How do you, the women of this forum get over the "unfairness" of patriarchy, especially polygyny?

[The Revolting Man]

Yep, suffered with all of these. For years. (And I had gone into the marriage with full acknowledgment/agreement with “patriarchy.”)

A few thoughts:

On the Bible being written for man…
If the woman represents the church in the Metaphor then the entirety of the scriptures is intimately written to her. All one needs to do is sub the macro nouns with the micro. <<Fun side note, I learned today why TRM is not okay with any (esp female) bodily function talk. See Deut. 23:13-14>>

On being obedient in everything..
It really isn’t that serious. And you know it’s not. You are just focused on the details (see below for why). And you’re wanting to find holes in his logic. I’ve been there. Hell, I was probably there a couple weeks ago. But the best part of this whole authority structure is you are not responsible. He will answer to God for how and where he led you. All you are responsible for is how well you followed. It makes our jobs so much easier. There’s freedom in structure. And safety and security.

On the polygyny is gross…
The greatest benefit of BF retreats is meeting actual plural families. These women defy all feminist-ingrained, sin-natured, lies from the pits of hell that we have been raised to believe by everything and everyone around us for generations. These women are incredible.

Some highlights:
One first wife said with tears flowing, “He loves me so much more now than he did before (he married the second).”

Another said, “I’m just thankful that I can be a part of this family and make things beautiful,” after explaining her true life’s desires were not career-minded.

These solid wives all speak of abundant blessings; they each convey depths of wisdom; peaceful, calm dispositions; and the seemingly supernatural ability to see the big picture. (A skill that I’ve just now realized God gave men. While women are more narrowly focused… good for when he can’t find his shoes but not so much when she’s fixated on specific emotional marital details…)

It’s hard to argue with reality. Patriarchy hurts at first. I literally felt physical pain. Like the new man tearing away from the old. Like when Neo wakes up in the jello sludge and starts pulling cables out of his chest. Once you start realizing the truth, it becomes easier to see. Then you start seeing it everywhere. You see the damage feminism causes. You see the damage complementarianism causes. You see the unhappy women and emasculated men. But if we can get past our pride and entitled notions of what marriage should look like, we’ll find that God’s way is more deeply fulfilling and truly exciting than anything our own 21st century romantic fairytale brains can imagine.

I am so turned on right now.

 

[MeganC]

Major Winters never commanded Easy Company in combat, in fact he didn’t command them very long at all.

Richard Winters - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Summer 1944[edit]​

Meehan remained in command of the company until the invasion of Normandy, when at about 1:15 a.m. on June 6, 1944, D-Day, the C-47 Skytrain transporting the company Headquarters Section was shot down by German anti-aircraft fire, killing everyone on board.[2]: 78–79  Winters jumped that night and landed safely near Sainte-Mère-Église.[2]: 80  Losing his weapon during the drop, he nevertheless oriented himself, assembled several paratroopers, including members of the 82nd Airborne Division, and proceeded toward the unit's assigned objective near Sainte-Marie-du-Mont.[5]: 76  With Meehan's fate unknown, Winters became the de facto commanding officer (CO) of Easy Company, which he remained for the duration of the Normandy campaign.[5]: 92 

Later that day, Winters led an attack that destroyed a battery of German 105mm howitzers,[6] which were firing onto the causeways that served as the principal exits from Utah Beach.[5]: 78–84  The Americans estimated that the guns were defended by about a platoon of 50 German troops, while Winters had 13 men.[5]: 78–84  This action south of the village of Le Grand-Chemin, called the Brécourt Manor Assault, has been taught at the military academy at West Point as an example of a textbook assault on a fixed position by a numerically inferior force.[4] In addition to destroying the battery, Winters also obtained a map that showed German gun emplacements near Utah Beach.[2]: 88 

On July 1, 1944, Winters was told that he had been promoted to captain.[2]: 112  The next day, he was presented with the Distinguished Service Cross (DSC) by Lieutenant General Omar Bradley, then the commander of the U.S. First Army.[2]: 112  Shortly after, the 506th Parachute Infantry was withdrawn from France and returned to Aldbourne, England, for reorganization.[2]: 112  The citation for his DSC reads as follows:

The President of the United States of America, authorized by Act of Congress, July 9, 1918, takes pleasure in presenting the Distinguished Service Cross to First Lieutenant (Infantry) Richard D. Winters (ASN: 0-1286582), United States Army, for extraordinary heroism in connection with military operations against an armed enemy while serving with Company E, 2d Battalion, 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne Division, in action against enemy forces on 6 June 1944, in France. First Lieutenant Winters with seven enlisted men, advanced through intense enemy automatic weapons fire, putting out of action two guns of the battery of four 88-mm. that were shelling the beachhead. Unswerving in his determination to complete his self-appointed and extremely hazardous task, First Lieutenant Winters and his group withdrew for reinforcements. He returned with tank support and the remaining two guns were put out of action, resulting in decreased opposition to our forces landing on the beachhead. First Lieutenant Winters' heroic and determined leadership exemplify the highest traditions of the military forces of the United States and reflect great credit upon himself, the 101st Airborne Division, and the United States Army.[1]

 

[The Revolting Man]

Richard Winters - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Summer 1944[edit]​

