RobynInTheRaw: Raw doesn’t mean hurt or angry, but when a woman is brazen enough to step into the authority I have over my own blog, what she’s going to feel is me not letting her usurp my authority.
I tried to address the sender in private, but when you get no answer, you have no other choice. This is a reply she sent me in response to my postings about submission and authority:
“Glad you found something that worked for your marriage. This is in reply to both Part I and Part II. Agree & Disagree with some of your conclusions. The main disagreement I have is with your ascertains on Domestic Discipline. DD practice is abuse and sinful practice. Verses in Corinthians speak about what Love is and Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church. To say that we practice DD and we have a successful marriage just does not compute and is contrary to a Godly marriage (even if some claim that it works for them). Your spouse is not your child and should be treated as such and not “spanked” “slapped” “intimated” into submission.”
I’m starting to see this mindset a lot and it seems to be the generally accepted view of authority.
The mindset that a husband’s authority is synonymous with discipline. Sadly, it reveals a fearful and distorted view of authority – something to be hated and vehemently resisted and to be not trusted; and something that is above her in order to diminish and push her down into a non-person.
Women who view authority this way prove they do not trust the very person they are to be one with – the person they are supposed to be cleaved with. It proves they don’t trust that God gave the authority to their husbands, and they don’t trust their husbands with that God-given authority.
I find this typical of a feminist response in that it’s classic diversion. They take one little piece of something that has created a conflict within themselves, and cover it with spite and degradation. Oddly, of all feminists, it is Christian women who speak the loudest. I read a cute (but true) quote the other day: What Sally says to you about Michelle, reveals more about Sally than it does about Michelle.
What this commenter fails to realize is that her reply exposes more about herself than it does about my post. Her opening seems encouraging, but as you read through the reply you can see that its purpose was merely to placate. With the remainder of her words her true motive is revealed: She seeks to tear down and destroy.
When she said:
“The main disagreement I have is with your ascertains on Domestic Discipline.”
I don’t have ANY ascertains in regards to DD. What I did do was comment in the preface of my post that it was none of my business, because I didn’t want to judge someone else’s marriage. She was seeking to say that I do support DD, when what I actually did was to refrain from making a judgment:
“I’m not saying I condone domestic discipline but neither am I saying that I condemn it. What I am saying, is that I don’t want to be so narrow as to disregard a couple or their marriage that has obvious proven longevity because some small part might ‘appear’ to be distasteful.”
“To say that we practice DD and we have a successful marriage just does not compute and is contrary to a Godly marriage (even if some claim that it works for them).”
- I never said it works for us, nor did I say that DD is authority.
- I never said that the longevity of a marriage was the result of DD.
Read my words again:
“I don’t want to be so narrow as to disregard a couple or their marriage that has obvious proven longevity because some small part might ‘appear’ to be distasteful.”
She is judgmental of another couple’s success in marriage, and the heat from her anger about Biblical Authority and Submission has clouded her senses. She can’t succinctly track with me because she’s blind to it, which is a symptom of pride. Pride takes one broad brush stroke and sweeps over everything. It demonstrates the safety sought in religion [the need to make others follow your definition of rules] while denying the freedom of life.
This is the view that has women running around the internet looking for any information on authority and submission and going after every comment with the fervor of a Velociraptor, labelling “Abuse, this is wrong, and it’s abuse!”
“(even if some claim that it works for them)”
Also, why would you pontificate that someone doesn’t know what makes their OWN marriage work?
“Your spouse is not your child and should be treated as such and not “spanked” “slapped” “intimated” into submission.”
I doubt that very many men or women confuse their spouse with a child. Stating the obvious as a form of defense to back up a viewpoint reveals deep contention.
To put it quite simply, I don’t view a husband’s authority as intimidation any more than the Church views the authority and headship of Christ as intimidation.
And the Pièce de résistance –
“Verses in Corinthians speak about what Love is and Husbands are to love their wives as Christ loved the church.”
This is the most provocative and revealing statement, and also probably a large part of the reason women (including my former self) hate authority: Because the root of their focus is pride.
She actually believes she has the right to tell the Potter how to grow His son as a husband, instead of focusing on growing herself as a wife in her own relationship with the Potter. The proof is in the quoting of a verse(s) that is not applicable: She is not a husband. I [Robyn] am not a husband – nor will either of us ever be.
She quotes (as if in reference) the book of Corinthians as whole, thereby alluding to submission and authority in an effort to blend and equalize them to cancel each other out. But the only part she narrows into and capitalizes on is the responsibility of the husband. This is done in order to mentally dismiss and deny the sections of authority.