Angry Bird · Feminized Men

You Picked Her!

From an Angry Bird:

“The answer is yes, you have to submit. Couple of things. First, the wife picked him. She married him. The time to question hubby’s character is BEFORE you marry him, not after. The time to determine whether hubby is going to direct you to contravene scripture is BEFORE you marry him, not after. The time to determine whether hubby is a man of God is BEFORE you marry him, not after.”

Yup, this relates to some recent posts here–“you picked him”. I got news for these guys–anytime they whine about nagging, bitchy wife and/or a a wife who won’t provide sex–well, you picked her!

The time to determine if a wife will be eager for sex is BEFORE you marry her, not after. The time to determine if your wife will be submissive and in accordance with scripture is BEFORE you marry her, not after.  The time to determine whether your wife is a godly woman is BEFORE you marry her, not after.

So, there– too bad, too sad for any man who has a bitchy wife he can’t lead out of her bitchiness or for any man who is not getting sex— you picked her!

 

Advertisements

134 thoughts on “You Picked Her!

  1. STMA,

    That’s awful.

    If they do have a solid elementary education, here’s hoping they can catch up eventually.

    Is the father in complete denial over the fact that he can’t lock them up for ever? Eventually, they will be able to go where they want, read what they want, and do what they please? So it might make sense to teach a little discernment NOW.

    Like

  2. I personally know one couple who is in this situation — the husband literally runs ragged over his family, dragging them from church to church because he finds something he dislikes in every priest (we have one church where we are registered parishoners, and attend a couple others during the week sometimes or when we have had to be out of town over the weekend, so we also attend them all and have seen them). Their children don’t participate in any activities because of his fear that they might be contaminated by other children, the parents read every book before they allow their children to read them, even to the point of allowing them to read portions, but they cut out chapters they don’t want them to read. They now have two children in their middle teens who haven’t even started high school because this father overanalyzes every possible program they could use, and the mother simply can’t handle the do-it-yourself scenario…..she has a limited education herself and is overwhelmed with work running a mini-farm, small children and major health issues. She finally called me one day fed up and saying that her teenagers simply had to get on track for a high school diploma; would I let her look at the curriculum for the program I’m using, I got it together, arranged to talk to her after church, and she never showed up. I called to arrange another meeting — her husband forbade it because he suspected that the program might not be orthodox enough. The one that is rigidly religiously orthodox, however, isn’t academic enough. I can’t do anything for her now and I know it.

    Their oldest is fifteen. The best thing he can do for himself is turn eighteen and then get out of there. There are folks out there who will help him get a high school diploma, or at the least help him get his G.E.D., but it’s his parents’ responsibility and is the most atrocious educational neglect I’ve ever seen. But we can do nothing about it. It’s not our jurisdiction to do so, except pray for the kids — they all have amazing work ethics and great manners, so that’s going to go a long way in their favor to hopefully get an education on their own, because that’s the only way they are going to get one.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Deti writes like a 16 yr. old running his mouth like he knows it all but sounding very silly in the process because he doesn’t have enough life experience to know what he’s talking about.

    Like

  4. Mrs. H said:

    “And who says that on the rare occasion that a couple needs to turn to a pastor or priest for advice that the pastor/priest will side with the wife. He could just as easily point out that maybe the wife is being unreasonable.”

    Right.

    Catholic priests are generally very conciliatory people, and the idea that a circa 2016 US Catholic priest will be yelling at a husband or telling a wife to divorce for no reason is silly. (I’m sure ever diocese has at least one nut, but people do not generally seek out nuts for advice.)

    Like

  5. Deti says “What is being suggested is that if a wife doesn’t like her husband’s decisions, she has a right to go to a pastor/priest to have him tell the husband to change or cast aside the decision, or he will give her “permission” to separate and divorce.”

    Is he out of his mind? Does he even think before he types? What pastor or priest is going to give permission to separate and divorce unless there’s adultery or abuse going on? And who says that on the rare occasion that a couple needs to turn to a pastor or priest for advice that the pastor/priest will side with the wife. He could just as easily point out that maybe the wife is being unreasonable.

    Like

  6. Stone said:

    “This is the real funny though–say the orgasm word to stranger men online and you are in. Complain or speak a matter of fact about your husband and you are lambasted and shamed for saying such things to stranger men.”

    Yeah.

