Old School Patriarchy

wenglund · April 11, 2012

Or you're reading it wrong. I (and I assume DN) am reading it like this:
"subject to" or "under the authority of" a superior
You are apparently reading it like this:
"Subject to" or "under the autority of a superior"
"Subject to" begs the question of what/who (there's a noun missing, where it is specific to the other half of the definition of whose authority one is under).

I don't see it as begging the question. Rather, I see it as leaving the question open. However, it isn't important enough to me to quibble over semantics. I am okay with conceding your point.

As for whether women are subordinate to men (especially in marriage). I'm going to be extremely blunt: I think that's stupid. "subordinate"/"subjugate" and "women" are never found in the same sentence within scripture.

I don't know that those specific words are found in the scriptures at all.

Yet, the words "subject to," "subjection," "submit," "servant," "obey," and other words that intimate lines of authority and/or lines of ordinations (including sub-ordinations), are found in the scriptures, including in relation to women. Do you consider these to be "stupid" as well?

Again, what is important here aren't the specific words, but the meaning being conveyed.

Even more important to me is, my setting aside pride and concern about station and authority, and humbly following the Master and becoming the servant of all, and loosing myself in the service of others--including in my current and possible future roles as son, brother, friend, neighbor, husband, and father.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Storm Rider · April 11, 2012

I was wondering what people think about the relationship between a man and a woman in the gospel. I always felt that men needed to be more masculine and be the bread winners, while the wives became more feminine and became the house wife. Men should lead in ALL things pertaining to finances and the wife should be fully subjected to him in all manners. I do believe the woman's opinion should be considered always, but the choice should always lie with the man. I hear a lot of LDS guys say that their wife runs the house and that they learned to just do what the woman says. It makes me sad. Masculinity has become rare. Anyone else feel the same way? Any disagree?

Gosh, your definition of masculinity has nothing in common with mine. Masculinity does not demand a function as you have described. I have always been the major bread winner in our marriage. As an institutional investment manager I have always had my check deposited directly into our account. My wife, as my partner, implements what we both have agreed upon. Though she is my wife, she remains very independent. For example, she bought the first two cars of our marriage without ever talking to me first. She just chose to buy them and it worked for us for her to do so. I will say the first time surprised me, but then I just got used to her feeling comfortable enough to do so.

My wife walks beside me and she has never walked behind me. She has at times walked a little further afield from my side than I would like, but it seems like that is what works best in our marriage.

During our 2nd child's birth we were situated in the hospital next to another expecting couple. The wife was really having a hard time of things. The nurse would enter and ask are you sure you don't want any pain remedies, to which the husband always answered that his wife was fine and she wanted to have the child naturally. My wife and I had long since discussed having a neural block and when the pain became sufficient it was applied and viola, I had a wife that went through dilivery with flying colors in relative comfort. We never forgot this jerk of a husband that spoke on behalf of his wife. It got to be very offensive to both of us, but we realized that it takes all kinds in this world.

I would encourage you to broaden your understanding of what a masculine man is; I fear your definition is very, very narrow. I would be concerened that you were the type of man in the next room answering for his wife. That is not masculine; that is just being a bully and a jerk.

TruthSeeker24 · April 11, 2012

Gosh, your definition of masculinity has nothing in common with mine. Masculinity does not demand a function as you have described. I have always been the major bread winner in our marriage. As an institutional investment manager I have always had my check deposited directly into our account. My wife, as my partner, implements what we both have agreed upon. Though she is my wife, she remains very independent. For example, she bought the first two cars of our marriage without ever talking to me first. She just chose to buy them and it worked for us for her to do so. I will say the first time surprised me, but then I just got used to her feeling comfortable enough to do so.
My wife walks beside me and she has never walked behind me. She has at times walked a little further afield from my side than I would like, but it seems like that is what works best in our marriage.
During our 2nd child's birth we were situated in the hospital next to another expecting couple. The wife was really having a hard time of things. The nurse would enter and ask are you sure you don't want any pain remedies, to which the husband always answered that his wife was fine and she wanted to have the child naturally. My wife and I had long since discussed having a neural block and when the pain became sufficient it was applied and viola, I had a wife that went through dilivery with flying colors in relative comfort. We never forgot this jerk of a husband that spoke on behalf of his wife. It got to be very offensive to both of us, but we realized that it takes all kinds in this world.
I would encourage you to broaden your understanding of what a masculine man is; I fear your definition is very, very narrow. I would be concerened that you were the type of man in the next room answering for his wife. That is not masculine; that is just being a bully and a jerk.

