This has reinforced the fact that I tend to identify as black before I identify as a woman.
I know it's been said before, but it's a blessing to me to to know and (finally) understand this point of view. Thank you all for that. Do you think Hilary understands this? Shouldn't she?
While I understand your perspective that differential gender treatment will be seen by women differently I don't think it is at all fair to say a lady and a hood rate are the only two viable female paradigms. That is a profound insult to many women who don't consider themselves "ladies". I consider myself a strong independent women NOT a hood rat.
Since when can't a woman be a lady and also be strong and independent? You don't have to turn in your feminist card to act like a lady.
This dredges up so many feelings I can't even begin to write about them all. I don't care how nice the cage is, a gilded cage is still a cage. Teaching women that we should let the men folk make decisions, and though we can weigh in on them, they have final say just feels wrong to me. Yes it relieves you of the burden of making the wrong choice, but it also removes you from the power of being able to make that choice. And while someone who is acting in true good faith may never take advantage of a woman who's willing to submit, not all men are going to act as their highest selves. Time and time again we've seen that men and women do things that are selfish, cruel, or simply stupid. These lessons have a greater societal impact, and by teaching women that they need to submit, to let the men folk act, you place doubt in their minds, doubts in their intelligence, their intuition, their capabilities. The girl who won't speak up because her father is hitting her, the wife who watches while her husband gambles away their rent payment. Real submission leaves no room for second guessing, for wanting to look out for your own needs.
You could argue that "serving your husband" would leave room for those things. Because when your husband does something wrong you could then question the decision, or even disobey in order to safeguard him and your family against a bad decision. Your concern for his welfare as well as your own would still be in service to him, even if you did not follow an order. But those actions have no place in true submission. In submission, even if you're husband decides to treat you with scorn and derision, hurt and abuse, you are there to take it, to submit to it.
This is why the command works both ways. I would never submit to a man who mistreats me. There are two commands - I submit and he loves me enough to respect my opinion and treat me well. It has to be a give and take or it doesn't work. If one party isn't holding up their end of the bargain, why would the other?
I resent the idea that I live in a gilded cage. I have freedom and my husband respects my input. He would never make a decision without considering (and then catering to, because he is smart) my needs and wants. There is so much freedom in that. I feel protected, valued, cherished - everything I could ever want. And I am blessed to feel that way because my man was raised to be a gentleman, who prizes me above all else, and I have the confidence in knowing that he would never ever do anything without putting my best interest first.
I get that some women don't need or want that, but don't pity or look down on the ones that do. We don't feel like we live in cages.
Every female blogger in your realm of religion (most notably Debi Pearl), says the exact opposite of this. Submit no matter what. No matter how awful shitpiggish your husband is, submit. Always.
Debi once gave the qualifier "unless he is bone breakingly violent." I give credit when credit is due.
This is why the command works both ways. I would never submit to a man who mistreats me. There are two commands - I submit and he loves me enough to respect my opinion and treat me well. It has to be a give and take or it doesn't work. If one party isn't holding up their end of the bargain, why would the other?
I resent the idea that I live in a gilded cage. I have freedom and my husband respects my input. He would never make a decision without considering (and then catering to, because he is smart) my needs and wants. There is so much freedom in that. I feel protected, valued, cherished - everything I could ever want. And I am blessed to feel that way because my man was raised to be a gentleman, who prizes me above all else, and I have the confidence in knowing that he would never ever do anything without putting my best interest first.
I get that some women don't need or want that, but don't pity or look down on the ones that do. We don't feel like we live in cages.
Every female blogger in your realm of religion (most notably Debi Pearl), says the exact opposite of this. Submit no matter what. No matter how awful shitpiggish your husband is, submit. Always.
Debi once gave the qualifier "unless he is bone breakingly violent." I give credit when credit is due.
Please do tell me more about what women in "my realm" of religion do and don't believe. I'm sure your experience in reading about extreme cases which are in the media or vocal on the internet trump my real life experience living and interacting with women living my lifestyle and faith. By all means, enlighten me
I know I'm waaaaaaaay late to the game here, but I'm LOLing at the notion that bloggers are now the authority in the topic of submissive wives. Carry on.