Meehan remained in command of the company until the invasion of Normandy, when at about 1:15 a.m. on June 6, 1944, D-Day, the C-47 Skytrain transporting the company Headquarters Section was shot down by German anti-aircraft fire, killing everyone on board.[2]: 78–79  Winters jumped that night and landed safely near Sainte-Mère-Église.[2]: 80  Losing his weapon during the drop, he nevertheless oriented himself, assembled several paratroopers, including members of the 82nd Airborne Division, and proceeded toward the unit's assigned objective near Sainte-Marie-du-Mont.[5]: 76  With Meehan's fate unknown, Winters became the de facto commanding officer (CO) of Easy Company, which he remained for the duration of the Normandy campaign.[5]: 92 

Later that day, Winters led an attack that destroyed a battery of German 105mm howitzers,[6] which were firing onto the causeways that served as the principal exits from Utah Beach.[5]: 78–84  The Americans estimated that the guns were defended by about a platoon of 50 German troops, while Winters had 13 men.[5]: 78–84  This action south of the village of Le Grand-Chemin, called the Brécourt Manor Assault, has been taught at the military academy at West Point as an example of a textbook assault on a fixed position by a numerically inferior force.[4] In addition to destroying the battery, Winters also obtained a map that showed German gun emplacements near Utah Beach.[2]: 88 

On July 1, 1944, Winters was told that he had been promoted to captain.[2]: 112  The next day, he was presented with the Distinguished Service Cross (DSC) by Lieutenant General Omar Bradley, then the commander of the U.S. First Army.[2]: 112  Shortly after, the 506th Parachute Infantry was withdrawn from France and returned to Aldbourne, England, for reorganization.[2]: 112  The citation for his DSC reads as follows:

This action against the artillery pieces was initiated by another unit, if I remember it correctly, Winters took command of a mixed group that included some members of Easy Company, possibly Bill Guarnere among them, but I’m pulling that from memory.

Immediately afterwards every one dispersed to their units and posts.

Let me be clear, Winters had honorable service of which he should be very proud. He saw serious combat from D-Day through to the Battle of the Bulge. By every account I heard he was an excellent executive officer. But his leadership of Easy Company has been mythologized beyond all resemblance to the reality. His legacy should be as the executive officer of 2nd Battalion of the 501st through the hardest fighting of the European theater. That’s an amazing legacy. His legacy is not as the commanding officer of East Company, that belongs to other men.

 

[MeganC]

A quote which applies here:

“Consent of the governed” refers to the idea that a government's legitimacy and moral right to use state power is justified and lawful only when consented, or agreed to, by the people over which that political power is exercised.

Likewise, a man's gifted and unearned authority is not a license to impose himself as a dictator over anyone.

And credibility absolutely comes into play with regards to authority.

Case in point are the police in Lahaina, Hawaii. It has come to light that the police from more than one agency blocked the few roads leaving Lahaina and hundreds of people ended up dying because of police actions which the police are justifying by saying, "We were following orders".

The few people for whom the police held no credibility voided any claims of police authority and went around the roadblocks and barricades and escaped to safety. The sheep who did what they were told to do are mostly dead.

This is important: The consequence of the atrocity in Lahaina is that in all future situations the police as a group will hold far less credibility than they did a month ago. People will ignore their bleatings about "Mah Authoritah!!" and those people can be expected to move from acts of civil disobedience to acts of active resistance.

Likewise, there are reasons why women are in rebellion against men. Many of those reasons are rooted in the anti-religion of feminism.

Many reasons are also rooted in the failure of generations of men to be men.

The failures of male leadership had to first become apparent and obvious to MEN before they were convinced to cede a social position that had previously been theirs by birthright. Men were in control and men ceded that control. No bunch of dump truck shaped lesbians took away male power, it was surrendered by men who saw that they were collectively unfit to hold such power.

Not that things got better, no they got worse. Much worse.

The correct solution was to become Godly men but that was far more difficult than in simply surrendering the birthright and obligation of men to BE MEN and to be the leaders of their Faith, Families, and Nations.

@FollowingHim recently wrote about how he trained his sheep to do what he needs them to do and he does this without a guard dog, without a sheep dog, without a whip, and without forcing his sheep to do his bidding. Samuel doesn't beat them and he also doesn't complain about a flock of disobedient and rebellious sheep.

The sheep trust him and they willingly follow him. He is a credible leader to his flock and his flock has no reason to question him. But no one gave Samuel a piece of paper and said, "Now you have authority over these sheep and they have to do what you tell them to do!"

Likewise with woman and families. Credible men will hold real tangible authority with their wives and their families and men who are not credible will complain about why no one respects their authority.

@NBTX11 Wrote about his understanding of how authority works in the military and he has it half right.

Yes, subordinates are supposed to follow their orders. But when too many subordinates are in a state of mutiny against a certain officer then the military will indeed punish the mutineers but they also tend to remove the officer who instigated the mutineers in the first place.

Credibility and authority therefore go up and go down a chain of command. A lieutenant may well have all the authority of the UCMJ behind him but when his Colonel decides to revoke that authority then it turns into nothing.

All men by birthright are still obligated (but not entitled!) to be leaders of their Faith, Families, and Nations. Their obligation is very much like a military commission.

And both must answer to the higher authority who is the fount of their own authority. A failure of credibility will cause that authority to be revoked.

In the military this is easily observed when an officer is demoted or discharged for failures of leadership.

In a marriage or a family it is observed when a man's wife and children hold his authority in contempt.

The certain answer is always to first be a good man and a Godly man. The rest will follow.

