laying down of ones life (as Christ did)” …in fact- I can have nothing but total admiration and respect for that man (and -that’s- just a natural reaction🙂.

I’ve explained previously the problem with responding to a reframe with an intellectual argument.  The temptation here is great, but as you can see soulthirstjc quite casually responded to my post explaining how biblical teaching on marriage has been corrupted by effortlessly shoring up the corruption.  Remember, the title of the post she is responding to is:

Reframing Christian marriage part 2: rebelling wives aren’t to blame for their own rebellion.

This isn’t an intellectual discussion.  If it were, soulthirstjc would have acknowledged and discussed the reframing the post was focused on instead of doing more of the same.  In most cases the woman doing the reframing isn’t doing so with clear conscious intent.  It is in most cases a thoughtless, automatic act;  they merely notice that their rebellious feminist frame has been replaced with Christianity, and instantly set about discarding Christianity and returning to feminist rebellion.

This entry was posted in Attacking headship, Denial, Feminists, Frame, Headship, Rebellion, Rebuilding the mound, Submission. Bookmark the permalink.

293 Responses to Effortless

  1. Anonymous Reader says:

    Link problem: both links in the first sentence point to the same page, your “Reframing” post.

    soulthirstjc puts on a clinic in Christian feminist reframing in response to Reframing Christian marriage part 2: rebelling wives aren’t to blame for their own rebellion.

    That is, the embedded link at clinic points to Reframing

    [D: The first goes to her comment in reply to the post (at the end of the discussion), the second to the post itself (the top).]

  2. Pingback: Effortless | Manosphere.com

  3. Anonymous Reader says:

    Research shows that husbands who do take part in household chores, cleaning. etc. are actually statistically happier, than those who do not.

    What reasearch, done by whom, where, when? ‘Cause the more recent work might not support that claim.
    Then next:

    Now- I am- as a woman- called to “submit” (I know this. Even most unbelieving women have heard this.. We’ve ALL been hearing this for decades. LOL),

    Eh? What planet is this woman writing from? Not the land of Title IX et al, where “submit” is a dirty word that only shows up in shades of grey…

    It IS very encouraging to me that there are ministries out there that do place responsibility on the husband of LEADING the home in a LOVING manner (Ie. being the ultimate example of Christ).

    Right, since Jesus is her BFF who gives her what she wants when she wants it, then hubs should be just the same way.

  4. Pingback: Effortless | Neoreactive

  5. Cane Caldo says:

    Courageous, too. Who else stands up with the rest of the billions of churchgoers for the call for women to be irresponsible?

    Oh, wait…

  6. PokeSalad says:

    Glad this was pounced upon. I saw her original post and thought, “O Lord, where to begin?”

  7. Dalrock says:

    @Anonymous Reader

    What reasearch, done by whom, where, when? ‘Cause the more recent work might not support that claim.

    The newness of her studies isn’t the problem. The problem is that she is rebelling against headship and submission as taught in the Bible. Whether she is doing so while referencing new studies or old ones doesn’t matter.

  8. unsigma says:

    FIFY soulthirst

    NAWALT, Patriarchy…

  9. Sarah's Daughter says:

    But let me tell you- if your husband is constantly totally unloving (calls you names, flips you off, acts superior, etc.)

    Acts superior? A wife can paint with a very broad brush when she has determined that her husband acting superior is not loving and the cause of the otherwise obedient wife to rebel.

    Now that’s a dangerous place to be.

    Yes, just ask Job. Or how about every Christian who has been tested in their obedience and tempted to rebel when life’s not easy.

  10. Jeremy says:

    “The reason I’m rebelling is…”

    Any excuse will do.

  11. John Nesteutes says:

    There is a complete lack of understanding of how suffering and the cross are part of what leads to a victorious Christian life, and to experiencing sanctification itself.

    The Bible is clear what is to be done with a woman with an unbelieving spouse: she is to demonstate to him by her chaste and silent conversation how a believing wife acts. No more, no less.

  12. Femertilizer says:

    “the husband of LEADING the home in a LOVING manner”

    Can someone give me an example of this that doesn’t involve the husband basically submitting to the wife’s desires in everything? Because I get the feeling that that is exactly what she means.

  13. Anonymous Reader says:

    [D: The first goes to her comment in reply to the post (at the end of the discussion), the second to the post itself (the top).]

    My error, I thought this was a posting in response to some blog posting somewhere, rather than a comment on a recently revived thread.

  14. Anonymous Reader says:

    The newness of her studies isn’t the problem. The problem is that she is rebelling against headship and submission as taught in the Bible.

    Do you really think that the latter actually matters to her?

  15. @Femertilizer: Can someone give me an example of this that doesn’t involve the husband basically submitting to the wife’s desires in everything? Because I get the feeling that that is exactly what she means.

    Biblical examples of a husband “leading” would include:

    – Abraham leaving a nice, comfortable city and going and living in a squalid desert

    – Lot leading his family out of Sodom, including not even looking back at his wife when she longed to return to Sodom and was immediately slain for doing so

    – Joseph leaving Judea in order to safeguard Jesus and living like nomads in Egypt for several years

    – King David condemning his wife’s protestations at his jubilant dancing before the Lord, to the point of her barrenness (there is some debate as to whether this was a curse from God, or simply a consequence of King David never sleeping with her again)

    – Hosea (after being commanded by God to marry a prostitute) buying her back from a pimp. Note: I don’t think godly men should marry active prostitutes, but if they do, they’d better convince me that they’ve been prophetically called to do so, and be upfront about exactly who and what they’re marrying.

    The general theme here is that a man of God simply follows God, and it’s up to the woman if she follows. The responsibility to follow is entirely upon her. In Hosea, it’s quite clear that his wife’s disobedience was indeed disobedience against God, and was displayed as an analogy of Israel’s disobedience to God. She was still responsible to repent.

  16. Cane Caldo says:

    @AR

    Do you really think that the latter actually matters to her?

    If it doesn’t, then nothing else matters.

  17. Dalrock says:

    @Anon Reader

    The newness of her studies isn’t the problem. The problem is that she is rebelling against headship and submission as taught in the Bible.

    Do you really think that the latter actually matters to her?

    Even if it doesn’t, the frame matters. She isn’t making a straightforward argument for rejecting Christianity and adopting feminism. She is presenting herself as a submissive Christian wife and then reframing marriage from Christian teaching to the feminist view. She isn’t openly advocating feminist rebellion. She is doing something much more insidious.

  18. Anonymous Reader says:

    Do you really think that the latter actually matters to her?

    Even if it doesn’t, the frame matters.

    Yes, and no. She appears to be involved in the whole “God as vending machine” and “Jesus as BFF” notion. It’s hardly unique. It all reminds me of some of the regulars at any of several web sites who are always ready to argue Bible quotes from the FI perspective.

    She isn’t making a straightforward argument for rejecting Christianity and adopting feminism.

    Well, of course not. But so what? She’s a woman, she won’t make a straightforward argument for many things, but it does not at all follow that her intentions are honest, or even clear. If we look at the actions she wants, it’s all about the husband submitting to the wife. What do we call that? Isn’t it gynocentric, or the FI, or feminism, depending on maybe some of the wrapper around the actions?

    She is presenting herself as a submissive Christian wife

    Where does she do that? I see words that claim she’s heard about submission, but don’t see much else on that topic. Rather, she’s pitching the same old equalitarian line.

    and then reframing marriage from Christian teaching to the feminist view. She isn’t openly advocating feminist rebellion. She is doing something much more insidious.

    She’s doing the same thing Shiela Gregoire and many others do. It’s hardly unique. I’d say it’s just more of the Same Stuff, Different Day, really. You could find postings like that by the dozen at any of several self-labeled Christian sites. This example just happened to pop up on a long-dormant thread.

    As with Gregoire and others, it is simple to test: actions vs. words, and how intricate & totured a reading of the Bible has to be to make their idea work.

  19. feeriker says:

    She isn’t making a straightforward argument for rejecting Christianity and adopting feminism. She is presenting herself as a submissive Christian wife and then reframing marriage from Christian teaching to the feminist view. She isn’t openly advocating feminist rebellion. She is doing something much more insidious.

    I’m struggling to imagine who would be fooled by her nonsensical drivel into thinking that it is even remotely scripturally sound in nature. Her attempts at subtlety (if that’s what she’s attempting) fail utterly, and it’s impossible for this set of male eyes to believe that even the most self-deluded of churchian women would read her scribblings as anything other than an open invitation/encouragement to rebellion, no matter how “politely” it is couched. I would also assert that she is indeed making a “straightforward” argument for rejecting Christianity, just not in those exact words. The intent of her writing is unavoidably clear. She clearly knows her audience well.

    This just seems to further support the assertion that most women, no matter how dedicated they are to keeping up the appearance otherwise, DO NOT believe in or have any use for God, His son, or the Scriptures when these clash with their own base impulses stemming from the FI. To this add the absence of any meaningful legal or social restraints on their worst impulses, and you have an entire society of soulthirstjc’s tearing the family to shreds, to say nothing of rotting the “church” to its core from the inside. I’m really beginning to wish that these women would just drop the intelligence-insulting pretense and honestly admit their true motivations and beliefs.

  20. jeff says:

    “Even if it doesn’t, the frame matters. She isn’t making a straightforward argument for rejecting Christianity and adopting feminism. She is presenting herself as a submissive Christian wife and then reframing marriage from Christian teaching to the feminist view. She isn’t openly advocating feminist rebellion. She is doing something much more insidious.”

    This is EXACTLY how FI/christian feminist/modern christian wives/women get away with shaming their husbands.

  21. @feeriker

    Whilst I hestitate to condemn those in a wildly different faith tradition than I am as “unsaved” or “not actually Christians”, I do strongly question just how much of a Christian a woman who rejects 1 Corinthians 5, 7, 11, and 13, Titus, and Ephesians really can be.

    In James, 1 John, and Colossians it is clear we are to judge a purported Christian by their fruits. In 1 Corinthians 5, we are commanded to judge those within our body (not without–which is why I hesitate to condemn any specific person, such as this particular woman. But I will transgress and judge the body politic at hand of “Christian” women who don’t act Christlike.)

    And in those scriptures, it is clear what the standard for godly Christian women is. It is distinctly visible Christianity, submissive to husbands, even husbands who refuse to acknowledge Christ at all. Visible symbols of submission were given for a reason: many women will claim to be “submissive”, but very few can keep up the ruse of wearing a visible sign of submission on their literal head for very long when they lack a submissive heart. (Some can. Most cannot, and most do not.)

  22. thedeti says:

    Something Dalrock and others have pointed out is how subtle all this is. Note that soulthirst talks about submission, love, respect, Christ’s sacrifice, how that informs the Christian marriage model, etc. It’s easy to nod one’s head in agreement and think “yes, this is correct, I think, because all of these things are what we are supposed to be in marriage.”

    It’s easy to gloss over the “I need to submit, but…..” language.

    It’s easy to miss the “Women need to submit, but if they don’t, it’s men’s fault” sentiment.

    It’s easy to miss the “Men get lots of respect for doing chores. Men get happy wives when they do chores” statement.

  23. Anonymous Reader says:


    It’s easy to miss the “Women need to submit, but if they don’t, it’s men’s fault” sentiment.

    It’s easy to miss the “Men get lots of respect for doing chores. Men get happy wives when they do chores” statement.

    If men, young and old, learn nothing else from the androsphere, it should be how to spot these common tropes. “Choreplay” being one of the more prominent, but “it’s all men’s fault” is another very popuar one. Both are easy to understand in Game terms.

  24. bw says:

    “We’ve ALL been hearing this for decades. LOL”
    Christians have “been hearing this for ” …. 2000 years.

  25. jeff says:

    Anon 3:17,

    This is what your “biblical” pastor/counselor will say and what he said to me every meeting of 8 and numerous emails. He did acknowledge her lack of submission and told her to stop nagging and follow 1Peter 3:2-4, but said if I would find a DIFFERENT way to lead she would follow. They do not understand the lead a wife to water, but can’t make them drink.

  26. Mark says:

    @Dalrock

    Nice post!……””rebelling wives aren’t to blame for their own rebellion.””……They are blameless!……Dontcha know!…L*

  27. In most cases the woman doing the reframing isn’t doing so with clear conscious intent. It is in most cases a thoughtless, automatic act; they merely notice that their rebellious feminist frame has been replaced with Christianity, and instantly set about discarding Christianity and returning to feminist rebellion.

    Of course.

    If you really want to make someone in your church uncomfortable, ask them if they are a Christian first or a US citizen first? I made the mistake of asking the wrong person that question once and that person responded that they didn’t like that question because it made them “feel awful.” But it is an important question because when you get right down to it Christian women are feminists first. The standard NAWALT diclaimer applies. But women worship feminism far more often than they worship God, even if they are doing so unknowingly. And the majority of Christian women in this country will unknowingly worship at the alter of feminism in just 18 and a half short months.

    This coming election of Hillary (and yes, she is inevitible) truly is bringing us to the end of days. I could quote half of the Book of Revelation and apply those verses to my country’s foolhearty decision to annoint her, but the truth is, our destiny here is our own fault. The minute we gave into the feminist imperative and gave women the vote, our Biblical fates were sealed. Her election (this “Christian” woman who is supposed to OBEY her husband) will be looked to as the leader of the world. It will be seen as the greatest triumph of feminism, ever. the complete and total rebellion of God and His authority. And we’ll never hear one peep from churchianity in this regard.

  28. @jeff: This is what your “biblical” pastor/counselor will say and what he said to me every meeting of 8 and numerous emails. He did acknowledge her lack of submission and told her to stop nagging and follow 1Peter 3:2-4, but said if I would find a DIFFERENT way to lead she would follow. They do not understand the lead a wife to water, but can’t make them drink.

    The core problem here is sin, because lack of submission to God’s creation order is sin, whether it’s on the part of a man or a woman. And nothing short of Jesus’ grace can rescue a sinner from his sin. Not perfect laws, not the most excellent church discipline, and not the most loving husband in the world.

    If Christ himself, lavishing love on sinners, doesn’t draw ever sinner to repentance, how can a husband be expected to do better? “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” As Christians, our duty is to preach the gospel which provides a path for all sinners to the narrow way. But “few there be that find it”… including a lot of wives who think they are Christians.

    And as the church, it is our duty to admonish brothers and sisters who are caught in sin, even unknowing sin.

    Your typical “biblical” counselor/churchian pastor is more like an enabler who would argue with Jesus himself after he talked to the woman at the well, complaining about him not being more understanding about her needs, and would tell them if he really wanted to be Christlike, he’d be carrying the water for her.

    Instead, he offered her living water, and then got back to whatever he needed to be doing with his (male) disciples.

  29. JDG says:

    I’m struggling to imagine who would be fooled by her nonsensical drivel into thinking that it is even remotely scripturally sound in nature.

    Well, few here would be fooled, but most church goers already believe this nonsense thanks to Pastors placating to cultural changes resulting in decades of bad teaching.

  30. Mark says:

    @IBB

    “”But women worship feminism far more often than they worship God,””

    Understatement of the decade!

    “”This coming election of Hillary (and yes, she is inevitible)””

    PLEASE!…PLEASE!…..Do not even think that! Having her as President wants me to shoot myself!…..and I am a Canadian!!!!!!!

  31. @TFH

    A quick read of Genesis should be enough to explain to any man what woman’s base, sinful nature is: choosing the knowledge of good and evil over trusting in God, and then attempting to pervert her husband into following her into evil.

  32. @mark

    Given how many former Obama voters I know who are now avowedly conservative, I have a feeling a Hillary victory will result in a lot of feminist voters becoming decidedly less-feminist.

    Think of it as a form of Agree & Amplify.

  33. a girl says:

    I usually just lurk here, but I kind of have a question. I’ve read this post and the quoted comment a few times and I am not seeing the problem with the comment. Rebellion can be the fault of someone else. Christians are told not to provoke others to anger for example. Making someone angry with unloving, high handed leadership could cause them to rebel against your authority.

    And I realize that this isn’t the main point, but about that housework – are you all saying that husbands shouldn’t do any or that wives shouldn’t ask him to any and should just wait to see what he decides to do on his own? I am assuming that people here aren’t actually against a man cleaning up in his own home, so the the problem must be in how the wife is asking?

  34. BuenaVista says:

    “It IS very encouraging to me that there are ministries out there that do place responsibility on the husband of LEADING the home in a LOVING manner (Ie. being the ultimate example of Christ).”

    I guess Jesus got the memo, and is an exemplar house husband; He knows the value of “happy wife, happy life.”

  35. jeff says:

    John Neteutes,

    Yes. The pastor asked me what I wanted to discuss and learn from his counselling. I point blank asked him to teach us biblical headship, submission and understanding.

    He didn’t even come close once to mentioning headship.

  36. JDG says:

    Republicans delude themselves about this each time.

    Yes they do. I’m not sure there will ever be a Republican president again, not that I care anymore.

    Conservatives are whiteknights/feminists too.

    Sadly, yes they are. A feminist is a feminist, right or left.

  37. DeNihilist says:

    Then there are weirdos like me who has basically banished my wife from the kitchen. Except for turkey dinners, she has no passion for cooking. Whereas cooking is in my top three of passions. I love to cook for my family, friends, fishing partners, even strangers. To me cooking is the way I share some of my life.

  38. JDG says:

    He didn’t even come close once to mentioning headship.

    Well, that’s because headship is just a source like the beginning of a river. Or better yet, the husband is the head, but the wife turns the head, ect. ect… /sarc

  39. DeNihilist says:

    Hey JDG, was away at our country property for the Easter long weekend, just moi and the wife. 3 outta 4 days asked her to make me a sammich and she did! Every day the sammich was better then the last.

    Slowly, slowly…..

  40. JDG says:

    Oh wait, I forgot one. He wears the pants, but she tells him which ones to wear.

  41. JDG says:

    Hey JDG, was away at our country property for the Easter long weekend, just moi and the wife. 3 outta 4 days asked her to make me a sammich and she did! Every day the sammich was better then the last.

    You just put a smile on my face. That’s the kind of news I like to hear.

  42. DeNihilist says:

    up here in the great white north, the last 2 elections, one federal, the other BC provincial, the polls showed the left NDP winning a majority. Nope, Conservative won both with healthy majorities, Seems like us Canucks love buggering the pollsters!

  43. JDG says:

    … are in league with Democrats, and are just pretending to be an opposition party (much like a WWE villain that is scripted to lose, after pretending to have a real rivalry with the protagonist).

    This is the same conclusion I reached after a few years. Its a charade IMO.

  44. JDG says:

    DeNihilist are Canuck conservatives feminists like US conservatives?

  45. Anonymous Reader says:

    JDG
    He wears the pants, but she tells him which ones to wear.

    Oh, that reminds me (Not Entirely Safe For Work) comments are interesting:
    https://theprivateman.wordpress.com/2015/03/28/never-go-shopping-with-her-its-a-shit-test

  46. Novaseeker says:

    @Marcus —

    From that NR article, this very telling snippet:

    Writing as a Republican baby-boomer woman, I cannot emphasize enough how emotionally rewarding it would be for Democratic and Independent baby-boomer women to elect the first female president. Older women feel this way too — my 89-year-old mother in her nursing home recently spoke these exact words: “It’s time for a woman president.” And those raised on girl power — women aged 50 and younger, who twice helped elect President Obama — are the most rah-rah for “It’s time.”

    Yep. You can kind of tell that the Republican female writer is *herself* excited about the prospect, despite her politics. Sex trumps politics for many women, remember that.

  47. JDG says:

    Anonymous Reader says:
    April 15, 2015 at 5:07 pm

    For women, shopping is a legitimate enthusiasm. I understand that. But that doesn’t mean I have to go along with that. Nor should any other man.

    I tried it ONCE. Now I just drop her off and head on over to Best Buy. Either that or she can drive herself to the store. I DO NOT follow her around as I’ve seen other men do (they have my pity even if they don’t deserve it).

  48. jeff says:

    I tried to explain to the pastor that we rebel against Christ’s love toward us continually and he agreed. I pointed out that the Spirit will often times convict us. He agreed. I told him that Christ love’s us even in our sin. He agreed. I said Christ would point out our sin and call us to repent. He agreed.

    I explained that when my wife is rebellious, I love her continually. When she admits her guilt, I let her. When she is disrespectful and lacks submission, I still love her. I told him that when she sins against me I ask her if she is sorry, she does and I forgive. I asked him where am I not loving. His answer: “If Jesus knocks on your door, He’s going to ask for the man of the house.”

    He had me read a book by a mangina. I told him what I thought of it. His son is 17, he doesn’t see the shit that is going to happen to him when he gets married.

  49. Dalrock says:

    Welcome to the blog a girl.

    I usually just lurk here, but I kind of have a question. I’ve read this post and the quoted comment a few times and I am not seeing the problem with the comment. Rebellion can be the fault of someone else. Christians are told not to provoke others to anger for example. Making someone angry with unloving, high handed leadership could cause them to rebel against your authority.

    We can be stumbling blocks for others, but others don’t cause us to rebel/sin. Otherwise we wouldn’t be responsible not to sin. Eve’s rebellion against God wasn’t due to God not leading her correctly, or not loving her sufficiently. Moreover, we learn in Genesis that women will face a strong temptation to rebel against their husbands. This is a result of the fall, yet soulthirstjc and many others argue that wives are naturally prone to submit if the husband is loving. It is quite simply a lie, as the Bible tells us otherwise.

