Women’s Opinions On Submission and Discipline

A Request For Women’s Opinions On Submission And Discipline

As regular readers here know, I’ve had several posts on hypergamy from a Biblical point of view.  I have taken the unpopular position that hypergamy isn’t an evolutionary development in women, but is rather part of God’s judgment on women contained in Genesis 3:16.   I’ve posted multiple times on this, The Reason Feminists Don’t Talk About Eve and more recently, Hypergamy and Genesis 3:16 A Man Must Be Fit To Rule.

Essentially, I make the argument that women respond to men and a woman will only have desire (true sexual desire) for a man who she determines is fit to rule over her.  I loosely define “fit to rule” as being a confident, masculine and dominant man who embodies good character traits such as honesty, loyalty, courage, faithfulness and wisdom.  I say loosely because different women are attracted to different things, but in general all women are attracted to masculine, confidently dominant men.

Based on my understanding of what Genesis 3:16 says, I believe it’s incumbent upon a man to develop himself and become fit to rule because God said that a woman’s desire will be for a man who is fit to rule over her.  As a result I’ve written a half-dozen posts or more on that subject encouraging men to maximize their potential.

Then comes the tricky question of a woman’s submission.  I’ve frequently made the point that submission isn’t obedience.  Obedience is following the rules, submission is accepting accountability for one’s actions and the consequences for violating the rules.  And, as I’ve pointed out before, the only examples of how Christ loves His church involve spanking.  Revelation 3:19 is the clearest and most succinct.

“Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline.  Be zealous therefore and repent!”

Specific to physical discipline, in You Need To Be Spanked I made the point that

Women are attracted to dominance and men are attracted to submission.  Attraction is the coin of the realm and as a rule, a woman chooses to submit to a man based on her attraction to him.  The willing submission to physical discipline is the ultimate expression of both dominance and submission.   All other things being equal, if he has what it takes, she will choose to submit herself to that.  If he does not, she will not willingly do so.

I also made the point in 50 Shades of Biblical Marriage that the rules on marriage (taken from the Bible) actually read like a BDSM-style D/s relationship contract.  In other words, a Biblical marriage pretty much requires a dominant man because the woman is commanded to be a submissive over and over again.

 

Not Everyone Agrees

Commenter Cybersith1 claims women are demon-infested and won’t willingly submit to a man’s authority.

women have an inbuilt Jezebelic demonic rebellious attitude towards male authority and will NEVER willingly submit.

In addition, his position is that men don’t have any responsibility in whether a woman desires to submit to her man.

“I believe that women should be in submission regardless of whether a man is worthy enough or not…  Man doesn’t have to be “fit to rule” over women, he IS fit to rule over women PERIOD”

(I read that to some wives I know and their response was peals of laughter.)

Even though his argument is incoherent (is he advocating beating them into submission?), it’s a common theme amongst a certain flavor of churchians.  They can’t understand why women find them unattractive, they claim women should be attracted to them because they’re “godly men” and then they get upset when it doesn’t happen.  And the ones who managed to get married get really upset when their wife won’t submit to them, which usually means “have sex with him”.  As a rule she doesn’t want to because she finds his “servant leadership” and “mutual submission” repulsive.  Castrated males are simply repulsive.

In my response to his argument I related an example of my experience with women and submission (if they’re attracted to me they don’t have any problem with submission), but I thought it would be good for the women to chime in on this.  Especially those of you who blog about this sort of thing.

So, if any of you women readers would care to offer your thoughts on submission and discipline, why you might or might not want to submit to your man and what that might involve, go to the argument room with Cybersith1 and do so in the comments there.  He seems to be the sort of man who listens to women.

Comments About Submission and Discipline Here

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Marriages Go Their Own Way. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Women’s Opinions On Submission and Discipline

  1. SnapperTrx says:

    “I believe that women should be in submission regardless of whether a man is worthy enough or not…  Man doesn’t have to be “fit to rule” over women, he IS fit to rule over women PERIOD”

    I can halfway agree with this. A woman who is a believer SHOULD submit to her husband, regardless of whether or not she finds him “fit to rule” or not because God commands her to. At the same time, as a husband, being a fit, dominant alpha type man makes it all the easier for her. We are in this world, but not of this world. Being in this world means we still adhere to things like biology, gravity, etc. Biology says that a strong, healthy, confidant man will drive a woman wild with desire, while a slouchy, mousy push-over of a man will not.