 

[NBTX11]

@NBTX11 Wrote about his understanding of how authority works in the military and he has it half right.

Yes, subordinates are supposed to follow their orders. But when too many subordinates are in a state of mutiny against a certain officer then the military will indeed punish the mutineers but they also tend to remove the officer who instigated the mutineers in the first place.

Credibility and authority therefore go up and go down a chain of command. A lieutenant may well have all the authority of the UCMJ behind him but when his Colonel decides to revoke that authority then it turns into nothing.

I am 100 percent right about what I said, not half right. You made great points about credibility. And generally, that's great advice.

Here's the thing. I don't offer advice and think my opinion is more valid that someone who has vastly more experience than I do, generally speaking. For example, I know nothing about sewing. Let's say there is a woman who is a seamstress, and has 32 years of experience doing that. I am not going to watch a few youtube videos, movies, etc., and maybe even try my hand at sewing, and then try to lecture her on the proper way to be a seamstress. I am generally going to defer to those with more authority in that subject. We all do this, in every walk of life. I don't tell my mechanic how to do his job, because he has more expertise than I do.

You are not doing this. You feel your limited knowledge on the ins and outs of military service is adequate to educate me on how things are run. They aren't. I spent 32 years of hands on experience in various levels of leadership working for the US military. I know how things are run. I don't have to guess, watch Youtube videos, watch movies, read books, etc. I've seen how they are run up close.

So no, I am not half right, I am completely right. Subordinates are not "supposed to" follow orders. They "have to" follow orders. The officer, does not, repeat does NOT have to be credible, for his order to be followed. That has zero to do with it. He is assumed to be credible from the moment he gains a commission. His authority is vested in the UCMJ, not credibility.

You're correct, a Lieutenant's authority can be revoked by a Colonel. A commander can be removed from command. But until this happens, orders must be followed by subordinates. You are not getting this. I have been watching it first hand for 32 years. If he issues an illegal or immoral order, or has shown to have moral failings in other aspects of his life, the officer will be reprimanded and removed from authority. But until then, he does not need to be "credible" to issue orders. That authority is granted by federal law.

If there is a "mutiny", then chances are the officer issued illegal or immoral commands, which violate the UCMJ anyways. At which point, yes he would be removed. If the orders were perfectly legal and just, then no, he would not be removed, the violators would be punished. There is a little gray area here, but what I am saying is generally correct.

The officer does need credibility to be a better leader, but he does not need credibility to issue orders and expect and demand them to be followed. A good officer will listen to his subordinates, taken the advice under consideration, and issue good solid orders. But even if the subordinates disagree, they have to be followed, by order of the law. He doesn't actually have to listen to subordinates if he doesn't want to. A good officer just generally does that.

I know what I am talking about. It's generally good to defer to those with authority on a subject. We do the same thing when we defer to Greek and Hebrew scholars on the wording of translations of the Bible. I am not a Hebrew scholar. Others are. I would not presume to know more about Hebrew than those that have spent their lives studying it.

 

[NVIII]

But no one gave Samuel a piece of paper and said, "Now you have authority over these sheep and they have to do what you tell them to do!"

It seems someone did say that to Samuel. See Gen 1:28. And it seems the animals, being creatures of instinct not having a will or being capable of being deceived, do follow that command flawlessly across all generations, no matter what Samuel tells them to do, for better or worse. And no, no paper has to be involved in any circumstance. Authority is given by the Author, and He is the one you are upset with.

 

[raulus]

I know my words were first used to argue this point of "patriarchal men" and the idea that they automatically have authority, due to my original post. I never did explain my stance @MeganC

The ultimate authority figure, is God. It is He who has given authority to man over woman. Meaning He literally has told us that men ARE the leaders and ARE to be obeyed. He has structured society this way since the beginning. There is no criteria given besides that. A man therefore due to the authority given to him, has the ability take another wife. It is not sin, it is authorized, regulated, encouraged even, by God. Whatever the consequences or persecutions, he still has that authority to do so. Whether he has the gall to sustain that, and take care of them--or if they respect him, is another question entirely. Not one of authority.

Yes women have more rights then ever now, and they can go and disobey their proper authority, but I think this is all to their detriment. It is against themselves. In fact, it is extremely likely that it is the enemy of God that has pushed for these women empowering movements, and husband/father emasculation trends.

You will find a link between the occult and feminism if you dig deep enough. People who channeled devils in order to bring these tactics into our society in the late 1800's and early 1900's, one of their tactics the we are very familiar with, is abortion. It is no mistake that it came into our society when it did. The enemy we know as Satan and his horde of goons; it all is eerily similar to how the garden played out getting the woman away from the man offering her her own freedom, away from her husband's care, to destroy absolutely everything. He loves to play the same tricks over and over again, hoping we never realize what is going on.

Women can do all the things you said they do, rebelling their husband and their God. Culturally it is encouraged for them to be as defiant as possible. They can technically escape the authority of their husband, but they cannot escape the authority of God. They will answer for themselves, as us men will.

And men should not fear their women, but only God. Women should be in fear of Him too. It is God that has the ability to cast both soul and body into hell, those are Jesus' words. It is a man's decision to make the choices he will, with the authority he's been given by God. What you have been saying I find to be irrelevant, because your words do not hold merit compared to our creator's.

