lurking 12: the good christian wife
There’s lots of online advice about how to be a good Christian wife. I’ve seen quite a few handy tips recently that I think would benefit a wider audience.
Insanitybytes gives her insanely romantic opinion on how a half-brained woman can have a fairy tale relationship worthy of a Disney movie if she behaves likes a proper Christian wife.
Any woman with half a brain who wishes to have a relationship with a man will learn how to submit. Not out of fear, not because it’s mandatory, not to subject themselves to tyrants, but because we know if you can sneak in under a man’s defense mechanism, he’ll rope the moon and the stars for you.
In conversation on a post informing us that the god God has a penis, nolaughingmattersministries explains how it’s possible to genuinely love someone as an equal while expecting them to submit as your underling.
I agree 100% that marriage is an equal partnership. The woman being submissive in the relationship doesn’t mean that she’s anything less than a 50% partner. She’s still an equal partner in the relationship. She’s just CHOOSING to submit to her husband’s authority.
If you have a husband that loves you like Christ loves the church, and he’s willing to give himself for you like Christ did the church, then you would never have to worry about your husband abusing his power or authority.
Finally, the crowning glory comes from the peacefulwife, who gives 54 of the “greatest ways to prevent becoming a controlling, disrespectful wife“. My personal favourites encourage women to doubt their own judgement and to isolate themselves from other men:
If your husband asks you to blatantly sin, then you will have to respectfully refuse to submit to him. But check out the post Spiritual Authority to be clear on what this means. Many wives assume things are sin that really aren’t, and resist their husbands’ leadership to the destruction of the marriage over things that are not sin.
Guard your heart and your marriage from other men. None of us are above adultery. Set up healthy boundaries to protect yourself and do not seek to be close friends with other men.
Realize that God can and will speak through your husband to you. Be accepting and prayerful about correction. (Unless he is asking you to blatantly sin or condone sin or there are extremely major issues and your husband is not in his right mind – uncontrolled mental health problems, addictions, infidelity, severe sin issues, etc.) Prayerfully consider your husband’s comments and ask God to help you see what is true and what He might want you to work on.
I’m sure everyone will agree this has been a thoroughly educational exercise on how to demean, disempower and devalue women through religious indoctrination, leaving them vulnerable to manipulative, controlling and abusive relationships.
It kind of fascinates me Violet, the opposite of “submit” is to fight, battle, defy, resist. Why would the thought of a woman having a relationship that does not involve battle, upset so many people?
As to these ideas leading to allegedly, “demean, disempower and devalue women,” the whole world kind of revolves around us. I hate to sound so self centered, but many men are busy working themselves into an early heart attack just so they can give us rather comfortable lives, homes, shelter, protection, support for raising children. It doesn’t seem at all unreasonable to allow him to hold a few of the cards, in fact to do otherwise seems somewhat unfair.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Obviously, the concept of equality escapes you. Or perhaps you’re correct and your contribution to your family is considerably less important than the men who “work themselves into an early heart attack just so they can give us rather comfortable lives, homes, shelter, protection, support for raising children.”
I wouldn’t really know, as my partner and I share responsibilities. Neither of us is a candidate for a stent because of our relationship choices.
LikeLike
“Obviously, the concept of equality escapes you”
I’m not trying to sound unkind here, but obviously the nature of male and female interpersonal relationships, escapes you. As to shared responsibilities, I’m going to assume those do not include male and female biological roles, childbirth and child rearing?
You’re quite free to have a relationship anyway you like, but I am curious, why does mine and others like mine, offend you?
LikeLike
It doesn’t, my dearest. Generations of women have chosen or been forced into submission. That is (or was) the way of the world.
I don’t think there’s any ‘nature’ to any relationship. They’re constructs. We can choose to subscribe to fairer or less fair constructs.
Personally, I like the concept of fair, between any and all people. The whole aristocracy palaver doesn’t seem to have a leg to stand on (said the aristocrat).
LikeLike
“I don’t think there’s any ‘nature’ to any relationship.”
Well, with all due respect, this conclusion is based on what exactly? Have you observed a great many relationships between men and women, studied, biology, psychology, human sexuality, interviewed those who have been married for decades?
I’m sorry, I have to claim the upper hand on this one. I am after all, the hopeless romantic.
LikeLike
The upper hand in what? Cutting your husband’s fingernails?
As a qualified historian I say what I say, and I’ve got an infinity of books on anthropology and history to back me up.
In fact, I myself have been with the same partner for 13 years. Considerably more than the average person…
Hopeless whatever that you may be, unfortunately it’s not hopelessly knowledgable.
LikeLike
“As a qualified historian I say what I say..”
I’ve already been subjected to your “qualified historian” credentials and I found them to be sadly lacking. No, I have the upper hand in the fact that I totally own you when it comes to understanding male and female interpersonal relationships.
LikeLike
SUPERB!!! That’s probably why I paid more in property taxes last year than you made in your entire life! Terribly lacking indeed!
I mean the Zmurko in my dressing room is probably terribly lacking in the sense it’s worth more than your house.
LikeLike
Why so defensive, have I failed to be submissive enough? Why would you seek to lord your white privilege, elitist, MALE, dominance over me? Have you never heard of sexism before? How ironic that you strut around like a peacock while attempting to lecture me about female equality.
Thanks for playing, Pink. If nothing else you do make an amusing lab rat.
LikeLike
That’s not a defence, my dearest fool, it’s an attack. Terribly sorry no one taught you the difference 😉
LikeLike
I just wanted to clarify- which part of my body of work did you find questionable? The research on Russian hardstone carvings? The essays on the work (cartons/tapestries) of Jean Baptiste Huet? You see, when you say “sadly lacking” one hopes you have equal credentials to back that up. Otherwise, you’re just an idiot trying to make your pathetic life seem worthwhile via internet discussions.
LikeLike
I have twenty years of experience in male and female relationship and my relationship has always been that of equality. Before that I have my parents marriage, that lasted some sixty years (before my dads death after he had worked himself to death to make a safe and comfortable home for his kids like his wife did) as an example of marriage equality. In addtion, I live in a society that prefers married partners to be equal. It is not a perfect society, but a lot more healthier than the ones where such is not the ideal.
I have no personal experience of a relationship where the other party submits, but I have wittnessed some of those and honestly to me those seem unethical, immoral and sick.
What proportion of any western society recieves such good salaries, that one partner in a marriage alone in working life can support the entire family? That this could be the model for a modern society to strive for is a fantasy from very sheltered and minimal part of society.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hi Insanity, as a few other people suggest, it’s odd that you consider submission or battle to be the only options. Co-operation and logical decision making are usually about neither. I’ll have a look around your blog to see if I can get an idea of your age and relationship history because I can’t imagine what drives these kind of beliefs.
As I’ve only been in equal relationships (in terms of work and childcare as well) I’m not sure I can relate to this next bit. But if what you say is true and many men are busy working themselves into early heart attacks, it probably would be best if the rested and reflective wives make all the decisions, as it sounds like the judgement of the men would be seriously affected by such onerous conditions.
Besides all that, from what I’ve read of your personality, I don’t think for a minute that you are genuinely submissive to anyone. I can well imagine you talk the talk but in reality make all the decisions through careful manipulation.
LikeLike
“I don’t think for a minute that you are genuinely submissive to anyone..”
There really is a misconception that submissive to a husband means you are a Stepford wife and therefore a doormat for the entire world. It’s a bit of a paradox, but yielding in one area of your life can actually strengthen and empower you in many other ways.
As to careful manipulation, that made me laugh. Oh, I wish I were that clever. I’m not sure my husband has ever been manipulated by anyone in his entire life. On the bright side, he does listen to reason and he’s very kind. I honestly cannot imagine a relationship where everything has to be perfectly “equal.” Who keeps the score? Where is the trust?
LikeLike
@insanitybytes, what is it that you are actually advocating? At one point you seem to prefer submission, but then on the other hand it seems you would not submit to everything. (For example, if your husbad told you to give up your religion, would you?) If you are actively engaged in making choises what to submit to, then do you think your husband is not supposed (by your god) to make similar choises just in case you had the better idea what to do next? An equal partnership is not about counting who gets to choose, but about mutually agreeing on the better conduct regardless who suggested it. Submission according to genitals is in direct contradiction to such, or any, logical endeavours.
