• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

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

you're missing my point: fathers these days are generally, willfully ignorant of what is going on with their daughters (or, worse yet, convinced that they're powerless to influence them), and your analysis not only lets the fathers off the hook (by blaming the sons)
ultimately it is men who are responsible for how screwed up everything is, and it will be men who will have the power to correct everything by taking full responsibility for fixing it.
I agree with all of that, and I'm not trying to let anybody off the hook, but add more to it. I had to read back over what I wrote to see how you could have thought I missed your point. Poorly written, is all I can say. I do see how you got that impression.

I wasn't trying to refute your point, but add to it or widen the scope of men who are to blame: not only the fathers, but also the men who exploit the situation. I was also trying to show that it's not some phenomenon where girls are being born that way, but it is that they are being shaped that way, and that all the men involved are to blame and have the ability to correct it. Fathers by ruling, and bachelors by refusing the adulterous young women, as the proverb says to.

This lifts no blame from the women; it simply doesn't mention their blame because their blame is between them and their own male head. For all we know, they might be blameless if their father has knowingly allowed or even taught their behavior, or they might be full of blame in his eyes, but that's irrelevant at this level. That's how being under authority works. Her behavior might be dishonorable, but it is the father's dishonor because he has the authority and responsibility. As you restated:
our efforts are best spent encouraging fathers to either properly train their wives and daughters

So again, I think we are in agreement with where the buck stops as long as we both recognize that it takes two to tango and that the man who picks the low-hanging fruit is just as culpable as the man who allowed the peach tree to lean over the fence. It used to be that, if you took her virginity, you married her. And before that there was a bride price involved as well, even if the father refused to allow the marriage to stand. So, if there was a price to be paid, a responsible party must have been the one paying it.

So, yes, men are at fault: all of them who are involved.

How far off am I?
 
But it's still cowardice on the part of the man (I can vouch for having done that myself).

What we rarely see these days is women staying married at any cost, no matter whether the man is paying half the bills or all the bills -- and certainly not for the sake of the children. Some do, but they are rapidly becoming the exceptions that prove the rule.

We're even discouraged from considering what that means in relation to the myths about women supposedly being more nurturing, caring, loving and devoted to their children.

[Don't forget: I predominantly blame men for all of this. When a man takes the cowardly way out by allowing the women in his life to dominate him, his behavior affects not only his family but the families of those for whom he's being a role model. Our culture is far more harmed by weak men than it is by the small minority who engage in domestic violence (NCVS figures have consistently indicated that 70% of all physical domestic violence is initiated by women, and over 90% of all emotional violence is initiated by women).]
ncvs?
 
  • Given that you're asserting that your opinion is anecdotal, but you're asserting patterns, you may want to either (a) switch to describing anecdotal examples you've observed or been part of, or (b) consider the possibility that your opinion isn't even anecdotal but guesswork. I see truths for which receipts could be provided, but they're not firmly connected to each other, which makes pattern-determining difficult.
  • Nonetheless, you're missing my point: fathers these days are generally, willfully ignorant of what is going on with their daughters (or, worse yet, convinced that they're powerless to influence them), and your analysis not only lets the fathers off the hook (by blaming the sons) and further falls into the snare of letting the daughters off the hook (just another example of permitting females to feign victimhood while demanding agency/power). We've built a world in which individuals (and most certainly females) between the ages of 14 and 25 are given the privileges of adulthood and the responsibilities of toddlers. I don't know how close you've come to direct observation of what goes on at college campuses these days, but when it's just chaos one has to be thankful. I got national recognition for designing behavior management systems for dormitories, but it's not because I'm brilliant; the solutions are all rather non-complex. The problem is a combination of lack of will to do anything about misbehavior on campus and the fact that the students arrive there with the expectation that anything goes.
Bringing it back to the point: ultimately it is men who are responsible for how screwed up everything is, and it will be men who will have the power to correct everything by taking full responsibility for fixing it. The rest is just gas coming out of pie holes. Thus, fathers are far more responsible than are any others in the equation, and it's a cop-out for fathers to blame other men's sons. I contend that the fathers who let their daughters off the hook are the most egregious offenders in this whole dynamic, more so than the sons who f*** those daughters or the fathers of the sons who fail to compel their sons to refrain from jumping on the daughters who make themselves available.

It's a common societal behavior for older men to say, yeah, well, we screwed up, but now it's up to the young men to fix this for us, while we older men sit back and blame the young men for being enticed by female sirens. The only 'fixing' that is likely to occur from that formulation is for the young men to repeat the tsk-tsking proclamations once they're older men. No society has ever been saved by the next generation coming up.