 

[MeganC]

The ultimate authority figure, is God. It is He who has given authority to man over woman. Meaning He literally has told us that men ARE the leaders and ARE to be obeyed. He has structured society this way since the beginning. There is no criteria given besides that. A man therefore due to the authority given to him, has the ability take another wife. It is not sin, it is authorized, regulated, encouraged even, by God. Whatever the consequences or persecutions, he still has that authority to do so. Whether he has the gall to sustain that, and take care of them--or if they respect him, is another question entirely. Not one of authority.

The first man in my life was my father. Plenty of men here would assert that my father had total authority over me.

My father raped me.

Then I got to deal with police who kept trying to get what they thought would be an easy collar for drug use or possession. They had authority. They made my high school years misery.

Then it was the social workers and the police. Even when I turned eighteen and moved out of the county they still came after me until my husband, his friends, and a different sheriff's department told them to f**k off.

We moved to Wyoming and were treated to California tax agents coming to our place in Wyoming and threatening Christie. One of them kept reaching for his pistol while arguing with her and had that pistol cleared the holster I was ready to blow his head off and then do the other one too. Screw him, screw his authority, and screw his badge. Our local sheriff chased them off and told them not to return. They have not.

We then had two confrontations with armed badge wearing National Park Service trying to steal our bison. Yup, lots of authority there too.

And then there was the church elder who kept making overtures at me and touching me when I told him not to. He liked to do this when my husband wasn't at church. The last time he did this I told him to leave me alone, he refused, and I beat him to a bloody pulp. Even worse for him was no one tried to stop me because he had it coming and it was long overdue.

So I know you don't know me and I apologize if any of this disturbs you but my history with male authority is not an exercise in theoretical theology. It has been an exercise in discernment.

Along the way I have gotten to know my husband and his military friends. Not one of them has ever told me about their authority and when they would go off on a mission rank was not the deciding factor in authority, credibility was. I have learned lots of very practical things from them about leadership, sacrifice, obligation, and duty. I now expect these qualities in anyone claiming to be a man.

My husband insisted that I submit to him when we got married and then he insisted that I learn to be a stronger person. He has never lorded over me nor have his friends. He has my abiding respect and even now as he's suffering from cancer I'll do what he asks me to do because I know he wouldn't ask unless it were the right thing to do. There isn't anything I won't do for him because there has never been anything he won't do for me. He has all the credibility in the world with me. Authority is never a subject with him because it's a given.

See, I have had both good men and idiot men in my life. And yes, Scripture has a lot to say about male authority and I do my best to take it all in.

The men who claim authority because God said so without first being the men God told them to be are mentioned by Matthew in 7:21-23:

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Let me emphasize:

but he who does the will of My Father in heaven

So for me any man who wants to claim a mantle of authority from God Almighty Himself had better be doing the will of God. He had better be a credible man of God.

I have no patience for men who whine about how the women in their lives fall short when they and God have yet to be acquainted.

 

[MemeFan]

I know my words were first used to argue this point of "patriarchal men" and the idea that they automatically have authority, due to my original post. I never did explain my stance @MeganC

The ultimate authority figure, is God. It is He who has given authority to man over woman. Meaning He literally has told us that men ARE the leaders and ARE to be obeyed. He has structured society this way since the beginning. There is no criteria given besides that. A man therefore due to the authority given to him, has the ability take another wife. It is not sin, it is authorized, regulated, encouraged even, by God. Whatever the consequences or persecutions, he still has that authority to do so. Whether he has the gall to sustain that, and take care of them--or if they respect him, is another question entirely. Not one of authority.

Yes women have more rights then ever now, and they can go and disobey their proper authority, but I think this is all to their detriment.

Would be nice if you are more precise in your thinking in last sentence.

Anything before leads naturally toward rights as God-given or towards natural law. Both have only limited number of rights and finding new is very very hard.

Last sentence is more about rights given by state. That's why state can invent new rights.

It matters what is source of right. Because if rights come from state or Lord then state is naturally limited or shouldn't exist. If rights come from state, then rights are gifts of state towards population.

 

[MemeFan]

The first man in my life was my father. Plenty of men here would assert that my father had total authority over me.

My father raped me.

Then I got to deal with police who kept trying to get what they thought would be an easy collar for drug use or possession. They had authority. They made my high school years misery.

Then it was the social workers and the police. Even when I turned eighteen and moved out of the county they still came after me until my husband, his friends, and a different sheriff's department told them to f**k off.

We moved to Wyoming and were treated to California tax agents coming to our place in Wyoming and threatening Christie. One of them kept reaching for his pistol while arguing with her and had that pistol cleared the holster I was ready to blow his head off and then do the other one too. Screw him, screw his authority, and screw his badge. Our local sheriff chased them off and told them not to return. They have not.

We then had two confrontations with armed badge wearing National Park Service trying to steal our bison. Yup, lots of authority there too.

And then there was the church elder who kept making overtures at me and touching me when I told him not to. He liked to do this when my husband wasn't at church. The last time he did this I told him to leave me alone, he refused, and I beat him to a bloody pulp. Even worse for him was no one tried to stop me because he had it coming and it was long overdue.

So I know you don't know me and I apologize if any of this disturbs you but my history with male authority is not an exercise in theoretical theology. It has been an exercise in discernment.

Along the way I have gotten to know my husband and his military friends. Not one of them has ever told me about their authority and when they would go off on a mission rank was not the deciding factor in authority, credibility was. I have learned lots of very practical things from them about leadership, sacrifice, obligation, and duty. I now expect these qualities in anyone claiming to be a man.