    And I realize that this isn’t the main point, but about that housework – are you all saying that husbands shouldn’t do any or that wives shouldn’t ask him to any and should just wait to see what he decides to do on his own? I am assuming that people here aren’t actually against a man cleaning up in his own home, so the the problem must be in how the wife is asking?

    I don’t have any hangups about housework, but we need to be honest that feminists very much do have hangups about it. It is very similar to the push to get men to sit down to pee. There is a great deal of envy here, and we shouldn’t pretend this isn’t so. soulthirstjc raised this feminist hot button issue under the guise of making men happier. However, this isn’t what she really has in mind, as she betrays when she explains If momma ain’t happy, no one is happy:

    It could be because they are taking pride in their living space, and because they are creating some really happy wives…which, even in natural, non-christian marriages, has a chain reaction.

    This is about rebellion against headship and submission. The rest is merely misdirection. The problem is, the rebellion and attendant misdirection are so common that it seems normal.

  50. JDG says:

    TFH says:
    April 15, 2015 at 5:13 pm

    Yep! Your 1, 2, 3 list was exactly what I saw, and of course there were other events as well. To me the most glaring item was / is the bold face feminism that is embraced by conservatives who act as if this was the founding father’s plan all along.

    Not long ago their grandparents where arguing about whether or not women should have careers. Now they all except it just about the entirety of feminism with only abortion remaining taboo (but for how much longer?). The same thing happened with birth control, various forms of sexual deviancy, and increasing governmental control. The “right” is ever always sliding “left”.

  51. Anonymous Reader says:

    JDG
    Anonymous Reader :
    For women, shopping is a legitimate enthusiasm. I understand that. But that doesn’t mean I have to go along with that. Nor should any other man.

    Not my words, Private Man wrote that.

    I tried it ONCE. Now I just drop her off and head on over to Best Buy. Either that or she can drive herself to the store. I DO NOT follow her around as I’ve seen other men do (they have my pity even if they don’t deserve it).

    There are lots of ways to solve the issue, agreed. My point was the “go shopping with me” is in a way a form of choreplay. Note that Private Man mentions holding her purse while she looked at something. That is a test, whether deliberate or not. A few weeks back I was in a church where I saw a college-aged woman handing her purse to a college-aged man, who then dutifully stowed it in a pew. I could not find a way to get to him after the service to tell him “Do not do that ever again”, unfortunately.

    Churchgoing women…are still women.

  52. JDG says:

    are you all saying that husbands shouldn’t do any or that wives shouldn’t ask him to any and should just wait to see what he decides to do on his own?

    I’m saying that a woman should go into a marriage expecting to do any and all housework, as well as expecting to help her husband in any other way that he needs. Making sammiches is one such example.

  53. JDG says:

    I am assuming that people here aren’t actually against a man cleaning up in his own home,

    No, not if he is single.

    so the the problem must be in how the wife is asking?

    No, a symptom of the problem is the fact that she is asking at all. The problem is that she has a warped view of the husband and wife relationship due to the influence feminism in her thought processes.

  54. JDG says:

    Should be … influence of feminism…

  55. JDG says:

    JDG says:
    April 15, 2015 at 5:34 pm

    “Now they all except accept it just about the entirety of feminism with only abortion remaining taboo…

  56. JDG says:

    Anonymous Reader says:
    April 15, 2015 at 5:53 pm

    Apologies, I thought perhaps you were him.

    Note that Private Man mentions holding her purse while she looked at something. That is a test, whether deliberate or not.

    My wife tried that right after we were married. I nipped that one in the bud even before I’d heard of the manosphere. I’m not bragging, I just wasn’t going to hold a woman’s purse, end of story.

  57. DeNihilist says:

    JDG, I have heard it said that our Conservative party, nationally, would be about the same as your Dems. Though our Prime Minister is a strong protestant, he still has to lead in a more liberal way in this country then what he probably would like to. Yet fiscally the Conservatives, this time around are far to the right of your Dems.

  58. DeNihilist says:

    Holding her purse was the most humiliating 5 minutes of my life. Told her in no uncertain terms, that if she wanted me to ever hold her purse again, it better be a camo one!

  59. Dalrock says:

    @JDG

    Note that Private Man mentions holding her purse while she looked at something. That is a test, whether deliberate or not.

    My wife tried that right after we were married. I nipped that one in the bud even before I’d heard of the manosphere. I’m not bragging, I just wasn’t going to hold a woman’s purse, end of story.

    Funny. I did the same when my wife and I were first dating. It hasn’t been an issue since then. In fact she has relayed some funny tactics men have written about online when faced with this. One man’s wife told him he needed to hold her purse because “it was for both of them” as it contained items they might need. He agreed and amplified, loading her purse with a pipe wrench, etc. She decided her purse really was hers and not theirs after all. A simpler tactic is to immediately start going through the purse once received, even better if you add color commentary.

  60. JDG says:

    Dalrock says:
    April 15, 2015 at 6:28 pm

    LOLOL!!! I am still laughing as I try to write this. A pipe wrench? That is hilarious.

  61. Dalrock says:

    @Buena Vista

    I guess Jesus got the memo, and is an exemplar house husband; He knows the value of “happy wife, happy life.”

    Upthread I referenced “If mama ain’t happy, nobody is happy”, but this is a better fit to describe what soulthirstjc is selling.

  62. Sarah's Daughter says:

    Rebellion can be the fault of someone else. Christians are told not to provoke others to anger for example. Making someone angry with unloving, high handed leadership could cause them to rebel against your authority.

    I am always amused at how often proponents of biblical marriage are accused that it denies women of having agency only to have similar such individuals openly assert women have no agency (their rebellion is someone else’s fault) and therefore cannot be a responsible party in biblical marriage.

  63. @Sarah’s Daughter
    “Or how about every Christian who has been tested in their obedience and tempted to rebel when life’s not easy.”

    Yes! I was thinking this recently when reflecting on the whole argument of “of a husband leads well, his wife will submit.”
    The reality is, all Christians are tempted to rebel against Christ, even though he is the perfect King and Saviour! How much harder it is then to submit to our human husbands.

    And can you imagine excusing a husband’s poor leadership because his wife isn’t submitting well enough? Unheard of!

  64. Anonymous Reader says:

    Sarah’s Daughter: see “Ice, fried” in the category “Things women want”.

  65. soulthirstjc sounds infected with Sheryl Sandberg’s notorious brand of #Hashtag feminism where she wants men to #LeanIn to do chores just because she can enlist NBA Millionaire as spokesmen on E$PN. Never mind the they all have an army of maids and servants.

  66. @ a girl
    “Making someone angry with unloving, high handed leadership could cause them to rebel against your authority.”

    This certainly makes it harder to submit to a husband, but it doesn’t excuse rebellion.
    I’m not sure if you’re personally talking about your own husband here, but I wonder if the root issue in your example could be pride? As in, the wife is too prideful to submit to someone who expects submission.
    In my own marriage, the times I have rebelled are times when my husband has directly asked me to submit. And my inner dialogue was that he was being arrogant and brutish to ask me that, so I shouldn’t give in.
    Yes, I am embarrassed to admit that. Even more embarrassed that he had to ask me directly!
    But, an honest reflection reveals that I was being prideful – unwilling to bend my own will to someone I had judged unworthy.
    Could this be true in your situation too?

    Also, I find focussing on my husband’s weaknesses is a sure way to build discontent in the marriage. I remember reading in an Elizabeth Elliot book once that most women will agree that her husband meets about 80% of her expectations. She would be foolish then to spend her whole marriage trying to “fix” the 20%, and failing to enjoy the 80!
    I recommend women who feel their husbands are “unloving” and “high handed” spend time thinking about his good qualities and how you can be a better wife to your husband, not the husband oyu wish you had.

  67. JDG says:

    This is also why a society where women are allowed to make major decisions that can affect others, is a society that is courting doom.

    My wife and I were discussing this just this morning.

  68. justdoit says:

    In summary, what these churchian women are saying is the following.

    We rebelled because you were beating us. It’s your own fault. You should have beaten us until we stopped rebelling.

  69. JDG says:

    a girl says:
    April 15, 2015 at 4:08 pm

    When I saw this: Making someone angry with unloving, high handed leadership could cause them to rebel against your authority.

    I thought of this: Rebelling against authority could cause someone to respond with unloving, high handed leadership.

  70. Dale says:

    @JDG and a girl

    >so the the problem must be in how the wife is asking?
    >
    >No, a symptom of the problem is the fact that she is asking at all. The problem is that she has a warped view of the >husband and wife relationship due to the influence feminism in her thought processes.

    One clarification. Feminism demands that a woman work, just like a man.
    Then they complain that a woman has to work, plus do all the housework. They ignore the non-paid tasks a man does, whether yard work, building stuff, leadership, whatever. They then compare the woman’s job + housework to the man’s job, and decide this is unfair as the woman has more.
    The whole thing is nonsense however, as the man (usually) has not demanded the wife work an outside job in the first place. Yes, she should be productive with her time. In my mind, this means, in rough order of priority:
    1) provide for the caring needs of her husband, primarily relationship and sexual and domestic help, and the caring needs of his children.
    2) maintain an orderly, clean home. Not as important as #1. A woman just today commented on how her cleaning expectations of herself went down after their child was born. Partly due to less time I am sure, but especially as the son will be quite happy to mess up whatever she just finished cleaning / ordering. Thus she could either stress about how it is impossible to maintain a spotless home, or settle for an orderly home that is not spotless and have less stress.
    3) If any time left over after 1 and 2 above, then find something productive to do. Work, volunteer, whatever.

    For example, if I marry a foreign woman, she will not be allowed to work the first year anyway due to government regulations re getting permanent residency. And I do not care. If I married a foreign woman, I would want her spending her time that first year studying English so she can relate to the people around her, function in her new city, and not feel isolated. Why would any idiot think it is better, or even necessary, for her to work?
    Similarly, any woman who places her career ahead of family obviously has misplaced priorities. And will encounter problems as a result.

    Man – serve God. Provide leadership, food and clothing to family, and marital rights of his wife. Train his children in morals, character, submission to God, and proper roles for their future lives/marriages.
    Woman – serve God. Submit to husband, provide marital rights of husband, maintain the home and raise children.

    These lists are different, but that does not mean one is slaving away while the other gets a free ride.

  71. Dale says:

    @seriouslyserving
    >Yes, I am embarrassed to admit that. Even more embarrassed that he had to ask me directly!
    >
    >She would be foolish then to spend her whole marriage trying to “fix” the 20%, and failing to enjoy the 80!

    Thank you for choosing to be a good example, training the younger women. Titus 2:3-5.

    And if your avatar/icon picture is accurate, thanks also for providing an example of a woman who is able to wear women’s clothing, without suffering unduly.🙂 Deut 22:5.

  72. feeriker says:

    The reality is, all Christians are tempted to rebel against Christ, even though he is the perfect King and Saviour! How much harder it is then to submit to our human husbands.

    And can you imagine excusing a husband’s poor leadership because his wife isn’t submitting well enough? Unheard of!

    A true blessing and miracle would be the emergence of someone who could drill these two related AND VERY SIMPLE TO GRASP concepts into the heads of “pastors” today who think they’re qualified to counsel anyone on Christian marriage.

  73. It is in most cases a thoughtless, automatic act; they merely notice that their rebellious feminist frame has been replaced with Christianity, and instantly set about discarding Christianity and returning to feminist rebellion.

    Indeed it is thoughtless. She peppers her words with work arounds. Heck yes I’d be rebellious if my spouse was “flipping me off” etc. But what about the other 99% of dutiful yet boring husbands who just work, spend time with kids, maybe coach little league, are in men’s group at church and still cut the lawn in the ratty tee shirt with the list of promises from PK?

    Cough

    Well he is a jerk too. Because she isn’t feeeeeeling it.

    Its things like this that make the artificial reality aspect of the red pill metaphor so accurate.

    A pipe wrench? Amazing. And I thought the nasal hair trimmer was over the top. It lacked heft.

  74. Boxer says:

    ”This coming election of Hillary (and yes, she is inevitible)”

    President Hillary Clinton will reveal to American men that America is no longer a nation that elevates rugged cowboys and pioneers. That’s the bad, old America. The new America wants its men emasculated, weak, and completely controlled by a corporate-owned state that’s far more concerned with the wants of acquisitive career gals. Who better than Hillary Clinton to put the “nanny” in “nanny state?”

    Much more at:
    http://www.radixjournal.com/journal/2014/2/21/why-we-need-hillary

  75. theasdgamer says:

    “Making someone angry with unloving, high handed leadership could cause them to rebel against your authority.”

    Maybe it’s the feelz and hamster making a reasonable order appear to be “unloving, high-handed”. Why should we believe what a woman says when her own feelz can deceive her and those deceptive feelz may have influenced her words?

    What authority does any woman have to judge whether a man’s leadership is unloving? And how can we know if his alleged high-handedness might not be a response to his wife’s rebellion?

    Reframing 101.

    Now, what does real submission look like?

  76. theasdgamer says:

    I’m still waiting for someone to provide a scriptural reference saying that a husband is required to lead his family. I’d also like a reference that explains where a woman’s submission is dependent upon a husband’s leadership. I think that leadership derives from willing submission automatically. Leadership has to be learned, of course, and can be developed. A lack of leadership ability by a husband doesn’t excuse a lack of submission by a wife.

  77. Sarah's Daughter says:

    I’d also like a reference that explains where a woman’s submission is dependent upon a husband’s leadership.

    Of course there is no scriptural reference to this. What you’ll hear is that his leadership (done to her liking) makes it easier for her to submit. Which, if the Christian spouting such nonsense would think honestly about it, is not necessarily loving. Doing your children’s math homework would make it easier for him to get a good grade – it is not wise nor loving.

    I have yet to meet a wife, who adheres to biblical instruction for wives, who turned from rebellion thanks to an “easy to submit to” husband. There’s always a story of: “submitting when it was hard to do”, “obeying when it didn’t make sense to her”, “relenting when she wanted to fight”, “surrendering out of reverence to the Lord”.

  78. Darwinian Arminian says:

    Hey Novaseeker, saw this:

    ” . . . I cannot emphasize enough how emotionally rewarding it would be for Democratic and Independent baby-boomer women to elect the first female president. Older women feel this way too.”

    I won’t say she can’t win, but I’m not so sure that it plays out so easily with female voters.

    What makes me think this? I’ve got a story of my own: Back in 2008, I joined my surrounding family for a get-together. My paternal and maternal grandmothers are both there. The former’s a conservative republican and committed Christian; the latter is a moderate democrat and a lapsed Baptist. I’ve never known them to see eye-to-eye on anything before in my life. Until now.

    The TV is on, and a news update starts discussing the upcoming election. Hillary gets mentioned, and the maternal grandmother comments on how glad she’ll be when the whole mess is over, before adding, “I really hope she doesn’t win. I don’t want to see a woman leading the country.” At which point the paternal grandmother turns to her and says, “I completely agree with you! That’s not the place where a woman should be!”

    I know it’s anecdotal, but I thought it was telling (and I’ve always remembered it), in part because I think it showed an underlying truth to how women really are. It’s often said on the manosphere that women tend to be creatures of the herd, and it’s true! But that can also make it easy to forget just how much hostility each member of the herd can still have for all of the others.

    Remember Mencken’s line about how a misogynist is a man who hates women as much as the women hate each other? He was right. Women compete against each other, they fight each other and they sabotage each other all the time. In some ways they can even distrust them more than men do; there are still business surveys today showing that more professional women prefer to have a male boss over a female one.

    Who’s to say that seeing a woman vying for the top spot isn’t just as likely to inspire envy as it is pride? Or trepidation? Keep in mind that the last time Hillary ran she only barely beat John Edwards — a philandering glamour boy, no less! — in the first primary before then going on to lose the whole contest to a man who hadn’t even been in the Senate half as long as she had.

    The feminine imperative is strong, no doubt. But if Hillary is simply counting on Team Woman to carry her across the finish line . . . I somehow can’t help but suspect that things may not go exactly as planned.

  79. The Jack Russell Terrorist says:

    It’s only the dinosaur media that is giving the victory to the Hildabeast. There are still hearings coming up in the missing emails pertaining to Benghazi. Look at the clusterbomb ousting Khadafi caused. She has no connection with younger voters. Not personable like her philandering husband. Bill Clinton’s passed indiscretions. What did she ever do as Senator? Yes I am Canadian and I hope she never gets in, even though there is a shadow govt. running the show behind the curtains.

  80. @asd: The Book of Oprah demands fried rice and submission only if the man is fully present, with a sacrificial love as Christ loved the Church, and leading wisely, in the direction she wants to go, is a good provider, and provides lots of tinglololzzzz.

    @Agirl: “And I realize that this isn’t the main point, but about that housework – are you all saying that husbands shouldn’t do any or that wives shouldn’t ask him to any and should just wait to see what he decides to do on his own? I am assuming that people here aren’t actually against a man cleaning up in his own home, so the the problem must be in how the wife is asking?”

    We have dealt with this several times on /r/marriedredpill and the most recent answer is the sweet spot for housework is to do enough so she is not your mother picking up after you but not so much that you are her maid. The Captain of a ship obviously does his share- more than his share. Are you saying a SAHM should share 50% of the housework with a working dad? Or are you seriously asking us if a man is supposed to do what needs to be done? My wife makes more money than me and works more hours. I do more housework than her (except for this weird power surge she gets the week after she ovulates when she often goes through the entire house in a frantic multi-hour binge, but I digress).

    Yes the problem probably is in the asking. What do you think your husband would exchange for a wife with even a tiny bit of girl game who behaved as a Christian woman in full submission? What chores might he decide to pick up if you ended your rebellion and informed your husband that you would always be sexually available for him from now on?

    Read “The Surrendered Wife” and “Me? Obey Him?”

  81. JDG says:

    Who better than Hillary Clinton to put the “nanny” in “nanny state?”

    Is that her campaign slogan?

  82. Also, Hillary is most certainly not a shoe in. She will win the Democratic primary this time but there are several Ree-pew-bicks who could beat her. I am a Rand Paul guy and my physician smokes your old school apparatchik operative. Plus he is good looking.

  83. JDG says:

    What you’ll hear is that his leadership (done to her liking) makes it easier for her to submit.

    Yep! I’ve heard that one many times. Then there’s the fabulous: “If no one is following, then you aren’t leading.” I asked the last person who told me that how it applied to our Savior when His disciples forsook him.

  84. Just Saying says:

    husbands who do take part in household chores, cleaning. etc. are actually statistically happier

    What Feminist BS… Women need to be led by a strong man – if that isn’t you, they will look for someone who won’t take their non-sense, so they can complain about him. Every weekend those women come out looking for men. I enjoy them – treat them like they want to be treated then send them back to their boyfriend or husband so he can put up with her BS. I got what I wanted – you can deal with her for the other hours of the day, or days in the year.

    Women, by their very nature, are submissive. They are soft, for you to enjoy them. They are compliant, so YOU can mold them. Some of them will spout their non-sense loudly, but behind closed doors they will sit at your feet, and do whatever you want to please you. Because that is what they need – but they will challenge you to see if you deserve their obedience and submissiveness. Unfortunately too many men fail those challenges…

    If she doesn’t listen, turn her over your knee and make her bottom a nice cherry red like the disobedient child she is – I’ve known most women to become kittens after a good hard spanking. You don’t have to listen – your wives, girlfriends, or daughters will find their way to my bed eventually because it is what they need.

  85. JDG says:

    The feminine imperative is strong, no doubt. But if Hillary is simply counting on Team Woman to carry her across the finish line . . . I somehow can’t help but suspect that things may not go exactly as planned.

    Maybe I’ve finally crossed over into conspiracy loony land, but as far as I’m concerned the folks high up the political chain already know who the president is going to be, either that or it doesn’t matter because either major candidate will tow the line if elected. IMO it’s all a farce at this point.

  86. MarcusD says:

    @JDG

    “Yes they do. I’m not sure there will ever be a Republican president again, not that I care anymore.”

    Given the demographic changes, orchestrated or not, there will probably be a Democrat president. I think Critical Theory, and its cultural artifacts (much of which is taken as automatically true) was also quite an important development.

    @DeNihilist

    “Yes they do. I’m not sure there will ever be a Republican president again, not that I care anymore.”

    Unfortunately, the CPC is just delaying rather than reversing the stupidity of PET (etc). Canadian universities are mostly a joke now (primarily in the sense of the assumption that Left = correct, Right = evil).

    @Novaseeker

    “Yep. You can kind of tell that the Republican female writer is *herself* excited about the prospect, despite her politics. Sex trumps politics for many women, remember that.”

    Should Hillary be elected, we’ll see how large the margin is. I have no doubt that in-group bias will be of huge assistance to Hillary (cf http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E2%80%9CWomen_are_wonderful%E2%80%9D_effect).

  87. Spike says:

    She lost me a her first paragraph: “As a wife I’m called to submit…LOL…””

    Taking Scripture seriously, are we, soulthirstjc?”

    I’d like to apply the same argument to a ball busting wife:

    As a husband, I’m called to be faithful because it says “Thous Shalt not commit adultery…LOL…”
    Once again, she, like all feminists, fails the gender-switch test.

  88. Mark says:

    @DeNihilist

    “”the polls showed the left NDP winning a majority. Nope, Conservative won both with healthy majorities, Seems like us Canucks love buggering the pollsters!””

    Good point! I remember seeing a map of Ontario in one of our papers after the last Ontario election.All the Ridings were Blue(Conservative) and the Toronto area was Orange(Liberal).It was Toronto that carried that useless lesbian c*** into power in Ontario.I know lots of people that voted for her.I was not one of them!