    Like

  7. This is the real funny though–say the orgasm word to stranger men online and you are in. Complain or speak a matter of fact about your husband and you are lambasted and shamed for saying such things to stranger men.

    Like

  8. thedeti says:

    “What is being suggested is that the wife crush her husband with lack of sex, disrespect, nagging, and marital strife up to and including separation and divorce. What is being suggested is that if a wife doesn’t like her husband’s decisions, she has a right to go to a pastor/priest to have him tell the husband to change or cast aside the decision, or he will give her “permission” to separate and divorce.”

    That’s an interesting interpretation of this thread. I don’t remember saying really any of that, except for mentioning that going to a pastor or priest for mediation is an option.

    More:

    “I’d’ be willing to bet there are certain women posting around these parts who have never once even thought of siccing a priest on their husbands. The reason being is that submission comes easily to women who are extremely sexually attracted to their husbands.

    “Lack of submission is essentially a sexual attraction issue. All marital problems can be traced to a lack of sexual attraction from wife to husband.”

    He really could not be more wrong about this one. It doesn’t matter how sexy your husband when he’s gotten your family into a mess and is obviously planning to drag the family into more grief.

    Robyn said:

    “For me and ‘my’ sisters it is a self-feeding snowball: the greater the submission the greater the sexual satisfaction, the deeper the orgasm(s).”

    *covering ears–la la la la la! I did not want to hear that!*

    Like

  9. TPC said:

    “Who is saying every decision should be questioned at all? The harpies in detis head?”

    Yeah.

    Speaking of black-and-white thinking, there are a lot of alternatives on the spectrum between “question nothing” and “question everything.” Those are not the only two choices.

    Like

  10. https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2016/06/22/submission-is-a-test-of-faith/#comments

    thedeti said:

    “The fact that a man’s business failed or that he went bankrupt or that he doesn’t earn a lot of money doesn’t mean that every decision he makes should be second guessed and questioned by the wife, that wife should attempt to overrule him, that wife should go to the pastor or priest to demand that the clergy “do something”, or that she has grounds for separation or divorce. In those situations, it’s on the wife to submit and to trust.”

    So he can keep dragging his family through failure after failure and his wife isn’t supposed to say boo and gets to keep making bricks with no straw indefinitely…

    Sounds like a lot of fun.

    Robyn said:

    “I completely agree with you. I’m sorry that didn’t come across in my writing. I’m wondering why husbands aren’t more ….. aggressive in their headship when they are leading; moving in their God-given authority. If they believe they have it, and if they are doing what is the best interest of the family, then is it not sin to know what is right and not do it?

    ““talking/discussing/more talking” is a female design; not male.”

    That’s odd. I’ve seen men talk. They use words and everything! (I spend a lot of time around academic men–seriously, you cannot get them to shut up.)

    More seriously, I don’t actually encourage talk-talk-talk-talk-talk all in one sitting. This has been more helpful for us with major disagreements.

    Talk.

    Wait/Think.

    Talk.

    Wait/Think.

    Talk.

    Mutually agreeable solution!

    If nothing’s on fire, you don’t need to do anything right now. For instance, buying the $25k truck is not a life-threatening emergency. While saving up the $25k to buy it, one will eventually figure out if one actually wants to spend that much money on a shiny metal thingy.

    I know personally that the saving process is an excellent gut check for figuring out how much I actually want something. Some stuff will pass the test, some stuff won’t.

    Like

  11. TPC said:

    “But if one is HONEST about believing in Christian hierarchy and authority, then, yeah, the POSSIBILITY ARISES that the wife MAY 1% of the time have to seek counsel from authority above her husband.”

    Right. And realistically, probably 0.1% of the time. I’ve never had to do it. I’ve come really close, but never actually done it.

    “And frankly, stuff like “I need to find my bliss, so I don’t feel like making money” (the 200k vs 60k thing) is not necessarily go to priest time, but it’s also not a situation a wife needs to blindly accept.”

    Yeah. I have a few more thoughts on the business start-up issue that Stephanie in the DS thread mentioned later (friend’s husband left job and started business and is making nothing, much to friend’s dismay).

    What Dave Ramsey suggests to aspiring entrepreneurs is that instead of just flat quitting a job, they start the new business in the evening and on the weekend, and when the business starts making substantial income, quit the day job. His phrasing is that you need to bring the boat up to the dock and get in, not just jump off the dock into nothing. (Apologies for all the DR mentions, but he’s really the guy on marriage and money stuff.)

