Pedophilia - The Next Taboo To Fall?

[Mountain Man]

What fits in “Tassyland” is that husbands and wives are equal partners...

It seems you didn't see my post from earlier.

It's a two-way street. The man is the head of the marriage relationship, but he is not to domineer over his wife; rather, he is to encourage and protect her. And the wife is to submit to her husband, not as one who is subservient but as one who supports, like a pillar supports a bridge (note that in this analogy, the bridge can not stand without the pillar!).

This is based on Biblical principle.

You say things have moved on since Paul's day, and indeed they have. That explains why family and marriage in modern culture is so screwed up, because God's commands on the matter have been ignored.

[Cow Poke]

It seems you didn't see my post from earlier.

It's a two-way street. The man is the head of the marriage relationship, but he is not to domineer over his wife; rather, he is to encourage and protect her. And the wife is to submit to her husband, not as one who is subservient but as one who supports, like a pillar supports a bridge (note that in this analogy, the bridge can not stand without the pillar!).

This is based on Biblical principle.

You say things have moved on since Paul's day, and indeed they have. That explains why family and marriage in modern culture is so screwed up, because God's commands on the matter have been ignored.

IF Tassy managed to procreate, I wonder if they were 'equal partners' in childbirth, or if the 'other' did most of the work.

I remember about 10 or 15 years ago this big revelation in Psychology Today (or some such magazine) that proclaimed "men and women are different!"

Most of us already knew that.

[lilpixieofterror]

IF Tassy managed to procreate, I wonder if they were 'equal partners' in childbirth, or if the 'other' did most of the work.

I remember about 10 or 15 years ago this big revelation in Psychology Today (or some such magazine) that proclaimed "men and women are different!"

Most of us already knew that.

I tend to take it as trusting my husband at things he’s good at and don’t work at undermining him in those things. This also means he trust me on what I’m good at and doesn’t try undermining me in those areas. Is there more to it? Sure, but this has a lot to do with the whole ‘submission’ thing and will help a good deal in dealing with friction within a marriage.

[carpedm9587]

Like I said, we've been married for over 40 years, and we are still best friends and lovers. Yeah, that just doesn't fit in TassyLand.

Congrats on 40 years, CP. Tree (my wife) and I just passed the 30 year mark this year. Celebrated it with an eclipse-trip.

Somehow, this thread seems to have shifted to marriage relationships. My basic rule of thumb is, "whatever works." If the "submit" model works for a couple, and both are in favor of it, and it results in a 40 year marriage, who am I to complain? It definitely wouldn't work for my wife and I. If I were to even HINT that I am the head of the household and she is the "pillar that holds up my bridge," I would need to wear cast iron long-johns to bed to ensure I still had all my functioning parts in the AM.

Our marriage has been an equal partnership from the get-go. When we disagree, we compromise. Sometimes that process is messy and we argue. As we were raising the boys, we sometimes disagreed on choices related to them: she was OK with them going to a friend's house, and I was not - or some such. Our working rule was, "you have to get permission from both parents." That way I could say yes, but if she said "no" it was "no" (or vice versa). We each gave the other the room to parent in our own way. We were not always 100% successful, and it sometimes got heated - but we worked it out. Thirty years later, we're still working it out.

Short of a bonafide abusive dynamic - anything that keeps a couple together for 30 or 40 years is an accomplishment, in my book.

[Cow Poke]

Congrats on 40 years, CP. Tree (my wife) and I just passed the 30 year mark this year. Celebrated it with an eclipse-trip.

Congrats to you, as well. Where did you end up eclipsing?

Somehow, this thread seems to have shifted to marriage relationships. My basic rule of thumb is, "whatever works." If the "submit" model works for a couple, and both are in favor of it, and it results in a 40 year marriage, who am I to complain? It definitely wouldn't work for my wife and I. If I were to even HINT that I am the head of the household and she is the "pillar that holds up my bridge," I would need to wear cast iron long-johns to bed to ensure I still had all my functioning parts in the AM.

