-
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.
Taken in Hand/Domestic Discipline
- Thread starter Cool Wifey Jones
- Start date
@andrew you are emotionally reacting and casting judgment. Read what I said again and you'll notice that this:
is the opposite of what I just said.
I also used the term corporal punishment on purpose. That is the judgment neutral technical term. Terms like beatings and physical violence are judgement heavy terms which are not only technically incorrect, they are very hurtful/offensive to those in the BDSM communities and dangerous to the sanctity of their relationships. You would not like it if I used those terms about the physical punishment of your children, please show them the same respect.
I realize this subject is touchy for people because it violates their ideal view of women. But it is what it is. It is no surprise that in this thread we seemingly have 2 women who desire this yet have reluctant husbands. That is quite common. And I have seen women even tear apart their marriages and divorce their husbands because the men were unwilling to provide this need of theirs.
Personally, I'd rather take a lashing in the town square and be done with it than an indeterminate number of ass rapings in our penal system. Our society accepted corporal punishment of men, women, and children until very recently. We've grown soft.
Obviously something is amiss. But that is the present state of most marriages. I'm not going to cast judgement on those who find that corporal punishment appeals to them or helps them. All that would be accomplished by that is making me feel superior while driving them away.
That is a good end goal. But most women are not there yet. Even God dangles the threat of punishment before us.
This is true. But husbands beware, if your wife was brazen enough to request this of you she likely won't be satisfied with just threats and awareness. Don't make threats you aren't willing to follow through with or she'll loose respect and things will grow worse. Either stand firm in rejection of this way (and find a different way to accomplish the same end) or embrace it.
is the opposite of what I just said.
I also used the term corporal punishment on purpose. That is the judgment neutral technical term. Terms like beatings and physical violence are judgement heavy terms which are not only technically incorrect, they are very hurtful/offensive to those in the BDSM communities and dangerous to the sanctity of their relationships. You would not like it if I used those terms about the physical punishment of your children, please show them the same respect.
I realize this subject is touchy for people because it violates their ideal view of women. But it is what it is. It is no surprise that in this thread we seemingly have 2 women who desire this yet have reluctant husbands. That is quite common. And I have seen women even tear apart their marriages and divorce their husbands because the men were unwilling to provide this need of theirs.
Personally, I'd rather take a lashing in the town square and be done with it than an indeterminate number of ass rapings in our penal system. Our society accepted corporal punishment of men, women, and children until very recently. We've grown soft.
Obviously something is amiss. But that is the present state of most marriages. I'm not going to cast judgement on those who find that corporal punishment appeals to them or helps them. All that would be accomplished by that is making me feel superior while driving them away.
That is a good end goal. But most women are not there yet. Even God dangles the threat of punishment before us.
This is true. But husbands beware, if your wife was brazen enough to request this of you she likely won't be satisfied with just threats and awareness. Don't make threats you aren't willing to follow through with or she'll loose respect and things will grow worse. Either stand firm in rejection of this way (and find a different way to accomplish the same end) or embrace it.
Yep! I didn't accomplish one of the Zero Tolerance issues (washing dishes, the bane of my existence) and I was told I would, in fact, be getting disciplined later. That prompted me to do 2 things.... Wash dishes and cut deals. Suddenly I became a master negotiator. I would have made our president proud. I got one final extension, and dishes haven't been a problem since. That being said I don't think TiH/DD has to be so harsh and serious. Soldier and I come at it in a more of a fun way to address problems. It can escalate to a harder form of discipline but for the most part its a way to address all issues without arguing.
The best part for me is once the price is paid, everything goes back to normal. No arguing for days or Soldier burying himself in work to get away or me walking on egg shells because I know he is close to his limit. To each there own, but it's amazing how much it has helped us.
This thread gives me concerns on multiple levels. I appreciate Andrew bringing up points of civility within this thread. I have mentioned in other threads of my wife working with victims of domestic violence, working with the local judges, lawyers, police officers.
That being said, I would like to only talk to the men at this point. I, personally, have known pastors (plural) that have sent wives back to the husbands that had just finished beating on their wives. Usually with bruises that are not seen. (Their clothing covered the bruising) Then the abuse began again, because she told someone. I guess I could take you to the grave of the most extreme case of a wife being abused. Or tell you of the police officer that was torn up on the inside because she returned a woman to her significant other. The crescent wrench imprint was still visible after a two week stay in the hospital.
Although the remarks on this thread do not go to the level as I described, I have heard stories of how DV began, from women, that are eerily familiar with some things I’ve read here. I did say ‘began’. Keep that in mind.
In no way, shape or form can I or will I condone corporal punishment towards a wife.
