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. OW!

    I wasn’t able to find the source for this:

    “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.”

    However, it does occur to me that it’s a bit unfair to expect a young woman to figure this all out on her own, especially since young marriage and quick short engagements are also encouraged in conservative religious culture. How well can a year or two of premarital acquaintance predict 40-70 years of married life? That’s a very long prediction horizon, especially with the young man being on his best behavior during courtship.

    If anything, shouldn’t we blame her parents (if they had a lot of input and green-lighted the guy)? They have way more experience than an early 20-something woman could be expected to have.

    If women are to be held responsible to obey 100% no matter what because that’s what we chose, the more sensible women won’t marry at all or will do so on a very leisurely schedule…

    Also, a lot of conservative types recommend not spending any time alone in order to avoid sexual sin, which is going to make it very difficult to figure out what kind of critter the guy is. Most people behave very differently in large groups in public versus with just a friend/girlfriend/wife.

    Throw in issues like addiction, head injury, stroke and dementia (which can all alter personality and behavior) and I think the author is being rather unfair.

    I’m a bit of a submission skeptic (at least as it’s understood in the manosphere–which is that the wife is supposed to be essentially a slave). Everybody (even smart, wonderful, virtuous people) gets bad ideas sometimes, and one of the blessings of having a spouse is having somebody to say–NOPE! We’re all stupid and selfish some of the time, but each spouse is usually stupid about something different–so the stupid cancels out. If one person’s stupid is always allowed unchecked rein, we have eliminated one of the great advantages of marriage over the single state.

    Like

  2. Maea, I saw your comments with these guys. Funny that you point out the simple fact you are married and they are not and then you get accused of shaming. Its a matter of fact they are not married. I think you hit a sore spot.

    As far as juggling the rules, yeah making the simple complicated. You submit your husband and what he wants. Period. If he wants intelligent submission that’s what you do, despite what the great masculine keyboard warriors say.

    Like

  3. Stone said:

    “If he wants intelligent submission that’s what you do, despite what the great masculine keyboard warriors say.”

    I think they don’t really know what they are asking for because they don’t have a lot of experience.

    I’m a mom and I have a teenage daughter. I know what “mindless” obedience means–it means getting what I asked for, rather than what I actually want. “Mindless” obedience is a variety of disobedience.

    Or consider our old friend the Proverbs 31 woman–she obviously enjoyed a great deal of freedom with regard to details for producing the desired results for her family (a comfortable, orderly and prosperous home).

    I’ve heard that at a certain level in the US military (and it’s not that high), leaders are given a lot of latitude in figuring out how to achieve the overarching goals. This is apparently a major philosophical difference between the US military and others.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-differences-between-the-Russian-and-American-militaries

    “The American system empowers personnel at every level, starting with the most junior. Decision-making authority is pushed down the organization along with the mission objectives necessary to function autonomously. This is known as “lead by influence”. Everyone down to the basic rifleman should know why they are on a mission.

    “This is accomplished with the IOT clause. That means “in order to”, and it’s the main tool (after extensive training, of course) used to empower junior personnel.

    “Simple Example
    If you know there are enemy forces trying to get across a key bridge, then a traditional order would look like this:
    “Proceed to [grid coordinates] and secure the bridge.”

    “But what happens if the bridge is blown up when the unit arrives? Many inexperienced or poorly trained leaders would shrug their shoulders and return to base.

    “An American order would look more like this:
    “Proceed to [grid coordinates] and secure the bridge IOT deny the enemy freedom of movement across the river.”

    “This may seem like a small change, but it means everything during combat operations. In the middle of chaos, leaders on the ground need to have the right information to be effective. That’s how we are trained.”

    That’s what I would understand as the difference between intelligent and “mindless” obedience.

    In Catholic thought, we use the term “subsidiarity” for a similar concept:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity_(Catholicism)

    Like

  4. What I don’t understand is why it bothers them to know these things are going to look different across marriages. There is only ONE key point– a wife molds herself to her husband. That’s it. All of this coddswallup about “wives don’t need to submit intelligently” and then coming back with “oh I never said that” is backpeddling.

    Like

  5. I can’t figure why intelligent submission and freely obeying are somehow mutually exclusive. I keep feeling like I live in the twilight zone or something. There are times when as a wife you obey, even when you don’t see all the details or are unsure how it;s going to play out. Because your husband asks you to do that and do that without arguing and sulking. So you do it.