But you don't appear to be denigrating the Biblical model - if it works. True?

Our marriage has been an equal partnership from the get-go. When we disagree, we compromise. Sometimes that process is messy and we argue. As we were raising the boys, we sometimes disagreed on choices related to them: she was OK with them going to a friend's house, and I was not - or some such. Our working rule was, "you have to get permission from both parents." That way I could say yes, but if she said "no" it was "no" (or vice versa). We each gave the other the room to parent in our own way. We were not always 100% successful, and it sometimes got heated - but we worked it out. Thirty years later, we're still working it out.

You know, you pretty much described our marriage. To denigrate the Biblical model, you have to assume that the husband is "the boss" and the wife is "subjugated". That's a strawman that you do not appear to be building.

Short of a bonafide abusive dynamic - anything that keeps a couple together for 30 or 40 years is an accomplishment, in my book.

I don't think you and I have a lot to argue about on this point.

[Cow Poke]

I tend to take it as trusting my husband at things he’s good at and don’t work at undermining him in those things. This also means he trust me on what I’m good at and doesn’t try undermining me in those areas. Is there more to it? Sure, but this has a lot to do with the whole ‘submission’ thing and will help a good deal in dealing with friction within a marriage.

Sure, because men and women are different. They are different from each other, and men are different than other men, and women from other women.

GENERALLY speaking, if there's a burglar in the house at 3 AM, it's the man who will respond to protect his family. But Lord help the man who gets between a woman and her children!

[carpedm9587]

Congrats to you, as well. Where did you end up eclipsing?

We went to St. Louis for the long weekend, and drove south to St. Genevieve for the eclipse itself. Spent the day at a small winery there. I have this observation about St. Genevieve: I have never seen more "Mary in a Tub" statues per capita in any other place

But you don't appear to be denigrating the Biblical model - if it works. True?

Short of an abusive relationship - what makes a marriage work is specific to the two people involved. If someone were to tell me that there is something wrong with MY marriage because it is not the "biblical model," I would object (and probably suggest they talk to my wife).

You know, you pretty much described our marriage. To denigrate the Biblical model, you have to assume that the husband is "the boss" and the wife is "subjugated". That's a strawman that you do not appear to be building.

I think the "biblical model" has enormous potential to be misunderstood and abused. When one person is told they "must submit" to another, that very language can create problems - and I think there are a lot of people who are doing exactly that. That does not mean everyone is, and I know a lot of very happy couples who function out of the "traditional" biblical model. If both are comfortable with it, and the relationship is not an abusive one, so be it. What works for me is not what will work for everyone, and vice versa.

I don't think you and I have a lot to argue about on this point.

Damn!

[carpedm9587]

Sure, because men and women are different. They are different from each other, and men are different than other men, and women from other women.

GENERALLY speaking, if there's a burglar in the house at 3 AM, it's the man who will respond to protect his family. But Lord help the man who gets between a woman and her children!

It is a man's job to ensure the mother does not smother the children... (honey, don't you think, at 13, they can walk across the street without holding your hand?)

It's a woman's job to make sure the father does not (inadvertently) kill or maim them... (honey, do you REALLY think it's a good idea to use the fence along the Grand Canyon as a balance beam?)

[Cow Poke]

It is a man's job to ensure the mother does not smother the children... (honey, don't you think, at 13, they can walk across the street without holding your hand?)

It's a woman's job to make sure the father does not (inadvertently) kill or maim them... (honey, do you REALLY think it's a good idea to use the fence along the Grand Canyon as a balance beam?)

So you're sexist!!!!

But, yes, generally speaking, the roles of a husband and wife balance and moderate each other. (Until the kid figures out how to divide and conquer)

Age old wisdom - When junior asks dad, "can I go spend the night at Mike's house", a wise dad would ask, "what did your mother say?"

