<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TheStudent:<BR><B>However, like I said earlier, the idea that the man is the head of his wife assumes--a priori--that she is subservient and inferior to him. And why? Not because of his actions, but because he just so happened to be lucky enough to be born with a penis instead of a vagina.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Hmm. I can't agree with the idea that a position of greater authority implies greater worth. In my mind, the difference is primarily functional. <I>Someone</I> has to be the tie-breaker in decision-making.<P>My own take on submission in marriage is probably not going to be popular, and I have recently been forced to ponder whether it is more a convenient justification for my passivity in my marriage than anything else. Nevertheless, here it is...<P>Husband and wife are called to submit to one another, but in a Christian marriage the husband is designated as the "head" of the household. What this meant to me is that when my wife and I had a disagreement about what to do, I almost always deferred to her. Since as "head" I got the final say, I figured that my submission to my wife preempted my wife's submission to me. The exceptions mostly occurred when matters of stewardship and principle became involved. There, my submission to God preempted my submission to my wife.<P>Remember Jesus said that he who would be greatest of all must be servant of all.<BR><p>[This message has been edited by GnomeDePlume (edited February 26, 2001).]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TheStudent:<BR><B><BR>No person is the HEAD of any other person just because they exist. It makes women into children. Something weak and lame who needs to be protected.<P>Both people need to submit in a relationship. The fact that these terms are not used for men ARE historically and culturally based...<P>...both man and woman should submit to the relationship, both need to be responsible for their actions and words.<BR></B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Many years ago, I was in a group which believed that, yes, wives submit to husbands, but husbands also were to submit to their pastors who in turn submitted to higher up authorities in the group, etc.<P>So maybe in terms of Christian beliefs it's not just men vs. women, but a deeper question about who is responsible for my life--me or someone else? When he elected to leave the group, the pastor of the local church I was in stated that if he stayed it would be a decision to always stay a child.<P>For those of you old enough to remember, I think frequently of Tina Louise as Ginger in the corny old comedy "Gilligan's Island". The character was supposed to be a movie star, and she would frequently sing a song in a little girl voice which was supposed to be sexy. It was the antithesis of sexy to me, because I associate sexiness with intelligence and strength combined with warmth and sensitivity. To me, a woman who is chronologically an adult but emotionally a child, and who does not take responsibility for her life as an adult, is not attractive. Yes, I care about looks, but I'd be incredibly lonely with a beautiful idiot who is an emotional child.<P>For me, it's all about POJA, which requires two adults. Both have to be capable of honesty, accountability for their own choices, and the ability to consider another's point of view. Mature adults, in other words.<P>If you have to depend on some sort of binding understanding of how to tie-break disagreements I think the relationship is in trouble. Sort of like having to keep a prenuptual agreement under lock and key, just in case. It's not a very good formula for success in a marriage IMO.<P>OTOH I don't have a very high need to control others, and I've not been through a divorce. If my wife manages to grow up and become an adult herself, maybe I never will. I don't need another child, I need a life partner for my lover and spouse.<P>Steve<P>

"If you have to depend on some sort of binding understanding of how to tie-break disagreements I think the relationship is in trouble."<P>I agree. We all can testify that this "binding authority" is very prone to abuse. One spouse, usually the one who is supposed to have "authority" can ostensibly decide they are tired of the negotiation process and say "do it cause I told you so". The submissive spouse (also tired of negotiation) can submit prematurely, then use passive-aggressive tactics to get their way. Both paths are unhealthy and lead to dishonesty.<P>Gnomedeplume,<BR>It doesn't matter if the person who is in authority actually has more worth or not. The end result is the same. The fact that they are given the rights of one who has primary knowledge--which is the ONLY justification for authority under ANY circumstances--does directly imply that they are more worthy. The fact that men are given this priviledge--and I keep saying the word a priori--assumes that they have done nothing to EARN their authority except by being born male. Nobody has authority over me except that which they have earned and which I offer them. And the same applies to me.<P>Furthermore, there is no way on this earth that any one person is more knowledgeable about everything than I am. However, there are people who are more knowledgeable about individual areas than I am, and I will submit to their authority, when necessary, in those areas. Not for long though. If I recognize their strength in that area, I will compel them to teach me. Weak and insecure people hold onto to their authority and "strengths" and refuse to be teachers in order to keep others dependent upon them. Why they do this is beyond me. When you build up your spouse and foster their strengths, it is much more likely that they can be a resource to you when you need support. Each building on the others strengths, not parasitizing them. <P>Finally, my existence as a human being precludes any approval or authority by any other human being. I don't need any man's "permission" to exist or control my own life or make decisions. <P>

