I think she does a very good job with this interview (the article is here). First of all, she comes across as quite strong and yet, very friendly to her interviewer. Her interviewer is careful not to offend, which is an excellent sign for Mrs. Bure (yeah, I see the hyphenated last name. Since I don’t know much about her at all I am choosing to hope she did this for her career. I don’t agree with it, but she has the rest in hand). Mrs. Bure is mostly in control.
Now, some of you might take issue with her statement that she allows her husband to be the leader. A couple of thoughts on this. It’s impossible to know how she means this statement. Some women literally think, well, I straight up allow this to occur and it sounds like the wife is really in charge but allows her husband to think otherwise. I’ve given this some thought because I have found myself using the word allow in real life conversations and cringing when I hear the word leave my mouth. In real life (let alone HuffPo), it’s far more difficult to speak clearly about these concepts because there is no delete button to edit one’s thoughts before submit is clicked. What I’m hoping Mrs. Bure meant is that when her husband makes a final decision that she disagrees with, she calmly relents and graciously accepts his decision. No nagging, no tantrums, no treating him with disdain because she disagrees. She might be a bit peeved, but she calms down quickly and gets to work getting it done. In that way, she allows the final decision.
As to the underhanded comment that she would go along with a decision that would be a detriment to her family, she addressed this in her comments about trust. I would wager that, not for one moment, does she think that her husband would make such a decision. What’s more, she knows that should she not submit, that would be a far more terrible detriment to what they have been able to build together.
My only other beef is her phrase, “Give him the respect that he would like to have within marriage . . . ” Again, on TV and on the spot, I hope. Maybe it’s just me preferring “deserve”.
Overall, I thought she did a great job. It’s encouraging to see these ideas entering the mainstream far more often. Gabrielle Reese, Costanza Miriano in Spain, and now Candace Cameron Bure. Somehow, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that this is happening in tandem with Red Pill ideas going mainstream at the same time.
On the Rock 
if i don’t get any feminimity and submission, i walk. 90% of the time a woman’s going to demand protection, time, and resources. which is fine, i’m ok with that. but if don’t get what i want. hasta.
never met a woman that i couldn’t replace.
She looks great and expressed herself very well, I think. As far as her name goes, I don’t think anyone would pay attention to her interviews unless they saw “Candace Cameron” in the headline. But with respect to her use of “allow”, well, submission is a choice. Even if he rightly deserves the last word, she could nevertheless choose not to give it.
Danny,
Women are going to be understanding more and more that they are easy to replace. It’s not longer enough to bring one thing and one thing only to the table.
I understood ‘allow’ the same way as Denise. I think it commonly has this meaning colloquially – when something involves a choice (and submission is a choice), then the choice you’ve taken is something you’ve ‘allowed’ to happen.
In fact, I think it now primarily has this meaning, because our culture has such a disdain for authority, that ‘allowing’ in the sense of ‘granting allowance’ is somewhat taboo and therefore rarely used. ‘Allowing oneself’ is ok though, so now it mostly just means making a choice.
Also, wow! I’m really glad to see such a direct and *happy* presentation of wifely submission in the mainstream media. If more women can find it in themselves to be likewise fearless in their day-to-day interactions with other women, we may turn this ship around yet.
Denise,
Welcome!
I think you’re right about her name and it’s a good thing in the long run. I just miss the days of women proudly taking their husbands names.
But with respect to her use of “allow”, well, submission is a choice.
Yes and that is how I understand it as well. Too many see allow as “permission” which puts her in authority. That is why I cringe a bit.
That is a choice is so difficult for so many women to understand because they see submission as something they are beaten or forced into. Or, if they choose it, they feel weak. They can’t get past this, so for an interview on HuffPo that’s how so many of their viewers will take it. So, was she wrong? No, but given how people think, they will take it in the wrong manner.