[Cow Poke]

We went to St. Louis for the long weekend, and drove south to St. Genevieve for the eclipse itself. Spent the day at a small winery there. I have this observation about St. Genevieve: I have never seen more "Mary in a Tub" statues per capita in any other place

Cool - was there a lot of jammed up traffic? Was everybody in the world (but me) there?

Short of an abusive relationship - what makes a marriage work is specific to the two people involved. If someone were to tell me that there is something wrong with MY marriage because it is not the "biblical model," I would object (and probably suggest they talk to my wife).

A lot of this, obviously, depends on previous marriages or relationships - how we were raised. Some women are far more independent, and some men are weenies!

I think the "biblical model" has enormous potential to be misunderstood and abused. When one person is told they "must submit" to another,

Here's what most critics of the biblical model fail to understand. While the woman is told to submit, the husband is command to love her "as Christ loved the church and gave His life for her". Too many men fail to live up to that part, while emphasizing the "submit to your husband" part. The woman is NOT commanded to love her husband. (Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and hgave himself up for her Eph 5:25 ESV)

So, yeah, the biblical model can be abused if it is misunderstood or perverted. If followed as intended, though...

[carpedm9587]

Cool - was there a lot of jammed up traffic? Was everybody in the world (but me) there?

The east and west coasts were apparently slammed, but the midwest, not so much. We went down a couple hours before the start and encountered no traffic. We returned right after the full eclipse, and encountered a minor slow-down on the 60-minute trip back. But St. Genevieve is right on the centerline of the path of totality. Some businesses and churches were carving their property into 4' square blocks and renting them for the day. It was pretty amazing to watch them fill up. We were fortunate and had a nice table with food and beverage service. A real find!

A lot of this, obviously, depends on previous marriages or relationships - how we were raised. Some women are far more independent, and some men are weenies!

True dat.

Here's what most critics of the biblical model fail to understand. While the woman is told to submit, the husband is command to love her "as Christ loved the church and gave His life for her". Too many men fail to live up to that part, while emphasizing the "submit to your husband" part. The woman is NOT commanded to love her husband. (Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and hgave himself up for her Eph 5:25 ESV)

So, yeah, the biblical model can be abused if it is misunderstood or perverted. If followed as intended, though...

I understand the two sides - but that is the problem for me (and for my wife) that makes it a model we would not be happy with. I do not want someone "submitting" to me and my wife has no desire to be the one who "submits." Submission is an intrinsically subservient term, and neither of us wants to be in that role. I realize it is balanced with "love your wife," but that love does not eliminate the subservience implicit in the language. Rather, we prefer to recognize that each of us has strengths in different places, and to defer to the one who has the greater skill or knowledge in that area. Defer is not a power word - it is not a dominance word. And it is applied case by case, with my wife sometimes deferring to me, and me sometimes deferring to my wife. And I prefer a model in which love is mutual - husband to wife, wife to husband. In other words, I prefer a model in which two people are equals - deferring to the strengths of their partners.

I suspect most who live the "traditional biblical marriage" (like yourself) are actually living out a model that is more like what my wife and I live than what many think the "traditional biblical model" calls for, so we are likely doing the same things and using different words for it, and I am more concerned with the reality than the words. The problem, for me, is that the words are not very good ones, and are too prone to misinterpretation. Indeed, I suspect that is why so many take such a strong stand AGAINST the "traditional biblical model." I am all about communication (I am a teacher by profession). When words get in the way, I tend to change the words.

[Mountain Man]

My basic rule of thumb is, "whatever works."

When my wife and I were married, it was understood that divorce was simply not an option, that we were in it for life, and that whatever problems we would face along the way, we would just have to figure it out. That philosophy has been working for 24-years.

I think the "biblical model" has enormous potential to be misunderstood and abused. When one person is told they "must submit" to another, that very language can create problems - and I think there are a lot of people who are doing exactly that. That does not mean everyone is, and I know a lot of very happy couples who function out of the "traditional" biblical model. If both are comfortable with it, and the relationship is not an abusive one, so be it. What works for me is not what will work for everyone, and vice versa.

