Old School Patriarchy

[divinenature]

Sorry, but I find this thread really disturbing.

You aren't the only one.

[TruthSeeker24]

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?

Because man was created to lead their wives. Naturally, everyone here disagrees with that of course. I'm just saying that that's my view, thus my justification of it.

[TruthSeeker24]

Protect, Provide, and Lead basically.

[divinenature]

Because man was created to lead their wives. Naturally, everyone here disagrees with that of course. I'm just saying that that's my view, thus my justification of it.

So, other than an appeal to your personal opinion, you have no reason that a woman should subjugate herself to a man.

[TruthSeeker24]

So, other than an appeal to your personal opinion, you have no reason that a woman should subjugate herself to a man.

Are you asking for my opinions and reasoning, or for references and quotes?

[Buckeye]

Sorry. This thread isn't going to go anywhere. It's like arguing with the old guy at the gas station as to why I let my wife pump the gas.

[TruthSeeker24]

Sorry. This thread isn't going to go anywhere. It's like arguing with the old guy at the gas station as to why I let my wife pump the gas.

lol true. Though from what I've seen, none of the other threads ever go anywhere either. It's just something to do to pass the time and learn some new things and get other perspectives.

[wenglund]

Sorry, but I find this thread really disturbing.

Open and honest and potentially instructive discussions like this may not be for the faint of heart and the overly sensitive.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Saints Alive]

I think it is pretty clear that men are called to preside over their families, how you define "presiding" and what roles you and your spouse take I think, should be based on the couples preferences.

[Saints Alive]

Sorry. This thread isn't going to go anywhere. It's like arguing with the old guy at the gas station as to why I let my wife pump the gas.

you let your wife pump gas when you are present! Chivalry truly is dead.

[Buckeye]

you let your wife pump gas when you are present! Chivalry truly is dead.

Chivalry viewed women as property. I'm very glad its dead.

Of course I let my wife pump gas. She often wants to because its a lot quieter outside than it is sitting in the van with the kids. I also let my 5 year old daugher hold the door for me and her brothers. She thinks its fun and outruns them for the chance to hold the door.

[Buckeye]

lol true. Though from what I've seen, none of the other threads ever go anywhere either. It's just something to do to pass the time and learn some new things and get other perspectives.

Very true. For every thread I've started, I cease recognizing the purpose of the thread after about 75 posts.

[divinenature]

Are you asking for my opinions and reasoning, or for references and quotes?

Yes. I'm wondering if you can come up with a logical, non-sexist reason that ALL wives should be subjugated to ALL husbands. If you can do it without appealing to patriarchy or "God" I will be amazed.

I'd also like to point out that "because I said so" is even less likely to work with adults than it does with children. To expect obedience from one's spouse "without question" is really out there.

Protect, Provide, and Lead basically.

This sounds like what a parent does. I do not view marriage as a parent/child relationship. What does a grown adult woman need to be protected from by her spouse? What does a grown adult woman need to be led in? Generally, both adult parents provide for the needs of the household and children. How they work that out is up to them and should have more to do with personal talents and desires than who has girly bits and who has the boy bits.

The fact is, not all men are leaders. Many of them are terrible leaders. Luckily, marriage can be a partnership of two equal adults loving and supporting one another through life.

Edited April 11, 2012 by divinenature

[mercyngrace]

Chivalry viewed women as property. I'm very glad its dead.

Of course I let my wife pump gas. She often wants to because its a lot quieter outside than it is sitting in the van with the kids. I also let my 5 year old daugher hold the door for me and her brothers. She thinks its fun and outruns them for the chance to hold the door.

Your house sounds a lot like mine!

My neighbor, an older Jewish woman, saw me mowing our very large lawn with the push mower once and asked disdainfully "Where is your husband?!" I smiled and said "Inside with the kids."

Her attitude completely changed and she smiled knowingly.

My daughter always holds the door for us, too, she thinks it's a game. I always commend her as a thoughtful gentlewoman. LOL.

[KevinG]

If anyone feels the need to "pull rank" in a marriage the problems started long before you got to that point.

[mercyngrace]

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....

Very interesting. I don't think she speaks again but I don't know that such can be directly attributed to the covenant.

[mercyngrace]

If anyone feels the need to "pull rank" in a marriage the problems started long before you got to that point.

A.M.E.N.

[wenglund]

Very interesting. I don't think she speaks again but I don't know that such can be directly attributed to the covenant.

It is a marvel that she is allowed to speak at all given the Paulian edict for women to remain silent in church--an edict no doubt prompted by the earnest desire of men to have a day of rest from the incessant yammering of women. LOL [oh boy...I am in trouble now]

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[mercyngrace]

It is a marvel that she is allowed to speak at all given the Paulian edict for women to remain silent in church--an edict no doubt prompted by the earnest desire of men to have a day of rest from the incessant yammering of women. LOL [oh boy...I am in trouble now]

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

That Paulian edict no doubt oozed with the same charm that kept Paul a bachelor...

[grannysue]

Not that TruthSeeker cares (or should care), but he and I would be a mismatched couple because of his notions about the marriage relationship and the words he uses to describe those notions. My partner in life would never use the word "subordinate" in referring to me, and I like that about him. In fact, I require it. Of course, I would assume that Truth's wife must be comfortable with his way of speaking/thinking about their relationship, or she wouldn't have married him. So whatever works for them, works for them. Having said that, I would be sorry if outdated, negative stereotypes about male/female power were perpetuated under the auspices of the Church. I know this would not be the Lord's intent.

The fact that my husband "presides" in our home is not an issue for me because he sees that as a responsibility that has more to do with seeing everyone is well-served than being "in charge" or exercising any form of dominion whatsoever. Neither does he see that as any kind of authority or superiority over me, my decisions, or my agency. No decision is made in our home without both of us coming to agreement. He would not make a decision over my objections, ever. And I offer him the same respect.

