|
|
|
|
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 9/15/2008 7:07:25 PM |
Why would you want to have a relationship with a man who
isn't wiser than you?
I haven't met any that are wiser than me, David...lol..j/k..kinda...
Personally, I prefer about the same...with maybe some intellectual knowledge that I lack in some areas...less wise and I have to do too much, wiser than me ( which often is a perception, not a fact), and they use it to intimidate or control....I have taken care of myself quite well for 17 years, I really don't think I need anyone else's wisdom? Now, input is nice, and I love good philosophical discussion, but, at my age, I really don't think I need "guidance"?
It just all implies to me that I am not capable of making good, intelligent decisions without the help of a guy? Besides, as I mentioned...often what they think is best or right, is so for them, but, not for me....I don't want a situation where one person (of either gender) dictates the outcome of all decisions..because they think they know better? | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 9/16/2008 6:30:54 AM | It is simple to speak in the singular when making decisions. I, me, myself ... of course things are relatively easy when you are on your own!
What happens when there are two of you to consider? Don't all women desire to be cared for by a special and loving man? Surely things must be very difficult for a man who's partner doesn't admire him in some way and refuses to listen to his advice. This makes the relationship very brittle, and emasculating for him. Furthermore in return she thinks she has to do everything herself and this makes her resentful.
Sure enough, she has a lot to offer to, but to make the most of her feminine traits in nurturing and caring. This is about love between a man and a woman, not a job specification requiring formal qualifications, fairness and equality should not be considered when it comes to romance. This should be a time when women can revel in their femininity!
If my partner buys me flowers, I don't think I ought to buy him flowers for instance. I don't think to myself I am being manipulated, or feel in debt. I just feel appreciated.
We can't all be leaders. We all know that in everyday life this simply doesn't work, everybody is accountable to somebody. Why should things be any different in love? Submission in a relationship takes strength and confidence in your partner and displays an ongoing sense of worth and value. A lot of long-lasting and successful relationships have this dynamic actually. | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 9/16/2008 9:26:43 AM |
What happens when there are two of you to consider? Don't all women desire to be cared for by a special and loving man? Surely things must be very difficult for a man who's partner doesn't admire him in some way and refuses to listen to his advice. This makes the relationship very brittle, and emasculating for him. Furthermore in return she thinks she has to do everything herself and this makes her resentful. m
Thi s has nothing to do with admiring him in my mind..I already admire him, or I wouldn't be with him, and his opinion is valuable..I don't need advice...I need a partner, not another father figure...
I was already in one marriage where he thought he was smarter, better than me...and used that to control...and I started out trusting him to my detriment...
I am far from a fan of equality, especially in romantic relationships...but, I don't have any desire to be told how to behave, or what role to take or anything that smacks of you will be who I want you to be, not who you are.....ever again. Submissive, for me, just seems like an invitation to be abused and taken advantage of. ( yes, I ended that sentence in a preposition..lol). When, or if, I meet a guy who can be trusted to not abuse it...maybe it will be an option...until then...no way am I going to concede to inferiority just to feed someone's ego. I still don't understand why any one person has to be in control or make all the decisions..or make them unilaterally...
And I will admit...haven't met many men I could trust to honestly have my best interests at heart...in a marriage, I still think it is a partnership, not a dictatorship...regardless of who may be wiser...I'm generally cautious of any behavior that has the potential to hurt me.... | |
|
| |
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 9/16/2008 7:38:56 PM |
Rosalund wrote: ...the man could, say, walk beside me
and with his arm around her tell her, " I will show you the way."
Depends on what the issue is, for some things women are
better at handling than a man so he also needs to have enough
wisdom to let her handle things he knows she is better at doing.
Very true. The wife must be given small amounts of power in
ways that are important to her, in accordance with her husband's
master plan. | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 9/16/2008 8:29:19 PM |
Very true. The wife must be given small amounts of power in
ways that are important to her, in accordance with her husband's
master plan.
HAHAHA...you are too funny...
Have to write a bit more to post...can't always tell when you are serious...but, seems I was right in my thoughts... | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 9/25/2008 7:51:03 PM | It's good that we're not married because I would force you
to exercise every day, and wear your hair very differently.