    @JDG

    “”DeNihilist are Canuck conservatives feminists like US conservatives?””

    I would say NO! Canuck Conservatives are much more Liberal that their American counterparts.

    @Jack Russell

    “”Yes I am Canadian and I hope she never gets in, even though there is a shadow govt. running the show behind the curtains.””

    Nice to see more Canucks like you and DeNihilist coming to Dalrock’s Forum.Every major candidate that runs for the US Presidency comes from the Council on Foreign Relations(CFR).The exception being Ronald Reagan.But,Reagan got told..”we will make you President but,your VP is George HW Bush..and he is our man”.The “Eastern Establishment” is VERY powerful.Never have any doubt about this.The EE and the CFR is headed up by the Rockefeller family.Which is the most powerful family in the US.Second most powerful in the world.The wealthiest most powerful being the Rothschild Family of Europe.

  89. Mark says:

    @TFH

    The al-Saud family is powerful.But,the Rothschilds are 200 years ahead of the al-Saud family.They have oil,I agree.But,it is the US(Rockefeller) and Europeans(Rothschild) that have the oil companies for extraction and export.The Oppenheimer family is also up there.The Rockefeller family controls about 11 Trillion in assets.The Rothschilds about 110 Trillion in Assets.The reason that I know so much about these “Power families” is that they are Jewish.Except,the Rockefellers….who claim to be Baptists.But,they have Jewish lineage in their history.Also,Canada has an “Establishment”.My father is part of it.I have been hearing these names since I was a kid.So I do have a VERY good view from the “inside”.

  90. MarcusD says:

    Dress Codes: Now Part of Rape Culture
    https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/13/dress-codes-and-the-naked-public-square/

    Sarah Silverman Struggles to Come Up With Her Own Tale of Wage-Discrimination Woe; Comes Up With One Example, Then, When Confronted With the Facts, Apologizes and Admits It’s Not a “Very Good” Wage Discrimination Story At All
    http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=356178

  91. MarcusD says:

    Man and woman are different and complementary, Pope emphasizes in audience [CWN]
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=956172

    Please Help! I want a divorce!
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=956295

  92. Dale says:

    @theasdgamer
    >I’m still waiting for someone to provide a scriptural reference saying that a husband is required to lead his family.

    Pretty sure you have already received these, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt once.

    One person is a leader, the other follows the leader. If one is ordered to follow or submit, this logically requires that the other lead the one who is submitting. A private cannot submit to the orders of the sargent if the sargent refuses to give any. I cannot submit to Christ if I have no idea what Christ wants me to do.
    Yes, these passages below do not say, “thou shalt lead”, instead they order the wife to submit. I expect you have the ability to work your way through the logic of the statement above.
    Must submit:
    – Titus 2:3-5
    – Col 3:18-21
    – Eph 5:22-33 This one not only says she is to submit, but states: “23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.” And how is Christ the “head” of the church? Romans 10:9-13 says in part “confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord”. Lord was used to mean the guy in charge. Thus the one who gives the teaching/direction.
    – 1 Pet 3:1-7

    Less reliable, but there are also numerous examples of God expecting that the husband will lead his family. These off the top of my head:
    – Joseph only was told to get Mary and Jesus out of Bethleham (about Matt chapter 1, 2 or 3). Mary did not need to be told. As leader of the family, Joseph was the only one who needed to be told, as he would be telling the family what to do.
    – Joseph only was told to return his family back to Israel (about Matt chapter 1, 2 or 3)
    – God told Adam the command about the tree of good and evil (about Genesis chapter 3). Eve was told by Adam not God, as partly shown by her having misunderstood. (She thought she also could not go near it; I am guessing that Adam relayed God’s command, and then added, “do not even go near it”, with the intention of keeping her far from the danger. If only he had kept on with that attitude, instead of abdicating his leadership position to her. Look where that abdication got us.)
    – Josh 24:14-15 shows the example of Joshua stating, “as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord”. It doesn’t say, “if my wife agrees, then we will serve God.” Joshua lead. Wife did not need to agree, only obey and follow.
    – God told Abram (also called Abraham) to go to a new country. God did not tell the wife. She would follow Abram’s leadership or get left behind. (Referred to in Hebrews 11:8. Those events recorded somewhere in Genesis; around chapter 12.)

    > I’d also like a reference that explains where a woman’s submission is dependent upon a husband’s leadership.
    – 1 Pet 3:1-7 shows the opposite, as I presume you already know. People who say the wife should submit only when the husband does “x”, or is good enough, are serving Satan, even if unknowingly. (2 Tim 2:22-26)

  93. Opus says:

    There is a long time – a year and a half – before your election, so there is all to play for, and nothing is settled. I understood, however, that the power of your President is somewhat limited, but I leave it to the political philosopher’s here to correct my understanding of your settlement.

    Our election is however far more imminent – 7th May next, in fact – and so I thought you would all like to know how we are essentially untroubled by Democracy.

    We do not get to elect or re-elect our head of state – that is a matter to be decided between The Prime Minister and The Archbishop of Canterbury, nor for that matter The Prime Minister himself for that is a matter for the Head of State; nor do we get to have any say, as I believe you do, as to who our local Judges might be (that is a matter for the Lord Chancellor). There are two House of Parliament; the Lords and The Commons. The Lords (the equivalent of your Senate) are not Lords at all as all real Lords are now excluded, instead people are appointed by The Prime Minister so it is a collection of the great and the good (and the not so good), that is to say the good are the Bishops and the great are people who have done well: for example there is Baroness Lawrence who was so awful that her husband returned to his native Jamaica to escape her and her sole claim to fame is that her son was murdered. Most Lords never bother turning up for the sittings of the House.

    Then there are The Commons (over six hundred of them); the candidates have now been announced. Until recently the ballot paper did not even indicate the respective party (if they have one, as they usually do) of the candidate – the fiction being that we are returning a representative rather than lobby-fodder for the whips. In the Royal Borough which is my local constituency six candidates have been entered: of those six one is female; all are white. Of those six, one claims to be Independent and so the others are affiliated to political parties; one each from each of the three main parties and two from smaller lunatic-fringe parties. Should they do very badly they will lose the deposit that they had to place down to have their names entered at all. On the day of the election I will go along to my local polling station which is manned all day by employees (usually) of the council (it is a very long day – I did it once). I will be given a form with the names of the candidates and will then enter a booth where there is a pencil which I will use to place a cross beside the name of my chosen candidate (no idea yet who that is). I will then fold the paper in half and leaving the booth, place it into a slit in a large box. As I leave the Polling Station, an elderly man who is slightly deaf will ask for my name: this man is a member of the Conservative Party and what he wants to do is find out (by deduction) who has yet to vote, so that he can send his gang of thugs round to ensure that those who haven’t voted may do so. Elsewhere in the world this would be described as interference with the voting procedure but we treat it as care in the community. Women and Children over eighteen (and possibly, Prisoners) are allowed to vote but not Europeans.

    We have a female head of State, a female Mistress of the Monarch’s Music and a female Poet Laureate. We once had a female Prime Minister – a woman so divisive – that on her recent death a song, The Wicked Witch is Dead went straight to the top of the pop charts. Be careful what you wish for.

  94. Richard Cook says:

    She tries to present this mess like a tick crossed with a crab crossed with a mole. Underground and sideways. And its so obvious.

  95. Darwinian Arminian says:

    Opus,

    True, your country did produce a female prime minister. But credit where it’s due; She could be counted on to drop occasional quotes like this:

    “The feminists hate me, don’t they? And I don’t blame them. For I hate feminism. It is poison.”

    . . . Do you suppose the candidate on our side of the pond might sometime have the generosity to provide us with comparable nuggets of truth and wisdom? C’mon Hill, give the people what they want!

  96. earl says:

    ‘But let me tell you- if your husband is constantly totally unloving (calls you names, flips you off, acts superior, etc.)…it can lead a wife to a place of feeling total injustice and naturally wanting to rebel- not just against him, but GOD.’

    So what does it say when the wife does these things and where that leads her husband?

    I’d suggest women read up on St. Rita. She probably had a husband most of them would consider ‘unloving’…and read up on what her conduct was. It lead to his conversion on his death bed.

  97. earl says:

    ‘But it is an important question because when you get right down to it Christian women are feminists first. ‘

    Well by their fruits you’ll know. I think most Christian women are told two different things…and much like Eve they prefer the stuff that pleases them over what God tells them. Feminism isn’t some new modern creation…we just have a name to the bug now.

    I like the idea of calling out rebellion whether a man does it or a woman…too many people get the idea that rebellion should be celebrated when in fact it leads to their demise. Disobedience to God was the first sin.

  98. Boxer says:

    Dear TFH:

    Most women have a huge intellectual handicap about grasping that when men earn a paycheck, it is hard earned. This leads to ignorant beliefs about ‘men not doing housework = lazy men’ as well as the perennial myth of a ‘pay gap’. All stem for a complete ignorance by most women about how money is earned, how wealth is created, and why productivity is the most important thing of all (to women, productivity is the LEAST important thing).

    The plethora of stories on this and related sites never ceases to entertain. The average woman views masculine productivity and earnings simply as a byproduct of having a cock.

    After an extended tantrum about ‘not spending enough time with her at home,’ I asked my wife not to spend so much on frivolous nonsense, so that I could take some time off. She replied with ‘why don’t you just find a part-time job that pays more money than the one you have now’ and kept screaming…

    Yes, find a new job “that pays more, for less hours” so that he can spend more time doing the dishes… all while she hits up Starbucks with her bitch friends. What a genius. However did this poor man marry so well?

    Regards,

    Boxer

  99. earl says:

    ‘After an extended tantrum about ‘not spending enough time with her at home,’ I asked my wife not to spend so much on frivolous nonsense, so that I could take some time off. She replied with ‘why don’t you just find a part-time job that pays more money than the one you have now’ and kept screaming…’

    Oh that is almost the same thing from a Chris Rock rant in one of his shows.

  100. Boxer says:

    Oh that is almost the same thing from a Chris Rock rant in one of his shows.

    I got it from one of the old MGTOW fora. I kept it because it struck me as simultaneously hilarious and deeply sad.

  101. earl says:

    Like Chris Rock said…’try your best, but you can’t make a woman happy…it’s impossible.’

  102. theasdgamer says:

    @ Dale

    Thanks. I agree that there are plenty of biblical examples of a man leading his family. However, I don’t think that a man needs to convince his wife to follow. The onus is on her to submit.

    If one is ordered to follow or submit, this logically requires that the other lead the one who is submitting.

    I don’t follow the logic here. I take “submit” to mean “actively and willingly seek to obey” as opposed to “grudgingly and passively obey”. There’s no implied command to men to lead.

  103. Boxer says:

    Dear Earl:

    Do you read Catholic Answers? It’s eerie to note the similarities to soulthirstjc’s reframing the rebellion of wives as the fault of their husbands in so many different scenarios. Here’s an entertaining example:

    In general, divorce is bad for children. That’s why (one of the key reasons) the Church is so opposed to it. But it can be neccessary in some cases (eg abuse). You need to decide if your case is such an exception to the norm.

    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=956295
    (Thanks to Marcus D for this gem)

    A woman who needs to “decide” that she’s being abused is not being abused, of course. If there were even mild abuse (one bruise would do it, anywhere in North America) her husband would be carted off to the clink, with or without her consent. The advice this woman is giving to her sweet, Catholic sister is to destroy her family on false pretenses. The bizarre part is that the second woman will probably end up believing that her husband has been abusing her, despite the fact that no such thing ever happened. (He appears to be sort of a mediocre guy, with a lot of problems, but she never said he beat her up physically).

    This reframing tendency is the best reason I find never to get too deeply involved with any one woman. Most of them are masters at it, and if you try to jump through their hoops and accept these “alternate” versions of reality, you’ll probably end up having a psychotic episode.

    Boxer

  104. Novaseeker says:

    Like Chris Rock said…’try your best, but you can’t make a woman happy…it’s impossible.’

    It’s a feature, though, not a bug. It very much helps women with raising children, because they are constantly on the lookout for things that can be improved, and are not content with the status quo with any kid — that’s very important from a developmental point of view for children. It’s also helpful in being a helpmeet if it is channeled properly and reined in properly — by noticing that which is not optimal more readily, she can help her husband address things that he might not be noticing. That’s a good first officer. Where it becomes dysfunctional is when it is not reined in or channeled properly, and becomes a source of constant dissatisfaction with everything in life — too much of a basically good thing results in a bad thing, of course.

  105. earl says:

    @ Boxer…

    ‘Do you read Catholic Answers?’

    Some of them. The advice given is a classic example of a mixture what the church says and what the world says. Capping it off with usually telling the woman to go with ‘her will’. If a woman is truly in a state of clear abuse…I doubt she needs an answer forum to confirm what’s happening. But that’s just my logic and reasoning talking.

    I often have to catch myself from re-framing rebellion. We seem to think that woman are masters at it but that may be because we see them do it on the outside more than we realize we can do it ourselves. Bottom line is for everyone is ‘Are you are going to listen to God’s will and what the church says or your rationalization hamster?’

  106. earl says:

    ‘ It very much helps women with raising children,’

    And we thought it was a good idea to take that ability from women away from that and put her into the workforce. The feature is now a bug.

  107. Mark Citadel says:

    “She is presenting herself as a submissive Christian wife

    Where does she do that? I see words that claim she’s heard about submission, but don’t see much else on that topic.”

    Pretty damning, she offers no affirmation of the Scripture she cites, and the LOL is obnoxious. It is never advisable to use ‘LOL’ when discussing the Holiest of Texts.

    “And we thought it was a good idea to take that ability from women away from that and put her into the workforce. The feature is now a bug.”

    More of a virus really

  108. earl says:

    ‘That one thing gains soooo much respect from women- women long to be loved like Christ loved the church (unselfish leadership).’

    Now that’s true…because this is the model. Men are supposed to have unselfish leadership and lay down their life for their wives. But all we ever hear is what women long for…how about what men long for?

    Women in return are to be like the church and lay down their life for their husband…submitting to his leadership, helping him on his mission, giving praise and respect to him, etc. How men men long for that from their wives?

    Point being both sexes have their part in this dance and can play their part in improving the state of their marriage.

  109. @MarcusD

    Dress Codes: Now Part of Rape Culture
    https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/04/13/dress-codes-and-the-naked-public-square/

    Excellent article. Any sane society quickly figures out that dress codes are required for both men and for women, but that 80% of their problems will be on the women’s side of things.

    Since feminism represents a rebellion against any kind of societal order, or God’s order, we should not be surprised that feminists and liberals are busy rebelling against the idea of anyone telling them they should wear clothes. Their sin is analogous to that of Adam and Eve’s in the garden, when God condemned their inadequate homemade clothing and instead gave them proper garments.

    There is a point that needs to be made, however, and is one I think feminists can successfully fixate on: women and girls don’t need to wear modest clothing in order to avoid distracting boys. They need to do so because God said so. On a hypothetical desert island inhabited only by women, proper Christian women would not parade around unclothed.

  110. @MarcusD

    To CAF’s credit, a fair number of people pointed out her marriage to a divorced man probably isn’t even a valid one and that she whined about the last 15 years but hasn’t been bothering with the Eucharist or Penance until about 4 months ago. (Although part of the purpose of the church is to provide a home to which wayward children can return.)

    Read Hoosier Daddy’s post (#23). His description of his wife’s endless dreaming is priceless. Excerpt:

    It all started with my little dreamers idea that we start a Catholic book store. Then that we buy a ranch, then just a small “hobby” farm, now it is a christmas tree farm that does weddings in the summer. She always has these little gems. And I like it. I think it is cute. And some of them I can even get on board with. But mostly I blame pintrest, IG, and blogs. They present this perfect view of these little things that are not realistic.

    Pinterest and its ilk have enabled covetousness and vanity on a never-before-precedented scale. These things are all sins, and they’re sins for a good reason.

    In my past life as a consultant specialising in social media to target women in the 30-40 demographic (the biggest spenders), I remember the first day I saw Pinterest and immediately bugged a few friends for an invite. “This will let us sell more crap to women than anything we’ve ever had before.” And it’s all based on pride, coveting, and vanity.

  111. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    John Nesteutes: Any sane society quickly figures out that dress codes are required for both men and for women, but that 80% of their problems will be on the women’s side of things.

    I suppose you mean that women should dress with modesty. Especially women who have husbands and boyfriends should not dress in a lewd manner that attracts the attention of other men.

    I agree. But suggest to a modern woman to cover up, and she’ll explode with, “If men can’t avoid looking at me, that’s THEIR PROBLEM. It’s MY BODY, and MY RIGHT, and MY CHOICE to dress however I want. Why should I change MY CLOTHES just because MEN have a problem with THEIR EYES?”

    It’s hypocritical of them, of course. They dress to attract male attention, then act all innocent when they get male attention. They’ll even act offended if it’s attention from the wrong males.

    BTW, have you noticed how common it’s become in the past 15 years or so for women to wear dresses that expose their navels? So many more women walking around with bare stomachs than when I was young.

  112. It very much helps women with raising children, because they are constantly on the lookout for things that can be improved, and are not content with the status quo with any kid — that’s very important from a developmental point of view for children

    Nova

    I understand why you state this. I still disagree. The drive you describe manifests in the wrong way. Her interests for the children so often have to do with her. This drives the overly packed schedule of lessons and sports, much of the stuff that comprises creature comforts in the home, the dietary restrictions and educational focus as well as restrictions on things not perceived as good for the little buggers like today’s aptly called “screen time”.

    Not suggesting women are indifferent to kids. Am saying that what you describe, because it is outwardly focused, is not where you’d get the proof of her altruistic selfless parenting.

    Not being content with the status quo as a state of being is not profitable.

  113. Point being both sexes have their part in this dance and can play their part in improving the state of their marriage.

    Other point being these are not conditional. They are not even hard linked. They are God given imperatives at man and at woman. Full stop.

  114. feeriker says:

    Where it becomes dysfunctional is when it is not reined in or channeled properly, and becomes a source of constant dissatisfaction with everything in life — too much of a basically good thing results in a bad thing, of course.

    Unfortunately, most women are incapable of channeling this or reining it in themselves. It takes a MAN’s guidance and perspective to channel it into productive form. Unfortunately, given that the rebellion is at fever pitch, any attempts on a man’s part to do this are usually futile.

    BTW, have you noticed how common it’s become in the past 15 years or so for women to wear dresses that expose their navels? So many more women walking around with bare stomachs than when I was young.

    Yes, and so many of these woman are morbidly obese too. Worse still, I’m starting to see more and more of this type of dress on women in “church.” And of course no one calls them on it …

  115. earl says:

    Yeah just read that CAF piece that that sounded like a trainwreck before the marriage:

    ‘To start out with I will freely admit that during our courtship I had definite ideas on the kind of man I wanted to marry. I wanted first and foremost for him to love me, not cheat on me, be a good father to my daughter, be strong and reliable, and be someone who shared my interests as well as fulfilled my sexual needs. When I met my husband I had just gotten out of a relationship with a highly abusive (mentally) man. I fell in love very fast but looking back I know I was pretty desperate and needed to feel valued. I pursued my husband from the first, and I mean REALLY pursued him.’

    So it’s a case of a divorced man and a single mother from an abusive relationship (perhaps the father of her kid) getting married. Add onto that all her points on the checklist and desperation and you get a bunch of fresh wounds that are sprinkled in with the salt of unrealistic expectations.

  116. a girl says:

    @ seriouslyserving

    I am not married, but considering it. He brought up submission recently and I am concerned that he is overly focused on it. But when I asked him what submission would look like to him and his answer was vague each time. So it is something that is important to him but he can’t or won’t really describe or explain how it would work in our day to day lives. After reading the comments here I am going to ask him how he feels about housework because I can’t see myself married to someone who has issues with it. I don’t want to be the only person who scrubs the toilet for the rest of my life.

    @ Dalrock
    Got it! Even if the husband is perfect the wife will be tempted to rebel.

  117. The Question says:

    @Dalrock

    I’m amazed at your ability to interpret these comments people make. I could have read them a hundred times and not quite get what they’re saying. People have a wonderful way of saying so little in so many words.

  118. earl says:

    ‘Other point being these are not conditional. They are not even hard linked. They are God given imperatives at man and at woman. Full stop.’

    That’s a good point too. It shouldn’t be cause and effect because of what the other spouse does…it should be done because that’s what God requires. Most of these type of articles never state what God says (or dismisses it) but instead elude to the fact that the man should do this first and then the woman will do her thing.

  119. anonymous_ng says:

    @a girl
    Here’s one man’s opinion on the whole submission thing. I really don’t get all the sturm and drang on the part of women regarding submission. Have they never worked for someone else?

    Submission is like working for a good boss. Your input and opinions are welcome and you’re damn well expected to pipe up if something is categorically stupid or likely to get someone hurt, but once a decision is made, then, the time for discussion is over and you’re expected to use your God given talents, abilities, and judgement to accomplish the goals set forth by the boss. And, if things don’t turn out well, that’s not on you, it’s on them. It’s not your place to jump in with and “AH HAH!!! I was RIGHT!!!!”

    Besides, what the hell is the big deal about washing the toilet? It takes five minutes once a week. Do you get similarly upset at the prospect of having to brush your teeth or shower? Does anyone jump for joy at the prospect of taking out the trash more frequently than the damned toilet for the rest of their lives?

    Besides which, it’s almost a cliche that the men who got frivorced were doing plenty of housework because their no good wives weren’t.

