What’s your evidence for that?
His wife did.
Look Dio, some people do things in a way that is not 100% Dio-approved. That doesn’t mean they are necessarily doing anything wrong.
Or her church did.
Look, RR, there are a lot of people in this world who find the idea of one adult being subservient to another at least disgusting if not wrong.
My spouse insists on performing some traditionally gender specific tasks; so do I. We think it is cute. The wife does not remove dead rodents; the husband does not do laundry that requires bleach.
We trust each others’ judgements. We believe in relying on each others’ strengths. We are partners who strive to ensure the whole is more than the sum of the parts. The husband puts food on the table and the wife keeps house - in our case that means the husband does the cooking and the wife does the wallboarding and painting.
No way in hell do we think either one of us has the right to tell the other what to do. We’re grown ups here. And we were when we got married.
Which she chooses to keep attending.
I’m fully aware of that. It’s just that those people are idiots who think their way of doing things is the only possible way and anyone who would agree to do things any other way is an idiot.
I’m sure the OP’s friend and his wife would say the exact same thing.
If a traditional Muslim or an Orthodox Jew read that, they may think you are idiots who aren’t running your life properly. Why do you think they are wrong when talking about you but you are right when talking about the OP’s friend’s marriage?
Any belief system that subordinates one gender to another is fucked up and stupid, and religion is no justification (nor is it an indication of real consent), and I’ll judge the oppressors in those relationships all I want.
I doubt either one of them would say that.
Any adult who sets himself up as lord and master of another adult is doing something wrong. That’s my opinion. What are you going to do about it?
He does trust her judgment, Czar. Her judgment (which he trusts) finds that his judgment is sound enough to lead the household. If he didn’t trust her judgment he wouldn’t accept her judgment that his judgment is worth trusting and he’d have to trust her judgment as leader of the household. It’s so simple! Do you get it now?
Point and laugh at your complete failure of a worldview, that’s what I’m going to do about it.
Also, we’re still waiting on your evidence that the wife is unhappy.
No, but I will once I find the Tylenol 3 tablets.
Would you require evidence that she’s unhappy if we’d been told that the husband was, say, beating her?
Yeah. Moving this from IMHO to Great Debates.
I still can’t operate any heavy machinery…
There’s a big difference between the two situations. Do you see why?
No.
One is mental subjugation and abuse, and the other is physical subjugation and abuse?
So she clearly can’t choose the cup in front of her . . .
I doubt she’s allowed to.
People. This thread so illustrates the typical liberal doper’s worldview. The woman is choosing to do something that you wouldn’t choose to do, so of course she shouldn’t be allowed to choose it.
Take payday loans. A typical liberal doper wouldn’t choose to borrow at such high interest rates, so of course the payday loan places are “predatory lenders” and should be put out of business. Never mind that many people actually choose to take out those loans because they believe the alternative is worse (i.e., getting a car impounded or getting evicted).
By the way, the difference I was going for was that actual physical abuse is illegal, whereas choosing to live in a “Biblical marriage” is not illegal.
- The people that go to these predatory lenders usually find out that they made the wrong choice in the long run.
- Physical abuse, if consensual, is not always illegal…putting it on par with “Biblical” marriages, wouldn’t you say?