My husband insisted that I submit to him when we got married and then he insisted that I learn to be a stronger person. He has never lorded over me nor have his friends. He has my abiding respect and even now as he's suffering from cancer I'll do what he asks me to do because I know he wouldn't ask unless it were the right thing to do. There isn't anything I won't do for him because there has never been anything he won't do for me. He has all the credibility in the world with me. Authority is never a subject with him because it's a given.

See, I have had both good men and idiot men in my life. And yes, Scripture has a lot to say about male authority and I do my best to take it all in.

The men who claim authority because God said so without first being the men God told them to be are mentioned by Matthew in 7:21-23:

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Let me emphasize:

but he who does the will of My Father in heaven

So for me any man who wants to claim a mantle of authority from God Almighty Himself had better be doing the will of God. He had better be a credible man of God.

I have no patience for men who whine about how the women in their lives fall short when they and God have yet to be acquainted.

Man, you were truly abused.

 

[MemeFan]

I am 100 percent right about what I said, not half right. You made great points about credibility. And generally, that's great advice.

Here's the thing. I don't offer advice and think my opinion is more valid that someone who has vastly more experience than I do, generally speaking. For example, I know nothing about sewing. Let's say there is a woman who is a seamstress, and has 32 years of experience doing that. I am not going to watch a few youtube videos, movies, etc., and maybe even try my hand at sewing, and then try to lecture her on the proper way to be a seamstress. I am generally going to defer to those with more authority in that subject. We all do this, in every walk of life. I don't tell my mechanic how to do his job, because he has more expertise than I do.

You are not doing this. You feel your limited knowledge on the ins and outs of military service is adequate to educate me on how things are run. They aren't. I spent 32 years of hands on experience in various levels of leadership working for the US military. I know how things are run. I don't have to guess, watch Youtube videos, watch movies, read books, etc. I've seen how they are run up close.

So no, I am not half right, I am completely right. Subordinates are not "supposed to" follow orders. They "have to" follow orders. The officer, does not, repeat does NOT have to be credible, for his order to be followed. That has zero to do with it. He is assumed to be credible from the moment he gains a commission. His authority is vested in the UCMJ, not credibility.

You're correct, a Lieutenant's authority can be revoked by a Colonel. A commander can be removed from command. But until this happens, orders must be followed by subordinates. You are not getting this. I have been watching it first hand for 32 years. If he issues an illegal or immoral order, or has shown to have moral failings in other aspects of his life, the officer will be reprimanded and removed from authority. But until then, he does not need to be "credible" to issue orders. That authority is granted by federal law.

If there is a "mutiny", then chances are the officer issued illegal or immoral commands, which violate the UCMJ anyways. At which point, yes he would be removed. If the orders were perfectly legal and just, then no, he would not be removed, the violators would be punished. There is a little gray area here, but what I am saying is generally correct.

The officer does need credibility to be a better leader, but he does not need credibility to issue orders and expect and demand them to be followed. A good officer will listen to his subordinates, taken the advice under consideration, and issue good solid orders. But even if the subordinates disagree, they have to be followed, by order of the law. He doesn't actually have to listen to subordinates if he doesn't want to. A good officer just generally does that.

I know what I am talking about. It's generally good to defer to those with authority on a subject. We do the same thing when we defer to Greek and Hebrew scholars on the wording of translations of the Bible. I am not a Hebrew scholar. Others are. I would not presume to know more about Hebrew than those that have spent their lives studying it.

Didn't US army copied command system from Germany army after WW2?

One which gives initiative to lower commands and doesn't expect blind order following? One which only provides commander's intent and leaves rest to subordinates?

And one which allows disobedience by subordinate because he has better knowledge of terrain and what is happening?

 

[raulus]

The first man in my life was my father. Plenty of men here would assert that my father had total authority over me.

My father raped me.

Then I got to deal with police who kept trying to get what they thought would be an easy collar for drug use or possession. They had authority. They made my high school years misery.

Then it was the social workers and the police. Even when I turned eighteen and moved out of the county they still came after me until my husband, his friends, and a different sheriff's department told them to f**k off.

We moved to Wyoming and were treated to California tax agents coming to our place in Wyoming and threatening Christie. One of them kept reaching for his pistol while arguing with her and had that pistol cleared the holster I was ready to blow his head off and then do the other one too. Screw him, screw his authority, and screw his badge. Our local sheriff chased them off and told them not to return. They have not.

We then had two confrontations with armed badge wearing National Park Service trying to steal our bison. Yup, lots of authority there too.

And then there was the church elder who kept making overtures at me and touching me when I told him not to. He liked to do this when my husband wasn't at church. The last time he did this I told him to leave me alone, he refused, and I beat him to a bloody pulp. Even worse for him was no one tried to stop me because he had it coming and it was long overdue.

So I know you don't know me and I apologize if any of this disturbs you but my history with male authority is not an exercise in theoretical theology. It has been an exercise in discernment.

Along the way I have gotten to know my husband and his military friends. Not one of them has ever told me about their authority and when they would go off on a mission rank was not the deciding factor in authority, credibility was. I have learned lots of very practical things from them about leadership, sacrifice, obligation, and duty. I now expect these qualities in anyone claiming to be a man.