Of course if in your relationship, it is your husband, that always has the better ideas of what to do, then it leads you to a situation where you might be inclined to expect you to support his ideas even in the future. However, my experience is, that people should marry their equals on emotional and intelligence levels. Because the party whith the higher capacity usually has also higher expectations of coercion and communication and might get really bored at the party whith less capacity. On the other hand if the party whith higher capacity is an abusive a-hole then who else is more easily abused then the simple person who submits easily?
Now, admit it, the opposite of submission is not to do battle, but to find equal grounds. Conflict is only necessary if one party is trying to force a nother indipendend party into submission. And please do admit it, that societies where women are submissive to their husbands are less healthy in comparrison to the ones where marriage equality is preferred. Or would you prefer to live in Saudi-Arabia rather than in Norway?
LikeLike
“On the other hand if the party whith higher capacity is an abusive a-hole then who else is more easily abused then the simple person who submits easily?”
This comment shows such a staggering misunderstanding of the nature of relationships between men and women that I hardly know how to respond. Just, no.
First of all, abuse does NOT occur because somebody is submissive. The inherent disrespect for victims of abuse that is contained within that statement is also hard to address. Victims of abuse are not abused because they are submissive or stupid or not intellectually equal to the abuser. There is so much victim blaming in your statement that you are probably completely unaware of. Abuse victims are not “simple people” who “submit easily.” Dump that stereotype immediately.
Indeed, the opposite of the word submit is to fight. You cannot attempt to change the entire definition of the word submit because you wish the opposite of the word to mean “equal.” That is flat out wrong. The opposite of equal is unequal, not submission. Submission means to not engage in battle. In your mind, to not engage battle means to be unequal. There are a myriad of reasons why people would choose to not engage in battle that have absolutely nothing to do with perceiving themselves as inferior. Love for instance, is one reason we may choose to submit.
LikeLike
@ Insanitybytes,
“On the other hand if the party whith higher capacity is an abusive a-hole then who else is more easily abused then the simple person who submits easily?”
Raut did say if. I don’t think it was presumed that all people in this type of relationship are abusive/abused. Having been in a submissive role to someone who was abusive I can say that 1) I’m glad that your spouse is not abusive toward you and 2) you display a staggering misunderstanding of the nature of relationships between an abusive man and an abused woman.
I am by no means “simple” nor am I “intellectually inferior”. BUT I did choose to simply submit to my abusive partner because my Bible, my church, and even well-renowned evangelical teachers told me that’s what God wanted me to do. I submitted to him as a “simple” act of obedience and love for the God that I worshiped. What you fail to understand, and what I think Raut was pointing out, is that this instruction is a weapon in the hands of an abuser.
While you may not subscribe to that, and you may believe that abuse is an acceptable reason to leave your spouse, that is not what is in the Bible. There you are very much cherry picking.
LikeLike
Everything is a weapon in the hands of an abuser. Those who do not distort religion and biblical teachings to justify their abuse, will use other things.
Also, submit does not mean to tolerate abuse, it simply means to not engage in battle. If you are in a violent situation with a man, engaging in battle is not going to do anything to make the situation better, in fact it will likely get worse.
LikeLike
Don’t tolerate abuse, don’t engage in battle, and don’t leave.
Lovely options.
LikeLike
Nowhere in the bible does it say you cannot leave. Nowhere does it tell women they must live with violent husbands and endure abuse. If abusers have distorted Christianity to attempt to justify their behavior, well, abusers have also distorted environmentalism, paganism, veganism, football, and even atheism. If you can name it, it has probably been used as an excuse for abuse.
This idea that if we rid the world of Christianity abuse will suddenly cease to be is false.
LikeLike
I’m not certain where anyone said that. I don’t know anyone who is under that allusion.
Thank you for negating my experience and the experience of many others like me. Maybe you could tell Dr. James Dobson a thing or two.
Now, maybe I did misspeak. Yes, an abused spouse is allowed to leave, but not divorce and certainly not remarry.
LikeLike
I think you’re wrong about this Insanity. Christianity gives manipulative, abusive men a clear framework to wield their trade. You just have to look at the peacefulwife’s advice given above. God may speak through your husband. Doubt yourself. Be submissive. God will protect you. Never divorce, there is shame in divorce, there is shame in not being the successful Christian couple that the god God has blessed. Have you prayed about it? You are ONE flesh. In secular life men can still be abusive but they can’t appeal to a higher, invisible power for authority, they can’t rely on the shame of divorce or superstitious ideas of spiritual union.
LikeLike
Precisely, Violet!
LikeLike
@Insanitybytes, you are evading my point. Do you see how?
The opposite of battle and conflict is peace, not submission. You can play whith words all you like, but life is not a choise between conflict and submission, rather submission is an end result of a conflict. And yes, I agree, I may not change the meaning of the words (nor have I) and EQUALLY you may not make new meaning up for opposite concepts as you go. 😉
A conflict of interrests should be solved through consensus and compromise. Or simply by mutually agreeing on the better conduct.That is how healthy relationships work. Not by other party categorically submitting to all according to what genitals they have.
England does not have to submit to the US in order for them to work for a mutual goal. Does it? Equally, a married couple gets to do better choises, if the proposals of both parties are evaluated on equal ground. That is what marriage equality is all about. Reasonable people usually are quite well equipped to choose the better method of conduct from among the proposals in a mutually agreeable way. Correct? Equal parties also get to make equally good proposals equally often even whithout counting scalps. Did you not know this? Why should genitals have anything to do whith whose proposal is chosen, or even who gets to choose which proposition is better?
You still have not admitted, that it is better to live in a society where marriage equality is the norm rather than in a society where submission is the norm. Why? Or do you think that the better weather in Saudi-Arabia in comparrison to Norway makes up for the expected submission of women?
Did you choose to misunderstand me about the fault of the victim in an abusive situation on purpose, just to divert the conversation? English is not my first language, but I am pretty sure I was rather explicit about my points, that you totally missed.
LikeLike
“A conflict of interrests should be solved through consensus and compromise. Or simply by mutually agreeing on the better conduct. That is how healthy relationships work”
Excuse me, but who died and put you in charge of defining “healthy relationships?” Who are you to tell me what “should be?” Also, consensus and compromise in several situations actually sucks, because those who wield the most power will always get the “consensus” and “compromise” they desire. For example, I have a rather private relationship with my husband that is really not a political matter and yet several of you seem bound and determined to attempt to force your version of “compromise” and “consensus” on not just me, but the entire country. Really appalling that you pretend to be doing it in the name of equality and tolerance. Your version of equality and tolerance does not respect diversity, does not promote free choices, and is actually quite authoritarian.
“..rather submission is an end result of a conflict..”
Well now you’re just being stupid. Do you fight with stop signs before submitting to them? Do you peacefully submit to traffic on the freeway or do you ram into cars until you have no option but to submit? Submit means to yield. One can peacefully yield with no conflict at all. In fact, submitting is a way of creating and keeping peace. The opposite is battle, conflict.
LikeLike
@insanitybytes, you are still evading and stalling. Are you not? Perhaps it is not deliberate.
Look I make it simple for you:
1) Why would genitals determine who “submits” on any particular subject, or not?
2) Why would certain type of genitals make the choises of a nother person better than the other party in a marriage?
3) Is it not reasonable to expect, that decisions mutually agreed upon are better for both in a couple, than that just one party gets to decide on everything based on such a random qualification as what genitals that person sports?
4) Would you rather live in Saudi-Arabia, or in Norway? Why?
I am merely telling my opinion from my experience on what should be. Are you not doing the same, or do you have a higher authority, than yourself to actually present?
You wrote: “Also, consensus and compromise in several situations actually sucks, because those who wield the most power will always get the “consensus” and “compromise” they desire.” So, is this supposed to be why consensus and compromise should and will not work in a marriage? Do you really think they are somehow magically made better, if the woman categorically submits to the man? How could that even be? Do you expect the man inevitably to be totally immoral and use his physical strength to get his way anyway, or what on earth are you referring to? Does that sound like a healthy relationship to you?