    When my parents were starting up their store (which was ultimately successful), my dad kept his full-time job, continued to do his normal cattle ranch work, may have done some other (!) stuff, and worked in the store and did the books in his time off. My mom and my sister and I ran the store the rest of the time. My dad did not initially quit his 40-hour-a-week seasonal job to work at the store.

    Another thing is that with a new business (or a struggling old business), you need a kill date going in–like if the business is not in the black within six months, we will close it.

    “deti has made comments indicating that what he is actually familiar with is an insanely high level of dysfunction and volatility within marital relationships. there are some doozies on older dalrock threads from back when i read the comments more.”

    Not surprised.

    I feel like there’s a lot of black and white thinking on the DS thread.

    In my experience, initially it feels like there are only two options (my option and his option), but if you give it time, all sorts of other options start emerging. Given enough time, it’s very likely that options will appear that both husband and wife can live with. It doesn’t always need to be husband-crushing-wife-under-his-wingtips.

    Like

  12. I just wish deti would stop completely lying about what commenters are posting. Nobody here has actually said “gurl jes’ go to the priest whenever you feel like it!” Nobody here has advocated regularly and frequently going to higher authorities *as a default*.

    But if one is HONEST about believing in Christian hierarchy and authority, then, yeah, the POSSIBILITY ARISES that the wife MAY 1% of the time have to seek counsel from authority above her husband.

    And frankly, stuff like “I need to find my bliss, so I don’t feel like making money” (the 200k vs 60k thing) is not necessarily go to priest time, but it’s also not a situation a wife needs to blindly accept. Deti apparently only knows terrible wives, the husbands are apparently all saintly men who are just oppressed by cruel cruel dames.

    This is, needless to say, his usual “my social circle=normal, your social circle= weird and probably imaginary” schtick.

    deti has made comments indicating that what he is actually familiar with is an insanely high level of dysfunction and volatility within marital relationships. there are some doozies on older dalrock threads from back when i read the comments more.

    Like

  13. I was thinking of a post LA wrote about wives whose husbands ask them to work or go back to work, but they’re all of the same vein.

    Like

  14. FWIW, if Deti has such a problem with wives disagreeing he should consider the fact Lori Alexander has written articles on this where she encourages wives to try to change their husband’s minds. On one hand, LA writes a lot about how wives need to submit 100%, unless it means they might become “careerists.”

    Like

  15. Thedeti has another case for us:

    “2) H decides the family should buy a $25,000 truck as a family vehicle. W says it’s too much money; they should buy a $15,000 mid sized car. The family can afford both but the more expensive truck will be tougher to afford and money will be tighter for a while. W disagrees with H’s decision. H says “I’ve decided the truck is what we will buy. I’ve heard what you have to say, W, and I disagree. I have made the decision.

    “The traditional view of submission says W must submit. Our erstwhile friends elsewhere say W doesn’t have to submit, and she can go to the priest.

    “And the priest is going to do… what exactly? Act as an appellate court over H’s decisions? Say “H, you can’t do that, you have to stay in your $200K job that you hate”? “H you cannot spend money on that because it makes W uncomfortable”? Bark orders at H? Give W a dispensation for a divorce? Tell W to separate? Tell W to withhold sex or housework until H complies? How is any of this conducive to marriage?”

    Again, this is a somewhat science fictional case, as my husband is cheap as heck, would never want a truck, and in particular not a $25k truck. In fact, we’ve never spent $15k on a car. I believe our first car was $11k and our minivan was under $12k, and that’s all the cars we’ve ever bought. But I’ll give it a try.

    “Honey, we don’t have $25k in cash to buy a truck. If we were to take our emergency fund down to nothing and sell both our cars we could do it, but then we’d have no emergency fund and only one vehicle. That sounds really risky and inconvenient to me.

    “I think it is possible for us to buy a $25k truck in cash without doing that, but we would probably need to stop doing any college savings for the next 2-3 years. I know that college savings is a priority for you–do you really want to do that? Big Girl is hopefully going to college in 4 years and Middle Kid is going in 7 years, so we are in crunch time right now.”

    If that didn’t work and it was looking like a bad situation, I’d mention the pastor after that.