The older men have rewarded their wives for being boss bitches, as well as for initiating most of the domestic violence, most of the adultery, most of the divorces and probably even most of the childhood sexual abuse. The older men pulled punches on blatantly communicating to their daughters that they're acting like whores. The older men failed to either teach their daughters themselves or fully expect their wives to teach their daughters that it is, was and always has been those daughters' responsibility to carefully safeguard their carnal treasures. That, along with marital sex and reproduction, is the responsibility borne by females -- cooking, cleaning and working in the family business are secondary.

I'll be doing my damnedest from here on out to encourage young men to refrain from being led around by the nose by young women dangling pussy in front of them -- to stop doing husband chores for women who aren't prepared to participate in a lifelong commitment. But it's also very clear to me that our efforts are best spent encouraging fathers to either properly train their wives and daughters or be willing to do clean-up work on it after the fact if they failed to do that before their daughters were grown. They will always be your daughters. Yes, in our culture, once they're 18 they can move out and don't have to obey you -- but that doesn't stop them from hearing your voice in their heads. Instead of blaming the boys for tapping them, blame your daughters for so cavalierly opening those gates. We've become too afraid of shaming anyone.

Right now my youngest (19-years-old) daughter is predominantly avoiding me again and has asked me to refrain from talking with her about politics, religion, sexuality, polygyny, patriarchy and intersexual dynamics. She's checked herself into therapy, and she knows exactly what my trained ass thinks about that. I've already gotten beau*coups of advice telling me to do whatever I have to do to get her to feel all wuvved by me again. Of course!: Happy Wife, Happy Life! And Happy Daughter, Happy Life! What no one is holding in the forefront of their minds is that (a) I've said nothing to indicate that I don't love her but instead shower her with praise about how responsibly she's living on her own (well, with her boyfriend) in Austin, because I do indeed consider her to be one of the most resourceful human beings I've ever known; (b) since she moved out last year I've only given her advice when she's asked for it; and (c) until she notified me that she'd started avoiding me because she couldn't think of anything to talk with me about that we would both be interested in, I had no idea she was feeling overwhelmed.

Those who know our history will understand what I mean by this, but I'm not going to take the advice to make our relationship being luvvy-dovey a primary concern. I got the same misguided advice during The Coup back in 2021, and had I taken it, I would to this day still be a Sensitive New Age Guy spouting useless platitudes, my marriage would remain in a shambles with my wife regularly fitting me with new saddle bags, she would still be miserable, my older daughter wouldn't have received appreciated advice based on wisdom acquired through conquering The Coup, and her younger sister could very well be dead by now given things she told me about what she'd been doing before I took charge of the family.

She'll be back, and in the meantime I'm going to do my best to be her father rather than her friend.

She doesn't have to talk with me. Or we can just continue talking about the weather and her cat and dog and boyfriend for the time being. Because I know two things: she will still hear my voice in her head, and -- if I stand firm -- she will eventually want to resume a far-less-vacuous relationship with me. Or she won't. But I won't be doing her any favors by catering to her during this phase of feeling sorry for herself and believing that, if she can just drown out the things she wishes weren't true, everything will be Unicorns and Endless Vacations.
Life is short. Prayers for reconciliation, for all families in this forum dealing with similar situations.
 
What we rarely see these days is women staying married at any cost, no matter whether the man is paying half the bills or all the bills -- and certainly not for the sake of the children. Some do, but they are rapidly becoming the exceptions that prove the rule.
I agree with your sentiments @Keith Martin and those of @NVIII. One aspect of the modern marriage culture I find most disturbing, and especially for those claiming to be Christians, concerns having pre-nup agreements. This is nothing more than planning for failure and providing the structure for a successful failure. It seems to be the more we focus on marriage/relationship failure the more successful we've become at failure. Divorce should not even be contemplated as an option (maybe murder...??? ;) ) when entering into a marriage, except for the few biblical exceptions, and that understanding ought to be clearly established before anyone's pants come off.
 
This is nothing more than planning for failure and providing the structure for a successful failure.
If you leave that door open, someone is bound to feel like using it someday.

Quitting should not be an option.
 
If you leave that door open, someone is bound to feel like using it someday.

Quitting should not be an option.

Mixed bag here. In ordinary circumstances I agree but when there are drugs, mental illnesses, sexual abuse of children, and etc. then divorce needs to be an option.

A prenuptial agreement though is definitely a preparation for failure. Although in the case of the mockery that most Hollywood marriages are then perhaps that's rational for those people.
 