Phedre,
Maybe I am becoming too jaded. 😉
And I agree on the happiness! It was such a pleasure to see a happy, in control woman do an interview like this (I didn’t see any of Gabrielle Reese interviews. I only read about them). Her happiness and authority on the subject dominated the interview.
“Her happiness and authority on the subject dominated the interview.”
Indeed, and it is that kind of radiant and utterly self-assured femininity that can change other women’s minds. It is still not likely, considering the currently prevailing wisdom of the herd, that such a woman will cause other women to change, but there can be no doubt that the message penetrates the hamster’s formidable defences, if only for that short span of time. I know because I’ve seen it happen IRL. Logic is useless, but the words of an ‘alpha female’ always sink in. The hamster may override them later, in privacy, but for that span of time, it is powerless.
I think there is real potential for action there, for those of us trying to live out the ideal of feminine submission.
Phrede,
Well said. That self-assured femininity, coupled with the rising tide of men who will not settle for less than a feminine woman has the potential to change the world.
I feel for those who choose to live in the moment and lose out on happiness later in life, but if they choose not to see what is happening now, there is not much we can do for them.
I think there is real potential for action there, for those of us trying to live out the ideal of feminine submission.
Agreed. I tend to think the very best strategy is a double front, what we are seeing now. The men learning masculinity and the women learning femininity. Working together, there is real potential there.
I mean not only living out our femininity but also putting it on full, untamed display for other women.
It can be difficult at first, because you know *every* woman is going to notice, and some will make negative comments. But if you look closely, even those who comment negatively display an internal awareness of Hamster Fortress Breach. For those few moments, they recognise the fact that your femininity is a very GOOD thing.
If there is interaction, rather than just seeing from afar, we should not be fearful of voicing the reality of our submission. No criticism, no shaming, no pity, but neither should we spare them the truth, nor allow our words to be hamsterlated.
When we unapologetically maximise our external femininity, and likewise stand firmly behind the truth of feminine existence, the message is strong and unavoidable.
Every one of us that does this is making a difference, however tiny. We should force ourselves to do this.
I mean not only living out our femininity but also putting it on full, untamed display for other women.
Absolutely! And it can be difficult because one is completely self aware and self conscious at first. And you’re right, there is no reason to hold back in talking about submission. Women will *see*, if only for a moment and sometimes, that moment is enough of a seed to make a huge difference in one persons life. If she then does the same, and let’s other women *see*, it will take some time, but a ripple has started and it can be very difficult to contain.
Oh, yes. You have to understand that a lot of why men put up with entirely deranged crap from women (apparently a cultural phenomenon, according to friends in other parts of the world) is that they have no idea that (a) there is any alternative, or (b) the crap isn’t a bad thing. Worse, there’s a lot of brainwashing to the effect that the craptacular behavior, along with the men’s own servile nonsense, is actually a good thing which is making everyone better and more happy. Not that you didn’t know any of this, of course. But the thing I want you to understand is that the pause in hamsterbation caused by alpha-woman happiness is at least equalled by the cracks it causes in the shell of well-meaning stupidity that surrounds the average (American) man. It was that very kind of glimmer of truth that caused me to stop and look around, thinking that perhaps the inconsistencies I had noticed weren’t just me being clueless or incomplete in understanding, but glitches in the Matrix itself… glitches which have to appear if only because its programming is trying to resolve things which logic forbids.
Good lord. Looks like I need to get more coffee to tamp down the ol’ verbosity machine. But you see what I’m trying to say: Proof that true femininity makes high-quality women happy is a sure way to wake up the menfolk.
I second some of what Peregrin says. For way too long I bought into the tripe that I should be attracted to “strong, independent” types. I actually believed it, and when I found myself drawn to the feminine kind, I thought something was wrong with me.
Sis- “….one thing and one thing only….”
Vagina is NOT that important to a man that can access it easily and doesn’t see it as a big deal. If that’s all she’s got to offer, I’ll get bored with her quick.
I want a woman, not a fuck toy.