  120. Reluctant Neo says:

    I think it is easier and less stressful to love and lead a wife when she respects and submits as opposed to rebelling. It is easier to stay sexually faithful to a wife when she enthusiastically and willingly participates in sex. Can something similar be said from a wife’s perspective, and if so what would it be?

  121. Boxer says:

    Dear a girl:

    I’m assuming you and your affianced are both religious.

    So it is something that is important to him but he can’t or won’t really describe or explain how it would work in our day to day lives.

    The great thing about Christian and Jewish religious texts is that they’re generally written in a carnal, easy to understand way. No priest or “guru” is really necessary to interpret the teachings for you.

    You all have the text, right? The brothers here have loaded this blog up with relevant sections. If your betrothed doesn’t know exactly what he wants, just assure him that you will follow the text of the bible in questionable matters.

    After reading the comments here I am going to ask him how he feels about housework because I can’t see myself married to someone who has issues with it. I don’t want to be the only person who scrubs the toilet for the rest of my life.

    It’s important to realize that this might be your job. If you don’t think you can do that, you can always forget marriage and get a paper-shuffling job in a cubicle someplace, but that will be a lousy job too. Whatever job you choose, you should accept that it won’t always be pleasant, and discipline yourself to doing it well and without complaint.

    Best,

    Boxer

  122. earl says:

    I live alone and scrub my toilets, take out the trash, do the laundry, etc. They are not soul crushing back breaking tasks. Teaching children in a class I volunteer for is a bigger challenge than any of the housework or things that pop up in my job I have to do.

    If a woman is stressed out because of the kids…I get that. But the housework might be a good remedy to forget that for a while.

  123. a girl,

    He brought up submission recently and I am concerned that he is overly focused on it. But when I asked him what submission would look like to him and his answer was vague each time.

    That is because the feminist imperative is strong and he doesn’t want to scare you/freak you out. I will be purposely UN-vague. What he means is simply: do whatever he tells you to do. You submit. He picks the house you will all live in, you submit. He picks the schools for the kids, you submit. He picks the church you worship in, the vacations you take, the cars you drive, the kind of job you do inside and outside the home, and the s-xual acts the two of you will share in the bedroom, you submit. That is what men want. A bachelor has complete and total authority over all aspects of his life. A Christian man in a Christian marriage wants that same total complete authority. Submit to it.

    Now before you go and let all this upset you (because in submission, you are essencially agreeing to become his property) ask yourself this, this all important question that might help you put your mind at ease and keep the feminist imperative at bay: If for whatever reason you are NOT willing to do absolutely everything this man tells you to do, then why on God’s green earth are you even considering him to be your lawfully wedded husband? Go all in, or get out and let him find another girl who WILL submit to him.

  124. John Nesteutes says:

    After reading a girl’s comment, I can really see that the old idea of “If you want to be great in God’s Kingdom, be a servant of all” is a principle women are very interested in applying to men, but not interested in applying at all to themselves.

    There has been a rather steady drumbeat teaching women to get married so they have a 50/50 partner to share housework with. We see this in a girl’s mindset: “I don’t want to scrub toilets the rest of my life.”

    There is a tacit assumption here that a man is out there, waiting to willingly scrub toilets. The fact she will be scrubbing toilets alone the rest of her life (or arguing with her roommate about it, or paying a make $20 an hour) hasn’t occurred to her.

  125. Sarah's Daughter says:

    I don’t want to be the only person who scrubs the toilet for the rest of my life.

    I encourage you to reconsider marriage if this is a legitimate concern of yours. You mock the covenant and sanctity of marriage with an attitude like this. You are not up for the huge responsibility that follows the vows you’d speak.

    (I write this as my husband is reeling in pain due to a debilitating injury with a very clear understanding and welcome disposition that not only will I clean the toilets for the rest of my life, I will joyfully tie his shoes for the rest of our life together if need be.)

  126. earl says:

    Perhaps gals would be more keen on choosing and marrying men who submit to God’s authority instead of being rebellious with bad boys who only follow their will. Men who submit to God generally wouldn’t make decisions to put their wife’s soul in harms way.

    Because while authority is a greater right…it is also has a BIGGER responsibility than submitting.

  127. Cane Caldo says:

    @a girl

    After reading the comments here I am going to ask him how he feels about housework because I can’t see myself married to someone who has issues with it. I don’t want to be the only person who scrubs the toilet for the rest of my life.

    If all you can see of marriage and the extraordinary gift and power of a wife’s submission is scrubbing toilets, then you’re not fit to be married. He (whomever he is) will have dodged a bullet.

  128. S. Chan says:

    TFH says “Now, not only do I not donate money and not vote, I have convinced many others to stop doing the same”.

    I disagree with doing that. The problem is that if you do not vote, this will be interpreted as indicating that you do not care. My suggestion is this: if you believe that all the candidates are inadequate, then vote but spoil your ballot.

  129. BuenaVista says:

    a girl,

    If it’s a big deal to handle all of the housework, but you expect the prospective mate to handle all of the wage-earning, you really need to forego the marriage opportunity, find a submissive, non-Christian man, or explain to him that while he’s making all of the money, he needs to make *enough* such that you have live-in help.

    (You haven’t stated that you two have discussed your man being the sole wage-earner and I am not claiming you did. It’s merely a speculation of mine based on your interest in this blog and the other details you have disclosed.)

    If you wish to explore a possible explanation of what he means by ‘submission’, read the Bible and google “complementarian marriage” and “equalist (or equalitarian) marriage.” This would probably be more useful time spent than trying to get the Christian view on who cleans the lav. That’s an awfully quotidian concern to ponder while also contemplating marital union.

    One of the great contradictions, in most churches that suggest they are sola scriptura, is that they advance an equalitarian or female-dominating, feminist marriage model.

  130. Anonymous Reader says:

    empathalogicalism
    Other point being these are not conditional. They are not even hard linked. They are God given imperatives at man and at woman. Full stop.

    Looking at it from another angle: there should be no question that churchgoing marrieds are sexually exclusive. Faithfulness, fidelity (Opus may recall Beethovan’s only opera, Fidelio), whatever you wish to call it. Is it negotiable, within this context i.e. Bible? Nope. If a man attempted to justify an affair, an act of adultery, by saying “Well, I was angry at her” or “well, she was too busy with the kids” or “well, she was spending a lot of time on the job” would anybody agree? Who would stand up and say “Yes! Those are good reasons!”

    But flip the script. A woman is angry at her husband, or too busy to pay attention to her (yes, it can be over the children as well as work as well as hobbies), suddenly she’s justified in yelling at him, refusing any affection to him, trashing him to her friends, and so forth. And who dares disagree with that? Why, only the basement-dwelling neckbearded losers with small penes of the androsphere. Certainly not anyone in the FOtF / Boundless / etc. world.

    Anger, pride, jealousy, etc. are not virtues in most systems, specificallly including the Christian worldview. Yet somehow, they are not so bad when done by women to other women or to men, most especially to husbands. Even though it is pretty easy for even a casual reader to find prohbitions in the Bible. “Don’t do that” is not difficult to understand.

    Or to put it another way, there is no “except when she’s angry” escape clause in Ephesians 5, nor is there an “except when she’s tired”, “except when she’s not feeling it”, and so forth. Just as there’s no “Except when he’s feeling unappreciated”, “except when he’s drunk”, “except when he’s angry”, etc. escape clauses in the 7th commandment. One of these is recognized as unquestionable, the other…not so much.

    Just because it’s in the manual, it does not follow that everyone has read it or is going to pay attention to it.

    All vows are equal but some vows are more equal? Yep. Because of the FI.
    God or the FI, which one has the higher authority? Look at the actions, not the words. And yeah, I’m indirectly referring to moy own “what if she doesn’t care?” comment.

  131. a girl,

    I don’t want to be the only person who scrubs the toilet for the rest of my life.

    I encourage you to reconsider marriage if this is a legitimate concern of yours. You mock the covenant and sanctity of marriage with an attitude like this. You are not up for the huge responsibility that follows the vows you’d speak.

    Yeah I’m going to have to concur with sarah’s daughter. I too would encourage you to reconsider marriage. I think that if you don’t want to be the only person who scrubs the toilet for the rest of your life (and for some people, that is a legitimate deal breaker) then marriage is most definately, not for you. I would instead encourage you to live a life of celebacy and singleness serving God in someway. That way you can choose to pay to have someone come in and clean your toilets. You choose. You don’t have to worry about submitting to the authority of a husband. You need only worry about submitting to God’s law. Fortunately for you, God has not commanded you to scrub toilets. He has commanded you to only obey your husband (which you wont have.)

  132. Dalrock, could you fix my blockquotes in the above post? Thx.

  133. earl says:

    How about this @ a girl

    What is your idea of submission?

  134. MarcusD says:

    @John Nesteutes

    “Pinterest and its ilk have enabled covetousness and vanity on a never-before-precedented scale.”

    Yes, Pinterest has been behind many of the most elaborate weddings that I’ve witnessed. Usually the bride and friends will have years worth of ideas that “must” be implemented.

  135. Pingback: You Must Be Because You Are | Things that We have Heard and Known

  136. Opus says:

    Never one to turn down an opportunity to write about Ludwig van B, Anonymous Reader gratuitously refers to Fidelio and gives me a lead in. Fidelio (a rescue opera – so now you know the plot) is to Nineteenth Century German opera what G.I.Jane is to movies. Beethoven asks us to accept not merely the implausibility of the cross-dressing wife being able to pass for a boy but that she would come and rescue her husband from the deepest darkest dungeon run by the nastiest of gaolers (rather than go off with the local Alpha-male). Florestan, her husband, does nothing (how could he, for he is tied to the wall).

    It is by the way more accurate to say that it is Ludwig’s only completed Opera (and I do not mean to distinguish it from its earlier incarnation as Leonora); there are sketches for at least two others, Vestas Feuer and Macbeth.

    The music is quite good.

  137. @MarcusD
    Just imagine the profit pressure the “Marital Industrial Complex” is under with declining marriage and divorce rates. Marriage is not a growth industry.The complex’s profits increasingly needs to come from elaborate weddings; Pinterest and “Say Yes to the Dress” are a reflection of the new reality of the high cost princess wedding.

  138. PokeSalad says:

    “What is your idea of submission?”

    A homebrew says it tracks closely with that of soulthirstjc.

  139. thedeclinieandfall,

    Would a ridiculous tv show such as “The Bachelor/The Bachelorette” ever have succeeded on television 50 years ago? Actually, lets ammend that statement, would a show like that have even been allowed to be made? Probably not. But if it could be made (in 1965) would anyone have watched it like they do NOW? No. No chance. And its not because the people were far more sophisticated in 1965 and wouldn’t have wasted their time. Some would have wasted their time. It is instead because marriage was so common place among ordinary Americans in the 1960s that watching a show about 20 or 30 beautiful, thin, well educated, 25 year old girls (who aren’t already married, incredibly) trying to “catch a man” would not have made any sense. By their age, everyone was already married. Those 30 girls on The Bachelor, guys would have been beating down their dad’s doors in the 1960s to wife them ‘up. Their fathers would have been beating them off with a stick (while loving every minute of the fact that their daughters had so many marital options.)

    Today a show like The Bachelor makes perfect sense because women are far more hypergamous than they have ever been AND because marriage is getting rarer and rarer. What was once a normal Christian right-of-passage (so to speak) into family formation, is now only a cememony for the MC, UMC, and UC. The “Marital Industrial Complex” is in major decline, and everyone knows it.

  140. a girl,

    I just want to add one more thing if you are still lurking, no one here is picking on you. We are all talking to you kindly, taking your questions and comments very seriously. No one is accusing you of being a troll whom we are supposed to tease. You might not like what we have to say (or maybe you do) but we are saying these things in kindness, trying to help.

  141. The word/term/name “Florestan”, the husband Opus describes as “tied to the wall” in a jail/gaol, has simply got to replace the term white knight.

    Those Christian conservative Florestans……someone coin/coyn it, my license expired.

  142. Pingback: She Got Games You Ain’t Even Thought of Playing | Things that We have Heard and Known

  143. JDG says:

    He brought up submission recently and I am concerned that he is overly focused on it.

    There is an epidemic of self proclaimed Christian women who do not know how to, let alone intend to, submit to their husbands. Yet here you are claiming that a man in this upside down, twisted, feminized, and rebellious culture is overly focused on submission. And this from a woman who, as a product of the aforementioned rebellious culture, is overly focused on housework and toilets. Will you at least make him a sammich before you dump him?

  144. JDG says:

    “What is your idea of submission?”

    A homebrew says it tracks closely with that of soulthirstjc.

    As does the majority of women in this part of the world. I get it with the secular women. It’s the women that say they are Christian that twist my britches. Why call yourself Christian if you aren’t at least going to try to follow His Word.

  145. JDG,

    There is an epidemic of self proclaimed Christian women who do not know how to, let alone intend to, submit to their husbands. Yet here you are claiming that a man in this upside down, twisted, feminized, and rebellious culture is overly focused on submission.

    It is d-mn near impossible to explain to women (even Christian women) who ONLY look at marriage from a hypergamous sense (I will only marry if I get whatever I want AND improve my own standard of living over what I had as a single) to look at it from a submissive, family-formation, obeying God’s law sense. Obey my man? Why would I ever do that, they think. He doesn’t OWN me! My marriage will be a QUEENDOM! I have all these things I want to do/have in my life and I expect my man to help me get there or else…. why get married?

    Women are so used to the glamourization of fairy tale marriage, that every time they think of marriage, they think they are princesses. The Disney corporation has capitalized on this twisted thinking with marketing to young girls with their princess line of merchandise. And that has been very successful (arguably the most successful thing that has come of Michael Eisner’s tenure as CEO.) They all want to be Aurora/Briar Rose OR Belle/Beauty OR Cinder-Ella.

    I don’t fault “a girl” for thinking this way. She’s just being honest. She has been brainwashed by the feminist imperative to see marriage purely from the hypergamous sense. So of course, she figures if she is going to be married AT ALL then d-mn it, she is NOT going to be cleaning that toilet bowl all the time. Afterall JDG, she is already cleaning that bowl as single woman. Why marry him if that doesn’t change? See the root of this twisted line of thinking? Thank feminism for that.

    To teach single women to UNLEARN that which they have learned, very difficult let me assure you. And that is coming from a man with a daughter.

  146. earl says:

    ‘It’s the women that say they are Christian that twist my britches. Why call yourself Christian if you aren’t at least going to try to follow His Word.’

    Most of the Christian churches have rebelled from God’s word. Or they laugh off the parts where it says wives are to submit to their husbands.

  147. earl says:

    ‘Women are so used to the glamourization of fairy tale marriage, that every time they think of marriage, they think they are princesses.’

    They’d rather have the fancy expensive wedding and the title of wife instead of having an actual marriage.

  148. Earl,

    Most of the Christian churches have rebelled from God’s word. Or they laugh off the parts where it says wives are to submit to their husbands.

    They must. Wives pick the church because they have threatpoint. They are NOT going to sit in a building and listen to a pastor tell them to submit to a man whom they married for money/resources but never really respected. Pastor must be paid. How do you pay the pastor if there is no one in the pews putting money into the offering plate?

    I have seen what has happened to churches who have had pastors who spoke Biblically. The churches either wound up firing them OR they wound up in bankruptcy. Its typically only the lay pastors (preaching for free as they have income elsewhere) who preach in someone’s livingroom or on a blog (such as this) where you really hear God’s word. If they are working for free, they don’t care if they get fired. That gives you freedom to speak truth to power.

  149. JDG says:

    See the root of this twisted line of thinking? Thank feminism for that.

    Of course. Feminism has overtaken western culture. In western countries western culture has been absorbed by what is currently referred to as Christianity. Hence the abundance of self proclaimed Christian women re-framing feminism as Christian teaching.

  150. earl says:

    Pastors get fired?

    Who knew other churches are run like a business. Thank goodness Holy Orders are ordained from God through succession of the apostles. There job is to speak Biblical truth.

  151. Earl,

    They’d rather have the fancy expensive wedding and the title of wife instead of having an actual marriage.

    Of course. Here is my favorite writer….

    https://fireflydove.wordpress.com/2009/10/12/a-libertarian-view-of-gay-marriage/

    There were actually two big changes; the first, when divorce laws were amended in most states to make it easier to get a divorce; and the second, when “no fault” divorce allowed one spouse to unilaterally end the marriage. The second change produced another huge surge in the divorce rate, and a nice decline in the incomes of divorced women; it seems advocates had failed to anticipate that removing the leverage of the financially weaker party to hold out for a good settlement would result in men keeping more of their earnings to themselves.

    What’s more, easy divorce didn’t only change the divorce rate; it made drastic changes to the institution of marriage itself. David Brooks makes an argument I find convincing: that the proliferation of the kind of extravagant weddings that used to only be the province of high society (rented venue, extravagant flowers and food, hundreds of guests, a band with dancing, dresses that cost the same as a good used car) is because the event itself doesn’t mean nearly as much as it used to, so we have to turn it into a three-ring circus to feel like we’re really doing something.

    A couple in 1940 (and even more so in 1910) could go to a minister’s parlor, or a justice of the peace, and in five minutes totally change their lives. Unless you are a member of certain highly religious subcultures, this is simply no longer true. That is, of course, partly because of the sexual revolution and the emancipation of women; but it is also because you aren’t really making a lifetime commitment; you’re making a lifetime commitment unless you find something better to do. There is no way, psychologically, to make the latter as big an event as the former, and when you lost that commitment, you lose, on the margin, some willingness to make the marriage work. Again, this doesn’t mean I think divorce law should be toughened up; only that changes in law that affect marriage affect the cultural institution, not just the legal practice.

    Say yes to the dress Earl. Its all about the wedding, not the marriage because… the marriage doesn’t actually MEAN anything.

  152. Pastors get fired?

    Of course. I helped fire one. In my blue pill days (ripe old age of 20, member of the Diaconette), I was a member of a church with a female pastor. She went full-blown BPD and physically assaulted one of the members of the congregation. We had to hire a consultant to help handle the “situation” (which in a saner world, was a minor police matter.) I said let the consultant’s decision be final as they would be acting impartially. The consultant fired our pastor. Good riddance.

  153. earl says:

    Oh well I wouldn’t count that firing. Females shouldn’t be pastors in the first place.

  154. a girl says:

    @ everyone who responded to my comment.

    I need to know what I’m agreeing to before I agree to it. Housework isn’t much as a single person, or a married couple, but I was raised in a large family. There can be a lot of housework that goes along with that, especially when young children are involved. I don’t want to end up doing all of that work alone.

    He is concerned about submission and I am concerned about what he will want me to submit to. What does he think that he will need to tell me to do or not do that makes submission such a concern for him? Maybe some would say just jump in and worry about it later, but I’m not comfortable with that.

  155. JDG says:

    Most of the Christian churches have rebelled from God’s word. Or they laugh off the parts where it says wives are to submit to their husbands.

    Exactly. But if one is not going to at least acknowledge and try to abide by basic Christian teachings (which have been indisputable for centuries) why claim affiliation with Christianity? I used to think they were just mislead, but I have confronted too many women about this error using the scriptures to believe this any more. Unfortunately I found that most of these women didn’t care (for various reasons) what was written in the Bible at that time. Over time a few of them matured and changed, but that was only a small minority.

  156. Anonymous Reader says:

    a girl
    After reading the comments here I am going to ask him how he feels about housework because I can’t see myself married to someone who has issues with it. I don’t want to be the only person who scrubs the toilet for the rest of my life.

    Please don’t take this as piling on. There are a variety of duties in any household. Some of them must be done regularly, rather like weeding a garden, while others must be done only once in a while. Many women don’t much care for rodents, spiders, and other such things. Maybe you are that way. Someone will have to set mousetraps and empty them, deal with dangerous spiders in some climates, and so forth. You wouldn’t like it if your husband said “I don’t want to be the only person killing mice for the rest of my life”.

    Consider a married man with young children and a dog in the back yard. Someone has to clean up after the dog in the yard, with a shovel. He might wind up doing that as long as the dog is alive, and it would seem inappropriate for a father of young children to grumble “I don’t want to be the only person picking up dog poop for the rest of my life”, because someone has to do it, right? Unpleasant but necessary.

    Unless you live in a rural area, you probably don’t deal with dead animals much or at all. But even in suburbia, from time to time dead animals have to be taken care of. Again, you don’t really want a man who would say “I don’t want to be the only person cleaning up dead animals for the rest of my life”. Even more unpleasant, sometimes sick animals crawl up into little hiding places when they are dying – if someone has to crawl under the house to remove a dead critter, it’s likely to be the man of the house.

    I hope you are still with me. These jobs are much less pleasant than mowing the lawn, or cleaning out the catbox, and they are not things that happen very often, but when they do someone has to take care of them as soon as possible. Now I have one final point that you might not have considered.

    Sometimes, someone has to get up in the dark of the night and go investigate noises. If there are children in the house, someone abosolutely has to get up and go find out what’s what. It is almost certain that any random noise, even breaking glass, is caused by an accident of some sort – the cat knocked something over, a tree branch came loose and scraped the window, a rodent has gotten into the house and is scrabbling around, etc. But someone has to get up and go look, and that someone has to bear in mind the remote possibility of a hostile intruder. If you were married and heard a window breaking followed by screams from a child’s bedroom, you’d want someone going down the hall who was prepared to do whatever it takes to solve whatever problem is presented.

    You would not want a man who would say, “I don’t want to be the one who marches to the sound of breaking glass / screaming child for the rest of my life”, would you? No. You would not. If you think otherwise, wait until you actually have a child, and then ask that question of yourself again.