There is a search for the "binding understanding"/"binding authority"...<BR>...in the laws written in your heart.<P>Abuse of human "authority" will always exist...<BR>...but it is the abuse that is in the wrong...<BR>...not the authority.<P>If we've suffered from abusive authority...<BR>...we can work with firm will and prayer to have it stopped.<P>To fall into "do it cause I told you" or "passive aggressive tactics"...<BR>...is to fall into laziness... away from true "love"<BR>...is to gravely step away from mutual submission.<BR>You can be on guard against this... with prayer... (PUSH)<P>"It doesn't matter if the person who is in authority actually has more worth or not."...<BR>...this is true.<BR>"The <I>end result</I>"...<BR>...need not be.<P>If knowledge... earthly knowledge... were the only prerequisite for authority...<BR>...exclude not the other gifts...<BR>...wisdom, understanding, courage, awe, reverence, fortitude... that come from above.<P>Being given a privilege...<BR>...is the same thing as being given a responsibility...<BR>...is the same thing as being given a duty...<BR>...and in marriage... as in life... we <B>all</B> could use help with these duties/responsibilites.<P>Earning authority... <BR>...is much like earning the good graces and gifts from above.<P>Offering <B><I>respect</I></B> to any authority... especially one not selected...<BR>...is a <B><I>choice</I></B>.<P>Compelling others to teach...<BR>...does not guarantee transfer either of depth of knowledge... or wisdom... or understandng.<P>Recognizing others strengths...<BR>...is equally as important as recognizing their innate gifts...<BR>...in recgonizing/accepting what they are... not just what they can become.<P>Building on ability... in trying to match ability...<BR>...doesn't exclude... building on (or trusting) complementariness.<P>Existence is a gift...<BR>Control is a choice...<P>Authority is (often) a gift...<BR>Abuse is a choice...<P>Acceptence of all gifts... is itself a gift...<BR>The decisions we all make... are the choices.<P>Can/should we really equate active mutual submission... born from a duality headship/respect... focused on love and giving...<BR>...with abusive authority?<P> <p>[This message has been edited by NSR (edited February 28, 2001).]

"...wisdom, understanding, courage, awe, reverence, fortitude... that come from above."<P>Yes, and men don't have any monopoly on these things simply because they are born "men". To grant men authority (or women for that matter) without requiring that they demonstrate their capacity in these areas does not help either person.<P>For women to "submit" in the HOPE that men acquire these traits (especially if a woman already has these traits herself) provides the man with a false sense of security, and does not teach him anything. It is also demoralizing for women to feel compelled to squash or eliminate her strengths in order to prop up some man's ego. Of course, since women are inferior (by nature) and primarily breeding material it doesn't much matter what her REAL strengths are, as long as the man doesn't feel too put out or insecure around her. Since she is mostly breeding material, her strengths are only "important" in the context of producing children. Right?<P>You see, this whole idea about headship going to the man assumes that women are incapable of leadership and that men have nothing to learn from women in this area. It is completely convenient for the man to believe this. Two thousand years of argument to the contrary have not convinced many modern women that it is in their best interest to "submit" to men's "authority". The fact that 75% of divorces in this country are initiated by women tell the story. Go ahead and quote bible verses all day. Women have other options, and---you can say---now have the luxury of insisting upon being treated as equals. <P>All of these arguments from men insisting they should have authority is a waste of time. They are trying to find a short cut around having to prove themselves. Sorry. Too bad. And, they have to KEEP on proving themselves everyday. Even bigger bummer for guys who think they should be annointed because of their gender.

I too will thing about these questions...<BR>...and not just as words...<P><I>mutual submission</I>... is it a way for <B>everyone</B> to... "...wisdom, understanding, courage, awe, reverence, fortitude... and all gifts that come from above?"<P><I>mutual submission</I>... is that a demonstration of their capacity?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... is it in the HOPE of acquiring <B>traits</B>?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... does/should it provide anyone with a false sense of security?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... is it meant to demoralize?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... is it meant to make anyone inferior?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... does it make anyone <B>primarily</B> breeding material?... male or female?...<P><I>mutual submission</I>... does it value co-creating? or raising?... children?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... does it ignore <B>other</B> strengths?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... does it cover up "incapabilities" of headship?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... has it been understood for 2000 years?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... does it explain who initiates divorces?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... does it give us the <B>other</B> options?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... does it make us more than equals?... move us closer to an ultimate realtionship?... move to a luxury of insistance?<P><I>mutual submission</I>... whould it require"... having to prove oneself? ...everyday?...<P><I>mutual submission</I>... allows both to be annointed... by love... not because of gender?<P>

SUBMISSION...this is the main reason my husband gave me for leaving me. I will not submit to him. I am not a domineering woman in any way, in fact I am quite shy and don't state my opinion very much. I believe that when it comes to a marriage both husband and wife should have equal say in what happens and compromises should be reached. My husband doesn't believe in compromises he believes in submission. He quotes from the Bible extensively and it really is frustrating. If you really read the Bible though the idea of submission is not as black and white as some people would have you believe, it is all a matter of translation. It is very difficult living a life when your opinion matters zilch especially when you are the more experienced of the partnership. The only opinions in my marriage that mattered where my husband's, his father's, and his pastor's. Honestly I am starting ti feel relieved that he left me because now the only people's opinions that matter are mine and my daughter's. I finally have some freedom.<P>Courtney

Courtney...<P>It does sound like your H reads the words... submission...<BR>...and thinks it must be <I>unilateral</I> submission...<BR>...and further thinks is must mean <I>domination</I>.<P>He covers up the spiritual meaning of <I>mutual</I> submission...<BR>...with the earthly concept of <I>selfish</I> domination.<P>I pray for you...<BR>...and I'll pray for him... for a softer heart... and a conversion of understand... of true love.<P>Jesus never dominated...<BR>...but He sure did submit.<P> <P>Jim

I think the last exchange between Courtney and Jim says it all for me. I think many men are just like Courtney's husband and that's why women have such a hard time with the whole concept of submission. It is when men use the bible as justification to be domineering that we as women get very offended and rebel. <P>Again, having read through even more posts and all the biblical reasons, etc. for submission, I believe that mutual submission, trust, respect and love are the keys to long term success.