Peregrine, one can indeed hope to plant seeds of doubt in men too. I think more of those seeds end up sprouting than in womenfolk.
However, one has to be careful to only interact with men in a guarded way if alone, and preferably be with one’s husband. Otherwise it rapidly brings out worshipful/oneitis tendencies in non-alphas and that’s counterproductive to their waking up to reality.
But the thing I want you to understand is that the pause in hamsterbation caused by alpha-woman happiness is at least equalled by the cracks it causes in the shell of well-meaning stupidity that surrounds the average (American) man.
I think this is huge. These cracks in men are going to do even more in increasing femininity than seeing happy women right now. Women will follow the attention of men and right now, too much of that attention is coming from betas. This is slowing leaning back in the other direction where men will only give attention to those whom they believe deserve it. Women will absolutely notice this.
Well, yes. But I do mean showing in the context of a relationship – that being feminine in action and mindset in response to and in encouragement of open and honest masculinity, and continuing to be so while in a relationship and not just to snag some dupe with a personality bait-and-switch, wakes a man to the potential in being that kind of man himself. She demonstrates the rewards of a man being what he should be, and the observer tells himself, “Go and do likewise!”
Danny,
And that seems SO difficult for women to understand, especially when they are surrounded by people telling them how beautiful they are. It’s funny, because the internet has spread so many ideas that NEVER would have reached so many people at once and yet, at the same time, it’s inflated ego’s enormously. Double edge sword.
Well the wealth of info may hopefully re-educate the simple. Tho I doubt it.
Did a prep style post today, you should like.
Now, some of you might take issue with her statement that she allows her husband to be the leader.
I take it like she doesn’t fight him for leadership, which is so common today.
I liked her references to how submission is allowed in workplaces, in government, but somehow people don’t think it’s okay in marriages.
I listened to this interview on HuffPo a little bit after it aired and once I heard the submission part being brought up I just knew it was going to make news. But her explanation was so great I was hoping it would after a few minutes. “meekness not weakness” is now a favorite of mine that I will be using.
That she spoke out and the response she is getting is reminding me why I wanted to blog in the first place. I really appreciate her words and the play they are getting even if 90% of people think she’s nuts. She’s reaching the 10% and that’s a big deal.
Pingback: A Few Responses to Some Common Arguments Against Wifely Submission | Margery + The Man
As far as the word “allow”, I assume she means it in the same way that a woman has to choose to submit. No one can really make you do that and societal norms and pressures actually push a woman to do just the opposite. I don’t see it as giving permission or being the real leader underneath it all, just that she isn’t fighting him for control. He’s in charge by default. My own husband tends to be passive so I have to actively fight myself and guard my words/tone of voice since I want to submit and want him to lead and by temperament, I am the more dominant personality in our relationship. So in that sense, I sometimes remind myself to ‘allow’ him to lead instead of trying to charge ahead and do something myself. The blog peacefulwife.com talks about that dynamic a lot.
CK,
I think all of you are right in what she means by “allow”. I think my cringing is coming not from what she actually means, but by how some women will choose to understand her meaning. That through their authority they are giving him permission to lead. It’s something I tend to worry about when talking about all of this. That some will skew what is said in order to talk the talk, but not actually walk it. But, maybe I need to let that go more. It’s something to think about.
Phedre,
Something I think about very often regarding what you said about openly living this is a video Matt King has left before about evangelizing through beauty. In the video, Father Barron is talking about bringing people to the Church, but I think it is just as relevant to what you are talking about. Beauty has a way of drawing others to it, even those who claim to hate it in practice.
One of my very favorite quotes, is from the uber-feminist leader Gloria Steinem. She said: “Some of us are becoming the men we wanted to marry.”
How very prophetic. She said this as some sort of empowering statement. “You GO girl!” Yet I see it as women becoming men, and this is NOT what most men want in a mate. If I wanted a man to marry, I’d be gay, even if it was a woman that I married.