Very respectable views Storm Rider I guess I simply would have to agree to disagree with you on it. Except for your case with the woman in labor. I would view that as just being a jerk of a husband. In order for a man to be a good leader, he needs to consider his wifes needs and be able and wanting to meet them. He should also do things that he may disagree with himself in an effort to allow her room to breath.

wenglund · April 11, 2012

There's something innately funny about a person touting his own humility.

That is precisely why I said it that way. The humor was intentional.

Seriously Wade, you are cracking me up this week.

I am so glad. This means that my mission to uplift and bring happiness and joy has not been entirely in vain.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

mercyngrace · April 11, 2012

I am so glad. This means that my mission to uplift and bring happiness and joy has not been entirely in vain.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-

:good:

Senator · April 11, 2012

I agree that the idea of submission is in the temple ceremony however both male and female covenant to be subject to someone and the female's covenant contains the word "as" which introduces a release clause to her covenant. The male's covenant has no such out.

I agree.

One other thought along the lines of SaintsAlive's statement that he acts as the first point of contact in formal outside communications. In pondering over the endowment drama, one notices that once Eve is placed under covenant to hearken to her husband, she no longer speaks throughout the rest of the presentation. Correct me if I'm wrong. Interesting....

Saints Alive · April 11, 2012

HAVE NOT portrayed the Temple correctly
what's up with not being allowed to edited posts

Who the heck are you to tell me my interpretation of the endowment is wrong?

Saints Alive · April 11, 2012

I agree.
One other thought along the lines of SaintsAlive's statement that he acts as the first point of contact in formal outside communications. In pondering over the endowment drama, one notices that once Eve is placed under covenant to hearken to her husband, she no longer speaks throughout the rest of the presentation. Correct me if I'm wrong. Interesting....

never noticed that before, thanks for pointing that out

Senator · April 11, 2012

He should also do things that he may disagree with himself in an effort to allow her room to breath.

I think we're simpy at a different level of thinking. You see, her breath is not even yours to allow!

wenglund · April 11, 2012

I guess what I am trying to say is that, to me, and from what I have learned about leadership from the Savior, is that relationships in general, and marital relations in particular, work best when the relationship mindset is shifted from "whose in charge" and "how can I get my way" to "to whom and how may I serve." Christ taught this important lesson to his disciple as depicted in Mark 9:33-37.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

TruthSeeker24 · April 11, 2012

I feel as if my views are offending some people, in which case I apologize profusely. I meant no disrespect in any way.

divinenature · April 11, 2012

There's also more to consider than just "righteous" or "unrighteous" dominion. There's also things just having to do with choices. For example, lets say the husband wants FHE to be on Tuesdays because he knows he can get work off that day, but happens to work Sundays. But the wife doesn't like the idea of doing FHE on a day other than Sunday. If the husband, after considering her view and weighing the options, still finds that Tuesday is the better option, then thats the way it should be, no questions asked. At least thats how I feel.

This is an interesting example. Based upon it I would assume that the couple were very poor at communication and problem solving. They should perhaps consider counseling, mediation or communication classes of some sort.

See, if they both could look beyond "my way" and "their way" they would see that there are FIVE other nights in the week. If the mom is too tired on Tuesdays from running kids around to their various activities and realizes that in a year she will have kids in cub scouts and achievement days on Tuesday nights and the dad is too tired on Sundays (or gone) because he works an 8 hour shift they should be able to effectively communicate that to each other and look at one of the OTHER nights in the week that would be better for their family.