When I say healthy, I mean less likely to be one-sided and oppressive. Expecting one party in a marriage to submit according to their genitals is allready the very definition of oppression. Or do you have a better definition for healthy relationships?
Would you say that, if the US got to rule over GB their relationship would be “healthier” than if they work together towards mutual goals while keeping their own national integrity? Or are you not suggesting that a woman should not abandon her integrity for submission to her husband? Because until now, that is what you seem to be suggesting, and that certainly is what the Bible seems to suggest. Altough, I have met Christians who sincerely claimed it does not and that all the stuff about women submitting to men was just for the ancient cultures a bit like the rules about slaves submitting to their owners. I really do not understand how the book should be interpreted, since it seems to get as many interpretations as there are individuals who have read it and even lots more, because most adherents of Christianity seem to never even be bothered to read the book, exept for some tidbits that support their own cultural predispositions.
I do not “submit” to stop signs. I simply recognize the legal power invested upon them by us the people, through due democratic and legal process and the professionality of the engineers who put the signs where they are to protect citzens and all like me. The signs are hardware, not people. A bit like I do not “submit” to a gun by not shooting myself.
I am not forcing anyone to anything. I do not expect you to submit, you see. Where did you even get that? You and your husband may be sadomasochists for all I care, but is it not silly when a representative of the major culture, that has forced people to play whith their religious rules for genearations, claims that anyone questioning their unethical traditions is forcing them into anything? If you seriously think that your husband makes better choises for the two of you all the time, then fine for you, but how could that possibly lead you to think that other husbands are nearly as expert in comparrison to their wives as yours happens to be? You choose your path and I choose mine, but for pity sake, do not claim I am forcing you into anything.
On the other hand, teaching children, that girls should categorically submit to boys is close to child abuse and I do not care if it is an old tradition. It is unethical and immoral as it is not based on any sensible reasoning and I will certainly not keep quiet about the obvious harm it causes. It is only an outdated fashion about to go socially obsolete hopefully through common sense, ever growing scientific understanding and due democratic and legal process.
What “country” are you referring to?
LikeLike
Rautakyy, I have no idea why my comment to you posted way down below, so I’ll repost it again to make sure you see it.
“On the other hand, teaching children, that girls should categorically submit to boys is close to child abuse and I do not care if it is an old tradition. It is unethical and immoral as it is not based on any sensible reasoning and I will certainly not keep quiet about the obvious harm it causes.”
Bravo! And there is no “close to child abuse”. It IS child abuse.
LikeLike
” Why would genitals determine who “submits” on any particular subject, or not? Why would certain type of genitals make the choises of a nother person better than the other party in a marriage?”
I’ll answer the first two questions, because I don’t feel like writing a book here. The answer to the first part of your question is because there is this thing called biology. The two genders have different but complementary roles. I am more than capable of pumping the septic system and putting a new roof on our house, but it is infinitely stupid for me to take on those tasks on account of the fact that it will take me five times as long to accomplish them. It is a significant waste of time and resources to pretend as if all things are equal. They simply are not.
In answer to the second part of your question, YOU are the one who keeps implying that one must be “better than the other,” in what I must point out is very sexist attitude. Who are you to declare that a submissive role is “less than” another? Why do you insist on reducing this discussion to a matter of genitals, as if genitals are all that define women?
LikeLike
“but it is infinitely stupid for me to take on those tasks on account of the fact that it will take me five times as long to accomplish them.”
Wow — so men that have more upper body strength than you (not all do) have the right to rule over you — am I reading this right?
You clearly don’t understand what equality is, InsanityB. No one should be told by their religion that they are to submit to their husbands because they have upper body strength. Your Bible says that YOU were the sinner first, therefore you are to submit. YOU were made for your husband, not your husband for you. What part of those scriptures do you not get. Can you not see how degrading this is? Is this what you tell your daughters, if you have them, that they are to submit to their husbands because the woman was the first to sin?
And I do believe that the only real reason you are submitting is because you were told to, like a good little, obedient child, Unless you are getting something out of this like sneaking under the radar for your own benefit. But you are making it out to be as though it’s your choice, as though you came up with the idea yourself. Did you or did someone tell you to do this? Would it have been your choice had you lived in a part of the world that did not teach this?
Do you obey your husband?
LikeLike
“Wow — so men that have more upper body strength than you (not all do) have the right to rule over you”
Yes dear, because clearly anybody who pumps my septic tank RULES over me. I mean, that’s like a forgone conclusion, isn’t it? Again, I call sexism. Who are you to declare that upper body strength is so vastly superior to any of the strengths I have to offer?
“But you are making it out to be as though it’s your choice, as though you came up with the idea yourself..”
Actually, sort of. It just happened kind of naturally, a biological imperative, if you will. At the time I had no idea it really had any Christian implications. Life is simply more pleasant, less chaotic, and men more enjoyable when they aren’t being constantly challenged by demands for equality.
Surprisingly, I actually do obey my husband. He tends to have my best interests at heart. Disobeying him would be illogical in that sense.
LikeLike
“Who are you to declare that upper body strength is so vastly superior to any of the strengths I have to offer?”
@Insantiy: No, you were sexist — you made it out as though women couldn’t do the same job as a man, and in the same time-frame. That is simply not true. Not all men are cut out to pump out a septic tank — or roof. But there are plenty of women who hold their own as roofers, fireman, police, soldiers, etc. Men tend to take the higher risk jobs, this is true — but women put their life on the line every day, and die and have substantial injuries due to pregnancy and giving birth. it is a risk to climb radio towers and clean highrise windows. It is a risk to have babies. All put their life on the line.
“Actually, sort of. It just happened kind of naturally, a biological imperative”
No, this doesn’t happen naturally. It’s culturally driven. Women, however, are at a disadvantage when they don’t get the necessary assistance after giving birth to keep OUR species going. It has, no thanks to religions like yours, devalued motherhood and care giving. In fact, your good bible said that your god was going to greatly increase a woman’s pain during childbirth as a punishment — to throughout history it was believed that a woman should suffer because she was the first to sin. That’s a sadistic god you worship there, Insanity.
“and men more enjoyable when they aren’t being constantly challenged by demands for equality.”
This is sad to read. Don’t rock the boat — continue to allow women to be devalued because god forbid the poor whittle men get challenged by the demands of treating women like equal human beings. YOU are part of the cause of females being devalued. YOU contribute to the problem of human trafficking. —> YOU!
“Surprisingly, I actually do obey my husband. He tends to have my best interests at heart. Disobeying him would be illogical in that sense.”
Thank you for your honest answer. Now read my last sentence above.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh awesome, now I’m responsible for human trafficking. I love these arguments for female equality. Somewhere in the process I always become the oppressor. Tell me, how does this work? How do I manage to go from allegedly being a victim, a member of an oppressed group, to suddenly being so powerful, I’m now to blame for human trafficking?
The amount of emotionalism and projection in your response really is staggering. I don’t know what to tell you. I’m sorry you feel bad?
“No, you were sexist — you made it out as though women couldn’t do the same job as a man, and in the same time-frame.”
We really can’t. Hence we have gender segregated competition in the Olympics. Men and women are not the same, not physically, not emotionally and not reproductively. I don’t feel the least bit bad about this, I rather enjoy being a girl. Different does not mean inferior/superior, it just means different.
LikeLike
InsantiyB — you are playing mind games now. You brought up the human trafficking issue — as though devaluing women has not played a role in this? Again — when you subject yourself to your husband — obey him like a child — well there are consequences to society. This sends a strong message to young minds — especially boys that females are objects — property of men. That men know better about women and girls than women and girls do themselves.
Yes, you are partly responsible for the sufferings of so many women and girls around the world. You perpetuate this by buying into a book that has been debunked as fiction. You are gullible and trusting and dare I say a disgrace to our sex/gender. You need to seriously do some studying outside your religion and realize that the book you worship, you cherish, especially the 1st five books of the bible have been debunked. You have no excuse to be so damn naive. You have a brain, for crying out loud, use it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you for attempting to unload your huge pile of baggage upon me, but I’m really going to have to hand it all back. I am not the least bit interested in being blamed for human trafficking, the “suffering of so many women and girls around the world,” and being a “disgrace to my entire gender.”