My husband insisted that I submit to him when we got married and then he insisted that I learn to be a stronger person. He has never lorded over me nor have his friends. He has my abiding respect and even now as he's suffering from cancer I'll do what he asks me to do because I know he wouldn't ask unless it were the right thing to do. There isn't anything I won't do for him because there has never been anything he won't do for me. He has all the credibility in the world with me. Authority is never a subject with him because it's a given.

See, I have had both good men and idiot men in my life. And yes, Scripture has a lot to say about male authority and I do my best to take it all in.

The men who claim authority because God said so without first being the men God told them to be are mentioned by Matthew in 7:21-23:

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Let me emphasize:

but he who does the will of My Father in heaven

So for me any man who wants to claim a mantle of authority from God Almighty Himself had better be doing the will of God. He had better be a credible man of God.

I have no patience for men who whine about how the women in their lives fall short when they and God have yet to be acquainted.

And I am sorry for you that you had these bad people of authority over you. I'll say that a good husband to protect and lead you was exactly what you needed all along, and I am glad that you now have that!

Your father will pay for what he did, because of your heavenly father's love for you, and His righteousness. He will not get away with what he did. We can't take our anger out against men in authority from here on due to that, and the other instances in your life. That is the part where I disagree with you. The scripture talks about even obeying froward masters(not justifying your father, but for my original point of a husband's authority). And now you have your husband, who is your protector on the earth until our Lord arrives, and then there will be no more tears or sorrow at all.

I'm not setting out to convince you at all, only that I disagree on that point with you. Though we disagree may there be peace between us. I pray that you receive all the healing that you need with the trauma you've faced. Sincerely.

 

[Joleneakamama]

My father in law died in prison for the way he used his daughters. My dad's dad sexually abused all his daughters and his sons too. My mom had a relative raped by a police officer.
My folks told us that a police man could be kicked, hit where it counts, punched in the nose....if the were improper....and she told my sisters that in front of the officer who was taking them home.

My husband wishes his mom would have said no, refused to allow what happened in his family. The fall out has effected the other generations too.

I was very blessed in that my father was never inappropriate with us. We were never molested or abused. In fact, he deliberately avoided dominance too, because he didn't like the way his father was.

It is a fine and personal line this concept of submission to authority. My hubby has felt I defied him when I washed the milk jars in the sink after he told me not too. It seems a minor infraction....I really hate cold greasy dishwater in the morning.....when the wood hot water heater needs to be lit....but still. ...it is easy to say I'm not that bad, when I really could/should do better.
I know he would prefer we defy wanna be authorities....if they ever cross that moral line.

 

[NickF]

I know of a few men who have insisted they have authority over their wives and daughters. Saying you have authority because God has said you have power and authority does not matter when reality meets the road. A few of these men have informed daughters that they will believe in polygyny and that he will choose good husbands for them. They promptly left at the first opportunity and married men of their choosing.

While I agree with most of the men here insisting that the authority is vested in the man by God. The reality is if that man does not rise to the occasion and demonstrate he is worthy and capable to wield that authority, it is nothing more than a paper tiger.

Both parties in this discussion are actually correct. Megan is 100% correct that no amount of posturing and proclaiming will convince anybody you are boss of anything. The most pathetic men I've ever met are those who say how important they are, how tough, strong, deadly, smart, charming, or powerful they are. Those men are the opposite of what they proclaim. They're pathetic little boys playing dress up.

The most deadly men I've ever met never show off. They don't tell the world, they conceal their power and skill because displaying that power is dangerous and eliminates options. The intelligent man keeps his smarts to himself. The wealthy man doesn't flaunt his wealth. The man with real power and authority wields it, he doesn't talk about it. You feel it when he walks into a room. Sometimes you don't feel it until he displays that authority for a brief moment and then the cloak falls back into place again.

The issue I see on display here is there are those who are arguing that men inherently are endowed with authority and responsibility, and should be acknowledged as such. And others who are saying they may have authority on paper but it's a check that their ass can't cash cause they haven't demonstrated they have the stones to shoulder the rifle and feel the donkey kick em in the shoulder. Without the military might of the authority structure to back an officer up, all he has to go on is the training the men have to blindly follow an idiot, or threats of violence from higher ups. Put an idiot officer in the middle of nowhere with a squad of men who know he's an idiot making decisions that will get them all killed for no reason that directly endangers other soldiers, that idiot might find himself an "accidental" friendly fire casualty. There, the authority is not absolute no matter what the officials or official paper says. Similarly a husband may have on paper the authority to command a certain dress and attitude from his wife. But if he hasn't earned the respect, or she has not been trained from a young age to blindly obey and submit, the reality is he does not have the full expression of that authority and respect. Paper authority is worthless without reality to back it up.

A man will naturally engender a deep sense of respect and awe from a woman when he demonstrates that the inherent authority and power God has placed on him is both able to be wielded and he has proven he will do so with wisdom, grace, and might.

 

[The Revolting Man]

The first man in my life was my father. Plenty of men here would assert that my father had total authority over me.

My father raped me.

Then I got to deal with police who kept trying to get what they thought would be an easy collar for drug use or possession. They had authority. They made my high school years misery.

Then it was the social workers and the police. Even when I turned eighteen and moved out of the county they still came after me until my husband, his friends, and a different sheriff's department told them to f**k off.