My wife compliments me; she does not complete me. We each feed off the other, enhancing, enlarging the other. It’s not half plus half equals whole… more like 1+1 equals 3. I’m not this big huge romantic kinda guy, but I do say one thing that she loves to hear.
“You make me want to be better than what I was, yesterday.”
Can a man ask anything more than that, of his woman?
The Navy Corpsman
If the nine minute video is too long, skip to the three minute mark where he lays out the thesis. The first three minutes are him using Brideshead Revisited as an extended metaphor.
9 minutes too long? I am surprised you would make concessions to that kind of mentality, Matt 😉
I have seen it, and it is very good. The sheer unsurpassed beauty that Christendom has created has always been the one thing that, even in my atheistic days, kept the unavoidable Truth tugging at my mind and my heart.
I always took strong independent woman to mean the kind that has her own thoughts, and doesn’t go what the herd says. One you meet and feel she’s one that has friends instead of 1/5 of one group made up of five.
I know today
@stingray
It’s a well placed fear of male headship and female submission as nothing more than facade where man is chauffer rather than true leader.
Nothing more than workhorse where the privileged royalty sits on.
Water Cannon Boy,
If only that were true. Only today it means, don’t let anyone or anything break through your walls and they should love you for you. It’s a recipe for stagnation and incessant immaturity. Only, when compared to children, they get incredibly angry. Alas, it’s difficult to understand that because one has the feeling of strength, it doesn’t mean the feelings are true.
infowarrior1,
I have now and continue to learn that the urge for power in many women, coupled with the hamster, is a tour de force.
http://unmaskingfeminism.wordpress.com/2014/01/10/bend-and-snap-the-red-pill-woman-trap/
I’ve talked about this myself at times, that as this message goes more mainstream it will move further toward the center and our message will become watered down. It’s inevitable.
“Allows”
I take it to mean that she understands the power intrinsic to her position as wife to impede and undermine her husband’s leadership of the family or, alternatively, facilitate and empower his leadership of the family.
Understanding her wifely power to harm or help, she’s made the responsible choice to do what’s best for her family.
I think what must be done is what has been said over and over again. Watch what she does. I got the same vibe from Mrs. Bure as everyone else here. There was no, “wink, wink, nod, nod” from her. Only sincerity. There was no, the man is the head of the family but the woman is the neck power play.
It’s out there though and I do not want women to get that idea. It’s disrespectful and dishonest. At least straight out power plays have some weird ring of honesty to them.
I just found this and it’s exactly what I am talking about, only said far better.
@Stingray
I and she got this perhaps from this website:
gynocentrism.com
infowarrior1,
Are you talking about the Max Orell piece? I agree with that one and part of the bend and snap piece, but not all of it. I can’t throw out the baby with the bath water.
Not just Max O Rell. This website just includes him in the literature quoted to highlight and show gynocentrism that has existed since the 12th century.
” I can’t throw out the baby with the bath water.”
How so? Rebellion starts small and culminates in the feminism we have today. Getting to the root of the problem may stop its recurrence altogether.
Rebellion starts small and culminates in the feminism we have today. Getting to the root of the problem may stop its recurrence altogether.
I agree that it starts small and that getting to the root will help shift back the pendulum. I do not believe that we can ever stop it’s recurrence. I believe we can teach the truth, we can culturally suppress many things, but feminism is in the hearts of all women and can never truly be stamped out. Trying to force women to stamp it out will only make it surface faster. In the meantime, while I will not dilute my own message, I cannot throw out others messages that do not utterly synch with my own. That will completely shut the path off to many who otherwise might eventually find their way later in life, if someone is at least able to show them the door.
Unless the spirit of God sanctifies them. It will never be stamped out.
Exactly and in the meantime, I want to help other women and men the best way I know how. I hope to plant a seed where I may.