    I think that many Christian men feel that this physical aspect is something they can ignore because its “of the flesh”, when really the term doesn’t necessarily reference the physical flesh. I mean, just because we are Christians doesn’t mean we can stop eating, or going to the bathroom – these things must still take place because its how we are physically built. Just as a man will become aroused at a lithe, sweet, well endowed redhead (oddly specific for a reason), so a woman will become aroused at a tall, square-jawed and muscled man. Thus, she will submit, all the easier.

    How hard is this to understand?

    • I should have expanded on that.

      “A woman who is a believer SHOULD submit to her husband, regardless of whether or not she finds him “fit to rule” or not because God commands her to. At the same time, as a husband, being a fit, dominant alpha type man makes it all the easier for her.”

      A judgment is a decision that has impact by deciding a matter. God’s judgment in that short passage was that women would henceforth be under the rule, not just authority, of their husband or father. The responsibility of this is laid out in Numbers 30 and we see several instances of “the Lord will forgive her because her (husband/father) has forbidden her.” We also see “he shall bear her guilt.”

      In today’s legal and cultural environment women are faced with temptations they should not be forced to deal with. A father/husband will bear the woman’s guilt when he steps in and fixes the mess she got herself in by forbidding her agreement/vow, so how much more guilt will he bear for standing by and allowing her to be tempted and not doing the things he could do and should do? The things that are in his best interests to do?

      And one might reasonably point to the Duluth model of abuse and say “There’s nothing we can do because every reasonable step we could take is considered abuse or domestic violence and it’s illegal.” Well, how about arranging the situation such that the woman *wants* to obey and be submissive?

      No, being fit to rule is not a command for men, but in keeping with the nature of the judgment, God was saying ‘this is the way it is from now on, deal with it.’ Fitness tests by women are a reality and they grow up doing it naturally. I’ve seen daughters fitness testing their fathers and mostly observed their fathers fail miserably. By the time they’re adults they’ve been doing it for over a decade. Every man with eyes to see and ears to hear has observed women fitness testing men they’re romantically involved with and probably had it done to them. Some are shit tests (dominance) and others are loyalty tests (security) and women do it subconsciously depending on who knows what. The man has to recognize them for what they are and deal with them appropriately.

      On the man’s side of it, he should improve himself because “to those to whom much has been given, much will be expected” and at the end of the day it makes life better. On the woman’s side of it, being that confident, masculine and dominant man she’s highly attracted to will mean she’s subject to far less temptation. That’s a good thing.

      Women want a ruler and have a desire to be ruled by a man who is fit to rule, which is why the claim that women refuse to submit to a man’s authority is an obscene lie. This has nothing to do with Christianity, it’s the nature of women. The success of 50 Shades demonstrates points to it. The fascination that *women* have with D/s and DD/lg relationships proves it.

      So yes, Scripturally women are commanded to submit. Men are commanded to love their wives. The question is whether it’s a loving thing to make that submission easier on her by giving her what she needs in order for her God-given nature to be triggered. In the alternate, which is going to get more and better sex for the guy? Cybersith1’s view, or mine?

  2. ddjennifer says:

    I don’t agree with your overall assertions, but I do find your point of view interesting and like how you express it. I enjoy reading thoughts that are alternatives to my way of thinking. I do 100% agree with your point “Obedience is following the rules, submission is accepting accountability for one’s actions and the consequences for violating the rules.” I always find there is some common ground somewhere.

    • “I don’t agree with your overall assertions, but I do find your point of view interesting and I like how you express it.”

      Around here, that’s code for “You’re a lunatic, but an entertaining one. Better than a soap opera, but this stuff is insane. Eres tremendo.”

      I made the mistake of asking once. “Really? You liked that?”

      That got a really sweet smile. “Well, let’s just say you’re something of an acquired taste. Kind of like arsenic.”