    You can take the Bible, or you can take evolution, or you can take any model in between as an explanation of why men and women have different strengths and weankesses. But however you look at it, there are some unpleasant, even loathsome, or downright ugly, tasks that you would expect a husband to do. And he should do them without complaint, too. If that means he has to change blownout diapers on a newborn while you recover from childbirth, that’s part of the job. If
    that means he has to change a tire in the middle of the night while rain pours down, that’s part of the job.

    Cleaning a toilet is tedious and can be a bit gross, but it’s part of the job of running a household. Just like killing pests, of any sort, that are unwanted. The skill set of man and wife will almost surely have some overlap, but there’s going to be areas that belong to one or the other, and some are just tedious but necessary. That happens in business partnerships, too.

  157. feeriker says:

    Besides, what the hell is the big deal about washing the toilet? It takes five minutes once a week. Do you get similarly upset at the prospect of having to brush your teeth or shower? Does anyone jump for joy at the prospect of taking out the trash more frequently than the damned toilet for the rest of their lives?

    A very telling remark by “a girl,” that one. I’m willing to bet, just based on the fact that she makes such a to-do about such a simple five-minute (less than that, actually) chore that no one over the age of ten should think twice about, that she’s a LOUSY housekeeper. If that be the case, as it is for so many she-millennials, then I pity the guy who might be thinking of wifing her up.

  158. a girl,

    Great comment. Let me respond.

    I need to know what I’m agreeing to before I agree to it.

    Yes, understandable. And yet (here’s the kicker) if all men had that requirement before marriage, then there would probably be no more marriage. That is why they have the VOWS incase you make a mistake and marry someone that you didn’t know as well as you thought you did. That is because the marriage is supposed to be more important than what you want to make you happy.

    Housework isn’t much as a single person, or a married couple, but I was raised in a large family. There can be a lot of housework that goes along with that, especially when young children are involved. I don’t want to end up doing all of that work alone.

    I could work 5 hours a week as a single person with no children and support myself entirely. Alas, that is not the case. See where I am going with this? It shouldn’t matter that you don’t want to end up doing that all alone or not. If that is a deal breaker, don’t marry.

    He is concerned about submission and I am concerned about what he will want me to submit to.

    Then absolutely, positively, do not marry this man. Ever. Just stop. Call him up and tell him that you are concerned about what he might possibly want you to do at some point in the future. You doubt that he has your best interests in heart. And as a result, you need to stop seeing him. And it that makes you sad, I repeat my last question….

    If for whatever reason you are NOT willing to do absolutely everything this man tells you to do, then why on God’s green earth are you even considering him to be your lawfully wedded husband?

    Only marry a man that you KNOW you would be willing to do absolutely everything he tells you to do. If you never find this man, you are not entitled to marriage.

  159. feeriker says:

    Perhaps gals would be more keen on choosing and marrying men who submit to God’s authority instead of being rebellious with bad boys who only follow their will. Men who submit to God generally wouldn’t make decisions to put their wife’s soul in harms way.

    Nope, not a chance. Men who submit to God’s authority don’t induce tingles.

  160. feeriker says:

    innocentbystanderboston says:
    April 16, 2015 at 4:23 pm

    GOLDEN advice for “a girl.” Alas, it contains far too much of what used to be called “common sense.” It also places moral obligations and agency upon the woman, which is of course an absolute non-starter.

  161. I need to know what I’m agreeing to before I agree to it.

    No you don’t, and that’s the point. He’s being vague because he can’t see the future. How’s he supposed to know everything that might happen in your lives together, what decisions he might have to make, what tasks he’ll need to delegate to you? He can’t possibly know that, and you don’t get that information. Life doesn’t work that way. You don’t get a laundry list of requirements so you can play gotcha-games several years from now, saying, ” But you never said it would apply to that!”

    My parents have been married for 45 years and are farmers. Last year, my dad had to have surgery, so my mom had to do some of his farm work for a few months while he recovered. Did she “agree” to that 45 years ago? Yes, when she spoke the vows, but she sure didn’t know it was coming. He also couldn’t warn her that she’d have to move a couple times, work part-time now and then, help out with raising grandkids, or numerous other inconveniences that have cropped up.

    Think about how ridiculous it is to say, “I’ll be obedient as long as you provide me with a list of commands in advance so I can make sure I’ll be happy obeying them all.” That’s not submission at all. What’s submissive about agreeing to do things you want to do and then doing them? If that’s what submission meant, St. Peter and St. Paul wouldn’t have needed to command it, because anyone would volunteer for that deal.

    One more thing: he doesn’t know yet what your predominant faults are, and how he’s going to need to lead you in order to sanctify your soul and get you to heaven, which would be part of his job as your husband. He’ll have to learn what you need over time, and you will have to be open to his direction — not checking to make sure it’s on your list — for him to be able to lead you.

    If that offends you, you’re not ready for marriage. Perhaps you just don’t want to marry him, and you’d have a better attitude with another man, or perhaps you’re just too rebellious for marriage. You’ll have to figure that one out.

  162. feeriker says:

    Think about how ridiculous it is to say, “I’ll be obedient as long as you provide me with a list of commands in advance so I can make sure I’ll be happy obeying them all.”

    To the female “mind,” that’s not ridiculous at all. In fact, that’s EXACTLY what most women are asking for (even if not in obvious words), which is why they’re so resistant to the idea of submission.

    Here’s what interesting. As you pointed out, no one can predict the future. It’s inherently unstable and unpredictable and requires a maturity of mind and spirit to cope with its impact on life. Unfortunately, this is something that most women of the last three generations (and, sadly, too many men) lack. What’s especially puzzling is that, if women were to wake up and realize just how potentially unpredictable, dark, and ominous with uncertainty the future is, even with the love of and trust in God as part of their lives, they would WELCOME their husbands’ leadership, would not only embrace, but DEMAND that he assume full headship within the marriage and family, taking full responsibility for guiding the marriage through hard or uncertain times and all the hurdles that come with them. Alas, the disconnect between their lizard hind-brains and their cerebral consciousness won’t allow them to think this way. They would rather stubbornly resist the protection and nurturing offered by a husband willing to be the captain, putting himself in potential jeopardy, rather than accept the role of valued helpmeet while leaving the heavy lifting –and thus the ultimate responsibility– to their husbands. Cue in various parables by Jesus on this very subject, and the less than pleasant results that came about from ignoring their lessons …

  163. Let’s say Girl decides to stake her flag on the toilet thing. She says to Guy: “I love you and I want to marry you, and I’ll be obedient in everything else. I’ll sex you whenever you want and bring you all the sandwiches you can eat and do whatever else you say, but I won’t clean the toilet. I just have a thing about that, because my dad used to make my mom clean the toilet when he was drunk or something.” So Guy thinks, “Hmm, for cleaning the toilet once a week, I get all the sex and sandwiches I can eat? I’ll take that deal!”

    Then let’s say five years down the road, Guy develops a severe allergy to cleaning products, and every time he tries to clean the toilet he goes into some sort of seizure. He tells her, “Sorry, I know I promised otherwise, but you’re going to have to take over the toilet cleaning.” Now what? Does she have the right to refuse? Grounds for divorce or annulment?

    Obviously that’s an extreme, somewhat silly example. But marriage is like that, with the spouses having no idea what issues will crop up and turn out to be the ones that test their vows. It’s never what you expect, even if you dated/shacked-up for years before marriage and thought you knew exactly what your conflicts were. So she has to go into it intending to obey him in everything, and he has to go into it intending to love her in everything. Anything else means, “Til death do us part or I change my mind.”

  164. Boxer says:

    Somebody sez:

    Think about how ridiculous it is to say, “I’ll be obedient as long as you provide me with a list of commands in advance so I can make sure I’ll be happy obeying them all.”

    Then somebody else sez:

    To the female “mind,” that’s not ridiculous at all. In fact, that’s EXACTLY what most women are asking for (even if not in obvious words), which is why they’re so resistant to the idea of submission.

    If the female in question is religious, then help is on the way.

    http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org

    If a woman’s husband has left her with questions or problems, then she can probably not go far wrong by defaulting to the wisdom in this book. Grouchy husbands who may have been infected by male feminism will be shot down easily by a humble wife who explains that she didn’t know what the big dope wanted, so she just trusted Saul of Tarsus and Moses to give her advice, and would he please be more specific next time.

    Boxer

  165. jeff says:

    JDG and IBB,

    My wife caught onto me reading these sights last summer. Little by little I point out things at our soon to be ex church and the pastor who was counseling. You can see the light bulb go on when she cognites what I am explaining.

    At this point she emphatically tells me she was not consciously thinking “i’m going to shit test”. I explained to that is the hampster!

    So… FI has taught them mind gymnastic without even being aware. If they are aware, it’s called BPD

  166. Cane Caldo says:

    @feeriker

    Men who submit to God’s authority don’t induce tingles.

    This isn’t always true, and it certainly does not have to be true. I don’t even believe we can say it’s mostly true because we don’t see very many men (or women) who habitually submit to God’s authority. I think it is probably unrelated. A number of men want it to be true, because it is consoling. It’s a sort of “Jesus is my BFF”, or, “Don’t hate me because I’m holy”.

    They’re probably unrelated, and the more I consider what makes women tingle (or men schwing), the more I think it’s something within ourselves; not about the other. The standards and patterns are set by those around us, but we accept or reject them of our own free will.

  167. Jeff,

    My wife caught onto me reading these sights last summer. Little by little I point out things at our soon to be ex church and the pastor who was counseling. You can see the light bulb go on when she cognites what I am explaining.

    Good. Real good. It sounds like this board is helping. I don’t know if that was the intention that Dalrock had for creating these boards, but that is a nice side-effect.

  168. earl says:

    ‘They’re probably unrelated, and the more I consider what makes women tingle (or men schwing), the more I think it’s something within ourselves; not about the other.’

    Makes sense. I was going to say if it takes rebellion to make a woman tingle for you then why would you want to be with her anyway. That’ll eventually burn you.

  169. Gunner Q says:

    My two bits for Girl, it’s easy and normal to be nervous about getting married and what will be expected of you. You must understand, however, that submission is demanded by God not your husband. Any husband worth marrying is going to assign you chores and, if you never marry, you’ll have to do those chores anyway.

    A woman knows she’s gone from friend to family when she’s expected to do the dishes. That’s just how it is.

    If you don’t want to bother with domestic duties then find something feminine you can do for spending money: sewing or cooking or whatever you’re okay with (NOT a job). Then, ask your husband if you can use that side money to hire a housekeeper. That’s how a real woman rules the roost.

  170. One clarification: it IS appropriate for Girl to ask Guy how he sees submission in a general, theological, philosophical sense. If he knows it’s important, he should be able to say why. (After all, a truly traditional woman will want to make sure a prospective husband doesn’t plan on any of that “mutual submission” nonsense.) It also makes sense for them to discuss how to handle it: if she’s struggling with submission on some point, for instance, how should she approach him and get his help? When is a good time and what is a good way to say, “Dear, I’m having a hard time with this, can you give me some guidance?”

    These are all smart things for a discerning couple to discuss — not to lock him down to a limited list of things that fall under submission, but to get on the same page as to how to help each other when it’s difficult.

  171. Anonymous Reader says:

    Cail Corishev
    You don’t get a laundry list of requirements so you can play gotcha-games several years from now, saying, ” But you never said it would apply to that!”

    Probably every person who ever married has at some time said to themselves: “Hey, I didn’t sign up for this“. Some got over it, and some didn’t. I know men who have changed careers 2 or 3 times, each for a good reason, and each brought with it big changes. Switch from custom farming to long haul trucking, life changes. Switch from car sales to selling high voltage electrical equipment, life changes. The man who once was at home every night is now out a thousand miles away and still going. In most cases the women adapted, even when they likely said to themselves, “Did I sign up for this?”.

    If submission seems like a blank check to him, you aren’t thinking about it correctly or you don’t really trust him for some reason.

  172. earl says:

    ‘I need to know what I’m agreeing to before I agree to it.’

    How many apostles said that after Jesus said ‘follow me’?

    If you are on the fence because of submission or the thought that marriage is going to be hard…guess what: Marriage is a challenge, even if both spouses do everything right. But it is because it is hard that it makes it a rewarding experience when you go through it. One of the things my dad told me about it is…’there something about struggling together as a couple’.

  173. JDG says:

    I don’t want to end up doing all of that work alone.

    @ a girl

    You want your cake and to eat it too. You really shouldn’t marry IMO. I think you will only bring further hardship to the man that hitches to your wagon. How many men have you known in the biblical sense? I only ask because I wonder what other baggage you bring to the relationship.

  174. greyghost says:

    My advise for “a girl” Have you man come here and talk to us.

  175. feeriker says:

    If submission seems like a blank check to him, you aren’t thinking about it correctly or you don’t really trust him for some reason.

    The last (bolded) part of that statement hits the nail on the head. She either doesn’t know him as well as she thinks she does, or she doesn’t trust him. In either case she has no business marrying him.

  176. Renee Harris says:

    I fully admit the comment had nothing to do with anything The big Bang theory is doing episode about beta and I

  177. Renee Harris says:

    I’m continually Sheldon and Howard are the alpha while Leonard and raj are the betas

  178. RedPillPaul says:

    Holding purses…..take it from her. Imediatly take the valuables out, then promptly toss the purse on the ground in her full view. Walk away “honey, im going the food court/radio shack”

    feigned compliance then flip the script

  179. MarcusD says:

    @Mark

    “Saw this yesterday.Saved it just for you.
    http://globalnews.ca/news/1936607/german-woman-pregnant-with-quadruplets-at-age-65/

    Thanks. That’s a pretty surreal story. I expect women are going to read that and are going to justify delaying children even further. The “freeze your eggs” crowd is another example. I saw a thread on CAF recently: Choosing Lasthttp://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=955410

    One commenter wrote:

    There are so many fish in the sea that there will always be a prize catch waiting to be caught.

    Plenty of delaying – marriage and children, in order to do something (e.g. career) that they, demonstrably, dislike.

  180. Dale says:

    @feeriker

    > > Perhaps gals would be more keen on choosing and marrying men who submit to God’s authority…

    >Nope, not a chance. Men who submit to God’s authority don’t induce tingles.

    +1. I served in the church. Demonstrated that I had many verses memorized as I was able to use them to guide discussions with friends and church-people based on the ideas raised in the conversation. Live mostly within my means, excepting the mortgage.
    No interest from girls in the church. For the last 25 years.
    I get interest from women outside the church however. Only when she has seen my house or knows I work as a professional however; I cannot claim the interest would not be there with that knowledge, but it is possible.

    Now, as Cane Caldo suggests, perhaps a man can be submissive to God and appealing to a woman. I certainly hope so! Thus developing certain skills and attributes.

  181. Anonymous Reader says:

    http://globalnews.ca/news/1936607/german-woman-pregnant-with-quadruplets-at-age-65/”

    Notice how many children she has had in her life? She isn’t at all like the “lean in” crowd that decides to have their first at 40+. Also notice why she’s having 4? Because that’s what the iVF process dealt to her. Agree with her or not, she’s no way typical of the aging IVF mother-to-be.

  182. Anonymous Reader says:

    MarcusD points to:
    There are so many fish in the sea that there will always be a prize catch waiting to be caught.

    Well, now, doesn’t that depend on the bait? A prize catch might not be interested in old, used, dried up bait. Nope. Might just swim right on by.

  183. greyghost says:

    Now, as Cane Caldo suggests, perhaps a man can be submissive to God and appealing to a woman. I certainly hope so! Thus developing certain skills and attributes.

    It is called a Christian man with game. Church folks and half the guys that comment here are against that because a man with game will fuck any thing that moves because he can. Never mind he is a Christian man. Seems modern Christian men are of the ignorance is bllss line of thinking. Rather than teach a man the truth they would rather have a male neutered out of ignorance.

  184. a girl says:

    You guys sort of took my comments and ran with them. There are a lot of different types of men in the world. Some don’t think that that they should do any housework. I am not interested in marrying that type so before I marry I will make sure that he’s not one of those. I will also need him to tell me what his idea of submission is because if there’s something that he wants that he knows that I don’t want and he is waiting until there is no turning back to spring it on me then that’s not good.

    I get that you can’t predict the future, but why not make sure that you are compatible in certain ways before you marry?

  185. A man’s godliness is mostly irrelevant to his attractiveness. It doesn’t make women tingle for him, but it doesn’t prevent them either.

    That’s not entirely true, though. One of the things that makes a woman tingle is a man who “breaks the rules.” When many of the rules in her life come from the church, that means the man who lives outside those rules will turn her on more than the man who follows them faithfully, in general. The inferno-bound man also appeals to her caregiver instinct (he’s hot and he needs my help), as well as her pride (Look, I saved this man’s soul! And he’s hot, so bonus!).

    Now, she can choose whether or not to be ruled by that. She can set a No Heathens Need Apply policy and stick to it no matter how much the godless biker at her gym makes her wet. So the more virtuous a woman is, the less of a problem this will be. But no matter how good a Christian she is, it’s true that the churchgoing, rule-following man will need a bit more Game or something to bump up his attractiveness if he wants to appeal to her at groin level as much as the biker does.

  186. @ a girl
    “You guys sort of took my comments and ran with them. There are a lot of different types of men in the world. Some don’t think that that they should do any housework. I am not interested in marrying that type so before I marry I will make sure that he’s not one of those. I will also need him to tell me what his idea of submission is because if there’s something that he wants that he knows that I don’t want and he is waiting until there is no turning back to spring it on me then that’s not good.

    I get that you can’t predict the future, but why not make sure that you are compatible in certain ways before you marry?”

    I think it is wise to seriously consider marriage before entering it – it’s a huge committment! You should count the cost, and the blessings, and see if that is a committment you’d like to make.

    Yes, there are different kinds of attitudes among men when it comes to housework. But bear in mind that lots can change over the years, and you will have to roll with it.
    My husband used to do most of the housework when we got married, and now I do most of it. (The main reason for that is that I had no idea how to run a house and was studying full time then, and now I am a SAHM to two kids, and he works a demanding job.) There was a rough transition there for a bit, but I think we are settling down now – mainly because I decided to accept that I now do most of the housework, instead of complaining about it!
    So, even though he may say one thing now, it could change. Can you handle that?

    As someone said above, submission is primarily about trust. Trust in your husband, but moreso trust in God. Seek God as to whether you should marry this man, and then you won’t need to worry about what submission “might” mean.

    Are you worried he will spring something on you? Do you trust him?

    Also, submission is not something you will ever do perfectly – there are always ways you can learn and improve. When I first got married, I thought submission meant blind obedience, of the “yes, sir” variety (whilst still internally stomping my foot). It took years for me to understand that my husband didn’t just want my blind obedience, he actually wanted my agreement. As in, he wanted me to think about it, pray about it, and agree with him. That is much harder than blind obedience!

    Your intended may not be able to articulate right now what submission means to him, but once you are married you will have to find your groove.

  187. Boxer says:

    Dear a girl:

    You guys sort of took my comments and ran with them.

    The brothers here are giving you good advice. You came here and asked a question, and they delivered. I realize it’s probably not exactly what you want to hear, but you ought to consider it anyway.

    There are a lot of different types of men in the world. Some don’t think that that they should do any housework. I am not interested in marrying that type so before I marry I will make sure that he’s not one of those.

    You probably won’t believe me, but your best opportunity to snag a quality dude is now, not later. If you really don’t want this guy, dump him immediately and start making it known in your peer group that you want to get married. Don’t be loud, willful, publicly drunk/stoned. Don’t curse or behave badly. Wear dresses. Ferchrissake don’t get any skank tattoos or piercings.

    You won’t stay cute for long. Quality men are available now that will be snapped up by some smart girl tomorrow. Don’t settle for the first loser who chats you up, but do make hay while the sun shines.

    Once you’re married, get with some old women who have successful marriages. Older women who know how to please their men get everything they want without any nagging, and the dudes they marry are happy to oblige with cleaning the toilets and turning over the paycheck too. The men think it’s their idea. Women who have been married a long time (30+ years) to successful, happy men are the ones you need to model yourself on.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  188. A Girl,

    Looks like we understood you perfectly, since you’re just repeating yourself. Yes, as I said, you should make sure you and any prospective husband understand the same meaning of submission (and loyalty, prudence, and other virtues and big ideas); but you insist on turning that into a laundry list of allowed commands, which is neither possible nor desirable.

    But you’re an independent woman in the modern world, so don’t let us tell you anything. Go ahead and search for that “compatible” man who promises never to demand anything from you that you can’t effortlessly give. See how well that works out.

  189. earl says:

    ‘Now, as Cane Caldo suggests, perhaps a man can be submissive to God and appealing to a woman. I certainly hope so! Thus developing certain skills and attributes.’

    If we are going off tingles as gospel truth, then you are pretty much submissive to women, their emotions, or their sex drive.

    A man who submits to God’s authority won’t crumble as fast as the bad boy who only looks out for his own interests and pleasure. Most normal healthy women are looking for stability and security…what we have now is many unhealthy delusional women addicted to thrills and drama. How’s that working out for them?

  190. earl says:

    I think a far better way to figure out if you are compatible is what you BRING to a prospective marriage…not what you think the other person should do.

    Women have got this grand idea that they know all about what men should do in a marriage but don’t have a clue what they should do.

  191. Josh says:

    I think people either forget or disregard red flags. Ones that pop up while a couple is dating. I know many of us on here have done it. While years down the road. We have regrets and wish we could turn back time.

    If only people would open their eyes and question. When something doesn’t feel or seem right. I dated a girl many years ago. I thought she was the one I would marry. There were so many red flags that poped up. I ignored them and never spoke up. I’m glad we broke up before it really went anywhere.