Good grief, your stereotypes and sexism would give the most rabid misogynist a run for his money. Tell me again what separates you from my alleged oppressors?
LikeLike
” I am not the least bit interested in being blamed for human trafficking, the “suffering of so many women and girls around the world,” and being a “disgrace to my entire gender.”
You should be. If you obey and believe that your husband should make the decisions for you, then you send a strong message of inequality.
From the United Nations on Human Rights and Human Trafficking:
“Equal treatment of women and non-discrimination on the basis of sex is a fundamental right,
enshrined in all major human rights instruments. Article 1 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (hereinafter CEDAW) defines such discrimination as:
—> “Any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the recognition, enjoyment or exercise by women, irrespective of their marital status, on the basis of equality of men and women, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, civil or other field.”
When transposing and implementing the Directive, it should be recalled that gender refers to the social attributes and opportunities associated with being male and female and the relationships between women and men and girls and boys, as well as the relations between women, and those between men. These attributes, opportunities and relationships are socially constructed and are learned through socialization processes. They are context- and time-specific, and changeable.
Gender determines what is expected, allowed and valued in a women or a man, a girl or a boy, in a given context. Gender is part of the broader socio-cultural context.
—> It is a consequence because it is rooted in poverty, inequality and discrimination”.
Click to access UNCommentaryEUTraffickingDirective2011.pdf
There are countries in Africa now who have outlawed husbands being head of the household because it promotes inequality and causes dysfunction in their culture.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bit fascist and totalitarian of you, wouldn’t you say? I mean here we are discussing my individual choice, indeed, my full right to submit to my husband and you’re accusing me of oppressing the entire world.
It sounds a bit as if you are demanding that I submit to your ideas, indeed, even submit to the UN, rather than my husband. Are you planning to outlaw his role as head of household too, because it allegedly promotes inequality? How do you plan to enforce this? Cameras in our homes? Fines? Incarceration? Execution? Re-education camp?
LikeLike
” I mean here we are discussing my individual choice, indeed, my full right to submit to my husband and you’re accusing me of oppressing the entire world.”
Oh InsantiyB — I did not accuse you of oppressing the entire world — I said you contribute to this by falling for the belief that it is in your best interests that your husband rule over you — that you obey him like a child. You have to accept that you are a child. You can’t make decisions like an adult. You’ve allowed your husband to do this for you. Therefore, if you are raising children you are no different than them — and your husband sees you as a child, too, and they see this. Do not think this doesn’t affect their view of you. It does.
I do believe that had you been born in the Scandinavian/Nordic areas of the world you would not be obeying your husband. You would have an equal relationship as partners. You are doing this because you bought into the biblical belief that you should submit to your husband.
Now, as Christian Agnostic and I agreed — men and women have strengths and weakness and they both compliment each other. One may lead the other follow, and visa versa. But neither one of them obey the other. They cooperate. They come into an agreement that the decisions they make —> together are best for their family or relationship.
You, however, have given your power away by allowing your husband to rule over you in everything, and you assume he knows what’s best for you — just like your bible instructs.
But the problem I have with this, InsanityB, is that if you have children, you are passing this behavior on to them, and you promote it for all the world to see on your blog. That’s why this is an important topic to discuss.
LikeLike
Let’s see, you have now accused me of being a child, of having no brain, of violating some UN charter, of promoting sex trafficking, of having handed my power away,and you now cast the specter of child abuse about. You have also negatively stereotyped my husband, a man you do not even know.
You’ll have to forgive me, but my husband has my best interests at heart and a vested interest in my well being, so he is worthy of my submission. You obviously do not. At the moment I still have the freedom to choose to obey whomever I want. I do not choose to obey a secular ideology that believes it is entitled to dictate my own belief system onto me.
An especially insidious bullying tactic often used by feminists and atheists is to cast about the implication of child abuse against those you do not agree with. That is so wrong, I can’t even denounce it enough.
LikeLike
InsanityB wrote:
“Bit fascist and totalitarian of you, wouldn’t you say?
Adolf Hitler wrote:
“The world of women is a smaller world. For her world is her husband, her family, her children and her house”. ~Adolf Hitler
—————————
Working for the Nazis, Gertrude Klinz taught German women the idea of the superiority of man over woman. Women should be totally submissive and obey their husbands.
http://womens-dossier.webs.com/womeninnaziyears.htm
Hitler made his expectations of women clear: obey the husband, tend the home and bear children.
Nazi attitudes to gender and the lives of women in Nazi Germany were shaped by the personal views of Adolf Hitler. The fuhrer’s conceptions of gender were probably influenced by his mother, a simple but caring woman who had protected the young Hitler from his stern, sometimes brutal father. Hitler came to prefer women who were quiet, demure and motherly; he found it difficult to relax around women who were confident, outspoken or professionally successful.
Hitler believed women were kinder, gentler and more emotional than men; because of this, they were not equipped to survive the turmoil and pressure of workplaces, business or politics. In Hitler’s mind the only role for women was domestic: they must tend the home, care for their husbands, bear and raise children. These views were articulated in Mein Kampf and Hitler’s speeches: “Women are the eternal mothers of the nation”; “women are the eternal companion of men”; “the triumphant task of women is to bear and tend babies”; “men are willing to fight … women must be there to nurse them”.
—> Hitler rejected the idea that women were entitled to rights that placed them on a par with men: he described the push for women’s rights as a communist plot. – See more at: http://alphahistory.com/nazigermany/women-in-nazi-germany/#sthash.WOsyjfHL.dpuf
So you see InsanityB — your children see you. You are a role model for them — and just like Hitler’s viewed his mama, you are molding little minds to see women in the same light as Hitler — inferior to men.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow, now I’m just like Hitler’s mama. Somehow in the midst of promoting sex trafficking, ruining the African continent for women, and violating a UN charter, I’ve gone and become a Nazi.
Methinks we’ve now left the world of reason and entered the realm of girls, which pretty much proves my point, there is a reason why women were not designed to have unchecked power. We tend to have these blind spots and totalitarian attitudes when it comes to our own belief systems. My own belief system however, is a personal one involving individual rights. Yours seems to involve world domination and the remaking of an entire social structure to reflect your own image of what marriage SHOULD look like.
So who died and made you queen of the world?
LikeLike
“Bit fascist and totalitarian of you”
Playing the victim card now? See, InsanityB — I’m not offended by when you say that I’m a bit fascist and totalitarian. I’m an advocate for human rights, and I see women like you buy the lie and the ripple effect bring enormous harm to humanity and has throughout history. You’ve chosen to give away your voice. That’s your business — but when you raise children — and write blog posts that promote women giving up their power and their voice, because some 2000 year old book said to, I take issue with this.
You are part of the problem. If you want to be submissive to your husband like a good little girl — then for crying out loud, keep it private and especially don’t brainwash your children into thinking that your husband makes the final decisions in your life, as though you’re not capable. If you want him to be your master and lord over you, fine. But keep it between you two.
LikeLike
Funny how you accuse me of giving away my voice and being a good little girl…and then tell me to be a good little girl and be quiet.
I will not keep it quiet. Your beliefs do not trump mine.
Of course you are a “human rights advocate” one who apparently believes the way to human rights is through fascism and authoritarianism. In fact, I believe you are actually, projecting your own fascist tendencies onto me and my family. The words you use, the attempts to stereotype me, the perception of me as the enemy are all the first steps towards bigotry and stigmatizing, which then makes it much more palatable to you to justify enforcing your own will onto everyone else.
LikeLike
InsanityB wrote:
“there is a reason why women were not designed to have unchecked power. We tend to have these blind spots and totalitarian attitudes when it comes to our own belief systems.”
This is very disturbing. I am ending this discourse with you on my end, as you appear to have disdain and disrespect for yourself and for all women.
Indeed, you are very much a part of the problem.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Insanity, you are clearly a strong and opinionated women who has chosen the role of being submissive. You’re right, that’s fine, and it’s up to you. What Victorian has clearly demonstrated is that this tradition of thinking has less to terrible conditions for most women in the world. Do you recognise that ‘submission’ to husbands isn’t in the best interests of women generally or most women specifically?