      • ddjennifer says:

        Ha! I was being authentic when I said that, no intention to infer lunacy. I think people can disagree without either one being a lunatic. But I admit, I didn’t read more than a few of your posts, so perhaps I would think otherwise if I read more?

        • The lunacy comment was a reflection of our history in real life. Like the time I told that one I’d pick her up at work and we’d have lunch. She agreed. At lunchtime I went inside and made my way to her cubicle, picked her up, threw her over my shoulder and walked out with her. As I left she was hanging upside down with one hand trying to keep her boobs from falling out of her blouse, laughing hysterically as she waved goodby to her coworkers with her other hand.

          Her boss told me that afterward she was held in very high esteem by the other women there. I’m not sure why but she won’t talk about it.

          The stuff I write is serious and I back it up with the research I’ve done, but it sounds crazy to people who haven’t been exposed to it before.

          • ddjennifer says:

            Love that story! But I don’t think what you write is about research, it’s about opinion. Research is not about making observations that support your beliefs, it is about a systematic study of observation and experiment.

          • SnapperTrx says:

            No offense, but are you serious? The experiment of the entirety of human history is more than adequate to support what Toad has written, and the word of God is not opinion, unless your not a believer, in which case it doesn’t matter because you don’t believe the bible holds any weight for humankind.

            The things written here, and on many sites like this, are merely rehashing information that had been confirmed and known by both men and women for thousands of years past. Its no secret that attractive men attract women, nor that attractive women attract men. It is only recently that this information has been ignored and replaced with the lie that we should only be attracted to people for their “inner beauty”.

            I think your comment is rather offensive, considering the wealth of research and commentary Toad has done.

          • ddjennifer says:

            Again, “lots of research” carries no weight when it is simply picking and choosing things that support your bias. The word of god is not opinion? Then why are their countless versions of each religion claiming to be the “true” religion? Christian’s, Jew’s and Muslim’s worship the “same” god. One true word indeed. It isn’t what is written the Bible that people want to follow, it is what man interprets and picks and chooses from that they want to follow. I find that offensive.

          • Renee Harris says:

            You still with her😊

        • SnapperTrx says:

          “unless your not a believer, in which case it doesn’t matter because you don’t believe the bible holds any weight for humankind.”

          You either missed this or ignored it.

        • SnapperTrx says:

          And I will at least give you this:

          “One true word indeed. It isn’t what is written the Bible that people want to follow, it is what man interprets and picks and chooses from that they want to follow. I find that offensive.”

          Amen! Your astute observation has pinpointed one of the many problems Toad and others have pointed out about modern day American Christians. If we could fix that, it would be fixing much.

          • ddjennifer says:

            Then do this. Every day randomly flip thru the Bible and put your finger in the page. Follow what is says explicitly. You’ll be in jail by the end of the week. And I will let you even use the New Testament as even your god needed a do over. Bible roulette anyone?

          • SnapperTrx says:

            Blah, blah, blah. New day, same old argument and accusation by another person. Your the person who doesn’t seek answers but only seeks argument for the sake of argument. Your not questioning anything beyond “how can I piss off a Christian today”. Go find someone else to goad, I have seen your type too many times to get sucked into it. Have fun. Goodbye.

          • ddjennifer says:

            Strength is not about muscle. You are weak. Weak minded, submissive to mythology.

        • Jenny… thank you. You have performed magnificently, far beyond expectations. Inform your husband that I am pleased with your performance and I recommend he give you a suitably memorable reward.

          Snapper… go back and look at your exchange with Jenny and observe the dynamic. Believe it or not, she is proving my point about Genesis 3:16.

          A shit test, by definition, is a test for dominance to determine who has the strongest frame. If the woman’s frame is stronger she establishes for herself that the man’s frame isn’t strong enough to withstand the force of her will. If the man’s frame is stronger than hers then she enters his frame, which establishes him as the dominant one in the relationship.

          When it comes to recognizing a shit test, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck, it’s best to think of it as a duck. When a woman starts arguing, it’s far better to simply view it as a shit test by default and see where that takes you.

          If you think of her comments as a demonstration of a woman shit-testing a man, would that change how you respond? If so, how? Look at the sub-text and consider the real message. In real life, quite frequently the most effective response to a woman’s attempt to start an argument is to give her a smirk and a pat on the head or ass. It’s known as “amused mastery.”