    I’m not philosophically opposed to my husband having a $25k truck, but we’d need to do it in cash and without it interfering with our other major goals.

    Robyn replied to thedeti:

    “Why can’t H just go buy the truck he wants? Why is he even asking permission?”

    Oh my stars and garters!

    And that kind of thinking, ladies, is why there are hundreds of thousands of bankruptcies every year in the US.

    Like

  16. Deti is purposefully being obtuse and has no idea what it’s like for a married couple to take situations like this in stride and make decisions. He interprets every single scenario as one where the wife will throw a fit and run off to tattle. He clearly thinks women are equivalent to children.

    Hey Deti– it’s called FAMILY LIFE. Maybe you should learn it sometime.

    Like

  17. Thedeti has a test case for us:

    “Husband decides he wants to quit his $200,000 a year job and become a mid level manager earning $60,000. Wife will have to go back to work. They’ve discussed it, she disagrees. H says “I don’t care, I’m quitting and taking the lower paying job. You’ll need to start looking for a job.”

    “The traditional view of submission says W doesn’t like this, but has to go along with it. Our neoliberal feminists elsewhere say W doesn’t have to submit to that, and her recourse is to go to the priest.”

    Here’s more or less what I would say under those circumstances (this is a little science fictional because my husband makes a lot less than $200k and only plans to quit his job when they pry it from his cold dead hands):

    “Sweetie, I last worked a full-time job right after 9/11. The most I’ve ever made in a single year was maybe $20k even working 3 or 4 jobs. We have a 3-year-old and two kids in school–that means daycare and aftercare X 2. Even if I go to work full-time tomorrow, we’re barely going to break even on this.

    “As you know, I was planning to start working seasonally and/or from home once Baby Girl is in school full-time (and maybe even when she’s in school three full days). As we have previously discussed, we need me to do that in order to pay for Baby Girl’s school tuition and the big kids’ college savings. The plan was for me to start working in about a year or two. However, again, it’s unlikely that I am going to make more than $20k initially and I am pretty sure I’m not ever going to make more than $40k even if I work full-time. We also have our oldest hopefully starting college in about four years.

    “My suggestion is that we start trying to live on about half of our current income right now and save the rest. If we can do that for six months, we can easily follow your plan. I suspect, though, that if we were to live on $60k-$80k a year, we would need to sell our house, buy in an area that would require a commute, pull the kids out of private school and discontinue college savings. We could probably do it, but you would be doing a lot more driving than you do now, and I’m not sure we would like either the neighborhood, the rush hour commute, or the school situation. Also, I think the kids would hate it. Our oldest has been at her school for the last 9 years and she’s really attached.

    “Let’s think about this some more, cut down our expenses (I suggest we not buy that new truck you are thinking of) and see how much we can save by Christmas.”

    Again, this is a somewhat science fictional exercise, as my husband would never buy a new truck.

    More later.

    Like

  18. Proverbs 15:22 says, “Without counsel plans go wrong, but with many advisers they succeed.”

    A wife can be one of the “many advisers.”

    There are a number of different verses in Proverbs encouraging getting lots of outside input before making important decisions.

    Proverbs 11:14: “Where there is no guidance, a people falls;
    but in an abundance of counselors there is safety.”

    Proverbs 24:5-6: “5 A wise man is mightier than a strong man, and a man of knowledge than he who has strength; 6 for by wise guidance you can wage your war, and in abundance of counselors there is victory. ”

    One verse that I can’t seem to find in Proverbs is: Do the first thing that pops into your head without talking to anybody about it–if your wife doesn’t hop to and immediately obey, it’s because she lacks faith.

    https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2016/06/22/submission-is-a-test-of-faith/

    Like

  19. Not to be a thread hog, but I’d like to talk a little about marital decision-making.

    https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2016/06/22/submission-is-a-test-of-faith/

    In an emergency, dangerous, time-limited situation, it might make the most sense to just do what the person with the most information/most certainty/most presence of mind says to do (call 911, turn off the gas, hold this cloth to the wound, get the kids in the car, hold the baby while I go get the epipen, you stay home with the big kids I’ll take the toddler to ER, etc.).