LikeLike
“Do you recognise that ‘submission’ to husbands isn’t in the best interests of women generally or most women specifically?”
No I do not, and oddly it’s not because of religion, it’s because of biology.
I do not subscribe to this idea that men are oppressors hogging all the power and that the only way to improve conditions for women is to reduce men’s power in the world. Reducing men’s power in the world, be it economic or in positions of leadership, has had devastating consequences on multiple minority cultures.
LikeLike
This is excellent information about Hitler Victoria, thanks for posting it. I’ll try and remember to come back and use it.
LikeLike
@insanitybytes22, “Neuronotes” (if I got that right) already put in words most of what I would have responded to this, but for my own part, I’d like to add that though I am gratefull and appriciate it, that you finally decided to try and answer at least a couple of my questions (as it appears, that it was a bit of a hardship for you) I have to point out that you actually did not answer any of my questions.
You do realize that an individual regardless of their gender (biological or social) being more efficient in cleaning the septic tank, or putting a new roof has nothing at all to do whith which one of you makes better suggestions for what to do, nor better choises in any given issue? Nor are they in any way results of different biological gender.
Now, you raise a good point about gender not necessarily being dependant on biological sexuality or genitals. 🙂 We do have the concepts of social, cultural, biological gender, that are not necessarily dependant on each other. Biological gender is far less restricting (as far as we know only in the lower testosterone levels not providing as much muscle strength) to women than the cultural norm (of obidient property) of their role often is in backwater countries. Luckily, worldwide the societies are ethically evolving and morally advancing in this issue as our scientific understanding on the matter grows. Such restrictions – like for example that women should submit categorically to men in their decision making – are being revealed to be the result of ignorance and superstition.
I am not implying that one needs to be better than the other. Nor am I sexist. On the contrary. Read my comments again.
LikeLike
“I am not implying that one needs to be better than the other. Nor am I sexist.”
Of course you’re not, you’re just repeatedly stating that a female role is inferior and therefore women should seek to emulate a more masculine role in the world, since that is the only role that has any value.
Also in your very non sexist opinion, you repeatedly use terms like “backwater, ignorance, and superstition.” Let me ask you a question, do you think I am stupid? Do you think I will be so bedazzled by your brilliant words that I will not notice your patronizing tone?
LikeLike
@insanitybytes, are you now referring to the masculine and feminine roles according to which particular cultural norm? Equality of the sexes does by no means require a woman to take up any particular masculine role. You are equating masculinity to decision making, are you not? On what grounds should that be a masculine role? It really has nothing to do whith biology as women are biologically just as capable to make decisions and as we have allready established feminity is not about genitals. Have we not? Do you think Margaret Thacher was just playing out a masculine role, or was she truly a feminine leader?
Would you not call Saudi-Arabian culture superstitous and backwater regarding how they treat women? Is Norvegian culture not progressive and healthier in it’s attitudes towards equality of women? In Saudi-Arabia they expect women to submit to men and in Norway they have had a female PM. Can you see the difference?
I am not trying to be condescending towards you, but I am truly sorry, if you feel that way. I thought we were discussing these issues, and not you, or me personally. You have still my questions to answer at your leisure (of course), but ask yourself honestly – why are you awoiding and evading my questions?
You said: …force your version of “compromise” and “consensus” on not just me, but the entire country.” What was the country you referred to? Norway, or Saudi-Arabia? 😉
LikeLike
@insanitybytes22, by the way, I do not think you are stupid. I simply think you are wrong on this issue. There is a difference, yes? I could not possibly not know you enough to make such wide ranging judgement wether you actually seem stupid, or not to me. When there is not enough information I whithhold my beliefs. Like for example, that a particular person in the internet, that I do not know much about is stupid, or that there exist any particular god.
LikeLike
A thought here, Insanity defines submission as the opposite of battle. There is no peaceful middle ground, fight or give up is what the majority of us readers are getting from her. Rautakky sees other meanings for these things. In fact, we actually don’t really know what she means by submission on a day to day basis.
Oh, and Rautakky, the weather is better in Norway than Arabia. Trust me, I live in one of the US’s deserts.
LikeLike
Admit it, you just don’t want me to tell you what to do! 😛
LikeLike
Who are you talking to? Is your wife lurking? 🙂
LikeLike
Wife? Since when do gay men have wives?
LikeLike
Well, exactly! So who’s submitting to you?
LikeLike
Is that an offer? 😛
LikeLike
I bet you’d make the perfect domineering partner. I’ll keep you in mind for when I feel like submitting. (never happened in my life to date, so you’re safe from my buff body)
LikeLike
LOL. Are you from Glasgow? Just a guess…
LikeLike
Nope. But I went to uni there because only snobs go to St Andrews. 😀
LikeLike
I KNEW IT!!!! 😛
LikeLike
Hi I am KrisT with Arms of Audio, thought you might be interested in viewing a debate we are hosting between an Atheist and a Calvinist on Sunday. To avoid this going to your spam folder I am writing the website for you to check out and tune in 🙂 wwwdotarmsofaudiodotcom 🙂
LikeLike
I imagine that can’t apply to the polygamist variety.
LikeLike
LOL where is the LIKE button! It should be interesting
LikeLike
Thanks so much KrisT! I’m so pleased this didn’t end up in spam folder. 😉
LikeLike
NP 🙂 See ya today! If you miss it, just go to the website after!
LikeLike
Mormons have the rule that neither spouse should be alone with a person of the opposite sex. This applies equally to husbands and wives. Some have a stronger sex drive, and some, perhaps, are so uninspired that they are easily tempted.
LikeLike
Imagine! It would make every encounter hyper-alluring. And then on the unavoidable occasion you’re left alone with someone, the risky naughtiness would be over-powering – chemicals exploding everywhere!
LikeLike
I’ve been waiting for my sandwich for an awfully long time….
LikeLike
salami?
LikeLike
I dunno, i’ve forgotten was i ordered it’s been so long…
LikeLike
Don’t worry. Hopefully Ark will be back soon and you won’t have the shoulder the burden of making all the painfully poor sexist jokes on your own. 😥
LikeLike
It wasn’t *that* bad, was it?
LikeLike
Totally worthy of Ark. 😈
LikeLike
Oh, Voodoo.
LikeLike
Any word on him? I’m thinking of lurking on his daughter’s Facebook page to see if there’s any clues there. I don’t like blogging when he’s not around, it’s just not as much fun!
LikeLike
Like Flight 370, he pinged earlier and Liked my last post.
LikeLike
Ah okay, so he’s floating about a bit. Although what poor taste, prioritising your posts over mine!! Never liked him anyway. Sexist idiot and rubbish jokes. 😉
LikeLike
There you go again with the Voodoo… and to think you chasticised me for using the same tactic to lure Debilis out! The shame of being you 🙂
LikeLike
Does this make any sense to you?
“God is love. Loving each other is not the point. God wants all of us to love each other. However, he does have some standards for our behavior that may require any of us at any time to sacrifice our whims and urges in favor of serving him. That is what “Deny self” means.”
It was an answer in response to my question on the Bigots blog: “An honest question: Do you seriously think your particular god will punish two people for loving each other, but celebrate you hating people you’ve never met?”
LikeLike
It does seem inherently inconsistent. I’m surprised they didn’t just give you an essay about how they don’t hate. Interesting.
I was having a hilarious conversation about rape (didn’t know that was possible) in the Bible on a Bigot post, but just got a novel of nonsense reply that I can’t be arsed to read. That must be a Christian strategy. If you’ve got a spare hour or ten you should jump in. It’s Ada on what did the Christian and Gay say.
LikeLike
No way! One post is enough for me. Those people are nuts.
LikeLike
I thought you kept your end up remarkably well. I don’t know how you have the patience to discuss the time of day with them. I *MUST NOT* go and look at the conversation violet has mentioned.
LikeLike
Resist, but we both know you won’t be able to. The dragon is just too damn tempting, and his tail is sooooo close! 🙂
LikeLike
I looked, I left, I conquered. (ok maybe not the last and an appalling use of veni, vidi, vici, I have to say). well I did conquer my own desire to read such drivel again.
Don’t you ever write about life in Brazil instead of all that boring atheism crap?
LikeLike
Nah. That’s all far too depressing to dabble in.