We moved to Wyoming and were treated to California tax agents coming to our place in Wyoming and threatening Christie. One of them kept reaching for his pistol while arguing with her and had that pistol cleared the holster I was ready to blow his head off and then do the other one too. Screw him, screw his authority, and screw his badge. Our local sheriff chased them off and told them not to return. They have not.

We then had two confrontations with armed badge wearing National Park Service trying to steal our bison. Yup, lots of authority there too.

And then there was the church elder who kept making overtures at me and touching me when I told him not to. He liked to do this when my husband wasn't at church. The last time he did this I told him to leave me alone, he refused, and I beat him to a bloody pulp. Even worse for him was no one tried to stop me because he had it coming and it was long overdue.

So I know you don't know me and I apologize if any of this disturbs you but my history with male authority is not an exercise in theoretical theology. It has been an exercise in discernment.

Along the way I have gotten to know my husband and his military friends. Not one of them has ever told me about their authority and when they would go off on a mission rank was not the deciding factor in authority, credibility was. I have learned lots of very practical things from them about leadership, sacrifice, obligation, and duty. I now expect these qualities in anyone claiming to be a man.

My husband insisted that I submit to him when we got married and then he insisted that I learn to be a stronger person. He has never lorded over me nor have his friends. He has my abiding respect and even now as he's suffering from cancer I'll do what he asks me to do because I know he wouldn't ask unless it were the right thing to do. There isn't anything I won't do for him because there has never been anything he won't do for me. He has all the credibility in the world with me. Authority is never a subject with him because it's a given.

See, I have had both good men and idiot men in my life. And yes, Scripture has a lot to say about male authority and I do my best to take it all in.

The men who claim authority because God said so without first being the men God told them to be are mentioned by Matthew in 7:21-23:

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Let me emphasize:

but he who does the will of My Father in heaven

So for me any man who wants to claim a mantle of authority from God Almighty Himself had better be doing the will of God. He had better be a credible man of God.

I have no patience for men who whine about how the women in their lives fall short when they and God have yet to be acquainted.

Father’s do not have total authority as you can personally attest. Our authority is limited and temporary and held in trust for someone else.

 

[steve]

The first man in my life was my father. Plenty of men here would assert that my father had total authority over me.

My father raped me.

Then I got to deal with police who kept trying to get what they thought would be an easy collar for drug use or possession. They had authority. They made my high school years misery.

Then it was the social workers and the police. Even when I turned eighteen and moved out of the county they still came after me until my husband, his friends, and a different sheriff's department told them to f**k off.

We moved to Wyoming and were treated to California tax agents coming to our place in Wyoming and threatening Christie. One of them kept reaching for his pistol while arguing with her and had that pistol cleared the holster I was ready to blow his head off and then do the other one too. Screw him, screw his authority, and screw his badge. Our local sheriff chased them off and told them not to return. They have not.

We then had two confrontations with armed badge wearing National Park Service trying to steal our bison. Yup, lots of authority there too.

And then there was the church elder who kept making overtures at me and touching me when I told him not to. He liked to do this when my husband wasn't at church. The last time he did this I told him to leave me alone, he refused, and I beat him to a bloody pulp. Even worse for him was no one tried to stop me because he had it coming and it was long overdue.

So I know you don't know me and I apologize if any of this disturbs you but my history with male authority is not an exercise in theoretical theology. It has been an exercise in discernment.

Along the way I have gotten to know my husband and his military friends. Not one of them has ever told me about their authority and when they would go off on a mission rank was not the deciding factor in authority, credibility was. I have learned lots of very practical things from them about leadership, sacrifice, obligation, and duty. I now expect these qualities in anyone claiming to be a man.

My husband insisted that I submit to him when we got married and then he insisted that I learn to be a stronger person. He has never lorded over me nor have his friends. He has my abiding respect and even now as he's suffering from cancer I'll do what he asks me to do because I know he wouldn't ask unless it were the right thing to do. There isn't anything I won't do for him because there has never been anything he won't do for me. He has all the credibility in the world with me. Authority is never a subject with him because it's a given.

See, I have had both good men and idiot men in my life. And yes, Scripture has a lot to say about male authority and I do my best to take it all in.

The men who claim authority because God said so without first being the men God told them to be are mentioned by Matthew in 7:21-23:

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Let me emphasize:

but he who does the will of My Father in heaven

So for me any man who wants to claim a mantle of authority from God Almighty Himself had better be doing the will of God. He had better be a credible man of God.

I have no patience for men who whine about how the women in their lives fall short when they and God have yet to be acquainted.

I’m extremely sorry that you had to go through such an awful set of circumstances.
I praise Yah that when you had a chance to choose the man to be in your life, you made a choice that has blessed you and your children.
All too often a woman falls for a guy that makes her feel good and then wants him to prove himself after the marriage. If he doesn’t measure up in some way, she denies his authority.
The time to accept or deny his authority is prior to whatever kind of commitment ceremony that they choose to start their marriage with.

 

[MeganC]

And I am sorry for you that you had these bad people of authority over you. I'll say that a good husband to protect and lead you was exactly what you needed all along, and I am glad that you now have that!

Your father will pay for what he did, because of your heavenly father's love for you, and His righteousness. He will not get away with what he did. We can't take our anger out against men in authority from here on due to that, and the other instances in your life. That is the part where I disagree with you. The scripture talks about even obeying froward masters(not justifying your father, but for my original point of a husband's authority). And now you have your husband, who is your protector on the earth until our Lord arrives, and then there will be no more tears or sorrow at all.