    It might make sense to do what whoever is taking charge says to do, be that the husband or wife. In a genuine emergency, you’re doing AWESOME if at least one person takes charge–the worst thing that can happen in an emergency is everybody freezing and fumbling and nobody taking charge. I’ve been married to my husband 18 years, we have three kids (teen, tween and preschooler) and we’ve been through emergencies more times than I like to recall. He almost always takes the lead with household emergencies (having a lot more technical knowledge). but I think I often get the lead role on kid medical emergencies when I’m around (having more of the kids’ medical information in my head and being Baby Girl’s very favorite person).

    But when nobody is bleeding and the house isn’t flooding or on fire and there isn’t a tornado bearing down, I don’t think that it’s necessary to just stand back and let one person take charge. I would say that 90-95% of the time with high-stakes decision-making, there is actually a lot of time available to think and talk–sometimes literally years to think and talk and let ideas percolate. Take, for example, house-buying. A house purchase is the largest single financial transaction that most of us ever make and some of us take years getting ready to do it. A bad decision can cost tens of thousands (occasionally hundreds of thousands) of dollars and lots of grief. To make a good decision on buying a house, it’s a good idea to not treat it as an emergency. As Dave Ramsey says–there is a house on every corner. If you don’t get this house, there will be another house by and by–this is not the last house on earth. The same (to a lesser extent) goes for cars and a lot of other decisions.

    Really bad decisions are often the product of sales pressure, impulsivity and rushing. If we bring our spouse into the process, we can slow down the decision-making process, which is very likely to improve the quality of our decisions. A good idea is generally robust–it can wait a year or two–it doesn’t have to happen right this instant. It is also robust in that it stands up to scrutiny and questioning. In fact, a good idea will often get better by being “aged” and talked over and improved.

    (I say all of this as the more financially impulsive person in my marriage and a person with a LOT of ideas.)

    Like

  20. Maea said:

    “I find the Jenny Erickson situation ironic, because on one hand these guys loooove the fact she was excommunicated by her church’s authority– not that she was innocent of wrong doing, by any means– and on the other hand, these guys dislike the idea of being subordinate to any authority but themselves. They pick and choose what authority they do or don’t follow, but the default is always themselves.”

    Right.

    Whereas, if a hypothetical alternate universe Jenny Erickson had gone to her church leadership for redress of wrong-doing by her hypothetical alternate universe husband, they would cry like babies over the injustice of it.

    Like

  21. I find the Jenny Erickson situation ironic, because on one hand these guys loooove the fact she was excommunicated by her church’s authority– not that she was innocent of wrong doing, by any means– and on the other hand, these guys dislike the idea of being subordinate to any authority but themselves. They pick and choose what authority they do or don’t follow, but the default is always themselves.

    Like

  22. Again, if the Christian manosphere standard is one that historically, only 1% or less of couples in the United States have lived up to, does it actually make sense to complain very hard when contemporary couples do not meet that idea?

    Looking around, there are a lot of functional married couples who work well together, have good kids, and make good choices. I look around my extended family and there are functional, happy, prosperous couples that have been married 40-70 years–but they’re not using the manosphere playbook. The only “manosphere approved” marriages that I know of in my extended family were much less happy and functional, much closer to divorce–and their adult children have turned out much worse, too.

    There’s a real problem when people (who by their own admission) come out of dysfunctional families decide to figure out a priori what a good family looks like and set themselves up as marriage and family experts.

    Also, come to think of it, contemporary upper middle class society puts a lot of emphasis on good manners, self-control and being a good team player. Hence, it’s no surprise that upper middle class people are able to have better marriages and a low divorce rate. And they don’t do it by the husband rubbing his wife’s face in the dirt…Unsurprisingly, the UMC style family produces a lot of UMC children. Obviously, those qualities (good manners, self-control and being a team player) are not the beginning and end of virtue, but they are something, and lacking those qualities is a great disadvantage, both professionally and in marriage.

    The Christian manosphere thinks that they can achieve happy marriages with just one spouse (the wife) being a good team player, and I don’t think that works. Or, it’s not going to work for large numbers of people.

    Like

  23. TPC said:

    “And women with less than three standing next to them sure don’t seem to think they have the whip hand leading to cash and prizes if the marriage ended in divorce.”

    Ironically, the only people I hear promising cash and prizes from divorce are manosphere guys…

    If the only thing you knew about divorce in the US was from manosphere guys, you’d think divorce was El Dorado.