    That same husband can also ask that you speak up when you have pertinent information of concerns that he may hasn’t considered, no matter how certain he may initially be about a course of action. He wants intelligent submission. It all seems so strange to me, the zero sum nature which characterizes the framing of things. Marriage is a relational hierarchy not a military one.

    Of course people who are married would know that.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Elspeth said,

    “Marriage is a relational hierarchy not a military one.”

    And not even the US military wants from soldiers what these guys want from wives. It’s more like Soviet or North Korean style military obedience…

    “Of course people who are married would know that.”

    I think it’s not just not being married–it’s also not having had any substantial authority over other people oneself.

    Even as a parent, I feel like there needs to be a certain amount of flex in the parent-child relationship. Relationships without any “give” can be really brittle–the flexibility is what makes more longevity in relationships.

    Like

  7. Supposedly we’re two-faced ass-kissers now. It’s so funny how disagreeing is interpreted poorly on the ‘sphere. We’re all supposed to participate in some grand echo-chamber.

    Like

  8. I’m pretty sure that I am supposed to be the two faced ass kisser. I suspect I might even know who made the comment. I’m not sure why commenting on two dissenting post makes one two-faced. My position is consistent on each post and the problem is the black and white, zero sum approach to these things.

    I actually appreciate the amount of time and study Deep Strength gives to Scripture, but it doesn’t mean I have to agree with him on every point and this isn’t the first time we’ve disagreed. It’s not like I didn’t think this thread would be seen. I fully expected that it would be.

    It’s as if you are either on board with every tenet and argument or aren’t firmly entrenched in the manosphere camp or the pro-woman camp then you’re two faced. Stone is more than sympathetic to the situation many men find themselves in today, as well. I feel comfortable saying that. There are real and valid complaints men have.

    But heaven forbid you actually *think* about these things from all angles and come away with a perspective that transgresses either side’s core tenets in any way. Then you just *don’t get it*, or are *two faced* or *blue pill* or whatever. Life is just way too complicated and all people of both sexes are just way too screwed up for anyone to be able to stay firmly entrenched on a team.

    Right doesn’t have a side. It’s just right.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. You’re not two-faced and you sure as hell aren’t an ass-kisser. You just say it how it is and probably do it a lot more reasonably than most people (including me). There are too many keyboard warriors out there out of touch.

    Like

  10. “It’s as if you are either on board with every tenet and argument or aren’t firmly entrenched in the manosphere camp or the pro-woman camp then you’re two faced. Stone is more than sympathetic to the situation many men find themselves in today, as well. I feel comfortable saying that. There are real and valid complaints men have.”

    Yes, you are either red pill, manosphere lover all the way or you are a feminist. There is no middle ground and that is what makes me more and more see certain aspects of the red pill as cultish. People credit the red pill for saving their marriage, not God. Stuff like that. You can’t really question any of the major memes. And yes, I am sympathetic, but also for women too. It really sucks out there for both sexes and when I see stupid stuff put forth by either I feel “convicted” to share my opinion. The problem with modern relationships by no means is all caused by women. Experienced in the real world with real people has shown that to me. Sometimes people just suck and there is no other explanation besides that. Its not because of feminism, or hypergamy, or the feminine imperative or patriarchy or etc. Sometimes women are just bitches and men are just asshole jerks. Shit happens. Bitches happen. Jerks happen.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. DS:

    “It’s funny because my girlfriend got it when I explained it to her the first time. Now, I’ve had to type out probably 10 posts to explain this concept to married women.”
    Then marry her already! And stop wasting your time on the stupid online married women.

    Like

  12. Seriously? I have read Elspeth’s comments for going on 4 years almost, and she is the most level-headed, consistent, and Biblical person commenting I have seen. Period. I hope I can have half her calm and humility (that she at least exhibits online) IRL someday. Ridiculous.

    Like

  13. nicoustical,
    Completely agree. Its funny too how she can be so respected and has built a reputation for so many years, but say one thing that even slightly steers off the manosphere narrative and all those past things said and agreed upon mean nothing. Imagine if you disagree on something from a manosphere guy because you husband explained it to you better or your husband helps you to see why they are wrong. They hate that. They say they want women to be submissive to their husbands, but what they really want is submission to them and their precious red pill than their own husband.