I mean, what exactly is the reason we just "go with the husband's view" no questions asked?

divinenature · April 11, 2012

That's interesting mercyngrace, because I've always believed that a woman had the right to leave her husband, but that the husband couldn't leave the woman. Its just a feeling I have, so don't ask me to back it up lol.

Do you really believe that a man is duty bound to stay in an abusive relationship simply because he is male?

TruthSeeker24 · April 11, 2012

This is an interesting example. Based upon it I would assume that the couple were very poor at communication and problem solving. They should perhaps consider counseling, mediation or communication classes of some sort.
See, if they both could look beyond "my way" and "their way" they would see that there are FIVE other nights in the week. If the mom is too tired on Tuesdays from running kids around to their various activities and realizes that in a year she will have kids in cub scouts and achievement days on Tuesday nights and the dad is too tired on Sundays (or gone) because he works an 8 hour shift they should be able to effectively communicate that to each other and look at one of the OTHER nights in the week that would be better for their family.
I mean, what exactly is the reason we just "go with the husband's view" no questions asked?

I feel like your attacking my example, and not the perspective I'm trying to put across. Even if that was a poor example, it still doesn't change the fact that there are multiple scenerios in everyday life that don't really have to do with "right and wrong."

Do you really believe that a man is duty bound to stay in an abusive relationship simply because he is male?

Like I said, it's just a feeling. If the woman if physically abusive to the man, maybe the man needs to toughen up a bit lol

Buckeye · April 11, 2012

At times like this, I find it helpful to read these verses from Fourth MaccaBeatles:

Try to see it my way,

Do I have to keep on talking till I can't go on?

While you see it your way,

Run the risk of knowing that our love may soon be gone.

Think of what you're saying.

You can get it wrong and still you think that it's all right.

Think of what I'm saying,

We can work it out and get it straight, or say good night.

Try to see it my way,

Only time will tell if I am right or I am wrong.

While you see it your way

There's a chance that we might fall apart before too long.

Edited April 11, 2012 by Buckeye

divinenature · April 11, 2012

I feel like your attacking my example, and not the perspective I'm trying to put across. Even if that was a poor example, it still doesn't change the fact that there are multiple scenerios in everyday life that don't really have to do with "right and wrong."

I'm not trying to attack, just show that this couple is not communicating or problem solving effectively.

I would appreciate an answer to my question, though. Why are we just going with the husband's choice, no questions asked? Can you justify that for me?

Like I said, it's just a feeling. If the woman if physically abusive to the man, maybe the man needs to toughen up a bit lol

This statement is extremely sexist. Can you see why or were you perhaps joking? Do you believe that a man who is abused is "weak" and not masculine? Do you think that all victims/survivors of abuse are weak?

wenglund · April 11, 2012

This is an interesting example. Based upon it I would assume that the couple were very poor at communication and problem solving. They should perhaps consider counseling, mediation or communication classes of some sort.

A wise suggestion. Often, power-struggles and control issues are symptoms of core issue like poor communication, lack of problem solving skills, and no clear sense of direction and/or shared purpose. The good news is, these all-to-common core deficits/limitations can be corrected through effective education and practice (I would also include books on win-win negotiations).

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 11, 2012 by wenglund

Buckeye · April 11, 2012

Like I said, it's just a feeling. If the woman if physically abusive to the man, maybe the man needs to toughen up a bit lol

You can't be serious. A wife hitting her husband is still abusive and seriously harming their relationship even if she does not physically harm him. Same thing's true in reverse, or between parent and child.