    “Brought to you by currently reading the Little House books and noticing that Ma would be considered a disobedient, rotten wife and Pa would be considered a “weak beta” by the redpill brigade.”

    !!!!

    I hope there’s going to be a blog post!

    Come to think of it, that is an interesting issue–how many couples historically would pass muster with the manosphere?

    Like

  24. It’s not even that, it’s the denial that there are acceptable fringe subcultures that have influence at all. The average conservative Christian SAHM is in an environment way closer to what Eavan is describing than some “feministic” environment where “women lead from the neck”, at least from what I’ve seen offline in little and big churches. Even in churches where men are poked at in the pulpit. Because once you have more than two kids (and 30% of women in America have 3+ lifetime, currently), it’s very unlikely the woman is in a position to even think about anything other than keeping her head above water and everyone fed and clothed sufficiently. And women with less than three standing next to them sure don’t seem to think they have the whip hand leading to cash and prizes if the marriage ended in divorce.

    Fringey stuff can become mainstream, and that’s just as true on the rightish side, so all this pretending that a woman already in submissive-culture will turn into Jenny Erickson (who was kicked out of her church for her divorce, but that gets left out) is just paranoia.

    Brought to you by currently reading the Little House books and noticing that Ma would be considered a disobedient, rotten wife and Pa would be considered a “weak beta” by the redpill brigade.

    Like

  25. Mrs. H said,

    “As unpopular as qualifiers are in the manosphere in regards to submission, it’s not logical that there wouldn’t be any. Of course there are qualifiers to the limits of authority and the requirements of submission.”

    Right. There’s always going to be a lot of fine print–even on something as seemingly harmless as a bottle of Tylenol.

    Even assuming one marries a perfect saint, there are still things like strokes, brain injuries, brain tumors, pain medication, OCD, ADHD, ASD, Alzheimer’s, etc. that can substantially impair judgment. And those aren’t exactly rare.

    I feel like the “exceptional” cases are treated as being much more uncommon than they actually are in practice. Over the course of a long marriage, one is almost certain to encounter at least one.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. AmyP “I now think that C.S. Lewis was wrong because (just as with a lot of Christian manosphere guys) he just couldn’t envision anything other than middle-of-the-road white bread middle class conduct from a husband when he was talking about marriage.”

    My take on it is this. C.S. Lewis isn’t wrong per se. It’s just that when the statement is taken on it’s own without working out what exactly that means, then there could be real problems.

    All the things you mentioned would seem to come under not being in accord with “right reason” as outlined in Casti Connubii and further, may even necessitate the wife taking her husband’s place if he neglects his duty as also stated in the same document. It’s definitely neglecting his duty to not obtain suitable employment if he is mentally and physically capable or chasing after high risk-taking situations. Physical hygiene would also be a sign of neglect. If he can’t take care of this basic task for himself, he can’t fulfill his duty to the family.

    It’s not enough to just say the husband has a final say when no agreement is reached. That leaves the door open to all kinds of problems and unreasonable interpretations. As unpopular as qualifiers are in the manosphere in regards to submission, it’s not logical that there wouldn’t be any. Of course there are qualifiers to the limits of authority and the requirements of submission. The Church has nicely laid out what those are for us and even leaves room for how that plays out practically for different couples, places, times and customs. It’s not a stiff, rigid formula like the submission bloggers (men and women both) would like to stuff everyone into.

    Like

  27. When I was a sweet young thing, C.S. Lewis’s (or somebody’s) advice that the husband should have the final vote if spouses disagree seemed entirely reasonable.

    I had no life experience at the time, of course, and I couldn’t even envision that my new husband could ever be seriously wrong about anything for any substantial length of time.

    Now that I’m older and a lot less dewy, I realize that that the husband-wins-every-time method of settling arguments is a terrible idea for a lot of families. (And potentially very spiritually harmful for men.)

    There are choices that a husband can make that produce absolutely intolerable situations. There are guys that won’t work a real job even when they have multiple dependents and are quite capable of getting one. There are guys who won’t bathe for long periods of time (I’m not talking about skipping a day, or even a week), won’t go to the dentist at all, won’t see the doctor when they’re sick, etc.

    I now think that C.S. Lewis was wrong because (just as with a lot of Christian manosphere guys) he just couldn’t envision anything other than middle-of-the-road white bread middle class conduct from a husband when he was talking about marriage. That is a serious oversight, I think.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s