A doctrine of alienation

[Drich]

Good answer! And I agree that we have our firebrands and bomb-throwers who make real conversation difficult, but I think you'd be hard-pressed to find any internet forum where that is not the case, at least, not without the kind of strict censorship which we freethinkers tend to find deeply abhorrent.

This is true. Which is why I like this particular forum. Most atheist forums are run like the vast majority of Christian forums. They protect their core members to the point of breaking their own rules if need be. Here, the rules are the rules, and for the most part that's it. Which is what I found is what is needed to foster 'real conversation.' a Forum must allow it's members to bite and bite back. It can't take sides on issues just because it's primary support comes from one side of the fence or the other.

I don't even quibble with the "man as the head of the household" model, for those to whom it applies comfortably.  Both because of their personal genetics/nature, and because of social conditioning as a child, many women in our culture grow up wanting to be led. (In addition, various estimates place the number of "natural followers" in society as roughly 85%, and "leaders/individualists" at 15%, likely a gene-set that helped us in our tribal hunter-gatherer days.) So if the woman chooses for herself to find a strong man and wants him to tell her what to do, I wish them all the happiness in the world.

:thumbsup:

I do quibble (a little) with your summary of my position, but I'll start by answering your final question. First, I think it's impossible to give up our individuality, because we are individuals, and there's not really a way to get around that.

I would point out, only in western culture. Right now billions of people grow up with a family/society first, and their are no individuals. The individual pieces never exceed the family itself. Whether you see this is good bad or indifferent, my point in individuality is taught or a learned/ unchecked behavior and not universal truth.

But, like a soldier joining a Special Ops fireteam, we can learn to behave as if  we were a single unit. To me, marriage is like that.

And I would argue this works only 50% of the time, or so say the marriage stats.

You must find someone suitable to work together with (dating), and when you have found your "soulmate" (it's just a term; I don't think we all have one "special someone out there"), you will be able to work toward a fusion of your individualities into a composite that is much, much greater than the sum of its parts.

Which is in line with a scriptural marriage.

We are strong where the other is weak, and vice versa, and by working together it is possible to "survive, adapt, and overcome", as the military says, no matter what the situation is. I do not think that designating "the one with the penis is the leader" is a wise idea, simply because there may be times when you are out of your element but she is not, and her leadership could prove decisive in that situation.

...And if the one with the penis disagrees? then both parties circle the wagons battle it out.

Lord knows I have not always made the right decision. (Usally when I make one on my own.) It's when we both sit down and hash things out that the two sides become one. I find myself as simply being the voice of this particular body/marriage, and not source/rarly the source for every decision. I'm not saying this can't happen in a regular marriage, what I am saying is this is the purpose of a scriptural marriage. In the bible there are many examples of this good and bad, where the Husband and wife act as one. Moses pretending that sarah was his sister, or Anninias and Saphira who sold land and kept some of the proceeds but told Peter that they gave it all to God, or even Adam and Eve.. The point there is that even though Husband and wife made the decision together the ultimate voicing of said decision was not only done by the man, but it was the man who wound up taking primary responsibility/blame. Yes the wives suffered too, but in the sight of God the husband had to answer to Him.

So my quibble is that I am not suggesting that ideal marriage is retaining individuality; I am saying we cannot help but retain our individuality, and the key to happiness/success is accepting the equality of both partners, in every way, then figure out what skills/abilities each has or doesn't have, and learning to mesh those attributes into a marriage-team that can take on all comers.

And I disagree in saying I am nothing like I was, when I was on my own. I was funny, thin (er), and had hair.. Plus I was selfish, impatient, and did only what I wanted to do. I am not me anymore. I'm us. the difference between an marriage team and 'us' a team is two working individuals working toward a single goal. (which again is a successful model 1/2 the time.) the "One flesh/One being biblical model" has the man and wife both die to self. Meaning it's not about two people working as one, it's about two people becoming one, in word thought and deed. That is why Christ said:"What God united let man not separate." Because when it is right you can not separate one with out destroying the other.

When you were a kid did you ever jam red playdoh with blue playdoh? once you made purple playdoh could you ever successfully put all the blue back in it's container and all the red back into it's orginial container? no of course not. That's the Idea of a scriptural marriage to make purple playdoh rather than try and make something out of the blue and red while keeping them both separate yet bridge a gap that the two combined can cover.

In the traditional model, only the male gets to retain his individuality, while the woman is expected to completely subsume herself into the complete role of wife and mother and housekeeper. I find this model simply incompatible with the basic premise of "feminism is the radical notion that women are people", which is one of my guiding principles.

Maybe in the corrupt onesided version of what most people believe to be a biblical marriage. But again, a woman submitting to her husband is only 1/3 of the equasion. The man must wholy and fully transform Himself to be the working model of Christ in His house hold. It's been more than a decade and I'm still working on that transformation. Imagine changing yourself for more than 10 years, how much of your original self would remain?

My fiancee cannot cook to save her life, but I'm half-Cajun and I love cooking. Traditionally, what I do there would be "womens' work" (it's not, so much, in Cajun culture, which has a more egalitarian outlook in general), but I don't feel like it degrades me in any way, because I have set aside the old, sexist notions. I totally understand that, in Paul's day, and especially from his perspective as a former Pharisee, the "woman's role" would be obvious and something worth promoting. I just don't think it's a valid model of all modern society, unless chosen by the individual of their own free will. She can't work on motorcycles at all, and is still a beginner rider, relying on me to carefully lead her on rides. Yet she is the one currently bringing home most of the bacon, and she handles most of the finances because she's better at arithmetic-on-the-fly than I am. We're a team, and a damned good one.

A biblical marriage is has nothing to do with woman's or man's work. a biblical marriage can work when traditional work roles are reverses. There is nothing in the bible that says she must cook and clean while you work 9 to 5. At it's core it's about 2 becoming one,(im not talking about just sex) this represents how the church and Christ will work together and operate as one according to what Paul has written. It's about learning how to submit under authority and how to stop viewing the needs of self over the greater unity of the marriage covenant.

If my wife wanted me to stay home and watch the kids and cook and clean and we sat down together to make that all work out, I would do that. Or better yet we could take turns. But our situation will not allow that, and we both have to work.

Bottom line is Biblical marriage is not about who get the choice job and who gets stuck with the crap jobs in the house hold, its about two becoming one and working together in such away as to become one person expressed in two separate bodies. Because otherwise it is not possible to do/be the man or woman God would have us be if we tried to hang on to our individuality. Unfortunatly this concept is almost all but lost to time, at least in this culture.