    When I finally woke up and looked back at that relationship. I saw all those red flags. I’m glad that I never married here. We probably would be divorced. She now is on her second marriage. I’m still on my first marriage and have been happily married for 13 years.

    She’ and her ex-husband will both have to answer to God for their adultery. Since both are remarried.

  192. embracing reality says:

    a girl,

    This – “I will also need him to tell me what his idea of submission is…” that is a completely reasonable request. Both of you need to know what biblical marriage is, consult the bible scriptures concerning marriage, read it together, discuss it.

    He probably doesn’t know either. Not only does he not likely know what the biblical meaning of submission and marriage is he probably doesn’t even know what he expects in regards to you submitting to him. You seem to be fearful of the bogeyman of an oppressive spouse, you might be surprised. You may learn he fears the exact same thing, you being a horribly oppressive, nagging, manipulative, unholy terror of a wife!

    NOW is the time to learn biblical marriage and to learn to communicate effectively. What’s his mother like? The women in his family? Your mother, father, marriages around you? You have eyes to see, ears to hear. How many men do you know that in actuality are oppressed, dominated, have their lives run completely by their un-submitted wives? Yeah, that, he knows for sure he doesn’t want that but may not know beyond that how marriage is supposed to work, how love and submission is supposed to look.

    This might not be about you but about the reputation of women as insufferable wives. He’s pretty sure he doesn’t want that because the married men he knows who have wives like that don’t want them either.

  193. mrteebs says:

    @Earl

    Women have got this grand idea that they know all about what men should do in a marriage but don’t have a clue what they should do.

    I think many of them do know what God expects, but it is inconvenient, patriarchal, oppressive, outdated, unreasonable, conditional, (insert excuses here, ad infinitum). They go out of their way – along with the largely feminist contingent of “marriage ministries” – to explain why the Bible doesn’t mean what it says regarding a wife’s submission to and respect for her husband, while at the same time fiercely defending that the Bible means exactly what it says when it tells husbands to love their wives and Christ loves the church and gave himself for her. That – they will tell you emphatically – is absolutely unconditional and non-negotiable.

    Selective truth.

    And yes, they are usually extremely vocal about knowing exactly how men should live, behave, lead, and generally conduct even the minutiae of their lives – all in the name of taking their role of “helpmate” seriously. Most men I know neither want nor need this kind of help. Those that have been convinced to think they need such help are the saddest cases of all. Or perhaps those that preach such things from the pulpit and the airwaves are even sadder.

  194. Marg says:

    hEY all you guys, I hope you’re all as on with submitting to God as you are to being submitted to, as that is the nature of the arrangement. And I hope you’re as firm with yourselves as you are with your women in this matter. You gotta serve somebody. When you stand before the Judge of the universe he’s not gonna buy, “Wah wah because feminists.” Adam took the apple and ate, and blamed Eve. Just sayin’: we’re all human and we all have to account for the state of our souls. No excuses.

  195. Sarah's Daughter says:

    This girl hardly sounds attracted enough to this man to even be real.

    Everyone remember “T” and the socks?

  196. DeNihilist says:

    Dal, here is an interesting one. About a mather live tweeting whilst attending her teenage sons, sex ed class, that just happened to be the abstinence class. Oh yeah, she is a bio-ethicist.

    http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2015/04/16/lansing-mom-live-tweets/25884155/

  197. Sarah's Daughter says:

    Renee,
    We just finished watching that episode. I haven’t heard anyone use the Alpha/Beta + Omega terminology outside of Vox’s Alpha Game. Chuck Lorre must be a fan.🙂

  198. goodkid43 says:

    To Girl,
    Two things; Fear and Contentment.
    There is in your varied comments a hint of fear. Stop fearing and enjoy this exploration of questioning, answering, and thinking through the comments of your intended and you. The less your fear, the more clarity of understanding you will achieve. Every time you are with your potential spouse, sense the thrill of discovery in understanding yourself and another human being. Thank God that you have this opportunity. Again stop fearing.
    The beauty of Christianity is that no matter what missteps you or your potential spouse make, your discontent will always be sourced in you. And, your spouse’s discontent will always originate in him. This is the true joy of obedience to Christ. No matter what you may experience from your outer environment which you have no control over, your power is in that you control your inner spiritual environment which you have compete control over. Remember, if your peace is dependent on another’s behavior then you have no true freedom. St. Francis said in a more poetic but more succinct way, it is better to love than be loved, God bless

  199. feeriker says:

    ?

    As someone said above, submission is primarily about trust. Trust in your husband, but moreso trust in God. Seek God as to whether you should marry this man, and then you won’t need to worry about what submission “might” mean.

    Are you worried he will spring something on you? Do you trust him?

    The more I cogitate on this topic, the more convinced I become that trust –or rather, lack thereof– is in fact the root of the problem. Women are indeed distrustful – of themselves. Of their ability to choose a husband wisely based on criteria other than strength of ‘gina tingles. Of their ability to trust in God (in whom more of them than will ever willingly admit do NOT really believe) for anything. Of their ability to admit to themselves the extent of their inherent weaknesses as women. Of their ability or even genuine willingness to give up StrongEmpoweredWoman[TM]/YouGoGrrrrrrrrl/DontNoManOwnMe rebelliousness.

    The uncomfortable reality is that most women do not, will not, and cannot trust themselves to do the right and Godly thing where marriage and submission is concerned. Yet their rebellious nature, grounded in the sin of Eve and encouraged by the current culture, will also not allow them to defer to those who could help them cultivate wisdom and Godly behavior within themselves, whether it be those few older successfully submissive Christian wives, Godly men, or the Lord Himself. Thus the perpetual fear and distrust, the inability to accept responsibilty for her actions and decisions (“it’s all HIS fault!”), and an endless, vicious circle of confusion, fear, insecurity, and unhappiness.

    As long as churches continue to ignore Scriptural prescriptions for Godly marriage and encourage both men and women to indulge in the hedonic marriage and egalitarianism advocated by the popular culture, the problem will only continue to get worse.

  200. I agree with you innocentbystanderboston. TV is a good window into the cultural mindset. The Marriage Industrial Complex needs to soak the upper classes since there is no profit in the lower classes where marriage is in decline. This all still has a powerful impact message on women because they all will believe they deserves an expensive princess wedding. You can never underestimate the greed of American Corporations who are like ghouls chomping the corpse of Western Civilization.

    The brides don’t in “Say Yes to the Dress” are the types that spend years dreaming and planning their wedding but give absolutely no thought to the marriage. I like how the staff spends hours considering how her cover tattoos in yards of white ‘purity’ fabric or if the bridal veil and nose-ring will be a problem. The grooms are simply deluded thinking that once the rings are exchanged and vows are said that everything will magically work out. He ignores the warning signs in the form of the bride’s mother wearing an unholy tight black tent downing fistfuls of wedding cake that makes her look like Shelob from the Lords of the Rings. The poor skinny bloodless father often sits their lifeless seemingly drained of life. That poor groom will ignore his male friends; who plead and beg him to cast the ‘One Ring of Her Power’ back into the fires of Mount Doom. ‘Destroy it!! Destroy it!!”

    I digress. Now they are pushing the whole concept of ‘vow renewal’; which is a husband can be robbed and extorted again by the Martial Industrial Complex. So these poor schleps basically get to spend a boatload of his own money to ‘renew his vows’ a decade later. It is like buying your used high mileage car from the bank again ten years later. You get all the agony of car payments again, but you don’t get that new car smell, the ride is terrible, and the maintenance increases.

    The Marriage industrial Complex has to find ways to keep making money; don’t underestimate the desire of these companies to find creative ways to squeeze blood out of stone.

  201. JDG says:

    Adam took the apple and ate, and blamed Eve.

    Hey Marge! It warn’t no apple, it was a forbidden fruit. Adam didn’t blame Eve, he blamed God: “The man said, “The woman whom you gave to be with me, she gave me fruit of the tree, and I ate.”

    we’re all human and we all have to account for the state of our souls. No excuses.

    Everyone already knows that men will have to give an account. The problem is that most folks these days don’t realize that woman will also have to give an account. Now don’t you think that might be something important for women to realize?

  202. JDG says:

    Everyone remember “T” and the socks?

    Yep! a girl’s attitude fits T’s to a T.

  203. Dale says:

    @Marg

    Why are you trying to divert attention away from the topic being discussed? This does not display maturity.
    Of my male friends from church, yes, we are in fact stubborn about submitting to God. I do not copy movies, lie about my income on taxes, hire prostitutes, get drunk or fantasize about sex with another man’s wife. I really do not think you could truthfully come up with many church-going men who do. At least, that is not my experience.
    There are some obese men in the churches I have attended, which shows lack of self-control (Titus 2:1-2).

    The blatant, willful and continuous disobedience is not on our side of the aisle. There are regular occurrences of sin of course, simply due to our natures (1 John 1:8-10, John 3:23, Gal 5:16-18).

  204. Opus says:

    Back to Beethoven:

    Anonymous Reader did well to draw attention to Fidelio. There are few enough operas about married couples and few of them are happy (Wotan nagged to death by Fricka; Sarastro with open war being waged by The Queen of the Night; Canio aware that his wife Nedda is unfaithful) and it is thus interesting that Beethoven who never married should have devoted so much time (as he did) to this one piece (no less than four attempts at an Overture plus the re-write).

    The other day I was thinking that popular opera provides a litany of women to avoid (apart from Fricka, Reina Notte and Nedda. Like this:

    Do you want to marry a Cougar?: Traviata

    Do you want to marry an under-age chick?: Butterfly

    How do you fancy being cuckolded?: Carmen

    Do you want to marry a slut?: Boheme

    Do you want to marry a party girl?: (also) Boheme

    Do you want to marry an ice cold bitch?: Turandot

    Do you want to marry a prostitute?: Manon

    How about a ball-busting American?: Fanciulla del West

    or perhaps if you marry a spinster school-teacher you will acquire a beard: Peter Grimes

    Then there are the Manginas and pride of place must surely go to Laca who not only wants to marry Jenufa (who is not interested in him) but knows that she is pregnant with bad-boy alpha-dude Steva’s child. Spoiler alert: reader she married him.

  205. Oscar says:

    @a girl says:
    April 16, 2015 at 11:28 am

    “I don’t want to be the only person who scrubs the toilet for the rest of my life.”

    I work the oil field, which means a lot of time away from home. I even have a company-provided apartment. The other day I was cleaning the bathroom in my apartment and thought to myself, “Damn… I don’t remember the last time I scrubbed a toilet!”

    My wife and I have eight kids. My wife doen’t scrub toilets either.

  206. MarcusD says:

    Withholding relations and crumbling marriage, Help!
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=956532

    Escaping psychological abuse
    http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=956151

  207. Pingback: Effortless | Truth and contradictions | Scoop.it

  208. earl says:

    ‘And yes, they are usually extremely vocal about knowing exactly how men should live, behave, lead, and generally conduct even the minutiae of their lives – all in the name of taking their role of “helpmate” seriously.’

    Instead of being a helpmate, they do back leading. That is…they aren’t overtly leading, they are covertly leading by telling the man what he should be doing to lead. If the man follows her requests, he doesn’t get it and she looks for a man that does get it. If he doesn’t follow her requests, she whines about it to anyone who has ears. It’s a no-win situation with that type of woman.

    Women should stick to teaching women and their children good conduct…leave the giving advice to men for other men.

  209. earl says:

    ‘If only people would open their eyes and question. When something doesn’t feel or seem right. I dated a girl many years ago. I thought she was the one I would marry. There were so many red flags that poped up. I ignored them and never spoke up. I’m glad we broke up before it really went anywhere.’

    True…the kindest thing a woman who is wrong for you can do is dump you.

    However when you throw the cocktail of passionate emotions, premarital sex, and feminist brainwashing into a relationship…it can be difficult to see the red flags in front of you. The rationalization hamster is a strong force.

  210. Cane Caldo says:

    @greyghost

    Nice article about the church

    Not really. While rightly perceiving some real problems, the author purposefully misinterprets what he has seen, and flip-flops his criticisms according to a policy of making Christians sound stupid. He’s a charlatan trading on others weakness for personal gain.

    Plus, it seems RoK now has annoying pop-ups for Mackeeper; whatever that is. “Are you sure you want to leave this page?” Yes. I’m sure.

  211. a girl says:

    @ Seriously serving

    So, even though he may say one thing now, it could change. Can you handle that?

    He says that he has no hang ups about housework.

    . Changing circumstances are one thing.” I don’t do housework ’cause that’s just for women” is problematic. I have a cousin who married a man like that and her life looks miserable. She works too and is exhausted and I have cleaned at her place more than he has. Her husband will sit there staring at the TV while the baby is crying throwing food on the floor and she is cooking dinner and wait for her to come handle it. There’s nothing wrong with not wanting that kind of life for yourself.

  212. Scott says:

    I found that RoK article to be a pretty accurate assessment of most of the “Christian” experience of todays America. Unless you find a very hard-lined Bible teaching church, the article describes exactly what you will get.

  213. Regular Guy says:

    ” I can’t speak for all women, in general, i think we are wired to respond well to Christ like love- “laying down of ones life (as Christ did)”

    The Bible says otherwise:

    “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” Matthew 7:14 KJV. Like men, most women DO NOT respond to the light of Christ when they see it.

    And as Genesis 3:1-6 shows, Eve, the mother of the human race had the perfect father in God Almighty and STILL rebelled against his authority.

    “20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man. 21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, 22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness” Mark 7:20-22 KJV. Sin doesn’t happen in a vacuum like these rebellious women would have us believe. The sin of rebellion was in her heart all along and the husband “Not leading” is simply an excuse to act on it.

  214. PokeSalad says:

    Housework is a red herring. What about letting him control the finances? Pick your childrens’ schools? Pick your family’s place of worship? Decide where the family will live? Decide how much media influence (internet, TV, social media) will enter the home? Choose your vacations? Etc?

  215. Novaseeker says:

    OT, but on a topic often discussed here: http://www.wsj.com/articles/big-shift-pushed-in-custody-disputes-1429204977?mod=WSJ_hps_sections_news

    It’s interesting that not one mention is made in the article of the huge elephant standing on the table in the middle of the room: the impact this would have on child support payments (i.e., a downward impact). Of course that can’t be mentioned.

  216. a girl says:

    @ Poke Salad
    Housework is a red herring. What about letting him control the finances? Pick your childrens’ schools? Pick your family’s place of worship? Decide where the family will live? Decide how much media influence (internet, TV, social media) will enter the home? Choose your vacations? Etc?

    We should discuss those things and try to reach an agreement. He would decide if we couldn’t agree. This shouldn’t be a problem unless the guy is a selfish or a control freak who must have his way all of the time. In premarital counseling hopefully we will discuss those kinds of issues to be sure that we are on the same page.

  217. Cane Caldo says:

    @Scott

    I found that RoK article to be a pretty accurate assessment of most of the “Christian” experience of todays America

    Yes, but that was not my criticism.

    You know those chicks that come around, and are “so excited” to find “a place where men are learning to men again!”? Then they start participating in the conversation. Soon you realize that they have no interest in men becoming men according to an absolute standard, but rather in men becoming the kind of men they’d like to bang, and that they have only the dimmest insight into why and how the things (which they see happening) are happening. Not long after comes the inevitable, “LOL! You guys are so pathetic. I bet you’re a virgin.” That RoK article was indistinguishable from those chicks. He can see a problem. He doesn’t know what is wrong or how to fix it. He mocks.

    As an example: He’s absolutely right about the foolishness of changing hymns to rock music. He’s also right about people acting as if they are clients of a church.

    So: Would he prefer the hymns that preceded them? I find that hard to believe. If he actually knows church music, he knows the hymnals are loaded with effeminate hymns. What if you change churches because your church plays rock music instead of hymns? Oops! Now you’re just a client. Gotcha, loser! The only valid option is to stop going to any church; which is to stop being obedient to the faith and tradition that Christians should go to church.

    Ultimately, the conclusion is “Don’t be a Christian.” That’s not a good article about church.

  218. theasdgamer says:

    @ a girl

    We should discuss those things and try to reach an agreement. He would decide if we couldn’t agree. This shouldn’t be a problem unless the guy is a selfish or a control freak who must have his way all of the time.

    Your frame is equalitarian, not leadership/submission. You believe in negotiation based on your equalitarian frame, not submission by the woman. A captain on a ship has his way all the time. A submitted wife would expect her husband to get his way all the time. There would be discussion of options and a wife might, in extreme circumstances (like the David & Nabal confrontation), act contrary to explicit orders from her husband, but the ordinary course of events in a “biblical” marriage would be active, willing obedience by the wife. She might fail from time to time to submit, but she would eventually recognize her failure, etc.

    A submitted wife would be prepared to pick up the pieces if a husband’s plan falls apart. She would also present alternative options in planning because a husband would likely find her suggestions helpful.

    Instead, what we see today are marriages based on equalitarianism, the wife judging her husband, rebellious, contemptuous wives, etc.

  219. a girl says:

    @theasdgamer

    Your frame is equalitarian, not leadership/submission. You believe in negotiation based on your equalitarian frame, not submission by the woman. A captain on a ship has his way all the time. A submitted wife would expect her husband to get his way all the time.
    Are you married? Happily? Is your wife happy?

    Never seen a marriage, or any relationship where one person got his or her way all of the time without consulting or discussing it with the other person. I can’t imagine any woman knowingly signing up for such a situation. You and anyone else who feels this way should let your wife know before the wedding, before the relationship even gets serious. This is first date conversation because it gives the poor girl a chance to make a run for it.

  220. @Agirl: Let me suggest /r/marriedredpill or /r/redpillwoman for your specific questions.

    I don’t really agree with several Exegists here who claim that a woman’s duty is to obey even when ordered to sin by her husband. Women and men both have free will. Women are called to submit by Paul- but let’s be honest: Paul was specifically talking about sexual submission. He was addressing Christian women who suddenly cut off their non-believing husbands and recognized this ancient example of female hamstering was an existential threat to the early church so he made a rule- women must fuck husbands and shut the hell up in church.

    Dogma like this makes it harder for reasonable women to accept genuine marital submission with two partners working together. Marital submission is not complete and simply means the woman looks to her husband with respect to make the decision. Where is it written a woman is not allowed to object to an order from her Husband? How about the entire book of Esther? A loving husband would get input from his wife and carefully consider her needs, desires, and opinions. What a coincidence that is precisely the command given by the Apostles.

    Submission is voluntary and the husband/wife relationship is not like the master/slave relationship. Most men want capable First Officers standing by their side, taking the initiative and taking care of business but always looking to him for leadership. This is different role than that of a helpless servant.

  221. DeNihilist says:

    And again, I am reminded why I do not frequent Return of Kooks.
    Poorly written, poorly developed and full of clichés.

  222. a girl,

    Housework is a red herring. What about letting him control the finances? Pick your childrens’ schools? Pick your family’s place of worship? Decide where the family will live? Decide how much media influence (internet, TV, social media) will enter the home? Choose your vacations? Etc?

    We should discuss those things and try to reach an agreement. He would decide if we couldn’t agree. This shouldn’t be a problem unless the guy is a selfish or a control freak who must have his way all of the time. In premarital counseling hopefully we will discuss those kinds of issues to be sure that we are on the same page.

    When a man lives alone, takes care of himself, he answers to no one. He is complete control over everything in his immediate life. You might call him a control freak because he is always going to get his way ALL OF THE TIME.

    When a man get married, he wants a helpmeet. That is you dear. You are supposed to help meet what he wants to do ALL OF THE TIME. That is a Christian marriage. Its perfectly okay if this type of relationship disgusts you and you want no part of it. But if that is the case, then you are not entitled to marriage.

    If you are going to marry a man, accept that everything wiil be his way, ALL OF THE TIME. If you are not willing to do absolutely everything he tells you to do, then don’t marry him and find a man that you WILL obey. If you never find that man, you are not fit for Christian marriage. And that is okay, as Paul would say it is not for everyone.

  223. Looking Glass says:

    @a girl:

    You’re attempting to reframe back to your worldly understanding. That’s your main issue. But roll this question around in your head: If you can’t submit to a Husband, how will you submit to God? Why do you think your Salvation is assured? Especially when there’s more than 0% chance that obedience to God will get you killed?

  224. Gunner Q says:

    a girl 9:19 am:
    “This shouldn’t be a problem unless the GIRL is a selfish or a control freak who must have HER way all of the time.”

    Fixed it for you.

    “In premarital counseling hopefully we will discuss those kinds of issues to be sure that we are on the same page.”

    There is nothing to discuss. You do what he commands or you rebel against God as well as your man. If you aren’t comfortable with blank-check obedience to a husband then either don’t get married or, at a minimum, don’t pretend to be a Christian.

  225. a girl,

    Never seen a marriage, or any relationship where one person got his or her way all of the time without consulting or discussing it with the other person.

    Only the happiest marriages that I have seen have this dynamic (where the husband got his way all the time and his wife obeyed.) These are the marriages that wound up lasting 60+ years, until death. And they were happy (him leading, her following.)

    I can’t imagine any woman knowingly signing up for such a situation.

    Of course you can’t. We know that. You can’t imagine any woman knowingly signing up for such a situation because you are a feminist. You can’t give up the “pride.” You are still sinning, still rejecting Christ. You only see marriage as something you enter into if (and only if) you think it will benefit your situation and make the feminist in you happy. You don’t see marriage at all as serving God and serving your husband. If you did, THAT would make you happy and you would do anything to knowingly sign up for such a submissive situation.