          You can also go with “agree and amplify.” Jenny, speaking to me, said “I don’t think” before throwing some bait on the floor to see if I’d take it. You took the bait because you didn’t look at this as a shit test. So, even with that nice, slow lob over the plate in the form of “I don’t think”, you stepped into her frame and argued with her.

          As I said, women unconsciously shit test men as naturally (and often as frequently) as they breathe and blink. It is part of their nature because God made them this way. Deal with it.

          • ddjennifer says:

            Toad- once again I don’t agree with your conclusions but I find your thought process very interesting and engaging. People can disagree without it being a “test.” But i believe men like you two react this way because of deep seeded insecurities which cause you to interpret everything as a challenge to your “manhood.” How’s that for a shit test? Oh, and despite your “true word,” no one gives a shit if you eat a lobster, get a tattoo, or get laid before marriage, which is why I suspect you have at least done 2 of the 3, if not all 3. By not following all your “word” and just cheery picking, you reveal yourself as the weak, feeble and insecure people that you so clearly all. The strong (muscle) do not rule. The strong in mind rule them. Most leaders and lawmakers throughout time were not the physically strongest. They were smart enough (mentally strong) to rule over those who were physically stronger and get them to do their bidding. Throughout time the physically strong have been submissive to the mentally strong. Which is why u hate educated women. By default it means collectively you weak minded people are submitting to them!

  3. cybersith1 says:

    You truly are a nasty person Artisanal Toad, truly worthy of your name “Toad”……Not once in our ongoing discussions on these topics have I made the debate PERSONAL, instead I have kept our disagreements on a theological level, I never attacked YOU personally
    Yet you continue to use ad hominem slurs against my character and to blatantly LIE about my position re your article here and in Toad’s argument Hall, where your continual use of personal pronouns referring to me personally is evident….In fact it’s downright slander and unbecoming from a purported follower of Christ

    I urge the readers to go and read all my comments in context and then compare them with what Toad actually says about me (do it now before he deletes my comments in order to cover his tracks, or edits his own)

    I let my ego get the better of me, in thinking that I could possibly win on a theological level using just the scriptures, but I was wrong…..You have rigged the deck, this is your blog, and you resort to blatantly misrepresent my position time and time again
    Your foundation has never been the plain meaning of scripture, instead as I have claimed before, your foundation is “game” “50 shades of grey” and the philosophy of the world

    I will attempt to answer a few times where you lied about my position, then I’m done as I will be unsubscribing from your blog, as you have demonstrated repeatedly that you are “NOT FIT” to follow….funny that, funny how your words are now used against you, but I digress

    1: “Commenter Cybersith1 claims women are demon-infested “…….You are a LIAR, I never said that women are demon infested, I said that women have an inbuilt demonic ATTITUDE of rebellion towards male authority…..being demon infested and having a demonic mind set is NOT the same thing, you deliberately twisted my words to add weight to your argument

    2: You LIED about me changing my position on Genesis 3:16 where you attempt to show that my summary of Genesis 3:16 changed from a “statement” to a “curse”, but that was never my position to begin with….the difference was between a COMMAND or a STATEMENT not between a statement and a curse because they can be both at the same time

    You consistently fail to see the problem of man’s inbuilt sin nature since the fall which has forever changed the dynamic between the sexes, and was never part of God’s original design…..The very fact that you resort to “game” is proof that a woman’s natural fallen state is to be in rebellion against male authority….you take away a man’s status, his wealth and power, and you will see how fast a woman will dump a man like a ton of bricks and rebel against being dominated and being in submission

    Your constant allusion to 50 shades of grey, and training a woman and how women love being dominated is sheer proof that you live in a foolish male fantasy world that is completely detached from reality…….You don’t follow Christ, you are a slave to your lusts and perverted desire to have multiple wives

    3: “Cybersith1 believes all men must to do is exist and women should submit to them, “……stop your filthy lies, I don’t believe that you LIAR, you twisted my words again….God’s judgement on womankind is that instead of mutual wise leadership, man will now RULE over women who because of their sin nature will constantly try to usurp that position and try to dominate man, that’s God’s curse and prophetic statement, it has absolutely nothing to do with what a man want’s or wishes, let alone what I want or desire

