discuss What does it imply when they say that wives have to submit to their husbands?

[Fidelia1]

I know that in religious circles, it is a teaching that is propagated that wives have to submit to their husbands. Do you believe that this is a principle for a good marriage? What is the scope of "wives submitting" to their husbands in your own opinion?

 

[Shawn]

I get that it's a cultural thing, but it isn't something I support.

A lot of abuse and neglect goes hand in hand with stuff like that, maybe not purposefully, maybe purposefully for some though.

I don't think it's right to belittle people based on their gender. A woman and a man are the same, they live the same and they die the same.

They should also be in charge of their own body, their own Sovreign life.

 

[Jason]

Some say Paul was a false apostle because Jesus seemed so pro-woman, as opposed to Paul. Paul come across as very socially conservative.

 

[Harsh World]

I get that it's a cultural thing, but it isn't something I support.

I would say that wives should submit to their husbands and family, and nobody else should come first, but the same would be said about the husband, too. However, that should be a given with:

Thou shalt not commit adultery.

They should also be in charge of their own body, their own Sovreign life.

Which would nullify this as well.

I don't necessarily read into "submissiveness" as being completely sexual. But I also think it's a two-way street.

 

[Fidelia1]

Submission for me is the default position of a woman in marriage. I believe that a man should be the final decision maker for a home. I can only convince my man and if he fails to see reason, I let him have his way. That's the more reason I have to ensure that I marry an intelligent man.

 

[NatureFreak]

It simply means that the husband is the head of the family. And for peace to reign, such an arrangement should be honored.

 

[Shawn]

I would say that wives should submit to their husbands and family, and nobody else should come first, but the same would be said about the husband, too. However, that should be a given with:


Which would nullify this as well.

I don't necessarily read into "submissiveness" as being completely sexual. But I also think it's a two-way street.

Submit to one another?

I can agree with that.

I also agree with not cheating on each other. If it comes to that, why not break it off before so no one has to really be hurt.

 

[Harsh World]

Submit to one another?

Of course. That's my view on marriage, at least.

It simply means that the husband is the head of the family.

I kind of agree with this. The husband may be the head of the family; let's equate that to a brick building. However, the wife is the cornerstone of the family. Without one or the other making up 100% of the relationship on an ever-shifting scale, the building or family unit will fail.

I don't like the idea of 50-50 in a relationship. Of course, it should balance out, but some weeks, one partner may be at 10%, and the other partner has to pick up the 90%. However, it could easily reverse or even be 60-40. Essentially, one has to pick up the slack as it's not always going to be 50-50. In a perfect world, 50-50 would be great, but things affect people differently outside of the relationship, and they need time to unwind from that.

 

[Reelz]

It is very important to prioritize mutual respect, trust and communication in each and every marriage. The issue of one partner being submissive to the other might not make a happy home. We are all equal but just that there should be a head, which is the man. Even in organisations, there are different hierarchies.

 

[MamaFrankie]

There should be none of that nonsense. No man has the right to dominate a woman even if she is his wife. She is not a possession like his car or his watch. This is one of the reasons I have never married and never will.

 

[NatureFreak]

There should be none of that nonsense. No man has the right to dominate a woman even if she is his wife. She is not a possession like his car or his watch. This is one of the reasons I have never married and never will.

There is a difference between domination and subjection. Husband dominating his wife is very close to abuse. But a woman should know that there is only one head of the family, which is the husband. And she does well to respect that.

 

[MamaFrankie]

I respectfully disagree, NatureFreak. Marriage should be a partnership not a dictatorship.

 

[Maina]

When people say wives have to submit to their husbands, it usually refers to traditional or religious views about marriage roles, where the wife is expected to respect or follow the husband's leadership in the relationship. However, many modern couples see marriage as a partnership based on mutual respect and equality rather than submission.

 

[Apsara]

This is prevalent in my culture but I am against it. This is a derogatory.

 

[Yama]

I am a Hindu and in Hindu books, it is mentioned that women should be under her father, and when there is no father, they should be under their brothers. After they are married, they should submit to husbands. after husbands die, they should be under sons. However, Hindu scriptures also tell to men that they should worship women in their house, mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters.

 

[Niyi Brixx]

In my religion, wives are to submit to their husbands. And this implies that a wife should allow the husband to lead the family. He is the one to take final decisions and be responsible for it on behalf of the family.