LDS_RM · April 11, 2012

I feel like your attacking my example, and not the perspective I'm trying to put across. Even if that was a poor example, it still doesn't change the fact that there are multiple scenerios in everyday life that don't really have to do with "right and wrong."
Like I said, it's just a feeling. If the woman if physically abusive to the man, maybe the man needs to toughen up a bit lol

And a woman should know her place with an abusive husband, right? Your thoughts on these matters are not supported by the teachings of the Church. The Church does not tolerate abuse. Also, I believe it was Joseph Smith who spoke negatively of person who would submit their will/agency to another, even with the other person was instructing something that was wrong.

For an extreme example, as I understand your position, if your husband came to you and said "God has told me to tell you to kill our children" ; You would kill your children because regardless you are subjected to the will of your husband.

TruthSeeker24 · April 11, 2012

I'm not trying to attack, just show that this couple is not communicating or problem solving effectively.
I would appreciate an answer to my question, though. Why are we just going with the husband's choice, no questions asked? Can you justify that for me?
This statement is extremely sexist. Can you see why or were you perhaps joking? Do you believe that a man who is abused is "weak" and not masculine? Do you think that all victims/survivors of abuse are weak?

Yes I was joking lol. Sorry I didn't make it more apparent. And in answer to your question, yes, I believe the woman should obey the husband, no questioned asked (on the woman's part). However, on the man's part, if he wants to be a good leader, he needs to always consider the wifes feelings and sentiments and be willing to compromise. If he's not, then he's simply a poor leader and definitely not a man.

TruthSeeker24 · April 11, 2012

And a woman should know her place with an abusive husband, right? Your thoughts on these matters are not supported by the teachings of the Church. The Church does not tolerate abuse. Also, I believe it was Joseph Smith who spoke negatively of person who would submit their will/agency to another, even with the other person was instructing something that was wrong.
For an extreme example, as I understand your position, if your husband came to you and said "God has told me to tell you to kill our children" ; You would kill your children because regardless you are subjected to the will of your husband.

No, in the case of a husband telling his wife to sin, then thats when going to a higher priesthood authority becomes necessary.

LDS_RM · April 11, 2012

No, in the case of a husband telling his wife to sin, then thats when going to a higher priesthood authority becomes necessary.

Not sure if you are male or female, but either way, I hope you have what you want in your life, nothing worse than being married and believing you have been dealt a bad hand.

So hopefully, if you are female and married you are subjected to your husband in all matters, or if you are male you married someone who is subjected to you in all matters.

I still maintain that your position is not supported by the teachings of Doctrines of the LDS Church.

Evangeline · April 11, 2012

No, in the case of a husband telling his wife to sin, then thats when going to a higher priesthood authority becomes necessary.

Um, if my husband told me to kill my kids, I'd high tail it out of there ASAP with my kids and call the police. Consulting with a "higher priesthood authority" would be an afterthought.

Sorry, but I find this thread really disturbing.

TruthSeeker24 · April 11, 2012

Um, if my husband told me to kill my kids, I'd high tail it out of there ASAP with my kids and call the police. Consulting with a "higher priesthood authority" would be an afterthought.
Sorry, but I find this thread really disturbing.

I agree. I'd go to the police. And I'm a guy by the way.

divinenature · April 11, 2012

Yes I was joking lol. Sorry I didn't make it more apparent. And in answer to your question, yes, I believe the woman should obey the husband, no questioned asked (on the woman's part). However, on the man's part, if he wants to be a good leader, he needs to always consider the wifes feelings and sentiments and be willing to compromise. If he's not, then he's simply a poor leader and definitely not a man.

You still haven't explained WHY. It is the why that I am specifically looking for you to answer. Thanks.

Sign In

Old School Patriarchy

Recommended Posts

wenglund

Storm Rider

TruthSeeker24

wenglund

mercyngrace

Senator

Saints Alive

Saints Alive

Senator

wenglund

TruthSeeker24

divinenature

divinenature

TruthSeeker24

Buckeye

divinenature

wenglund

Buckeye

LDS_RM

TruthSeeker24

TruthSeeker24

LDS_RM

Evangeline

TruthSeeker24

divinenature

Recently Browsing 0 members

Activity

Browse