Mixed bag here. In ordinary circumstances I agree but when there are drugs, mental illnesses, sexual abuse of children, and etc. then divorce needs to be an option.

A prenuptial agreement though is definitely a preparation for failure. Although in the case of the mockery that most Hollywood marriages are then perhaps that's rational for those people.

Who gets to decide what "ordinary circumstances" are and what are not ordinary circumstances?

Shouldn't we look to scripture to find out when divorce is allowed?
 
I agree with your sentiments @Keith Martin and those of @NVIII. One aspect of the modern marriage culture I find most disturbing, and especially for those claiming to be Christians, concerns having pre-nup agreements. This is nothing more than planning for failure and providing the structure for a successful failure. It seems to be the more we focus on marriage/relationship failure the more successful we've become at failure. Divorce should not even be contemplated as an option (maybe murder...??? ;) ) when entering into a marriage, except for the few biblical exceptions, and that understanding ought to be clearly established before anyone's pants come off.
If you leave that door open, someone is bound to feel like using it someday.

Quitting should not be an option.
I'm not sure if I would necessarily consider a prenup an option to quit. I remember reading previously that under 10% of marriages ending in divorce have a prenup in place and as many as 40% of married people have signed one. I could be wrong, this is older information. I think having many things in writing can be a good idea, particularly if children from other relationships are involved.
 
I think having many things in writing can be a good idea, particularly if children from other relationships are involved.
I think asking lots of questions is a good idea. Trust is a must. The best bet for women is to find someone who is living like you want to and has the values you want your children raised with. You will probably find it easier to go.....where you already want to go in life. (Duh!)
They say marriages fail because women marry men expecting them to change...and men marry women expecting they won't.
 
I think having many things in writing can be a good idea,
Yes, and the writing which a couple who claim to be Christians needs to agree on is the Bible. What non-Christian couples do is over to them, but those couples claiming to be Christians are representatives of the Lord Jesus Christ and His church (cf. Eph. 5:22-33). It ought to be a good representation they make!
 
The best bet for women is to find someone who is living like you want to and has the values you want your children raised with. You will probably find it easier to go.....where you already want to go in life. (Duh!)
Good advice and it goes both ways. If a single woman won't already keep her own place clean and tidy, cook her own meals, meet basic responsibilities, etc., a man would be shortsighted to view her as a good potential for his companion-helper. Same goes for the woman looking for a Christian husband; if he's not already doing those things a husband should do and being the man a husband should be, a Christian woman should stay away from him. A single woman has the advantage of being able to look at men, single and already married, and consider a potential relationship with either. Single Christian women have a big advantage if they can get their heads out of the world and into the Word. Shalom
 
How far off am I?
I wouldn't assert that you're far off, because you're consistently agreeing with yourself.

We just disagree, because I consider the fathers to be more responsible than either the daughters or the sons of other fathers. Low-hanging fruit left there to tempt is the equivalent of an open invitation. When the daughter offers up her carnal treasure and the daughter's father fails to do his utmost to prevent this, it's unfair and I believe inappropriate to place equal condemnation on the consumer of the carnal treasure. That younger man is certainly not entirely blameless, but his reaction is much more understandable than daddy sitting back while his daughter's fruit is hanging over the 'fence.' I blame the father more than the young man, who is just doing what he's being rewarded for doing, just as women are just doing what they're rewarded for doing when they engage in the delusion that they're independent enough to make such weighty decisions as choosing slut patterns, divorce their husbands to run off with half the family assets, or go on welfare to sustain their statuses as single mothers.

If fathers, who are older and know much better than young men exactly what it was like to be led around by one's own sex drive, can't be held accountable for being cavalier about their daughters' premarital intimacy choices, how are we ever going to alter the downward trajectory of male and female youngsters' poor choices in that realm?
 
I'm not sure if I would necessarily consider a prenup an option to quit. I remember reading previously that under 10% of marriages ending in divorce have a prenup in place and as many as 40% of married people have signed one. I could be wrong, this is older information. I think having many things in writing can be a good idea, particularly if children from other relationships are involved.
This is an excellent point. I'll look for the relevant research, but that's my understanding as well -- that marriages with prenups have a higher success rate than marriages without a prenup, and those that do break up tend to be much more civil about the way in which they dissolve things.

What's hard to take into account, though, is how many people who would have treated marriage too cavalierly just turned around and walked in the other direction when asked to sign a prenup.

I can certainly imagine that there are women whom I would offer the opportunity to sign a prenup as a condition of our marriage rather than just writing them off altogether.
 
Back
Top