I see what you mean by picking and choosing based on our own liking -- and how that can become dangerous -- but if you fully trust that the man had your best interest at heart, then shouldn't that eliminate some of those issues?
I think I hear the sound of one hand clapping -- or is it the future echo of the final nails being driven into a coffin?
I don't believe I can possibly articulate exactly why this is the case, but something about this post of yours has almost completely convinced me that you're not engaging in these discussions in good faith. You're smart enough to consistently pivot away from one lost argument after another into new questions that change the direction of discussions you yourself started (occasionally [strategically?] peppering your responses with the intermittent reinforcement of assertions that you understand what is being said), so it strains credulity that you haven't paid enough attention to the various responses you've received to be able to comprehend the main thrust of what
@Old Paths Gardener was graciously communicating to you: women need covering at least partially because they're prone to making foolish choices, sometimes to the point of being dangerous to self and others. If you see what she means, then how can whether or not a woman trusts that a man has her best interests at heart eliminate that danger, given, in the case of a woman pretending to not need covering, that she's prone to error in her choice of leadership?
Young woman concludes she has innate wisdom of the ages and can make her own choices.
Young woman rejects covering of her father, which includes rejecting his leadership example.
Woman therefore accepts marriage proposal from a man without benefit of father's wisdom.
Woman ends up making poor choice re: man's leadership potential.
Woman nonetheless trusts her poor choice, because she doesn't want to admit being wrong.
Woman convinces herself that pretending she made a good choice will solve problems.
Woman rides and/or drives this situation into eventual disaster.
Woman then finds anyone but herself to blame.
Woman ends up alone but concludes she still doesn't need male covering.
Woman remains dependent on a male-sustained world but believes she's independent.
Rinse and repeat.
Is the following somehow related to the issue of poor picking?
Wonder if I could possibly find one that would slap me across the face every time I open my big mouth for a month straight?
Or are you obliquely disclosing something you've personally experienced?
If so, I pray you have properly dealt with the slapper and gotten whatever help you need to transcend going through that kind of horror. But your choice to begin your response with that does make some other red flags go off for me, especially as it relates to the frequency with which you paint men, marriage and patriarchy with broad brushes. Men are not the only ones who commit violence against their partners, children or parents. Statistically, women are significantly more likely to initiate physical violence in domestic disturbances, and overwhelmingly more likely to initiate verbal and emotional abuse. Boys are predominantly raised with the admonition of, "Don't hit the girl," but that doesn't mean they're always successful resisting the temptation to strike back against incessant verbal, emotional and physical abuse from a woman. They will, of course, be condemned for crossing that line, but that doesn't change who bears the ethical responsibility for what ends up transpiring.
So, if you're hinting that in the past you've been slapped across the face by someone for a month straight, perhaps you shouldn't just hint about it, because otherwise it just smacks of pejorative innuendo -- and if your reason for asking all your questions is to lead up to getting support for having been mistreated, I'll return to my first assertion: I pray you've properly dealt with the slapper. If you're an innocent victim, this is a police matter, and you deserved to be rescued even more than the dogs you've rescued, but you also need some professional help. Dancing around the issue by posing questions here that you don't even appear to want the answers to isn't going to help you much in the long run. We're not a rescue shelter; we're a support system for others who want to explore biblical truths about polygyny and patriarchy. Trying to get transformative counsel from our lot is more likely to lead to more dangerous harm than any likelihood it has to provide you transcendence.
Going to dumb this down for myself- What you're saying is if I can half-ass what i'm designed to do as a woman then why can't men?
That's pretty close, but you're not all the way there. You're not even
half-assing it. You aren't bearing any children, you're elevating the needs of dogs over the needs of humans, you think you're doing the world a favor by being giving to some people in your life, and you're only toying with the idea of becoming submissive and feminine, and then you pretty much negate even your desire to half-ass it by saying something like the following . . .
But, some men do stand back and allow those things happen, not only allow them happen but actively participate in causing it to happen in the first place. If men were doing what they were supposed to do as a whole, women wouldn't be in such situations to begin with typically. I am thankful for the ones who protect others but that doesn't solve the root of the problem.
Some men are bad, so we can still blame all your problems on men, because all men aren't doing what you believe they should do, and therefore women are stuck in a world that doesn't live up to their expectations.
Some men are bad, but most men actually would step up in all of the scenarios I mentioned, whereas almost all women would just sit back and watch -- or maybe film them on their smartphones.
Some men are bad, but why don't you just note that some women are also bad -- and that maybe the bad men and the bad women even themselves out? I'm not saying that's the case, but why do you never mention bad women?
You seem entirely clueless about the actual
root of the problem: we live in a fallen world. Yah owes us nothing but wrath, and yet He still demonstrates His Love for us -- and we're surrounded by a world, albeit a fallen and imperfect one, that is so filled with wondrous blessings that we should choke on any self-pity we have. We should in addition express gratitude for every blessing we receive from every other human being, male or female; if we did that we wouldn't have time to whine, moan (well, maybe some moaning is in order in the right context), complain or come up with theories about how the world should have been designed better for us so we won't ever be uncomfortable or inconvenienced.
You without a
doubt suffer from an entitlement attitude. As I addressed above, if you're hinting that you've been repeatedly face-slapped in your past, then some bitterness and confusion is in order, but I've known kids who were regularly beat with baseball bats who still found it within themselves to be grateful for their existence. You are not
owed a world better than this one, and you give a good impression of someone who has organized her life so thoroughly around self-pity and defining even your contributions to others as martyrdom for which you should be praised that it leads me to wonder if you think you could have designed a better world than Yah did.
What I'm really getting tired of, though, is this formula you repeat that consists of, "But some men are bad, so therefore all us women should be left off the hook, free to pretend that we're independent and have the right to feel perfectly entitled to the largesse of everything men have created and maintained, all while feeling just as free to complain that men aren't making our lives rosy enough or fast enough." All while discussing submission as if it's something you'll deign to do if you can negotiate the right compensatory package in exchange.
I'll just be frank: it makes it hard to be sympathetic toward you. You reserve the right to criticize men for not managing to meet your standards about how they should organize the world for your benefit, but you also feel like you should have to be
convinced that you owe men gratitude, submission or even babies in return. We should all be grateful that our mothers and grandmothers weren't possessed to that degree of this type of attitude.
But, oh yes, I forgot: some men are mean to perfectly innocent and angelic women.
I look forward to reading a response from you that indicates you've taken all this to heart, but in the absence of that I won't be answering any more questions.