That bend and snap is a restatement of women making the man think he’s in control and what women have to do because, as the talk show says, “men are so insecure…”
So the new red pill woman, once the subject makes it to the Bethenny Frankle(?) Show will be the same old thing.
I know that many of you will attack me for my opinion, but this article, the video, and some of the comments here have really upset me. I didn’t realize that people actually devalued women and our purpose like that. This is unbelievable. I did not write to start an argument, so I will not reply back to anyone. But here is what I needed to say:
Marriage is not just about submission. A video from a woman telling how she is submissive is so not necessary, unless there is also a video with a husband telling how he honors and sacrifices his life for his wife. This practice sets a dangerous precedent for young females to follow. These young females see older women as the wise females, ones who are supposed to make sense. But some of us don’t have much, and in fact, some of us are downright foolish. Women ought to know better than to allow themselves to focus on submisson only, unless they will also tell men what their roles are. Why would a woman make a video about submission? What is the purpose?
When a man marries a woman who comes into their relationship having a successful career, her own residence, and her own money in the bank, then that woman is “allowing” him to lead, because before the marriage, she was an independent woman and was not looking for someone to “support her”, contrary to what men alwys say. She can really live without a man. Men are not doing women favors by marrying them. Men, you all have got to stop telling lies on women, that “we are looking for someone to support us”. This is soooo lame and sooo untrue. Men are not the only ones with jobs. Besides all that, women do not get much out of marriage, because we do all the work. The men get the sex they so desperately want, they get someone to dominate, someone to cook meals, someone to raise the couple’s children, someone to do all the laundry, and someone to do the housework. If women are to do all the submission stuff, yet all the physical work, then, what the heck is the purpose of a woman getting married? Women are better off, staying single.
What the woman is really looking for when she marries, is someone who can be a loving, respectful partner with her and appreciate her for all her qualities and all the things she will be able do with him in the marriage. Marriage is not about serving a man. He must be kind to her, and treat her like she matters, because she does. What wife wants to have sex with a cold, selfish, distant, unloving husband? His attitude and approach does matter. Women have to be a part of all decisions in the relationship, especially the ones that affect her. In fact, a husband cannot just make decisions and shove them in the wife’s face.Those decisions that profoundly affect her and her body and emotional comfort, must be discussed with her anyway. Stop treating women like doormats and sexual receptacles, because women are more than that.
.
Stop telling wives that we have to lift up husbands up, unless you tell husbands to lift their wives up. Be fair and balanced.
“Stop telling wives that we have to lift up husbands up, unless you tell husbands to lift their wives up. Be fair and balanced.”
Culture holds men up in spades. But what about the female half of the bargain?
Oh, awesome. Yo, Danny, hand me the popcorn.
It’s been a busy day here. When I get the chance, I will respond to your comment in a new post, Jean. Thank you for stopping in.
Pingback: On the Rock
Your husband won’t always “deserve” respect but you are supposed to give it anyways. Just like your spouse won’t always be lovable…love them anyways. Candace IMO said it just right!!
Well said, Kellie.
It’s a great MSM fluff piece that gets across our message without scaring the rabbits unnecessarily. Except obviously, lil Jean there. She clearly needs to exercise her amygdala a bit more so that she can get beyond the point where she is in pain, feeling sick and terribly offended and get a chance to get past her brain hijack and actually learn something. This is the 2nd good MSM piece I have seen this week. The other was the Aussie gentleman on Fox talking about the Wussification of American men.
@Mina,
Don’t need to hide behind big words and phrases that are not usually a part of everyday conversations. Do they make you feel bigger than you really are? Hum,
Sorry to hear that you learned how to be arrogant and rude in your responding to people. Sorry that you did not learn how to have a conversation with other adults and stick to the topic, without attacking people on a personal level.
Sorry you needed to show people you were taught to be an imbecile, and to tell others that it makes you a big man to tear a woman down who gives her opinion. Sad that you need to make false statements about someone who you know nothing about.