    Like

  14. I am going to respond to myself:
    “They say they want women to be submissive to their husbands, but what they really want is submission to them and their precious red pill than their own husband.”
    Point proven! DS has a new post where he gives credit to Robyn. Puts her on a pedestal for being one of the few married women who “gets it”!

    Like

  15. I read over his post and the comments and here’s my take. He’s basically saying that by “churchians” telling wives to submit intelligently, that that is feminist code for questioning your husband’s decisions based on a lack of trust in them. A wife, knowing that her husband is a Godly man of good character, should trustingly submit to his decisions because he is worthy of that trust. In that post and his most recent one, he uses biblical examples of unquestioning trust in God as an example of faith in Him and uses that as a basis for a wife having the same level of trust in their husband. I’ve noticed it’s pretty typical of Christian manospherians to use examples of full faith and trust in God as how wives should follow their husbands. While it is good for wives to have faith and trust in their husbands, wives also know they are married to human beings and so interactions with a human husband is going to be not quite the same as having a full faith and trust in God.

    I disagree with his interpretation that intelligent submission is some kind of covert feminist code that means “questioning due to an unwarranted lack of trust.” IMO, what the so-called churchians mean by intelligent submission is an acknowledgement of the prudent Christian obligation to evaluate a proposed action before giving ascent of the will and carrying forth the action. Being a wife doesn’t dispense of this obligation as we all stand before God and answer for our actions. In good Christian marriages, husband and wife are generally of one mind on values held, vision for family life, shared faith etc. Their day-to-day interaction isn’t one of an explicit focus on the husband having to make every decision and the wife waiting for such decision to be handed down and carried out. It’s usually more a banter of back and forth sharing of pertinent information, offering opinions and coming to a shared consensus. It looks very egalitarian on the surface BECAUSE there is already a unity or oneness on the big questions of life and a marital friendship. DS mentioned oneness being the goal and anticipating what the other would already be thinking. This is actually pretty much what the quote he was arguing against is saying but he can’t see it because he is looking for feminist infiltration where it doesn’t exist. The last line of the quote sums it up ” rarely will they differ greatly in the decision (for the Lord has made them “one flesh”)”

    ” Practically,[meaning this how it usually plays out in 90% or more of the daily decisions that come up in married life] this means that they will frequently talk about many decisions, both large and small. This also means that both the husband and the wife will listen to the other’s unique wisdom and insight related to the decision. Often one will defer to the other in the decision; rarely will they differ greatly in the decision (for the Lord has made them “one flesh”)”

    Really all this quote is saying is that the couple will communicate in a healthy way and each not seeking to serve self but to come to the best decision for the good of the marriage and family.

    In the rare case of an impasse where there is no agreement on course of action, the husband should make the final call and for the sake of maintaining unity, the wife should defer to her husband.

    He arrogantly claims that the married women just don’t get it like his girlfriend did upon him explaining it to her. The married women get it because they understand what the original writer of the quote in question means by intelligent submission. Every Christian, married or not, should evaluate a proposed action before taking it. This doesn’t mean every action needs a deep introspection but it does mean we should be mindful of our actions. The married women don’t agree that to submit intelligently means an untrusting questioning.

    Like

  16. Oh, there was a lovely little submission should be as reflexive as breathing (whatever that means) in there from another married woman. Things like prudence, discussion, expressing concerns, etc. means:

    1. You don’t trust your husband and by extension, God (what’s funny about that is people ask for guidance in prayers all the time when they are unsure about His plan, or ask others to pray for them…oops?)
    2. You shouldn’t get married if you don’t trust your husband
    3. You are a feminist.

    I think that just about sums it up. FTR if his girlfriend does such a great job of understanding, I’m curious as to why they aren’t married yet since she’s a “woman who gets it.”

    Like

  17. Yes, I saw the submission as reflex comment. Funny, submission is only described as a reflex akin to breathing when it comes to wifely submission. The manospherians have no problem with untrusting questioning and refusing to submit after evaluation when it comes to the leadership of pastors they disagree with even though the body of Christ aka The Church is supposed to one.