    You and anyone else who feels this way should let your wife know before the wedding, before the relationship even gets serious. This is first date conversation because it gives the poor girl a chance to make a run for it.

    You should make a run for it. We are telling you, over-and-over, DO NOT MARRY THIS MAN. Your repeated questions regarding submission to him (which for me is a no-brainer) tell all of us everything we need to know about your situation. You do not respect this man you are involved with, will not obey him, and your marriage will either be one of misery or it will end in frivorce (probably initiated by you.) Run. Let him find a woman that is more deserving of him, a woman who will serve him by being his true help meet. You are not good enough for the man who is in your life who is talking about marriage.

  226. feeriker says:

    If you never find that man, you are not fit for Christian marriage. And that is okay, as Paul would say it is not for everyone.

    Given her entrenched resistance to the very idea of submission, I don’t think that “a girl,” like almost all other women today, has any interest whatsoever in or desire for “Christian” marriage. Further discussion of the topic with her would appear to be an immoral waste of time and effort.

  227. BuenaVista says:

    “a girl” is a child. (Or a trolling gender studies major.) It’s not so much that she’s a faux-Christian, it’s that she is contemplating marriage to someone whose values are incompatible with hers, and seeking comfort and justification for knowingly, and deceitfully, using another human being whom she figures she will just whip into different form. This is the emotional and psychological version of declaring an “oops!” pregnancy.

  228. He would decide if we couldn’t agree. This shouldn’t be a problem unless the guy is a selfish or a control freak who must have his way all of the time.

    And you will decide when he’s being selfish or a control freak (obviously he won’t think he is, or he’d stop, and you’re the only other one in the marriage), which means you’re the one in charge, and all his decisions are actually suggestions waiting for your approval or veto.

    No one said he shouldn’t discuss things with you and respect your opinion, so that’s just another red herring. Don’t worry, we understand perfectly what you mean and what you want; we see it all the time around us. He should play leader until something important comes along (defined by you), and then defer to you. I’m sure you’ll be able to find a man willing to sign up for that, if you’re not hideous and don’t set your sights too high. Just don’t come whining to us 5-10 years from now when you can’t remember why you married his weak, indecisive ass and want out.

  229. earl says:

    Put it this way…if you negotiate with your husband and he goes along with the decision, and said decision falls apart…are you going to stand by his side taking part of the responsibility for the blame and/or building him back up or will you place all the blame/judgement on his shoulders? That’s what leadership is all about…getting the credit for the good and the finger pointed at you for the bad.

    Because from what I’ve seen many women will be there when things are going good but it takes a special woman to stay through the rough patches in a marriage.

  230. earl says:

    The other thing about submission to a husband that the feminists won’t tell women is…it actually frees them. In the strong, independent circles of female thought they love making decisions when they are easy such as what dress to wear or which meal am I going to instagram tonight. When it comes to making tough decisions like what to do with this business, how to discipline the children, or where are we going to live…those big adult decisions make them revert back to the ‘I’m tired of being an adult, I want to be a kid.’ attitude.

    Feminism is basically slavery of women to mammon/state/corporations which doesn’t really care what you do to yourself. Good biblical marriage gives women a framework on how to submit to God through their husband.

  231. a girl says:

    @ innocent bystander

    I can’t tell if you are being serious with this or not.
    If you are going to marry a man, accept that everything wiil be his way, ALL OF THE TIME.
    I’m pretty sure that Christians aren’t supposed to insist on having their way all of the time. Actually, no well raised person over the age of 3 would do this. Imagine a husband and wife in the grocery store.
    H: I want chocolate ice cream
    W. I’d like some vanilla. We got chocolate last week.
    H: No I am in charge so chocolate.
    W: Look they have half and half. We can both get what we want.
    H: No! Chocolate only. You should submit!

    A silly example, but that’s pretty much what you are suggesting. No one is signing up for that, and that is not what the Bible tells people to do.

    @Bluepillprofessor

    I will give those subreddits a look.

    Dogma like this makes it harder for reasonable women to accept genuine marital submission with two partners working together. Marital submission is not complete and simply means the woman looks to her husband with respect to make the decision. Where is it written a woman is not allowed to object to an order from her Husband? How about the entire book of Esther? A loving husband would get input from his wife and carefully consider her needs, desires, and opinions. What a coincidence that is precisely the command given by the Apostles.

    Submission is voluntary and the husband/wife relationship is not like the master/slave relationship. Most men want capable First Officers standing by their side, taking the initiative and taking care of business but always looking to him for leadership. This is different role than that of a helpless servant.

    This sounds quite reasonable.

  232. anonymous_ng says:

    A friend was telling me about a conversation he had with his wife’s very wealthy uncle. They were at the uncle’s house and his wife(second) was tidying up some things when he noticed my friend observing this. The uncle’s comment was that it took him three tries to find this woman, a first marriage, another woman where it didn’t result in marriage, and then finally his current wife.

    She works as hard as he does, but her work is managing the domestic side of things freeing him up to put more of his attention at growing his company to the over $100M+ concern it is now.

  233. BradA says:

    a girl,

    You are right, that is a stupid example.

    A wise captain knows the capabilities of his crew. He also knows the best for the ship. Things will go better for the ship when they follow his leadership than when they second guess him.

    My wife does better for herself when she truly lets me lead. She may not always like the direction I am heading, but it takes a huge load off of her to let me bear that. Staying in that position is an ongoing process though.

    Are you sure you really want the responsibility for leading your family? A family will always have a leader. It cannot be two as one will always make the decision, ultimately. The question is who it should be.

    A wife who always has to approve a husband’s leadership is the leader in reality in that family. This is not the order God created or intended.

    Never seen a marriage, or any relationship where one person got his or her way all of the time without consulting or discussing it with the other person.

    Why raise that straw man? Who ever claimed that? I can’t say for others, but I am constantly gathering input and data, including from my wife. I find it most ironic when she will complain at one time about not being heard and yet will not have had anything to add when I asked her about something a short time earlier.

    I find this is just something I have to work with, but she also has to realize the dichotomy if she wants our marriage to be successful. She mostly does so, fortunately for both of us. I am also strong willed enough that other approaches are not going to work.

    This sounds quite reasonable. (from another reply)

    Note that Esther did not gripe about the unfairness of risking her life to approach the king. She just worked with it, with lots of prayer. How many Christian women today do that? You would seem to not take that approach.

    Though the straw man of the cruel ogre of a husband is just that, a made up bogeyman meant to keep husbands following their wives, outside the proper Biblical order.

  234. BradA says:

    Dalrock,

    On the OP: I regularly hear preachers (I listen to a fair bit of preaching) dismiss the command for wives to submit because they are “continually beat over the head with that,” yet I can’t recall a single sermon beating a women over the head with that.

    My wife and I did visit one church at least 20 years ago where all the women had their heads down and a somber attitude, but that was a truly rare thing and definitely not the common problem preachers claim to be confronting.

  235. By the way, let’s keep in mind that A Girl isn’t talking about sin here, so we don’t need to go down that rabbit hole. She’s talking about housework. A man is going to provide her with a home, and in one room of that home there will be a porcelain bowl, which through some sort of dark arts carries away her bodily wastes at the push of a handle. 99% of her ancestresses would have considered that the height of luxury, if not downright witchcraft, as they squatted in the cold outside their huts. Many women around the world today still would.

    And she’s afraid he’s going to expect her to spray some cleaner on it, swish a brush around for a bit, and wipe it off, maybe once a week.

  236. earl says:

    ‘A wife who always has to approve a husband’s leadership is the leader in reality in that family. This is not the order God created or intended.’

    It’s called back leading…not submission.

  237. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    innocentbystanderboston: When a man lives alone, takes care of himself, he answers to no one. He is complete control over everything in his immediate life. You might call him a control freak…

    Here we see another feminist double standard. When a man wants his way, he’s a “control freak.” When a woman wants her way, she’s a “strong, independent woman.”

    I once heard a middle-aged woman on a talk radio show. She was saying how thrilled she was never to have married, because she could do as she pleased, all the time. As an example of her marvelous freedom, she said, “I can sleep on whichever side of the bed I want.”

    Of course, she probably plucked that example at random, without thought. But I found it interesting that the best argument for singlehood that she could conceive on short notice was something so trivial. Was this strong, independent woman trying to convince herself?

  238. feeriker says:

    The other thing about submission to a husband that the feminists won’t tell women is…it actually frees them.

    This is exactly what I said upthread. The problem is that women are too blinded by feminist incoherence to grasp this bit of what used to be known as “common sense” (or, if you prefer, “a blinding flash of the obvious”). It’s just another example of how feminism has blinded women to their own self-interests.

  239. BradA says:

    Good point Cail!

    Though I am effectively banned from housework anyway since I never do it up to my wife’s standards. She is nowhere the neat freak my mother was, but she still wants more than I will ever accomplish. I don’t believe that is the sole root of our division of labor, but I am sure it makes it much easier for her to live with.

  240. BradA says:

    a girl,

    A silly example, but that’s pretty much what you are suggesting. No one is signing up for that, and that is not what the Bible tells people to do.

    I did miss the last part. It is the Biblical command. The husband in this case is likely being very stupid, but I could contrive just as silly an example that showed how that really was the best way to go. Perhaps he knows, but can’t discuss, that the flavor she wants has poison in it, as one example.

    Or maybe he is just being stupid. That does not remove her need to put his leadership in the proper place. Why did she marry in the first place otherwise? Why did he marry?

  241. earl says:

    ‘ It’s just another example of how feminism has blinded women to their own self-interests.’

    Put it this way…a woman submitting in marriage in many ways has an easier run of things than a woman who never gets married and makes all the decisions.

    A man who stays single has an easier run of things than a married man who has to account for his wife and kids with the decision making processes.

    You could make the argument as long as a man doesn’t get married or does something that makes a woman his responsibility that feminism benefits him in the long run.

  242. BradA says:

    a girl,

    He says that he has no hang ups about housework.

    He must want less sex too. Dalrock has written on that relationship.

    Though I would say I don’t have any hangups about housework either, I just don’t do much of it.

  243. Cane Caldo says:

    Well the wheels have fallen off yet another wagon! Way to go, BPP: She’ll get years of delusion out of your inane comments.

    BPP, you gonna be there to decide when she should obey and when they should fight? I’ll bet her beau will. E thrilled! Another example of the foolishness of taking up with women who don’t answer to you, and treading under your brothers.

  244. BradA says:

    One more comment:

    Her husband will sit there staring at the TV while the baby is crying throwing food on the floor and she is cooking dinner and wait for her to come handle it. There’s nothing wrong with not wanting that kind of life for yourself.

    Maybe she shouldn’t have fed the baby until she had time to deal with it? Maybe she should go with a simpler meal? Lots of other factors could play a role in this.

    You sound a lot like my sister-in-law boasting to my wife that she could easily help my wife tile a new enclosed room we had and then complaining (to my wife, not me) that I wasn’t out there helping when they were doing it. I was glad to have her “free labor,” but I would have gladly hired someone to do it had I known she really didn’t have the experience she claimed to have.

    She dug her own hole, but felt justified blaming me for it.

    You need to grow up a bit and realize that life is more complex than the simplistic explanations that seem so wonderful now. You also need to take the Scriptures far more seriously if you want to truly follow Jesus as your Lord. You are not submitting to Him if you fail to follow His directions in marriage, whatever you “feel” about those directions.

  245. a girl says:

    @ Cail –

    And you will decide when he’s being selfish or a control freak (obviously he won’t think he is, or he’d stop, and you’re the only other one in the marriage), which means you’re the one in charge, and all his decisions are actually suggestions waiting for your approval or veto.

    I would certainly have an opinion on his behavior, even if I kept that opinion to myself. Can’t really help that. But don’t wives always decide whether to follow their husbands or not? He will ask her to do something and she will either do what he said or not. He doesn’t suddenly get mind control of her and take away her free will. All relationships are like that even when one person is in charge.

  246. BradA says:

    Cane,

    Don’t you realize the operating principle is “All the authority and none of the accountability”?

  247. PokeSalad says:

    ““a girl” is a child. (Or a trolling gender studies major.) ”

    There’s a difference?

    It’s humourous to see agirl sagely assert that she’ll submit on the “big issues” after “discussion,” but cleaning a toilet is beyond the pale.

  248. a girl says:

    Maybe she shouldn’t have fed the baby until she had time to deal with it? Maybe she should go with a simpler meal? Lots of other factors could play a role in this.

    He sees taking care of the kids and housework as not his problem! She says that things were fine until they had children and if she’d known that he’d be this way she would’ve never married him. I don’t want to end up like her. I don’t get why that’s so controversial around here.

    It’s not like I’m married and planning a divorce. I’m trying to avoid a bad situation in the first place.

  249. a girl,

    I can’t tell if you are being serious with this or not.

    That is because you are immersed in the feminist imperative. The entire concept of doing what a man tells you to do (in all things) is so completely foreign to you, you can’t take it seriously. This whole discussion about submission is about a lifestyle that makes absolutely no sense to you.

    I’m pretty sure that Christians aren’t supposed to insist on having their way all of the time. Actually, no well raised person over the age of 3 would do this. Imagine a husband and wife in the grocery store.
    H: I want chocolate ice cream

    At this point, the wife should open the freezer door and silently place the chocolate ice cream in the cart. You’ll note, in YOUR EXAMPLE the husband didn’t say that she is to eat the chocolate ice cream. He is only stating that he wants it. If she wants to vanilla in the cart, rest assure, that will not be a problem so long as he gets his chocolate.

    Let me repeat something I said earlier. When a man lives alone, takes care of himself, he answers to no one. He is complete control over everything in his immediate life. If he chooses to marry, he wants to marry a “helpmeet.” Do you even know what that is?

    “A girl” have you ever in your life (even once) met a bachelor who was in complete control of his life, was organized enough to get most everything he wanted to do done, and at the same time enjoyed the freedom to do whatever he wanted to do whenever he wanted to do it? That was me in my 20s. I worked full time as a junior level computer scientist, I worked and managed my own office cleaning business in the early evenings, I owned my own home and took care of it, and on the weekends I travelled a lot with my close friends. I would make upwards of 15 short road trips a year and perhaps 5 or 6 flights a year. And whenever there were single women who took notice of how I lived my single life they wanted to be a part of it. They were physically and emotionally attracted to me because I was in complete control of my life. I didn’t have a wife I was leading at the time, but women I met WANTED to BE my wife. They WANTED to take direction from me, WANTED me to tell them what to do, WANTED to submit, WANTED to be my “helpmeet.” I had a timeshare in Florida. The woman I was seeing at the time, I told her that we would be flying to Florida one year (I didn’t ask, I told her) and the next year, we drove. We drove because I just bought a new car and I wanted to drive that car in Florida and I didn’t want to pay for the plane tickets. I didn’t ask, I told her. She submitted. And she wasn’t even my wife. But she wanted to be, wanted me to continously tell her what to do.

    Don’t you get it? I don’t even think you are attracted to this man who is talking to you about submission. If you were, then you wouldn’t even be the least bit worried about it, you would WANT him to take charge. You wouldn’t have to be talking to us about it. This is a no-brainer. Dump him and let him find a woman deserving of his leadership. You don’t deserve him, you are feminist.

  250. a girl says:

    “In premarital counseling hopefully we will discuss those kinds of issues to be sure that we are on the same page.”

    There is nothing to discuss. You do what he commands or you rebel against God as well as your man. If you aren’t comfortable with blank-check obedience to a husband then either don’t get married or, at a minimum, don’t pretend to be a Christian.

    You think that it is unreasonable for a couple to discuss how they’d like to handle money, children, vacations, ect before they marry? The alternative is to just pick a guy a marry him not knowing if you are compatible. Premarital counseling is supposed to be a sin now?

  251. Pingback: How would you respond if your husband lead/loved you like Christ? | Dalrock

  252. earl says:

    One of the easiest ways a man can take control of his life…submitting to God’s will. Rest assured your life will be more out of control if you try and take everything on your own. Submitting isn’t giving up control…it’s realizing somebody else has a better idea about how things are run and learning from them.

    Things really do come into focus when you do that instead of being swayed by whatever wind the world is blowing.

  253. Scott says:

    Ultimately, the conclusion is “Don’t be a Christian.”

    Agreed. I think however, 99% of what passes for “Christianity” in America is worthy of shunning. A home church of 6 people is better than 1000 person megchurch.

  254. a girl,

    You think that it is unreasonable for a couple to discuss how they’d like to handle money, children, vacations, etc. before they marry?

    In my blue pill days this question made sense. Then I took the red pill. The red pill clears things up, separates the BS from reality. How do you handle money now? Do you have any money or are you always in debt? Do you have any savings, IRAs, 401Ks, anything, or just bills to pay (student loans, credit cards, and car payments?) And if you don’t have any money (can never seem to save a penny) what possible good could come of you offering your two cents to a man on how to manage money? Do you go on vacations now (and if so, where do you go) and if not, why not? Where do you want to go and why haven’t you already gone there yet? Do you already have children? If so, do they do whatever they tell you to do?

    The question you are asking is moot. A man already knows how to handle these things (money, children, vacations.) He leads. You follow. End of story.

    The alternative is to just pick a guy a marry him not knowing if you are compatible.

    In the blue pill days, this made sense. But I’m red pill and I already know you really don’t get to pick. You are chosen by a man. The only right you have is the right of refusal of his marriage proposal. There is no “husband store” for you where you get to pick one. Some women (a sadly increasingly large number) will NEVER be chosen by a man in their life. They will never have the opportunity to submit to a husband. It appears you do. Do you know how many women would be willing to trade places with you, just to have the opportinity to submit themselves to a husband all their life?

    Premarital counseling is supposed to be a sin now?

    Its not a sin, its just a waste of time and money. Here let me counsel you.

    When you get married, do whatever your husband tells you to do.

  255. thedeti says:

    “I don’t do housework ’cause that’s just for women” is problematic.”

    Interesting. I don’t ever remember hearing women say “I don’t do full time work and bread-winning ’cause that’s just for men” was problematic.

  256. thedeti says:

    a girl:

    I think you should just accept that you don’t really respect and trust your intended. You don’t trust or believe that he loves you, either.

    Cut him loose and find someone else, and let him have a chance to find a woman who really does respect him and trust him.

  257. earl says:

    ‘You think that it is unreasonable for a couple to discuss how they’d like to handle money, children, vacations, etc. before they marry?’

    Discuss all you want…even the best made plans completely change once you are actually married. I think what IBB is eluding to is that when the rubber meets the road the man should have an idea already about what to do and you are there ready to help him.

    For me I would want three things from both of us before marriage…1) It’s biblical 2) no discussion of divorce as an out when things get bad 3) we are of the same religion. Everything else can be discussed but that means nothing once you jump in. Those three things mean everything beforehand.

    But I agree with the others here…from your tone you don’t trust this man to have the ability to lead you in marriage.

  258. thedeti says:

    “a girl” is like most Christian/churchian women when it comes to submission.

    To the modern Christian/churchian woman, submission=doormat. Submission=I lose, he wins. Submission=I must accept rudeness and cruelty. Submission=I have no autonomy. Submission=I will be treated like a child.

    And this is how it’s sold to Christian women also; if it’s even talked about (which it is not, for obvious reasons). Or it’s sold in conjunction with Eph. 5:21, and tempered with “mutual submission”. There are a couple of Christian mommybloggers who frequent other Christomanosphere sites who sell this garbage.

    Nope.

    Submission by Christian women, when done properly, is done ultimately in response to a command from God. It’s done unto God. It’s done in obedience to God.

    Submission is only to a husband, and not to other men.

    It’s supposed to be tempered with husbandly love and kindness.

  259. Gunner Q says:

    a girl @ 12:53 pm:
    “You think that it is unreasonable for a couple to discuss how they’d like to handle money, children, vacations, ect before they marry?”

    Unless he wants to hear your opinion, yes. You are not negotiating an employment contract or cargo shipment. You are swearing to God Himself to respect and obey your fiance for life in return for sexual exclusivity with him. Everything you have said here indicates you think of your fiance as a pocketbook to be spent instead of a stud to be mounted.

    Do you realize that, as his wife, it will be mandatory for you to have sex with him at least as often as he wants it? To keep your body pretty the way HE likes? Because he’s cutting himself off from every other female on the planet for you. If you like this idea then you’re compatible. Or do you plan to repay his sexual devotion with sexual refusal?

  260. Opus says:

    I have for while suspected that ‘a girl’ is here to wind us up, but whether that is so or not, I think she has a point. Say (as most women are) these days, your wife is CEO of a global corporation (maybe your surname is Clinton or Thatcher); how can you be expected to take orders from a man who you would not normally even deign to speak to just because in the dim and distant past you found that you married him. Taking out the garbage is a task way beneath you; what you need are servants. Is that not how the Upper Classes and anyone who aspired to Upper-dom dealt with this problem of submission.

    Has anyone read Chaucer’s tale told by the clerk of Oxenford: now there was a woman – Griselda by name – who no matter how much her husband baited her never complained until after a lot of incomprehensible verse in Mediaeval English he changed his ways. Is not the same also true of Hermione, wrongly accused of adultery by her husband Leontes in Shakespeare’s Winter’s Tale – though in the production I saw (with Judi Dench as the would-be adultress) I think Leontes might have had a point – difficult to tell with all the strobe-lighting. She does not complain and Leontes’ old nurse makes Leontes’ life miserable for the rest of the play.

    I don’t think I have ever come across a woman (other than my mother) who did as she was told.

  261. craig says:

    a girl says: “But don’t wives always decide whether to follow their husbands or not?”