LikeLike
Brazil is depressing? When you aren’t gay and married to a gorgeous Brazilian woman who dances better than you?
LikeLike
Hehehe! 🙂
LikeLike
InsanityB wrote:
“Any woman with half a brain who wishes to have a relationship with a man will learn how to submit. Not out of fear, not because it’s mandatory, not to subject themselves to tyrants, but because we know if you can sneak in under a man’s defense mechanism, he’ll rope the moon and the stars for you.“
Now I get it. Submit means to manipulate.
Clever. I wonder if hubby knows about this.
Manipulate:
To influence or manage shrewdly or deviously:
To influence, manage, use, or control to one’s advantage by artful or indirect means.
To adapt or change to suit one’s purpose or advantage.
So hubby works his ass of to provide food and shelter, protections, comfort, helps out with the kids, etc., and at the risk of having a heart attack, as noted above, and the “submissive” wife manipulates so that hubby will also rope the moon and the stars for her.
“I hate to sound so self centered, but…”
If I were a man married to such a woman, and found out about this, I’d divorce her self-centered ass in a heartbeat.
Such women do a great disservice to our gender.
1 Corinthians 13:5
“Love: it is not self-seeking
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reminds me of My Big Fat Greek Wedding.
LikeLike
Hahaha — a manipulating neck. That’s some kind of partnership.
LikeLike
You just don’t seem to be gelling with Insanity at all! She wrote a great paragraph about childbirth on a recent post
“My favorite example of that biological bubble of bliss at work, happens in labor and delivery. Childbirth is incredibly uncomfortable, often extremely painful, and if you witness it enough, you will learn all sorts of bad words you never even knew existed. There is a phenomenon that is so common you start to notice a pattern. After 20 hours of screaming, breathing, and begging for somebody to kill them, once a baby is born, most women say something along the lines of, “well, now, that wasn’t so bad!” If you are on the outside looking in, this emotional disconnect from the physical trauma of the last 20 hours is kind of startling. All those hormones start to flood the brain and wrap mothers in a bubble of bliss. “Child birth is awesome, what a gentle thing, I can hardly wait to do it again!” Yeah right. Women are cruising on an oxytocin high that would make a drug addict envious.”
LikeLike
That’s ironic coming from someone who appears to be unaware that she’s on a perpetual morphine drip.
LikeLike
She was quite nice to me when I commented on that post. I expected an accusatory rude bigot-style reply but she was perfectly civil. I have no idea why.
LikeLike
The problem with the this, is that no matter how you slice it…the husband has the only vote that matters. It is a dictatorship. He has the only vote that matters. He’s not the tie-breaker, he is the law maker.
Your husband might be kind, he might be a total jack ass…but according to this whole theory of men lead/women submit is that it is fundamentally UNEQUAL by it’s very structure. As a wife in this system, your vote can be cancelled out completely by just one other person. You have no recourse and no say in the matter. In the end, you are no different than an underage child. You must do it because your husband said so-end of story.
Instead of teaching couples to relate and resolve differences like equal adults, they stress roles that are unequal and then dispense advice on how couples can cope in such an unequal partnership.
I know, I know…there are many loving couples who do fine with such defined roles. But there are many that don’t, and there are some that are worse off than they would have been if they hadn’t swallowed such a viewpoint of marriage.
LikeLike
Well said, CA.
My mother divorced my dad because he expected her to submit to him. She told me after I became an adult that she felt like a child. She was only 18 when she got married, and really clueless what this whole ‘obey’ thing would entail. In her wedding vows she was asked to promise to obey my dad. Five years after she got divorce, she remarried and has been married to her best friend since the mid 70’s. They have always had a equal partnership.
LikeLike
I’m sorry she had to go through that….but I am glad that she was able to find happiness on the other side.
LikeLike
Thank you, CA. 🙂
LikeLike
“I know, I know…there are many loving couples who do fine with such defined roles.” Are there really? I’d be inclined to think they’re putting on a good show. Women are always stifled in this kind of set up, and the men will inevitably hit a power high of some description. It’s just little versions of the Stanford prison experiment – one person in charge and one person submitting. (Hopefully I read your comment correctly this time, I agree with the rest of it. 🙂 )
LikeLiked by 1 person
you’re good :)…..as for the show part-that might be true. I think there are some couples that are a well-tempered match and honestly don’t have much conflict.
In this case, the whole submission thing doesn’t affect them a whole lot. Just trying to acknowledge that there are some couples who believe in wifely-submission but have solid marriages. I doubt it’s a majority.
LikeLike
CA, I think it works when woman are not forced to submit — like it’s a natural part of their personality. Same can be said for men — they may not be the dominate one in the relationship — and it works. Force a man to submit and you have problems. Force a woman to submit and you have problems.
You see what I mean?
LikeLike
I totally agree.
In most relationships there are leaders and followers (by their personality)-but to force roles based on something as arbitrary as gender is wrong, in my opinion.
LikeLike
Lurking is a fine way to make posts is it not? What fascinates me is the skewed view these people have of a relationship between two people, in this case man and woman (because any other type is a sin as we all know). (Married) Life is not a constant battlefield. Learning how to live with someone, be considerate, compassionate, supportive and negotiating and compromise are good skills to apply in all relationships, whether work or domestic.
I agree with Victoria, such women do a great disservice not just to our gender, but to society as a whole. Their dominant husbands (assuming they buy into that crap) also serve to perpetuate patriarchal stereotypes.
LikeLike
It’s bizarre that anyone would buy into it in this day and age. Infuriating even.
LikeLike
I have now been in both types of relationships. The one of equality and….wait for it…compromise is immeasurably better.
If a partner truly loves you, as you are, they won’t expect submission. Two grown people ought to be able to discuss things rationally and come to join decisions without one having to submit to the other.
That may be so, but this mind-set makes it seem as though submission or battle are the only two positions within a marriage. Either the wife submits or there is battle. Unfortunately fundamentalist teachings on the subject make it a self-fulfilling prophecy. Thankfully there are a plethora of options in between.
LikeLike
@Ruth
It is always fascinating to watch the religious try to establish a rigid dichotomy of values, no matter how ill suited it happens to be for the matter at hand. Binary thinking often belays a shallow, uncritical, understanding of the issues at hand.
To the religious – Nuance is an important concept; use itto avoid being thwacked by the clue-by-four every time you decide to make a pronouncement.
LikeLike
Indeed. Rigidness from either side in marriage is just asking for conflict
LikeLike
Having been there and presumably seen a few more relationships like that up close, do you think the wife actually ever genuinely submits, or just pretends to because she’s supposed to and it impresses her Christian friends? I get the feeling that most wives like that (apart from those in truly oppressed relationships) play this role alongside their covert manipulation games. But maybe Insanitybytes is influencing me there.
LikeLike
I genuinely submitted. I also know a few more wives who, most likely, are genuinely submitting. I did it, and they continue to do it, because they honestly believe it pleases their God. They have been taught that it is their duty to do so.
What Insanitybytes is suggesting, in my humble opinion, is a recipe for disaster. She isn’t submitting herself out of obedience to God. She’s doing it for selfish reasons. Self-centeredness isn’t meant to be a part of it. Like Victoria says, if her husband catches on to her manipulation it probably won’t be pretty. Unless he is psychotic himself, if he has any feelings at all, he will in all likelihood feel betrayed. If there is a heaven she will have received her reward here. Not only is she doing it for selfish reasons, she’s bragging about it so all her friends can tell her what a good wife she is.
LikeLike
Yeah, but on the bright side, her relationship is a romantic fantasy where her hubby ropes the moon and stars for her. 😀
LikeLike
For now…..
LikeLike
I think ‘fantasy’ is the key word there. 😉
LikeLike
Mmmm hmmmm 😀
LikeLike
Also it bears noting that on some levels my ex-husband could have been thought to be roping the moon and stars for me.
I’m a thrifty person so I don’t spend much money on myself, personally. I had to be careful what I said I wanted because he’d go out and get it(even if it was just a passing fancy). It took me a long time to realize he was trying to manipulate me with those things. I was never appreciative enough, no matter how many times I said thank you. I didn’t brag on my awesome husband to my friends, and he’d get pissy. It took me a very long time to realize he wasn’t buying me anything for the pleasure I would take in it. He was buying them to get his own ego boost(or insert whatever thing he wanted in return, but didn’t come right out and say).