That being said, I would like to only talk to the men at this point. I, personally, have known pastors (plural) that have sent wives back to the husbands that had just finished beating on their wives. Usually with bruises that are not seen. (Their clothing covered the bruising) Then the abuse began again, because she told someone. I guess I could take you to the grave of the most extreme case of a wife being abused. Or tell you of the police officer that was torn up on the inside because she returned a woman to her significant other. The crescent wrench imprint was still visible after a two week stay in the hospital.
Although the remarks on this thread do not go to the level as I described, I have heard stories of how DV began, from women, that are eerily familiar with some things I’ve read here. I did say ‘began’. Keep that in mind.
In no way, shape or form can I or will I condone corporal punishment towards a wife.
That exact same logic could be used against corporal punishment of children. Difference being, children don't have the same skill and ability to walk away.
Do you also refuse to condone corporal punishment of children?
That YouTube algorithm, tho...
Andrew's video pointed me to this one next. Data teaches Whorf a little bit about discipline...
Do you consider a wife a child?
In giving a wife corporal punishment, what would be the intent? Would a husband feel it is his right to punish her?
In administering corporal punishment to a wife, is a husband trying to establish power or control over his wife?
In regaining a patriarchal biblical family, do we really want to establish this way of life on the very foundations used by abusers to control and dominate another human being? Are we not different fromthe world? Can we not be examples of the very ‘light unto the world’ our Lord spoke of?
@rockfox, I love ya, man, but sometimes....
Meanwhile, I'm fine with a wide variety of personal preferences and desires between consenting adults, but the only "sanctity" I recognize in relationships is that "the marriage bed is undefiled". And while I'm fine with a wide variety of personal preferences and desires between consenting adults, that's not the same as normalizing them, let alone "sanctifying" them.
I'm gonna let the irony of that accusation speak for itself.
Read what I said again and you'll notice perhaps that I wasn't addressing you. If the shoe fits, bro, wear it. If it doesn't, don't. Problem solved.
I don't know where you get the idea that "beating" is a "technically incorrect" term for "striking someone repeatedly", but you use your language and I'll use mine. And if there's some snowflake in the BDSM community that is going to get offended by the idea that striking someone repeatedly can also be referred to as a beating for rhetorical effect, then they can take that up with me directly.
Meanwhile, I'm fine with a wide variety of personal preferences and desires between consenting adults, but the only "sanctity" I recognize in relationships is that "the marriage bed is undefiled". And while I'm fine with a wide variety of personal preferences and desires between consenting adults, that's not the same as normalizing them, let alone "sanctifying" them.
Very limited pov. It is also "touchy"(?) in this context because it raises legal issues and cultural acceptance issues that are peripheral to the core mission of this ministry. We'll have this discussion, but we'll have all of it, not just your side of it.
Your use of the word "need" here is a textbook example of begging the question.
On this you and I agree. (We agree on much more than we disagree on.)
Neither am I, and neither have I.
And again, you and I agree.
I think the best thing you could do would be go back and re-read CWJ's personal testimony. In some specific cases, and for obvious reasons with both parties consenting, the acknowledgment that certain actions will result in corporal punishment can be of real help, particularly when addressing patterns of behavior with years of buildup and habit-forming (whether that's in a long-term relationship or due to behaviors brought into a relationship based on past problems).
And reminder: At least @rockfox and I, from our somewhat different points of view, are both seeing corporal punishment as something that would be appropriate for anyone, adult or child, in a society, and was considered so until relatively recently historically. It's not a matter of "treating a wife as a child" (or shouldn't be), it's a matter of understanding the pros and cons of corporal punishment and figuring out when to use it for mutual benefit.
I have enjoyed and have gained by reading texts from both @andrew and @rockfox, but my observances and dealings have led me to believe and say these things in this thread. (Play, is a totally different thing, that’s not what I am bringing up, although it was brought up in this thread). I understand most people do not have to deal with domestic violence, some people have to deal with the aftermath of such things. I would encourage certain aspects discussed here to be reconsidered in the future. In addition, I stand by every word I said in this thread.
Yes it does raise legal issues. But the problem is far greater because any form of power over women in marriage is today considered abusive, and that includes telling a woman that she should submit to her husband or even just reading her those scripture passages which touch on it. We're in the same boat with the spanker's, whether we want to be or not.
Agreed.
Pedantically yes. But corporal punishment is a value neutral term whereas things like beating and violence are not; they are condemning. They inherently cast the behavior is wrong. At least in the US context. If I recall the Kiwi's when speaking of "spanking" a child use a different term which we in the US context would not use.
This might oughta be on the first page list of read/watch me first. Then Welcome to the Forum!
This is a muddied characteristic of terms. In reality, women who have been subjected to corporal punishment cannot distinguish between ‘value neutral term’ and a beating.
That is wrong, plain and simple. If you'd ever talked to women who begged and pleaded their husbands to institute corporal punishment, and then experienced the beneficial fruits when he did you'd know how wrong that is.