And wear different clothes. You wouldn't like it. | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 9/25/2008 9:06:06 PM | Would there be sex after that?...rofl....
I admit to some reservations...I happen to be attracted to "masculine", alpha type guys...but...I am not attracted to being controlled or treated as inferior...seems to me that one can be one without the other? Then there is that trust thing...Obviously, if I trusted a guy to to not abuse any power...none of this would be an issue...however, haven't met one yet that didn't...or at least try to... | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 9/26/2008 2:08:46 AM | hmm .. it is the traditional saying isint it?.. and only on the womans side of the vow or whatever it would seem .. well i like it! a woman should obey!     | |
|
| |
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 10/15/2008 12:30:17 AM | mountaingirlee .... if this is true, i could see how that "oboedire" (To Hear) could follow the natural path of love...
how many of Hear our own bodies when they r in need of attn. | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 10/15/2008 7:43:09 AM | I've been married twice.
The first time I promised to 'obey' and it lasted 24 years.
Second time the word was 'cherish' and it lasted 1 year.
Same end result, just took longer when I was 'obeying'.  | |
|
| |
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 10/28/2008 11:58:25 PM |
Ahhhh .....women had it good and they were too dumn to know it .
Yes, something to be said about us "dumn" women......
 now you have some insight to why we think some of you are just 'dumb' arses.....
lol jk | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 10/30/2008 6:51:15 PM |
zangie wrote: Would there be sex after that?...rofl...
First let's see how well you follow my program before we discuss your benefits. | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 11/2/2008 2:26:15 PM |
First let's see how well you follow my program before we discuss your benefits.
OH...I see..the benefits come with strings?..teehee...
And only my benefit?
Seriously...this is my concern..that I have to be /behave a certain way to get love/attention/sex..whatever...and obey implies non questioning acquiescence...kind of like blind obedience... | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 11/2/2008 7:57:37 PM | Don't forget the "joke":
A couple goes to the Justice of the Peace to get married.
After the ceremony, the groom asks: "What happened to 'Obey' in the vows?"
The Justice answers: "Neither of you are going to obey the other... so why start out with a vow that you are guaranteed to break?"
Note that in some variations of the marriage vows, Obey was on BOTH sides. There never really was just one standard version... just certain versions have been more common with certain religious or ethnic groups. | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 11/3/2008 9:13:59 AM |
I haven't met any that are wiser than me, David...lol..j/k..kinda...
True, we haven't met.
"Obey" implies "ownership" and the ownership of females ended a very long time ago in the U.S., sadly it still continues in other countries. The term, once used in wedding vows is rooted in the hierarchical and patriarchal structure of Judeo-Christian norms. The term began to lose it's power when women obtained their right to vote, to own property, etc.
When women pushed for equal treatment in society (we're still waiting on that one, btw), the word eventually was dropped altogether. It has been my experience, excluding the most fundamental of faith traditions, that individuals must ask for its inclusion.
Rather than focusing on which of the partners is the leader or "wears the pants in the family," the majority of relationships are seeking equality within a partnership. Those relationships that tend to be successful are those that do not function on submission and subservience to a partner or partners, they thrive and succeed through interdependence where each partner recognizes and respects the knowledge, experience, and expertise in areas in which they are weak. They have the right and duty to agree or disagree and collaborate in coming to decisions that affect the entire family. They look to each other's areas of strength and make decisions through mutual respect and collaboration. Not from a "he's the man so what he says goes" position.
For a partners to place themselves under submission to others, as if they are more intelligent, wise, expert, experienced, or filled with all knowledge is reminiscent of checking one's brain at the door. To buy into such an arrangement, in my opinion, is foolish and a recipe for disaster.
Regards,
ACP | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 11/3/2008 5:50:45 PM |
Argentum Crinis Philogus wrote: For a partners to place
themselves under submission to others, as if they are more
intelligent, wise, expert, experienced, or filled with all
knowledge is reminiscent of checking one's brain at the door.
To buy into such an arrangement, in my opinion, is foolish
and a recipe for disaster.
When a non-negotiable conflict arises, only one person
can get their way, should they decide to press the point.