Your response tells people a lot about you.
Go on Mina, enjoy yourself.
Thank you to the real men and women in this world who know that it takes love and respect and submission on both sides and that everything in this world is not about exalting men.
Jean,
A wife lifts her husband by submitting to him. A husband lifts his wife by leading her. That’s the fair balance.
Men and women pair-bond properly as complements, not as duplicates.
Jean,
Mutual submission might sound nice, but in practice it doesn’t work. Eric has said it better than I.
Eric and Stingray,
I will not argue back and forth with you two, but, both of you are incorrect. “Submit ye to one another.” I am sorry that you two are not as knowledgable as you think you are.
Read the Word of God if you are Christian. If you do not believe in God, then, I don’t know what else to show you as proof that you are wrong. There are a few times when a man must drop his pride and desire to dominate and be all arrogant and cocky and show himself as an humble “servant leader.”
Nothing will shrink, if you submit to one another.
Zay,
You refer to Ephesians 5:21. I’m not Christian, but Ephesians 5:21 is cited often enough that I’m familiar with it, enough to know your interpretation of the passage is flawed due to taking it out of context and subtracting part of the passage itself.
From http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+5&version=ASV:
20 giving thanks always for all things in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God, even the Father;
21 subjecting yourselves one to another in the fear of Christ.
22 Wives, be in subjection unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
23 For the husband is the head of the wife, and Christ also is the head of the church, being himself the saviour of the body.
24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives also be to their husbands in everything.
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it;
26 that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word,
27 that he might present the church to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
28 Even so ought husbands also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his own wife loveth himself:
29 for no man ever hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as Christ also the church;
30 because we are members of his body.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh.
32 This mystery is great: but I speak in regard of Christ and of the church.
33 Nevertheless do ye also severally love each one his own wife even as himself; and let the wife see that she fear her husband.
The reasonable interpretation of Ephesians 5:21 is it refers to the man and woman giving themselves to each other in a pair-bonded union under – or “in the fear” – of Christ. Ephesians 5:22-33 then lays out with specificity the proper order and attitudes of wife and husband within their pair-bonded union under Christ.
Ephesians 5 is clear the husband is the “head of the wife”, and she is to submit to her husband’s leadership in everything and “see that she fear her husband”. For his part, the husband leads his wife because he loves her the same as he loves himself and has left his parents to “become one flesh” with her. Ephesians 5:25 strongly implies a husband should love his wife even to the point of self-sacrifice.
Short version: Under the authority of Christ, a wife gives herself to her husband by submitting in everything to him, as the church is to Christ. A husband gives himself to his wife by his cleansing, loving, cherishing, nourishing leadership of her, as Christ is to the church.
Like I said, I’m not Christian, so I’m not obligated to biblical guidance. Based just on my experience, though, Ephesians 5 has the right idea.
Eric summed up what I was going to say. The only thing I have to add is that love here is referring to love as the verb, not the feeling just as Christ loved the church. To love is to will the good of other as other.
Stingray,
The masculine ideal of leadership among men, the kind taught in the military, which relates to the leadership by husband of wife, fits well with the love you describe and the marriage protocols outlined by Ephesians 5.
As soldiers learn with experience, while rank has its privileges, the burden of command – at least when leadership is done right – far outweighs the privilege.
In addition to Zay’s mangling of Ephesians 5:21, his statement, “There are a few times when a man must drop his pride and desire to dominate and be all arrogant and cocky and show himself as an humble “servant leader.””, demonstrates that he doesn’t understand the ‘Captain – First Officer’ model of marriage.
You men, continue to pick out the parts you all want to slap in women’s faces. I read all of the Word of God. I know the whole truth. I also was in the miitary abroad, so I know that the General and his troops have a totally different relationship from the wife and her husband. Marriage is not anywhere near being like the military. The instructions that God gives and expects of husbands, towards their wives, are nowhere near how the General’s duties are to his troops. The General’s orders were created by iwar loving, violent, arrogant, infallible, mortal man. The husband’s orders come from a loving and Divine God.