Every model for marriage you might subscribe to "has enormous potential to be misunderstood and abused". The problem, then, is not with the model itself but with ignorance and an improper application. Seriously, man, that's a pretty weak objection to the Biblical model for marriage.

For one thing, people who focus only on the woman's role of submission are ignoring critical instructions to the husband that immediately follow; specifically:

"Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body."

In other words, husbands are to exhibit a sacrificial love that puts the needs of their wife ahead of their own. Anybody who thinks that the command for wives to submit to their husbands is a license for the husband to dominate and abuse the wife is not following the Biblical model for marriage.

[Mountain Man]

Submission is an intrinsically subservient term...

No it's not. For example, when I'm on the job, I'm working under a project manager. I submit to his authority and I do what's required to support him and make the project a success, but I am not subservient to him. I have a role to fill, one that he can't fill because he lacks the skill set and experience, and so he depends on me for the successful completion of the project.

This is how the marriage relationship works. My wife submits to my authority as commanded by God, but she is not subservient to me. She brings many qualities to our relationship that I lack, and I'm a better man because of her love and support. I would not be who I am today if it wasn't for my wife, not because she's my servant but because she's my equal who chooses to obey God's command to submit to her husband.

[carpedm9587]

When my wife and I were married, it was understood that divorce was simply not an option, that we were in it for life, and that whatever problems we would face along the way, we would just have to figure it out. That philosophy has been working for 24-years.


Every model for marriage you might subscribe to "has enormous potential to be misunderstood and abused". The problem, then, is not with the model itself but with ignorance and an improper application. Seriously, man, that's a pretty weak objection to the Biblical model for marriage.

For one thing, people who focus only on the woman's role of submission are ignoring critical instructions to the husband that immediately follow; specifically:

"Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, so that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body."

In other words, husbands are to exhibit a sacrificial love that puts the needs of their wife ahead of their own. Anybody who thinks that the command for wives to submit to their husbands is a license for the husband to dominate and abuse the wife is not following the Biblical model for marriage.

I don't think I said anything otherwise...so I'm not sure what you're objecting to.

What I did note is that the language of "submit" is subservience language. It invites misunderstanding. If it were my religion, I'd look to shift the language. The reality is that most people I know who live the "traditional biblical marriage" have a marriage virtually identical to mine: two people, mutually loving, each contributing to the marriage out of their strengths and deferring to their partner in areas where the partner is stronger. So why needlessly introduce language that just muddies the waters and invites misunderstanding?

But it's your religion and your language. That's just my opinion as an outsider.

[carpedm9587]

No it's not. For example, when I'm on the job, I'm working under a project manager. I submit to his authority and I do what's required to support him and make the project a success, but I am not subservient to him. I have a role to fill, one that he can't fill because he lacks the skill set and experience, and so he depends on me for the successful completion of the project.

This is how the marriage relationship works. My wife submits to my authority as commanded by God, but she is not subservient to me. She brings many qualities to our relationship that I lack, and I'm a better man because of her love and support. I would not be who I am today if it wasn't for my wife, not because she's my servant but because she's my equal who chooses to obey God's command to submit to her husband.

Subservient is synonymous with subordinate - which leans "lower in rank or position." Both its denotation and connotation suggest someone who has to bow their will to the will of another, hence the observation that it is a term of subservience and invites misunderstanding. In a job, when you have a manager, what the manager says goes. You may voice your opinion (if you have a good boss), and the decision may be influenced by your input, but the boss makes the decision, making your role subservient to theirs.

That is why I would not want to use that language to describe my marriage. I do not make decisions because I'm the man. I contribute to decisions my wife and I make mutually. She does not submit to me because I am male - she defers to me in my knowledge and expertise in some areas, and I defer to hers in others.

Personally, I think the language of the "traditional biblical relationship" invites misunderstanding, and sentences like "my wife submits to my authority as commanded by god" are just going to make the misunderstanding worse. Like I said, in my world, when words get in the way, I just change them to avoid confusion.