Happily, we most often agree. When we don't, we value each other's opinions to an extent that the very fact that the other feels so strongly causes each of us to feel differently about the situation. This has always ended in the person who feels most strongly and expresses the most powerful feelings about a given issue being accommodated.

I do tend to leave big financial decisions (such as how to invest our money) to my husband, but that's because he's a CPA and it's his field of expertise. However, when my gut feeling is strong about something, I have disagreed and taken an equal role. Likewise, he tends to accept my feelings and opinions on issues surrounding our children, but that's because my post graduate work was in the field of counseling. Sometimes, despite my experience, he has disagreed and taken an equal role in that area. (If our arrangement makes anyone think of the "body having two heads" issue mentioned earlier, I think it's important to remember that a husband and wife should be one in purpose, just as God the Father and Jesus Christ are and were.)

For us, it works. But every marriage is different, and the two people involved have to make their own way. It seems a very good idea to discuss these kinds of dynamics before the wedding, so that there are no misunderstandings about beliefs and expectations.

Note: I do think it's troubling to consider that a woman might feel obligated to stay in an abusive relationship under any circumstances. The Lord loves his daughters dearly, and He would not want them to feel bound to someone who was wounding their spirits to that extent.

[Evangeline]

The fact that my husband "presides" in our home is not an issue for me because he sees that as a responsibility that has more to do with seeing everyone is well-served than being "in charge" or exercising any form of dominion whatsoever. Neither does he see that as any kind of authority or superiority over me, my decisions, or my agency. No decision is made in our home without both of us coming to agreement. He would not make a decision over my objections, ever. And I offer him the same respect.

Happily, we most often agree. When we don't, we value each other's opinions to an extent that the very fact that the other feels so strongly causes each of us to feel differently about the situation. This has always ended in the person who feels most strongly and expresses the most powerful feelings about a given issue being accommodated.

This is beautiful. I couldn't agree more. This is how my husband and I work together as well, and we're both as happy as can be with our partnership.

[Pahoran]

That Paulian edict no doubt oozed with the same charm that kept Paul a bachelor...

Actually Paul was apparently married. His wife seems to have stayed with Church members in Philippi while he went on his various missionary journeys.

The fact that his views conflicted with feminism counts in his favour. Although he probably wouldn't last long in this forum.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Damien the Leper]

How did a question about patriarchy turn into a debate about homosexuality in the bible? It appears to me that those with an agenda are hijacking threads to advocate their unorthodox opinions.

I certainly hope that your reference isn't directed toward my posts because homosexuality is not the issue in which I'm addressing. I'm addressing Paul's advocacy for masculine/feminine equality and the later contradiction found in 1 Timothy.

[Calm]

http://www.lds.org/liahona/2007/08/crossing-thresholds-and-becoming-equal-partners?lang=eng&query=wife+obeys+husband

Correcting these two extremist attitudes, “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” teaches a husband-wife concept that clearly differs from both households where this hypothetical couple grew up. It states that fathers “are to preside” and “to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families,” while mothers “are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children.” Fathers and mothers are to “help one another” fulfill these duties as “equal partners.”¹

Our young husband’s parents believe the old idea that women are fully dependent on their husbands. Our young wife’s parents believe the new idea that women are independent of their husbands. But the restored gospel teaches the eternal idea that husbands and wives are interdependent with each other. They are equal. They are partners.

The incorrect idea in Christian history that wives should bedependent began with the false premise that the Fall of Adam and Eve was a tragic mistake and that Eve was the primary culprit. Thus women’s traditional submission to men was considered a fair punishment for Eve’s sin......

The concept of interdependent, equal partners is well-grounded in the doctrine of the restored gospel. Eve was Adam’s “help meet” (Genesis 2:18). The original Hebrew for meet means that Eve was adequate for, or equal to, Adam. She wasn’t his servant or his subordinate. And the Hebrew for help in “help meet” is ezer, a term meaning that Eve drew on heavenly powers when she supplied their marriage with the spiritual instincts uniquely available to women as a gender gift........

Genesis 3:16 states that Adam is to “rule over” Eve, but this doesn’t make Adam a dictator. A ruler can be a measuring tool that sets standards. Then Adam would live so that others may measure the rightness of their conduct by watching his. Being a ruler is not so much a privilege of power as an obligation to practice what a man preaches. Also, over in “rule over” uses the Hebrew bet, which means ruling with, not ruling over. If a man does exercise “dominion … in any degree of unrighteousness” (D&C 121:37; emphasis added), God terminates that man’s authority.....

Perhaps because false teachings had twisted original scriptural meanings, President Spencer W. Kimball (1895–1985) preferred “preside” rather than “rule.” He said: “No woman has ever been asked by the Church authorities to follow her husband into an evil pit. She is to follow him [only] as he follows and obeys the Savior of the world, but in deciding [whether he is obeying Christ], she should always be sure she is fair.” 5 In this way, President Kimball saw marriage “as a full partnership,” stating, “We do not want our LDS women to be silent partners or limited partners” but rather “a contributing and full partner.” 6

The bolded part certainly does not sound the least bit like "no questions asked" to me. Edited April 11, 2012 by calmoriah

[Damien the Leper]

Actually Paul was apparently married. His wife seems to have stayed with Church members in Philippi while he went on his various missionary journeys.

The fact that his views conflicted with feminism counts in his favour. Although he probably wouldn't last long in this forum.

Regards,

Pahoran

This is interesting. In fact, CFR. If you were to stack Romans, Philippians and Galatians against the fraudulent 1 Timothy we have a much different story than that you seem to advocate.