If any of you commenting men, are really men of God, you would know the truth, and not twist God’s Word to form your man-made doctrines.to beat, scold, demean, and disrespect wives. You men go on and on about a wife having to submit to her husband and fear him, but you leap over and avoid the passages that God told you husbands to do for the wives. These are just a few, and the real children of God who read here are laughing at you all’s ignorance and determination to put women in “their place”. God does not want anyone(men), to pick over his Word. God does not want his people to preach at wives, unless you are going to preach to husbands too, especially with all you al’s sins that you do against your wives. One day you will have to stand before God to answer for the way you all are playing with His Word. Be careful and do the right thing. A wife with a real husband, can be a real wife.
Some Husband Roles
submit to one another, listen to your wife (Abraham and Sarah) Give in to her too)
leave your parents,cleave to your wife ( Dont allow your parents to disrespect her)
be a servant leader (do for her sometimes and let her receive )
give your life for her (Can you handle this one)
honor your wife (Honor her and she can respect you)
love your wife (Stop trying to make her stay thin and young as a teenager
do not be harsh with her ( Shut your mouth sometimes and listen to her)
do not commit adultery (Keep it in your pants and stop lusting after other females)
Actually a great post, Jean, except you left out the most important role for the husband in the bible- to lead the wife for he is the head of the wife even as Christ is head of the church. Why are you so opposed to male leadership. Not male dictatorship but a Captain/EO arrangement that Paul would have abided.
Still, all of what you said is true but it is NOT inconsistent with what Stingray is saying as Captain/Executive Officer. OF COURSE the Captain listens carefully to his EO. A captain usually gives her what she wants and ALWAYS tries to give her what she needs. What exactly is the argument- you just can’t imagine listening to a man and respecting him?
Buepillprofessor,
You may go back and read my comment again, or no need to respond.
Being pigheaded, may get one into a lot of trouble.
Read all of God’s Word, before you throw your “man”-made doctrine at us women.
The human male tends to pick out the portion of God’s word that talks about the “Biblical wife”. This gives you men a chance to beat women over the head with a message about “submit” and “respect”
“Headship” and being the “leader” in the marriage is not separate form “giving your life for your wife, serving her, and honoring her”. Did you know that God is watching husbands as well as wives. Did you know that husbands must stand in judgement just like their wives?
Sometimes, when men open their mouths or put pen to paper, or finger to keyboard, they do so with their hearts being consumed with arrogance, pride, and malice towards women. The venom erupts on the paper, on the screen, and in the ears of those who are listening.
My suggestion to men and women who write articles about marriage, is to be fair and balanced and do this by lecturing the sins of husbands and wives, not just to wives. Is that possible, or is the venom in men’s hearts too powerful?
not just to wives. Is that possible, or is the venom in men’s hearts too powerful?
With the number of articles, sermons, lectures, marriage encounters, etc. written just to husbands with out a word for wives to submit or to be respectful to their husbands (many of these articles written by women) it is absolutely not out of place for someone to finally start calling out wives.
I keep seeing this call to make these articles fair and to call out husbands as well. Where is this concern when it is just husbands being called out. Is the venom in women’s hearts too powerful to make this possible?
Please, please, point me in the direction of articles that call husbands out. Wow! I can hardly wait to see those. 🙂 In my years of reading articles on the internet and in books that discuss marital relationships, I can honestly tell you that I remember maybe 2 or maybe 3 articles that some men wrote to other men, one in particlular that was well written that spoke to men to tell them what they should be doing to build their marriages and not to expect the wife to do everything, but guess what? Each of these aricles didn’t have more than 20 lines.
Not even the women writers will write and encourage the wives by telling what husbands are supposed to do.
The constant barrage of lectures, blames, belittlling, at wives, need to stop. It’s too much and women are fed up with it.