I'm not setting out to convince you at all, only that I disagree on that point with you. Though we disagree may there be peace between us. I pray that you receive all the healing that you need with the trauma you've faced. Sincerely.

I don't disagree that men are supposed to have authority. What I disagree with are the men who think they're entitled to God's given authority without fulfilling the obligations God demands from them.

I have long said it that women who submit to good men have it easy. We really do. It's the men who have to shoulder so many burdens and make so many sacrifices to make their families succeed. But claiming authority of a man while shirking the obligations of a man is a joke.

 

[MeganC]

I know of a few men who have insisted they have authority over their wives and daughters. Saying you have authority because God has said you have power and authority does not matter when reality meets the road. A few of these men have informed daughters that they will believe in polygyny and that he will choose good husbands for them. They promptly left at the first opportunity and married men of their choosing.

While I agree with most of the men here insisting that the authority is vested in the man by God. The reality is if that man does not rise to the occasion and demonstrate he is worthy and capable to wield that authority, it is nothing more than a paper tiger.

Both parties in this discussion are actually correct. Megan is 100% correct that no amount of posturing and proclaiming will convince anybody you are boss of anything. The most pathetic men I've ever met are those who say how important they are, how tough, strong, deadly, smart, charming, or powerful they are. Those men are the opposite of what they proclaim. They're pathetic little boys playing dress up.

The most deadly men I've ever met never show off. They don't tell the world, they conceal their power and skill because displaying that power is dangerous and eliminates options. The intelligent man keeps his smarts to himself. The wealthy man doesn't flaunt his wealth. The man with real power and authority wields it, he doesn't talk about it. You feel it when he walks into a room. Sometimes you don't feel it until he displays that authority for a brief moment and then the cloak falls back into place again.

The issue I see on display here is there are those who are arguing that men inherently are endowed with authority and responsibility, and should be acknowledged as such. And others who are saying they may have authority on paper but it's a check that their ass can't cash cause they haven't demonstrated they have the stones to shoulder the rifle and feel the donkey kick em in the shoulder. Without the military might of the authority structure to back an officer up, all he has to go on is the training the men have to blindly follow an idiot, or threats of violence from higher ups. Put an idiot officer in the middle of nowhere with a squad of men who know he's an idiot making decisions that will get them all killed for no reason that directly endangers other soldiers, that idiot might find himself an "accidental" friendly fire casualty. There, the authority is not absolute no matter what the officials or official paper says. Similarly a husband may have on paper the authority to command a certain dress and attitude from his wife. But if he hasn't earned the respect, or she has not been trained from a young age to blindly obey and submit, the reality is he does not have the full expression of that authority and respect. Paper authority is worthless without reality to back it up.

A man will naturally engender a deep sense of respect and awe from a woman when he demonstrates that the inherent authority and power God has placed on him is both able to be wielded and he has proven he will do so with wisdom, grace, and might.

I'm sorry you never met my husband because I know you and Steve would have been instant friends.

 

[NickF]

I'm sorry you never met my husband because I know you and Steve would have been instant friends.

We will one day and I'm sure we will be friends! Looking forward to it!

 

[NVIII]

I don't disagree that men are supposed to have authority. What I disagree with are the men who think they're entitled to God's given authority without fulfilling the obligations God demands from them.

I have long said it that women who submit to good men have it easy. We really do. It's the men who have to shoulder so many burdens and make so many sacrifices to make their families succeed. But claiming authority of a man while shirking the obligations of a man is a joke.

I offer my condolences for your struggles, am genuinely happy that God brought you to a better place, and feel sadness that you might lose it. I hope you understand what I say next. I don't pity you for what you went through because I know that we each face trials and are given thorns in our side, it is not unique to mankind, God has been with you through it all, never allowing you to be tried beyond what you can bear, just as He has with me and all of us, and we should count it all nothing compared to the reward that awaits us.

Phrasing your post another way:

I don't disagree that women are supposed to be loved. What I disagree with are the women who think they're entitled to God's love through a man without fulfilling the obligations God demands from them.

I have long said it that men who love good women have it easy. We really do. It's the women who have to shoulder so many burdens and make so many sacrifices to help their own husbands succeed. But claiming the love due a woman while shirking the obligations of a woman is a joke.

If those two paragraphs don't turn your stomach and immediately shout "falsehood!" to you, then the rest of this will be meaningless to you. That is not at all what love is. But, if you do see the blantant lie, if you do understand that love is given to the man for the woman, and there are no conditions or exceptions to the command to men to let that love flow through them to their wives, no matter how defiled, broken, wayward, defiant, or disrespectful they may be, just as God never ever stops loving His brides even when He has to continually minister to, sometimes severely chasten, and even repeatedly put away, then you must be able to also see how the original paragraphs I plagiarized are likewise errant at their core.

For the record, I too think that a man should do all that he can to walk in the ways of the Lord and be an honorable husband and father for the sake of his wives and children, just as a woman should do all that she can to walk in the ways of her husband and be a lovable wife and mother of his children for his sake and theirs. This is not the same topic as whether a woman is commanded to submit or whether a man is commanded to love, and failure to meet some human metric of accomplishment does not negate God's edicts. Our earthly existence can be hard. We can be chosen for trials so that God might be glorified. We can show the world what love really is by loving the unlovable, or what submission really is by obeying the unthinkable. Or we can be just like them and the salt will have lost its flavor.