@Phillip, I completely understand where you're coming from emotionally, given your background as stated. And I do agree with your fundamental concern.
However, in the case of children, are you able to see a difference between "corporal punishment" and "beating"? Or do you consider them to be synonymous?
If you can see a difference in the case of children, then just note that others can see the same difference in the case of adults, even if you are not able to see it yourself because of your past experiences. I think it is very valid to hold the concerns that you hold - however the fact that this can be used as an excuse for great harm is not a reason to abandon the topic entirely, just a reason for great caution.
Especially legally. In New Zealand it's illegal to even use corporal punishment on children. You'd probably get away with it more readily on wives, ironically, because if she didn't mind it would be excused as some sort of sexual kink (and sexual kink is all good), while any incident on children is illegal regardless of the child's opinion on the matter. Not that I'm promoting either, I just find the whole situation quite ironic.
However, in the case of children, are you able to see a difference between "corporal punishment" and "beating"? Or do you consider them to be synonymous?
If you can see a difference in the case of children, then just note that others can see the same difference in the case of adults, even if you are not able to see it yourself because of your past experiences. I think it is very valid to hold the concerns that you hold - however the fact that this can be used as an excuse for great harm is not a reason to abandon the topic entirely, just a reason for great caution.
Especially legally. In New Zealand it's illegal to even use corporal punishment on children. You'd probably get away with it more readily on wives, ironically, because if she didn't mind it would be excused as some sort of sexual kink (and sexual kink is all good), while any incident on children is illegal regardless of the child's opinion on the matter. Not that I'm promoting either, I just find the whole situation quite ironic.
I'm sorry sir but the Domestic Violence industry is just that, an industry designed to take in families on one end and spit out broken people on the other. It causes way more violence than it ever stops.
Hi @FollowingHim , let’s not side track this thread about disciplining children. I see children as a different topic. I also understand play time between spouses, also a side track issue. And I realize some have had fun with that issue on here.
But the fun and play time is not my concern. As we all know, if you send a text to someone that is in a good mood, it will probably be received well. If you send the very same text to someone in a foul mood, that person could take that text in a very foul manner.
That being said, this forum is going out everywhere, as you know. Being a plural forum, how will those remarks be received around the world as people read this thread? I personally have no desire for anyone on this planet thinking corporal punishment, to a spouse, is a common accurrance in Biblical Families. As I personally do not believe it is. And as stated earlier, I personally can not and will not condone it.
I wish I had your tact in discussions. You are far more eloquent than I. My comments are not intended to offend. But my convictions in this area are strong.
What statistics did you use? There is no Domestic Violence industry. In fact, try to get funding for it. There is money for drug rehab, human trafficking rehabbing, gambling addictions and many other areas. DV? Not so much. In fact, if you want the money to work with other rehab programs, the state requires you also take in victims of DV. So the programs out there are working on a shoe string.
So what industry were talking about?
You didn't answer the question. It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with the fact that your reasoning, if accepted as true, also condemns corporal punishment for children. So do you oppose both? Or are you trying to have your cake and eat it too?
Yes, lets ignore things that discredit your logic.
Would he feel it his right? That depends on the relationship. The intent? There are many purposes, and they don't all have to do with punishment or pleasure. If you stop long enough to listen nonjudgmentally to the viewpoint of those who find that lifestyle beneficial you'll learn about those.
Ah yes, "power and control" the favorite theory of the domestic violence industry that is tearing apart marriage. Under that view point anything that is power or control over a woman is abuse. But the very same actions which are abuse if done by a man are ignored or even embraced if done by a woman.
Let me be plain and clear: modern theory and law about domestic violence are wholly incompatible with patriarchy, the plain teaching of scripture, and successful marriage. It is ungodly and unjust. Sure the people on the ground feel like they are helping people. But in truth it is not about ending abuse in marriage because they minimize, ignore, and excuse abused men while ignoring the causes of abuse in marriage that don't fit feminist theory. It is really about establishing a matriarchy with women in charge, giving power in marriage over to women and even outright destroying marriage and making women goddesses.
The scriptures teach that man is head over a women and she is to obey him. He has authority; that means power and control. And that includes consequences for disobedience (whether that should include corporal punishment is besides the point). If he doesn't have those things he is a mere figurehead and either she actually rules or it is a house divided and they are at war with one another (usually meaning she rules superstitiously). Could he abuse his authority? Sure. But the exercise of authority in marriage is not in and of itself wrong and abusive any more than it is wrong and abusive between parents and children, bosses and employees or commanders and soldiers.
You mean marriage? That foundation? Or maybe sex? Again, your logic proves too much.
You want to be a light to the world? Come up with a theory grounded in the actual scriptures and not one associated with the devilish movements trying to destroy marriage.