    4: for the 50th time you have failed to rebut my assertion that you added the words “fit to” in Genesis 3:16 and waffled on about poor bible translations etc……Get over yourself, neither the Hebrew or Greek or English or any modern bible translation have those magical words in it “fit to rule”….you inserted them in order to support your position on “game”….basically you are trying to MAKE the bible say something it didn’t

    5: you continually attack me personally, and mock me by saying women read my comments and laugh about my comments on submission….They laugh because 1: you have misrepresented my position and 2: you set up a straw man caricature of my position…..I believe women should be spanked/beaten into submission, really??, I mean really?

    Hey Toad go and see if those same women who mocked and laughed at me will submit to their husbands if they lost their jobs, status, wealth, power, good looks etc…go on I dare ya

    6: The reason I have labored so long in proving you added the words “fit to” in Genesis 3:16 is because your entire foundation and philosophy is NOT bible based, but based on your idea of “GAME” and how to attract women……any honest woman reading your blogs should be able to see right through your garbage and see what you’re really all about….go tell your female readers in here that you believe that a husband should be allowed to spank his wife with his hands, or an object if they step out of line, and see if they are not revolted at your beliefs

    The thing is, and this is what is so funny about your blogs, here is the kicker, because women are naturally rebellious towards male authority and are not attracted to “normal” men, you have to invent “game”!…the whole idea of game is to attract a species that is not inherently attracted to men unless he has status, wealth and power ROTFLOL!!!……This proves that women are in rebellion towards male authority and submission to men, otherwise you would never have to learn “game” in the first place….Your whole foundation is then shown to be a joke, a farce!…you don’t need to train those who are willingly submissive, you only have to train those who are in rebellion

    Anyway I digress…..My goal here is not to refute the errors of “game” and the whole retarded philosophy behind it, BUT to pull you up on your continual misrepresentation of my position, and to call you to task for lying about me, so i will summarize my entire position for all your readers to see, and then they can judge whether you are correct or me

    1: Genesis 3:16 is BOTH a statement and a declarative judgement from God based on Adam and Eve’s sin, it is NOT a command….mankind’s inherited sin nature has resulted in a situation where the sexes will always be in a perpetual war for power

    2: The words “fit to rule” has been added to the original Hebrew by Artisanal Toad for no justification whatsoever, he used EISIGESIS, instead of sound biblical hermeneutics

    3: Women are naturally rebellious towards male authority whether they have “game” or not, this rebellion resulted from Eve’s sin and has been passed down to all future generations…see 1st Timothy 2:12…this command would be utterly redundant if women by nature were submissive

    4: A man’s “ruling over his wife” must be based on kindness, love and Christ centered, it is not based on using a rod of iron, or fear

    5: Notice the bible says that a woman’s desire is TO her husband, not FOR her husband….this tiny but crucial word changes the entire meaning of the phrase

    6: a wife’s submission to her husband is NOT conditional on the man fitting any requirements on his behalf, or him passing any “shit” tests she sets for him, or him being “fit to rule”…..this is a lie based on Toad’s philosophy of game, on the contrary, a wife is to submit to her man because Christ told her to PERIOD, that is HER responsibility
    This does not absolve the man from taking responsibility to be a loving, caring husband that deserves respect etc, but her obedience is not conditional….Toad wants it to be conditional so he can uphold his “game” philosophy

    7: Devoting an entire blog over at the Argument Room to attacking me personally, instead of refuting me on a biblical basis was uncalled for, and is the very reason you are despised over at biblicalgenderroles blogs…now I know why you’re not welcome there

  4. SFC Ton says:

    Women have opinions? Sense when?

  5. Linny says:

    Do you think there could be two different types of women in the world? One the children of Adam’s second wife Eve and one the children of his first wife accounting for the difference.

  6. Renee Harris says:

    Toad
    Can I send you my OkCupid profile and my phone number will you help me find a good husband ?

  7. Pingback: Frame, Fitness Tests and Feminism | Toad's Hall

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