    As to why he’s not married yet, perhaps she’s not yet fully groomed to accept his type of “leadership”.

    Like

  18. The manospherians have no problem with untrusting questioning and refusing to submit after evaluation when it comes to the leadership of pastors they disagree with even though the body of Christ aka The Church is supposed to one.

    This is why I’m convinced they’re all into making up their own religions. They are. When Christians aren’t interested in deferring to a final church authority and agreeing on the same things or the same basics, they decide it’s between their own interpretation of the Bible and God. At that rate, anything goes. I know there was a time where theological differences aside, Christians believed in respecting and deferring to some kind of church authority and now no one cares. They are far more individualistic and modern than they’d like to admit.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Maea said:

    “I think that just about sums it up. FTR if his girlfriend does such a great job of understanding, I’m curious as to why they aren’t married yet since she’s a “woman who gets it.””

    I would have thought or said very similar things as a fiancee or new bride

    …because I didn’t know what I was talking about.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Mrs. H said:

    “The manospherians have no problem with untrusting questioning and refusing to submit after evaluation when it comes to the leadership of pastors they disagree with even though the body of Christ aka The Church is supposed to one.”

    Ooooh!

    That is an interesting point.

    Like

  21. Mrs. H said:

    “He’s basically saying that by “churchians” telling wives to submit intelligently, that that is feminist code for questioning your husband’s decisions based on a lack of trust in them.”

    1. Sometimes I don’t actually know what my husband wants. Sometimes he doesn’t even know what he wants. There have been times when I’ve completely misunderstood what he wanted. So, it’s a good idea to ASK and make sure that I know what he wants.

    2. The Bible has a lot of examples of people (good, holy people) questioning God or asking for clarification. In fact, it’s more the rule than the exception. See, for example, Mary’s conversation with the angel in Luke 1 or Abraham bargaining with God about Sodom in Genesis 18.

    “I’ve noticed it’s pretty typical of Christian manospherians to use examples of full faith and trust in God as how wives should follow their husbands.”

    Right.

    And they don’t seem to feel any compunction about this.

    “Their day-to-day interaction isn’t one of an explicit focus on the husband having to make every decision and the wife waiting for such decision to be handed down and carried out. It’s usually more a banter of back and forth sharing of pertinent information, offering opinions and coming to a shared consensus. It looks very egalitarian on the surface BECAUSE there is already a unity or oneness on the big questions of life and a marital friendship.”

    Right.

    I’ve often thought that one of the easiest ways to break a manosphere guy would be to ask him to make every single decision.

    Like

  22. “I’ve often thought that one of the easiest ways to break a manosphere guy would be to ask him to make every single decision.”

    Perhaps. I mean, any normal husband would get frustrated with having to oversee daily life to the extent that he has to make all the decisions. Manosphere guys, it seems, would relish it because they seem to generally be an untrusting, suspicious bunch who are afraid of women because they will wig out and rebel if not tightly controlled. Only men can make rational decisions, ya know.

    Like

  23. I was thinking of asking literally EVERYTHING.

    “Should I feed the baby sweet potato or squash?”

    “Should I buy the cucumber shampoo or the green tea?”

    “Do you think the baby needs a coat today?”

    I think it would be possible to gum up the works by overwhelming them with minutiae.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. AmyP said “I was thinking of asking literally EVERYTHING.”

    Oh, I see. LOL! That’s akin to the “Agree & Amplify” in response to a woman’s s#%t test.

    Manosphere guy “I’m the man around here. I lead and you follow at all times. I’m not putting up with any of that “intelligent” submission either.

    Little Mrs. “Ok dear.”

    “Should I feed the baby sweet potato or squash?”

    “Should I buy the cucumber shampoo or the green tea?”

    “Do you think the baby needs a coat today?”

    Liked by 1 person

  25. What if your husband has actually done things like *gasp* lie repeatedly for years, which would, for obvious reasons, cause you to lose your trust in him?

    Oh, wait. That NEVER happens. I forgot.

    Like

  26. One person in the Bible who helped me see things in a clearer light after reading the manosphere for a while was Abigail.

    Like

  27. This:

    “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.”

    does not render this

    “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.”

    untrue, false, inaccurate, or inapplicable.

    “Men, too” or “Oooh, ooh, men do it too!” does not negate otherwise true statements about the conduct/behavior of women.