Mind games suck the big one.
LikeLike
Oh ouch! I would hate that too. Not just the whole mind games, but someone buying me things. Sounds like a horrible situation to have been in.
LikeLike
Yes ma’am. Even if you don’t like the things you have to pretend you do.
It also bears pointing out that at no time did I not work. We made roughly the same wage. It’s not like I was a kept woman or anything.
LikeLike
Violet, if I may add my two cents here — I got pulled into attending church after my partner died. This was a decade after I left organized religion. I still believed in god, though. When you are at your lowest, that’s when the vultures hover and dive in. That’s not to say that there aren’t sincere Christians with compassion and genuine care, but generally speaking, those involved in organized religion are ‘trained’ to bring people into the fold, so sometimes it’s hard to discern who’s sincere and who’s not.
When I remarried several years later, I married someone who was in a mainstream church that believed women should submit. I was pretty much indoctrinated to believe that I was honoring god if I submitted to my partner. I know that I submitted for what I thought were the right reasons. I did have faith and love for god, and to my conscious knowledge, it wasn’t because there was a reward waiting for me in paradise. I believed in love and gratitude — and wanted to honor my creator. That was my mindset at the time.
I was literally brainwashed about submission and made to feel like my gender was the reason Jesus had to die on the cross. The indoctrinate you in subtle ways. Kinda like that ‘sneak under the radar’ mentality. So shame was also involved, too, which fucked with my psyche. When I started questing my Christian faith because there were so many problems I found in the Bible, parts of my frontal lobes came back online. As I thawed from my religious stupor it was hard to face. It took me a long time to get over this — and to be honest, I can still get triggers when I see bullshit like what Insanity writes regarding women submitting. It’s possible that she’s brainwashed, too, but in all honesty, when she wrote that about sneaking under the radar, it seemed to me that she had other things in mind than truly honoring her god.
LikeLike
Thanks, that’s really interesting. I came from a much milder Christianity, and left in my late teens, so all this just seems ridiculous to me. I can totally understand that when it has affected your life, it’s not such a laughing matter. I’ve never hear anything about women being the reason Jesus had to die on the cross. Where does that come from? Just the Eve stuff?
LikeLike
Violet, my dad, as he’s gotten older has become more religious and a right-wing conservative. When he was visiting a couple of years back — we watched the Republican presidential debate. Michelle Bachmann was asked about submitting to her partner, and she tried to make it sound like it means ‘equal’ submission. When I said out loud in front of my dad, “BULLSHIT”, he responded — “that’s really what it means.” I told him “NO that’s not what it means — and you know it — you demanded submission from mom.” I had a trigger and told him “you have no idea how much I’ve suffered and how many other women have suffered because of this belief—because of these scriptures.
Anyway the whole conversation pissed me off and to release that pressure I made this video and sent it to him. So regarding your question — perhaps this video will answer it.
I also don’t mean to plug one of my blogs, but you can also see religious quotes from historical “men of god” on this post I wrote back whenThe National Review Online posted an article suggesting a repeal of the 19th Amendment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
These are great references – thanks! Feel free to post to your work any time. It’s frightening to think this ‘submission’ thing is taken seriously in whole sectors of the USA, it’s the domain of a crazy Christian fringe here.
LikeLike
Thank you, Violet. It’s hard to believe that tradition had most women here in the U.S. and apparently in your country, as well, having to say they promised to obey their husbands in their wedding vows. I can’t believe this still exists today — but lookie here:
“Kate Middleton will not vow to ‘obey’ Prince William in her wedding vows – following Princess Diana’s lead, it was claimed last night.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1379453/Kate-Middleton-vows-Bride-obey-following-Princess-Dianas-lead.html
I’ll also mention, for what its worth, that I never did the traditional thing of letting my dad “give me away” when I got married. Even when I was a Christian this tradition didn’t sit right with me.
LikeLike
So shame was also involved, too, which fucked with my psyche.
I know I’ve probably said this before but, yes, shame was not just involved – it’s a big tool. I started to leave that shame behind before my marriage ended and was a huge catalyst for the dissolution of my marriage and the questioning of my faith. When I stated to assert myself and set boundaries which I previously thought I shouldn’t have things got decidedly worse and more dicey(dangerous) for me. I was told on more than one occasion that ‘he didn’t like me that way’. Big whoop.
LikeLike
Yes — it is a big tool. In the beginning, I submitted in small ways — and it really wasn’t such a big deal. I saw it more like compromising or cooperating, which is necessary in any relationship. But then it gradually turned into a reality that I was solely there for my husband’s needs. I learned what it felt like to be a slave — to not have a life — to have to ask for permission to go out with my girlfriends, which was rare. To have to explain myself if I didn’t have dinner ready when expected. To have to have sex when I was ill or not in the mood. To deny myself for my family’s sake, even though that wasn’t expected of my partner. And when I started to question this that’s when the shame card was played — and scriptures were used like 1 Timothy 2:14 “And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.”
It’s incredibly embarrassing to even be sharing this, but many hours doing neuro research taught me that the brain, especially when a person has experienced trauma, can become easily susceptible to conditioning.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m familiar with all of that. I remember like it was yesterday him storming into the bathroom, angry, saying “What in the hell are you doing in here? This is our time together and you’ve been in here for thirty minutes!” Then pouting the rest of the night and not speaking to me for three days.
Boo damn hoo. That’s where I was at the time. Before it would have made me scurry around trying to figure out how to make the god of the house happy again. But I just.couldn’t.care.
LikeLike
Ah, the Timothy quote. I’ve never seen that verse before. Always something new to find in the Bible!
LikeLike
If the woman was deceived, why did she become the sinner? I’m not up on this biblical guff as you know, but that perplexes me.
Also, a question for you, and for Ruth except she might not read it (:D), but one that has been puzzling me reading all this whacky theory, is there anything sexual in this whole submission thing? I don’t mean in terms of physical acts of sex, but is it mentally sexual? Or is it just total command and the domestic slave obeys? It’s all just totally out of my comprehension.
LikeLike
Hehe…I did read it! 😀
Can you explain what you mean by mentally sexual?
LikeLike
Ruth, I was about to asked the same question.
LikeLike
Ah, I’m glad. I don’t feel so stupid now. 😯
LikeLike
LOL
LikeLike
Given that sex isn’t always just about physical attraction, sometimes we can be attracted to someone by their intellect, sense of humour, a whole lot more than sheer lust for a gorgeous body and pretty face. So I wondered if that submissive thing was a part of that, even moreso if women are brought up to be submissive to men. As I say I know stuff all about it, that’s why I asked. I didn’t mean mentally ill if that’s what you were thinking!
LikeLike
No, I truly didn’t understand what you meant.
Now, to answer the question. For me it was a huge turn-off. I suspect for some women that may be different, but I was in an abusive situation. I do know that some people are into that kind of thing and I’m certain there must be some mental aspect to it.
Instead of it being mentally stimulating, it was positively mentally exhausting. There were all sorts of “rules”, it had to be done by a certain time, it had to be done in a certain manner, that sort of thing.
LikeLike
This I can relate with. Exhausting is the term that stands out. I was exhausted — and sex became a chore. Ruth, I don’t know if you ever felt this way, but I know my partner was a gawd-awful lover. I know the difference now between Christian men in bed and non-Christian, and all I can say is that there’s no comparison. 😀 After all, men are taught that there’s a threesome in bed — god is kinky and jealous.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If I ever said I didn’t want to do a particular thing I was always, always lorded over me that my body was not my own.
The mind games just never stopped. Scenarios played out in his mind and I was supposed to follow a never seen script.
Ruth, I don’t know if you ever felt this way, but I know my partner was a gawd-awful lover. I know the difference now between Christian men in bed and non-Christian, and all I can say is that there’s no comparison. 😀 After all, men are taught that there’s a threesome in bed — god is kinky and jealous.”