You can agree in advance who the more powerful partner is
or wait until an irreconcilable dispute occurs to find out who,
when push comes to shove, has the upper hand. | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 11/3/2008 6:06:46 PM |
Posted By: David Lewis Argentum Crinis Philogus wrote: For a partners to place
themselves under submission to others, as if they are more
intelligent, wise, expert, experienced, or filled with all
knowledge is reminiscent of checking one's brain at the door.
To buy into such an arrangement, in my opinion, is foolish
and a recipe for disaster. When a non-negotiable conflict arises, only one person can get their way, should they decide to press the point. You can agree in advance who the more powerful partner is or wait until an irreconcilable dispute occurs to find out who, when push comes to shove, has the upper hand.
There is no person who will be right every time...
When an "irreconcilable conflict" comes up... usually BOTH are wrong.
 | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 11/3/2008 6:19:33 PM | Let's say the husband gets a promotion and job transfer
to another city, while the wife already has family, good
schools and friends nearby. One person is going to have
to defer to the other. One person is going to have to give in
and make sacrifices, but I don't see how either one of them
is wrong. | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 11/4/2008 8:59:11 AM | This was also in my sister's and brother-in-law's vows when they got married. It was a traditional catholic wedding (save for my sister's gum-chewing), so that explains a lot.
Anyway, "obey" will be out of my vows if I ever get married, but that's because I'm too much of a maverick :p | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 11/4/2008 10:20:39 AM |
Let's say the husband gets a promotion and job transfer
to another city, while the wife already has family, good
schools and friends nearby. One person is going to have
to defer to the other. One person is going to have to give in
and make sacrifices, but I don't see how either one of them
is wrong.
In that case ^ both husband and wife would carefully weigh the pros and cons and decide together what they think is best for them as a couple and for the family as a whole.
It's not (and should never be) a question of who defers to who or who's right and who's wrong. A couple who sees themselves as "one" - as being on the same side - as an "us" working together for the betterment of the couple-ship (and the entire family) will come to an understanding.
Yes there may be tears and it might be a difficult decision to make, but I can't believe that a wife or a husband wouldn't realize how important that promotion is for their partner (and for their own future) or that moving/changing schools would not upset their partner and children...what the hell? Are they in this together or not?
In my opinion, any couple who even thinks in terms of it's "him" vs "her" and that one of them has to "lay down the law" is doomed from the start. A "real" couple (IMO) makes decisions together, jointly, to the best of their knowledge and ability (and without the benefit of hindsight), and hope that their decision is the right one.
I don't personally care how other people live their lives but I know what works for me. And before someone points out the obvious, I would tell them that it's only when my ex and I stopped working as a team near the end of our twenty year relationship that we ended up losing "us"...:(
Anyway, for me, a couple will always be two people who love, respect and truly cherish each other.
JMO
| |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 11/6/2008 6:55:51 PM | oldsoul wrote: Yes there may be tears and it might be a difficult
decision to make, but I can't believe that a wife or a husband
wouldn't realize how important that promotion is for their
partner (and for their own future) or that moving/changing
schools would not upset their partner and children...what the hell?
Are they in this together or not?
If the husband understands full well how traumatic the move
would be for his wife, yet decides economic security is more
important to his family, and she doesn't agree, then the obedience
clause would spring into effect. | |
|
| To love, honor, and... OBEY?!?
Posted: 11/6/2008 8:48:34 PM | I always thought that traditionally only the woman had to say "obey", and the man said "cherish", based on times when the woman was the property of her father until becoming the property of her husband. She was agreeing to do what she was told like a good girl, and he was agreeing to look after her and not be overly harsh. I believe the husband had the legal right to beat his wife, in the name of discipline, as long as the rod used wasn't above a certain thickness. There was originally more parent/child about the whole arrangement than the type of equal partners idea we have about marriage now.
As for the celebrant mentioned in an earlier post, the one who wouldn't agree to performing the ceremony unless the couple exchanged vows the celebrant liked...well in this day and age, what sort of celebrant forces two people to make vows they don't believe in, and effectively holds them to ransom over it?? Personally, if I was one of the parties getting married, I'd be looking for another celebrant who would perform the ceremony the way my partner and I wanted. I wouldn't be dictated to. After all, the vows don't include any agreement to obey the celebrant.  | |
|
|
| Page 16 of 17
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 |
|
Home
login 