    Like

  28. ‘it does occur to me that it’s a bit unfair to expect a young woman to figure this all out on her own,”

    It similarly ought occur to you that it’s a bit unfair to expect young men to figure out this

    “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.”

    all on their own as well, particularly when we have an entire society that is geared toward concealing women’s sexual and marriage strategies from men.

    Like

  29. PS. For what it’s worth, I agree with this:

    “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.”

    If anything, it supports my original statement, by acknowledging its accuracy and then reflecting it back to men.

    People lie. People change.

    Like

  30. thedeti said,

    “It similarly ought occur to you that it’s a bit unfair to expect young men to figure out this”

    Yes, but the difference is that the young women are being told that they’d better get married now or they’ll DIE ALONE WITH CATS or their OVARIES WILL DRY UP, whereas the male equivalents of that are much less harsh. There simply isn’t as much pressure on young men

    Plus, you guys blame women for not choosing a spouse with perfect wisdom at 21 or 22, while passing the Kleenex to the guys who did roughly the same thing. The double standard is incredible.

    Look at that quote from you in the original post:

    “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.””

    So, to recap:

    1. Women are supposed to marry super young.

    2. If they choose badly (or a man that is less than 100% perfect in every way), it’s all their fault.

    3. No matter how imprudent, sinful or ridiculous their husband’s plans are, the wives need to obey anyway.

    What a road to hell that sounds like.

    Like

  31. So, out of curiosity:

    1. What is the ideal age for a woman to get married?

    2. How long should dating go on?

    3. How long should the ideal engagement be?

    I’m just wondering how long you think is the appropriate length of time for a woman to spend figuring out whether a particular guy should be her god and master, the person whose orders she obeys unquestioningly from her wedding day until her dying breath.

    If you say “less than one year,” I’m going to laugh…a lot.

    Personally, I don’t think that there’s any realistic length of time that will do the job.

    I would not encourage my daughters to marry on “Christian” manosphere terms. And, as it happens, those are not the requirements of our religious tradition as Catholics.

    Whew!

    Like

  32. @ AmyP:

    “Yes, but”

    Nope. Stop right there. No “Yes, but”. Your simple agreement will suffice. Just “Yes” will do, thanks.

    There’s no double standard. Not when our society has been reordered to make it as easy as possible for women to choose; and as difficult as possible for men.

    Moreover, as I said below,

    This:

    “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.”

    does not render this

    “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.”

    untrue, false, inaccurate, or inapplicable.

    Like

  33. “the person whose orders she obeys unquestioningly from her wedding day until her dying breath.”

    Strawman. I won’t debate someone who misrepresents the positions taken.

    There is no claim that a woman must do this.

    Like

  34. “There’s no double standard. Not when our society has been reordered to make it as easy as possible for women to choose; and as difficult as possible for men.”
    Yeah, men don’t choose their wives, they don’t propose. The wives are just thrusted upon them. Women may have lots of choices, but as you say they also have a lot of misinformation, so what good are the choices really. Men and women have A LOT of misinformation to shuffle through, but as Amy points out if you want kids women basically have a 15 year window to get this all figured out. If you want 3 or more kids, probably a 5 year window.

    Like

  35. Stone said:

    “Men and women have A LOT of misinformation to shuffle through, but as Amy points out if you want kids women basically have a 15 year window to get this all figured out. If you want 3 or more kids, probably a 5 year window.”

    And it might be even worse for that for women with particular gynecological issues.

    Like

  36. thedeti said:

    “Strawman. I won’t debate someone who misrepresents the positions taken. There is no claim that a woman must do this.”

    So, what do you want?

    You said you want submission.

    Frankly, I don’t think you know what you mean by submission.

    I’ve often wanted to ask this, and this is as good a time as any–what do you see as the difference between a slave and a wife? How can you tell the difference?

    Like

  37. Stone:

    “Yeah, men don’t choose their wives, they don’t propose. The wives are just thrusted upon them.”

    You’re being disingenuous here. You know very well the playing field has been lopsided in favor of women for decades now. It’s much, much easier for women to select and to get out of bad selections than it is for men. There’s no debate about this.

    Like

  38. If there is no debate (and you have said that a few times), why are you here? Why keep debating everyone here if there is no debate?

    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