Yes ma’am. Because I married so young I’ve actually only ever had two lovers. My fundy Christian ex was only concerned with his own pleasure, as he thought that was the only thing that counted. My non-Christian partner has the opposite opinion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Precisely. Wham, bam, thank you ma’am. I found a poem that a guy wrote and posted in the comment section of a blog I follow. I thought — wow — now that’s spot on. Let me fetch it. BRB
LikeLike
Here it is:
Misogynous Men and the Women They Love
By Mark Mathison 2007
“Unto the woman [God] said… thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” ~Genesis 3:16
Misogynous man in godly trance
Gratuitous sex in missionary stance
Masturbates in her vaginal vault
Absolves himself, ’twas her fault
Bound by parchment, loosened by lust
Ashes to ashes, dust to dust.
Coming to bed stale stinking and sour
Impress the world with morning shower.
“Spread your legs Woman, I need relief.”
Guilt hidden behind a fig leaf
Two-legged dildo grunting a tune
Ending the song two verses too soon
Aborted dreams draped in desire
Duped again by his heavenly choir
Hating to love, but loving to cum
Fooled again by his silvery tongue
“The pleasure’s all mine” was his only true line.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I didn’t read it as you meaning mentally ill. I just didn’t understand the question. But perhaps the Hitchens interview will answer your question.
LikeLike
“If the woman was deceived, why did she become the sinner? I’m not up on this biblical guff as you know, but that perplexes me.”
Critical thinking is not a top priority among our species. There’s not much that makes since with religion — except that its used to abuse.
Also, this whole Eve thing was simply a way to keep women down, and using shame was part of the psychological warfare. Christopher Hitchens was interviewed regarding women and religion. He states that men used religion to own women. He says that the impulse to own women would be there if they believed in god or not, but that it just might be a bit harder to persuade females that they should be owned by men if they were not told that god wants it to be true. That if all they are taught is that men wanted it to be true they would not be very surprised; but tell them that god wants it to be true and they may put up with it. He further states that the same goes with slavery.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you both for your comments. Sounds like a nightmare, and the abusive scenario and exhaustion sounds horrific. The Hitchins interview was interesting, funny chap (funny:odd not haha). Ruth, I understand the codependency aspect, that would make sense. Victoria, I like the poem. I find it all quite spooky though. In a way it reminds me of The Handmaid’s Tale.
LikeLike
Another point I’d like to make here is that some women[and men, for that matter] are codependent. So when you see a relationship where one is domineering and the other submissive and it seems to be working, it may well be. The co-dependent person might actually be [to their thinking] happy to serve the wants and whims of their dominant person.
My problem was that I’m not actually co-dependent. I thought I was supposed to be submissive so that’s what I was. It built up a measure of resentment within me because I was trying to shoehorn myself into a role in which I didn’t fit.
LikeLike
“My problem was that I’m not actually co-dependent. I thought I was supposed to be submissive so that’s what I was.”
Same here, Ruth. It also didn’t help that I spent half of my childhood, the second half, in the most religious state in the union. I was being groomed to submit — even in school.
LikeLike
Violet, if it’s not too much trouble, will you delete my comment to Rautakyy that posted just above under me, and this one, too, so as to not confuse. I reposted it under Rautakyy’s reply to InsanityB. I seem to have issues on where it’s going to post when I reply from email rather than directly from the thread. Thanks.
LikeLike
No problem. I’ve never replied from email, I’ll have to investigate that …
LikeLike
Thank you. Most people tend to have their nested comments set to default, so I’ve gotten used to replying from email.
LikeLike
That’s odd, mine are enabled to 10 deep. Is there another setting I’m missing?
LikeLike
No — I have no problems commenting directly from your thread. I just got into the habit of replying directly from email because most don’t have it set to 10. Hope that clarifies.
LikeLike
@”Neuronotes”, thanks. Did I get your nick right?
You know your stuff. I often get rather frustrated in conversations like this one whith Insanitybytes, when the other party chooses not to react to ones actual points, but does everything possible to derail the conversation to minor details. I am far too often stupid enough to repeat myself again and again, in hopes to actually recieve a reaction. In the end it seems like one is talking to a troll, though the other party is most likely not one deliberately.
Yes, you are right it is not “close to child abuse” rather it is child abuse, but I tried not to offer any offtopic sidepaths for her to run. Obviously I failed. If a person does not really want to discuss the matter, but just to shout out their opinion, but give an impression like they were in on the conversation, they have all the possibilities of derailing any discussion.
Mussolini said: “Giving birth to children is to women what war is to men.” This is totally bonkers of course, but it gives away this mindset of gender roles as “natural” or even “biological” and only the extreme form reveals how really nutty the division of men as deriving their social leadership position (even in marriages) from their greater ability for violence.
The difference between men and women is that women give birth and men do not. And that is it. Why would we read anything more to it? Because men who have low self esteems need women to submit to them in order for them to feel good about themselves. It is a cheap trick to feel good about oneself, as it is just like racism, not based on anything concrete and especially one does not have to accomplish anything positive by themselves. It is enough that you are born into the right race and as the right gender. Silly.
LikeLike
@ Rautakyy, I appreciate your comments, and I concur with your the points you made. I’ve spent several years researching about how power affects the brain. When men ‘or’ women are put in positions of unfettered power, then this changes their brain over time. Usually, the changes are noticed within 10 years. Ian Robertson coined this the 10 Year Illness, and you can clearly see this with many if not most people who’ve been in power for a any length of time. Men having the rule over their wives is no exception. They are prone to these brain changes, as well.
In Robertson’s book “The Winner Effect: How Power Changes Your Brain”, he writes:
“Testosterone and one of its by-products called 3-androstanediol, are addictive, largely because they increase dopamine in a part of the brain’s reward system called the nucleus accumbens. Cocaine has its effects through this system also, and by hijacking our brain’s reward system, it can give short-term extreme pleasure but leads to long-term addiction, with all that that entails.
Unfettered power has almost identical effects.
But too much power – and hence too much dopamine – can disrupt normal cognition and emotion, leading to gross errors of judgment and imperviousness to risk, not to mention huge egocentricity and lack of empathy for others.”
—————
Men who are told that they’ve been ordained by their god to rule over women, their wives, have unfettered power. They are accountable to their non-existing invisible god in the sky. This renders them vulnerable to abusing their power. It not much different than a dictator being accountable to no one but himself.
This, IMO, is why most countries that view equality as important tend to be the most peaceful.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And I should also mention that yes, Neuronotes is the correct nick, and you may also call me by my given name, Victoria.
One more note — out of habit I replied to you from my email again rather than the thread, so my first reply posted directly under your comment, but not in a way where you would get a direct notification, unlike this comment. Had I not been following the debate, I would have not been notified of your comment and would have missed it. You don’t appear to have a WordPress blog, so just letting you know in case you weren’t up on how things jive around here.
LikeLike
@Victoria, thank you for the honour of knowing your given name. I actually do have a WordPress blog. You can find it by clicking on my “gravatar” or from this link :
http://rautakyy.wordpress.com/
You are most welcome to visit, if you find it interresting. I will certainly visit your site. 🙂
That “10 Year Illness” would certainly explain a lot about the behaviour of some people. Sometimes it seems, that in our western society at least really selfish people tend to have the most staggering success. But if the “success” in grabbing influence and power (or money which is essentially the same) causes people to become even more selfish, then that explains the “power corrupts” prowerb concept.
This does not point to an “intelligent design” rather the opposite. Humans think they are the “flower of creation” and by fiat that we seem to be most advanced thinkers in nature. Silly really, we are poor at running, and in water we are just clumsy. We may be the dominant animal, but we are destroying our environment. How bloody clever is that?
However, I should think that this sort of mental state as in the “10 Year Illness” may start to develope even on a very early stage of life. A lot of mothers worship their sons and serve their every whim. This already puts young impressionable minds on a very dangerous path.
People who make an effort to seek money, or other forms of power seem to have a breach in their basic security and self certainty. Of course it is also a value taught by rich and powerfull people to their offspring, but if a person is secure in their self image, they do not have this unquechable thirst for power over others. It seems essentially more like a basic need to be good at something and to show how good you are at managing yourself to everybody else, since it is not self evident to them or to oneself.
LikeLike
Pingback: Todayoday’s free offer: a female slave and cashback too | Clouds moving in