    Yes. The dubious proposition now is whether it is worth it for a man to marry at all, if his wife rejects the principle that she should follow him. Under the law as it now stands, all the things he gives up by marrying are concrete and legally enforceable, while all the things he gains are intangible and subjective.

    It is reasonable for a couple to discuss how they would like to handle money, children, etc., to see if they are fundamentally compatible. It is good to break off a relationship for incompatibility rather than suffer a marriage. But there are unforeseen situations in every marriage that will not be answered by referring to the minutes of premarital discussions. At that point, someone has to be trusted. If you don’t trust him reflexively, you don’t respect him enough to remain attracted to him as a wife — and that lack of respect will cause suffering later in your marriage.

    “He sees taking care of the kids and housework as not his problem!”

    I don’t know any man who would balk at doing that if his wife were absent or incapacitated. I changed many a diaper back in the day. Every family has to figure out its own division of labor.

    But if taking care of the kids and housework is her job as a SAHM, it’s better if he doesn’t jump in. Especially when she’s perfectly capable but chooses to load her plate with other things that keep her from getting around to it. Just as a man with an unprofitable hobby should not put that hobby ahead of his regular job nor expect his wife to work to make up for the lost income, a woman should not expect her husband to come home and scrub toilets so she can give her day time to church groups, Junior League, or whatever. Does she see going to work to support the family, protecting against robbers, fixing sewer drains, killing coyotes, or whatever, as not her problem? It is evidence of a selfish, entitled mindset when his duties are his duties but her duties are ‘our’ duties.

  262. Opus,

    I have for while suspected that ‘a girl’ is here to wind us up, but whether that is so or not, I think she has a point.

    If that is the case (you might be right) then ‘a girl’ has failed miserably. I’m not the least bit wound up. At this point ‘a girl’ has made my thoughts on this process entirely clear. ‘A girl’ has helped me “unwind.” I mean if you truly follow Christian thinking, ‘a girl’s constrant reframing of the issue will never change reality.

  263. feeriker says:

    Submission by Christian women, when done properly, is done ultimately in response to a command from God. It’s done unto God. It’s done in obedience to God.

    And given the ferocious resistance from 99.9 percent of them to said command, I’ll just revert back to my statement of doubt that most of them have any intention of obeying, or even really believe in God.

  264. No feeriker, they don’t believe in God. Or if they did believe in Him, they think He screwed up with His laws, and they (feminists) have the authority to alter them to what they think is “moral.”

  265. What’s cute about @Marg’s comment is that she thinks men don’t have to deal with submission on a regular basis.

    Men submit all the time: to the government, to police officers, to church leaders… and most of all, their boss, unless they’re self employed. And the self employed often find themselves submitting under a client or a customer.

    The reason men think it reasonable to expect women to be submissive is beacuse we do it all the time and know it’s not that hard.

  266. earl says:

    ‘The reason men think it reasonable to expect women to be submissive is beacuse we do it all the time and know it’s not that hard.’

    Yeah I don’t get why a woman is fine submitting to a boss or a corporation, but finds it appalling to submit to a flesh and blood husband who vows to love her the rest of her life.

    Really the scope of a man’s authority is pretty limited for most men…basically to his wife and kids, or in the case of Holy Orders whatever parish he is assigned, and whatever duties he has at his job. Men have to submit to a higher authority all the time too.

  267. theasdgamer says:

    @ a girl

    Are you married? Happily? Is your wife happy?

    Quit reframing and deal with my questions.

  268. John Nesteutes says:

    Never seen a marriage, or any relationship where one person got his or her way all of the time without consulting or discussing it with the other person.

    Another poster alluded to this in his comment about he has eight kids, and thus his wife never scrubs toilets; this @a girl person seems to be unaware that children exist.

    I’ve taken care of plenty of babies and toddlers, and I don’t recall ever having a discussion or a consultation about which one of gets to have our way.

    To the modern woman, children and babies don’t exist. They’re more like pets.

    @innocentbystanderboston

    One key distinction between plain Mennonite and Amish churches is the (a) plural ministry, (b) unpaid ministry, and (c) ordination by lot.

    The plural ministry means there is more than one minister (pastor) operating in a typical church, and operating as equals. (Typical is 2 ministers, 1 bishop (senior pastor), and 3 – 4 retired ministers who preach occasionally and 1 or 2 retired bishops.) This puts the brakes on authoritarian behaviour, but also puts the brakes on attempts to tear down ministers who are upholding biblical standards. If things really get nasty, the old guys come out of retirement, who are usually more conservative than everyone else. Would-be social reformers sure don’t want that to happen.

    The unpaid ministry means being a minister is more of a duty and a responsibility than a cushy job. You still have to have a full time job; you have to have a wife and kids, so you’re busy raising a family; your wife is busy being a good minister’s wife (and you aren’t eligible to be a minister if your wife is unsubmissive, disobedient to the church, etc.); there’s really not much glamour in it at all.

    But the converse to this is that ministers have a lot less fear of man and fear of losing their jobs. And the “interface” between women in the church and the ministers is the ministers’ wives, as it should be.

    And the ordination by lot means that any man in good standing in the church (and whose wife is in good standing) is at risk of being called up to serve in the ministry.

    @earl / @Scott

    Your system of apostolic succession, along with only having male priests, seems to have served you well as well. Feminism seems to mostly have been kept out of your church heirarchy’s ranks.

  269. Regular Guy says:

    @ IBB
    ” But women worship feminism far more often than they worship God, even if they are doing so unknowingly.

    I believe it’s more accurate to say, “But women worship their feelings far more often than they worship God, even if they are doing so unknowingly.” It may seem like splitting hairs, but I assert that you can recently observe a growing movement of women ditching the idea of feminism the moment it became no longer useful to identify with it despite not displaying any evidence of changing their attitudes about male/female relations in any meaningful way. The proof of this can be found in #womenagainstfeminism and #notyourshield.

  270. @a girl: You think that it is unreasonable for a couple to discuss how they’d like to handle money, children, vacations, etc. before they marry?

    Marriage 2.0: Money and vacations. (Good news – unlike the marriage itself, these are permanent rights which will survive a divorce.)

    @Scott,

    You’re certainly right about a 6 member house church being preferrable to a 1,000 attendee mega church. (Most mega churches don’t even have a solid concept of membership; they just try to keep people’s addresses so they can sell the mailing list to fundraisers.)

    The road that leads to life is narrow, and there are few who find it. It seems you and yours have found it.

  271. JDG says:

    “a girl” is a feminist of the egalitarian flavor. Her every reply has been a re-frame from the biblical view to a feminist one. She is in rebellion and rejects authority as do her sisters in rebellion. Sadly, “a girl” is yet one more example of the fruits of our rebellious culture.

    Being of the same persuasion as Jenny Erickson, Sheila Mcgregor, and Barbara Rainy, this woman is not wife material for a Christian marriage. She will fit in just fine with popular culture and the sham that is marriage 2.0, but unless there is genuine repentance I don’t see her life’s trajectory bringing her to a place she will want to be later in life. I do see a high probability that she will tear down her house with her own hands and then blame her husband for it.

    This is exactly the the reason marriage to American women is a bad idea. “a girl” is the model US citizen. What does that tell you about the US? What does that tell you about marriage prospects for genuine Christian men in this country?

    Am I the only one besides Sarah’s Daughter who can picture “a girl” picking up her husbands dirty socks from some where in the house and throwing them on the floor next to her husbands side of the bed?

  272. earl says:

    ‘What does that tell you about marriage prospects for genuine Christian men in this country?’

    They haven’t been good for many years. Add on top that when men call out this behavior from women they get a bucket load of shame from women and white knights, it’s going to take divine intervention to overcome this mess.

  273. Sarah's Daughter says:

    Am I the only one besides Sarah’s Daughter who can picture “a girl” picking up her husbands dirty socks from some where in the house and throwing them on the floor next to her husbands side of the bed?

    Step One: Ask what submission looks like
    Step Two: Ignore all replies
    Step Three: Argue minutia (socks, toilets)
    Step Four: Use ridiculous anecdotes and trigger words (selfish, control freak)
    Step Five: Attempt to belittle a man
    Step Six: Teach men the Bible (see next post)

  274. Pingback: Love is not cheap. Hate is. [I Jn 3] | Dark Brightness

  275. a girl says:

    @ craig
    It is reasonable for a couple to discuss how they would like to handle money, children, etc., to see if they are fundamentally compatible. It is good to break off a relationship for incompatibility rather than suffer a marriage. But there are unforeseen situations in every marriage that will not be answered by referring to the minutes of premarital discussions. At that point, someone has to be trusted. If you don’t trust him reflexively, you don’t respect him enough to remain attracted to him as a wife — and that lack of respect will cause suffering later in your marriage.

    Well then we agree. This seems completely reasonable to me.

    @Sarah’s Daughter

    I am not concerned about socks or toilets exactly but about sharing the workload fairly in general. Not ending up as some overworked, frumpy house frau. That’s not minutia but about overall quality of life. Some posters are mad about that but I’m not being unreasonable. There were some who agreed with me, even here, where there isn’t much sympathy for women.

    I’m not ignoring all replies, but I can’t respond to every single comment directed at me. It’s a lot. I haven’t tried to belittled anyone!

    Did anyone feel belittled by my comments? If so I apologize as that wasn’t my point.

  276. BradA says:

    a girl,

    am not concerned about socks or toilets exactly but about sharing the workload fairly in general. Not ending up as some overworked, frumpy house frau. That’s not minutia but about overall quality of life. Some posters are mad about that but I’m not being unreasonable.

    Yes you are being unreasonable. Making your fears more important than your commitment to your husband means you will not follow when push comes to shove, which will always happen in even the best marriages.

    You will frivorce your husband or make his life hell because you aren’t happy.

    Only you can control your own happiness. You would control whether you become a frumpy house frau. Have you really not looked around enough to note that those who have a good attitude can put up with things far worse than those with a bad attitude?

    Grow up a little while you have time or condemn yourself and your children to a horrid life with your attempts to be in control. It won’t work nor will it really make you happy.

  277. JDG says:

    I am not concerned about socks or toilets exactly but about sharing the workload fairly in general.

    Who decides what is fair in this Utopian fantasy?

  278. As we’ve discussed before, it’s not possible to be an overworked housewife today, unless perhaps you’re Amish and reject all the appliances and modern conveniences that have reduced a difficult job to a fraction of its former load.

    As for frumpy, that’s entirely her choice. She can do the housework fully made-up in a French maid outfit and high heels if she wants. It’ll save time when her husband gets home. If she chooses instead to be frumpy, it’s probably because she resents her husband and doesn’t want him to find her attractive.

  279. feeriker says:

    Yeah I don’t get why a woman is fine submitting to a boss or a corporation, but finds it appalling to submit to a flesh and blood husband who vows to love her the rest of her life.</I?

    I would love to corner modern women, collectively, and tie them to a chair and not let them leave the room until they answer this question. It is, in my opinion, THE ONE question they've gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid even acknowledging, let alone answering.

    Really the scope of a man’s authority is pretty limited for most men…basically to his wife and kids, or in the case of Holy Orders whatever parish he is assigned, and whatever duties he has at his job. Men have to submit to a higher authority all the time too.

    Thanks to Big Daddy Government, most men don’t even have THAT much authority left in their lives anymore. Just try as a man to exercise biblical authority over your family and see how fast the blue-clad thugs storm your house, slap you in handcuffs, frog-walk you to a police cruiser, and haul your ass off to the slammer.

  280. Yeah I don’t get why a woman is fine submitting to a boss or a corporation, but finds it appalling to submit to a flesh and blood husband who vows to love her the rest of her life.

    That’s easy: she can quit the job anytime she’s unhappy. It’s not for life, even in theory. Even the career gal who intends to be a powerful attorney or surgeon or whatever doesn’t intend to have the same boss all those years. Feral women are obsessed with change and the freedom to choose something different at any time. A job allows that, especially the easily interchangeable jobs women mostly have.

    Of course, marriage is often not for life anymore either, but ideally it’s still supposed to be, and that’s how it looms when she’s considering marriage. There’s still some social stigma to having your marriage fail, as Dalrock has talked about, while there’s no stigma to switching jobs.

  281. theasdgamer says:

    @ Cail

    Maybe the submission problem comes from “No man can obey two masters.”

  282. earl says:

    ‘Maybe the submission problem comes from “No man can obey two masters.”

    That would make sense. There’s Godly women and Bernankified women.

  283. Dale says:

    @a girl

    >You think that it is unreasonable for a couple to discuss how they’d like to handle money, children, vacations, ect before they marry?

    This is partly very wise. You should get to know the character of the man who wishes to marry you. Then a wise decision can be made about whether it is wise for you to enter a 50+ year marriage where you will be completely under his authority. If he is foolish and lazy, the answer is obviously no.
    The problem I see is that you are unwilling to accept the “under his authority” part. Can you eagerly accept this idea with ANY man that you have ever known well?
    I suspect you do not want a Biblical marriage, as designed by God. Rather, you want the Satanic, self-destructive form of marriage that is practiced in Western culture.

    Challenge for you:
    Consider “old style” marriages that were run on Biblical rules. Wife and husband married as virgins, and thus had strong emotional bond. She gave herself to him as a bride at her age of 20, so for the rest of his life he sees her as the young and therefore beautiful woman she was when he first had sex with her. Both accepted this was for life, so whenever problems arose, they still felt safe and secure in the marriage, since they knew both were committed to making this work. Sex was as frequent as either needed it. Love from husband to wife was was also daily.

    Now consider “feminist style” marriages that are run on “equality”, as shown in our current culture. Wife and probably husband do not marry as virgins, and no longer see sex as sacred, and certainly do not view promiscuity as a problem. Will that help to avoid future adultery? Will having this fifth man’s penis inside her be as bonding as was the first?
    She struggles with “wasting” her youth and the opportunities she has as a very young woman on marriage, likely preferring to wait until at least mid or late 20s to marry. So he will not have the young, beautiful wife that every man desires. He probably will not like to see pictures of her from before she started their relationship, as he does not want to be reminded that she waited until she was no longer as beautiful as she once was before she let him have her.
    They both accept divorce as valid, although only in “special” circumstances. What those “special” circumstances are, will be decided on as an-needed basis in the future, as his and her attitudes change. So when problems occur, unless they are stupid, they will know there is a chance that this marriage will end now, or soon, as a result of this problem. Thus insecurity and a desire to protect yourself from your spouse, rather than to be open and trusting toward your spouse.
    Sex will be only as frequent as the wife wants, because she has learned he really wants it, so she can use this to get her way. He therefore feels betrayal and hatred FROM her, rather than love and loyalty.
    Although the husband may try to give unconditional love, regardless of his character, he is still a sinful man. And having his selfish wife refuse his strongest need (sex, in case you are unaware) consistently for years is a strong burden on his willful choice to love her with his actions and words. And regardless of how great he is at giving love to her with his actions and words, as an act of sheer will, he cannot make himself FEEL passionate about her. This is to be expected, as FEELINGS of love will result from receiving love. I can control my actions, but I cannot set the dials on my emotions. So, unless you are an idiot, you will quickly figure out that your husband serves you in loving actions and words, but actually has feelings of hurt, disappointment, resentment, and eventually hatred toward you. To religious nuts who claims a husband will FEEL passionate love to the wife who for years continually betrays him and acts with hatred toward him: Give me a real-world example please. I am not God, and while I can control my actions, I am sure my emotions will respond to her choices. In fact, this is necessary to the emotional bonding.

    So, the challenge is to pick the kind of marriage you want. You probably will want to choose the results of the first marriage, but the freedom of the second. And that choice is not available to you, regardless of the number of lies told to you by Satan and his servants, the feminists and many “religious” people. (2 Tim 2:22-26)

    And I will restate what you do not seem to be able to hear. In a healthy marriage, he is the leader. So if you think he is unworthy of this authority, then as thedeti said: Cut him loose and find someone else, and let him have a chance to find a woman who really does respect him and trust him.
    And he also said: Submission by Christian women, when done properly, is done ultimately in response to a command from God. It’s done unto God. It’s done in obedience to God.

    Both these wise. Consider.

    Whether this man is truly unworthy of this level of trust, or whether you are unable to trust any man, is another issue. But you do not trust THIS man, so do not marry him. If your questions are only related to your desire to learn more about him before you make the decision of whether you can trust him with marriage, that is one case. Fine, spend more time in discovery of his character. Do not marry a random guy from the street who is unknown.
    I suspect you really want control however for yourself.

    And I advise you to have your father choose for you instead anyway. As shown with the two types of marriages and their results above, women tend to not make the best decisions for themselves. In general, a loving father will make wiser decisions for the long-term, IMO.

    >I am not concerned about socks or toilets exactly but about sharing the workload fairly in general. Not ending up as some overworked, frumpy house frau.

    As I previouly wrote above:
    Man – serve God. Provide leadership, food and clothing to family, and marital rights of his wife. Train his children in morals, character, submission to God, and proper roles for their future lives/marriages.
    Woman – serve God. Submit to husband, provide marital rights of husband, maintain the home and raise children.

    These lists are different, but that does not mean one is slaving away while the other gets a free ride.

    @Cail
    >women are obsessed with change and the freedom to choose something different at any time. A job allows that, especially the easily interchangeable jobs women mostly have

    I think that is a big part. Plus feminism tells her she is supposed to want a job, but supposed to resent a husband.

    @Bluepillprofessor:
    >I don’t really agree with several Exegists here who claim that a woman’s duty is to obey even when ordered to sin by her husband

    >Most men want capable First Officers standing by their side, taking the initiative and taking care of business

    The problem with this, as others have pointed out in prior threads, is that modern women are so able and willing to decide that almost anything on the part of her husband is “sin”. Thus, in practice, giving her an excuse to view any situation as one where she needs to be free to follow, “God’s leading”, regardless of whether she has clear Scripture showing his instructions to be sinful or her preferences to be be correct.

  284. Dragonfly says:

    @TFH “Most women have a huge intellectual handicap about grasping that when men earn a paycheck, it is hard earned. This leads to ignorant beliefs about ‘men not doing housework = lazy men’ as well as the perennial myth of a ‘pay gap’. All stem for a complete ignorance by most women about how money is earned, how wealth is created, and why productivity is the most important thing of all (to women, productivity is the LEAST important thing).”

    You’re very right… it used to be that mothers would teach their daughters what kinds of pressures men were under, my mom did… I wrote about it here (http://girlwithadragonflytattoo.com/2015/04/16/men-vs-women-who-has-it-harder/), it goes exactly with what Rollo wrote about in his Burden of Performance.

    And as far as this whole post goes… didn’t I tell you men that Jesus wasn’t some supplicating Beta male… and even Scott disagreed with me. Jesus was alpha – in the most sincere and perfect form – not some stupid caricature you think of when you read the word “alpha” but in the very essence of who He was.

  285. Dragonfly says:

    @a girl… you’re walking into a minefield… curtsy to you😉

  286. Dragonfly says:

    @ a girl “But when I asked him what submission would look like to him and his answer was vague each time. So it is something that is important to him but he can’t or won’t really describe or explain how it would work in our day to day lives. After reading the comments here I am going to ask him how he feels about housework because I can’t see myself married to someone who has issues with it. I don’t want to be the only person who scrubs the toilet for the rest of my life.”

    Submission is loving him enough to look up to him – in all decisions. You can lovingly discuss things, even if you are concerned or have “women’s intuition” that maybe something could be a little off (say he wants to trust someone and you have this gut feeling they may not be trustworthy, it’s great to bring it up to him, but do so in an incredibly respectful way… and pick your timing wisely – when he is relaxed, ready to talk and you can approach the topic in a relaxed, matter of fact suggestion of your thoughts about it).

    Submission is doing whatever needs to be done (like housework) and realizing if he’s working a full-time job, that he may not (probably does not) have the same amount of time and pressure to want to do a lot of the housework. Even if you work, the home in general, is really something that a woman adds a certain element to that a man just usually doesn’t. Maybe it’s the decor, or the atmosphere/ambiance, but a woman that takes pride in creating a home (instead of just a house) adds an element of beauty to the marriage by maintaining their home.

    Obviously, a major part of maintaining this beauty and serenity is working effectively and efficiently to have a clean, well-organized and fully operating home – even if you work, it is not impossible to hand this if you stay on top of it, teach your children (when you have them) to pick up their things well, teach them how to keep their toys organized and separated and easy to find and easy to put away. Trust me! I know this becuase I live it… every day… chasing donkeys LOL It is easy once you get into a routine of it. For us, we typically have a pick up that generally takes 15 minutes a day (to get the general family area, kitchen (for me), and my sons’ game room cleaned up. If you wait till the end of the week to clean up it will obviously take longer.

    Hope this helps, if you have any more questions or get tired of the Men’s Club over here, visit my blog.

  287. Dragonfly says:

    Something else came to mind. Submission is allowing him to have the ultimate decision, even if you disagree with it (how could I forget this?!?). Seriously, if you respect him and admire him (which he needs from you as your husband), then you need to follow him even if he decides to trust that person you have a gut feeling could be untrustworthy. You can express your opinion and concern to him in the uber-respectful way that I mentioned above, however, if he still decides to go through with it, you need to drop the matter, and stay bonded to your husband as a team.

    Husbands are human, as we are also. They will sometimes make some mistakes, some possibly bad judgments. Submission is NOT holding it over his head or using it as an “I told you so!!!!” ugly argument. Submission is being there when something fell through that he believed in, or when he made a possibly had judgment call, submission looks like you taking him into your arms and telling him God can handle this.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s