• 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.

Bad Marriage Sayings

Daniel DeLuca said:
The line I hate to hear, and it is in so many commercials nowadays (e.g. The Snoring Center): "You won't have to sleep on the couch". or another variant, "You'll be sleeping on the sofa".

The ONLY time I have EVER slept on the couch, is when I dozed off there, and I never HAD to do so!
Click to expand...

Good example!

Someone will have to explain to me how men get to the kind of place they'd willingly sleep on the couch. It's so emasculating, how can they allow themselves to be kowtowed so badly? I can't think of any clearer demonstration of a woman being in charge than this.

FollowingHim said:
This helped to ensure, in the difficult first couple of years, that one potential way arguments could have been escalated just wasn't an option. In my opinion it was one of the few wise and leaderly things I did in those early years, and was beneficial on a very small number of important occasions. It basically set a positive tone for our entire marriage, that we were going to remain a team, under my leadership, whatever the circumstances.
Click to expand...

Putting ones foot down on an issue like this can have huge positive ramifications in how marriage conflict goes and in her esteem of you.

Another similar standard all men should set around arguments is the D word. It is common for some women to threaten divorce in arguments as a catchall way to win.
 
rockfox said:
Another similar standard all men should set around arguments is the D word. It is common for some women to threaten divorce in arguments as a catchall way to win.
Click to expand...
I've not experienced such threats personally but I met a woman yesterday who does exactly that. The sad thing about it is she and her husband have a son who hears the arguments and is growing to be very insecure. There's more at stake than just the man and woman's relationship with kids hearing and seeing these things at work.
 
rockfox said:
Another similar standard all men should set around arguments is the D word. It is common for some women to threaten divorce in arguments as a catchall way to win.
Click to expand...

IMO the best way to deal with that follows the thinking a guy told me once about a young lady in his house that was minorly cutting on herself and threatening suicide. He told her to give him the knife so he could make sure it was sharp enough to get the job done the next time. She quit threatening suicide because she just wanted attention

Maybe its just me, but if a woman doesnt wanna stay under my covering, she would need to make certain thats what she really wants, cause it will probably happen. I’m sure its not what I’d want to happen, but I refuse to be manipulated like that.
 
Verifyveritas76 said:
IMO the best way to deal with that follows the thinking a guy told me once about a young lady in his house that was minorly cutting on herself and threatening suicide. He told her to give him the knife so he could make sure it was sharp enough to get the job done the next time. She quit threatening suicide because she just wanted attention

Maybe its just me, but if a woman doesnt wanna stay under my covering, she would need to make certain thats what she really wants, cause it will probably happen. I’m sure its not what I’d want to happen, but I refuse to be manipulated like that.
Click to expand...

You are right, the only way to deal with this is to refuse to be manipulated. Best thing is to just set ground rules for arguments and make it clear that is off the table. But not everyone is in the position to do that. Many have had good results just calling her her bluff in some manner. Because it almost always is a bluff. Offer to help her pack, hand her divorce papers, start packing themselves, etc. It seems to be pretty effective, not just because it's a bluff, but because the bluff works by getting the man to demonstrate he needs the relationship more than her (making him the weaker party). Calling her bluff forces her to fish or cut bait and usually quickly ends the tactic and puts her in the weaker position. But you have to be willing to follow through on calling her bluff or you'll end up in a 1000 times worse position than before.

Though this isn't something I've had to deal with personally for various reasons.
 
rockfox said:
You are right, the only way to deal with this is to refuse to be manipulated. Best thing is to just set ground rules for arguments and make it clear that is off the table. But not everyone is in the position to do that. Many have had good results just calling her her bluff in some manner. Because it almost always is a bluff. Offer to help her pack, hand her divorce papers, start packing themselves, etc. It seems to be pretty effective, not just because it's a bluff, but because the bluff works by getting the man to demonstrate he needs the relationship more than her (making him the weaker party). Calling her bluff forces her to fish or cut bait and usually quickly ends the tactic and puts her in the weaker position. But you have to be willing to follow through on calling her bluff or you'll end up in a 1000 times worse position than before.

Though this isn't something I've had to deal with personally for various reasons.
Click to expand...
I do hear what you are saying, but I do not consider it off the table from the beginning. But if it comes up, I will not treat it as a bluff. Thankfully, with @Well loved wife this has never been an issue, and something that I try hard to make sure she’ll never have justifiable cause for. God being my helper.

My covenant is a conditional covenant, not an unconditional covenant. Under the right circumstances, IMO she could be justified to leave/divorce me. Those circumstances are listed in Exodus 21:10 whether I take another wife or not. Likewise, under the right circumstances, I could be justified to put her away or divorce her, primarily for rebellion though covenant breaking covers a lot of ground.

Most people believe that if you take this stance, you are setting up your household to inevitably culminate in divorce. I thoroughly disagree. I believe it will do just the opposite, provided that both/all understand their roles as God established them, and are both under authority.

In other words, God has vessels of honor and vessels of dishonor in His household for a reason. Not that I would intentionally bring a dishonorable woman into my household to make a point, but if a wife becomes dishonorable, and creates chaos in the home, or vexes the other wives, or refuses to follow clear directions, in my home, she would become a dishonorable vessel that would no longer be allowed to stink up my home, and if unreconcilable after a time, would then be free to live outside my covering.
 
Verifyveritas76 said:
I do hear what you are saying, but I do not consider it off the table from the beginning. But if it comes up, I will not treat it as a bluff. Thankfully, with @Well loved wife this has never been an issue, and something that I try hard to make sure she’ll never have justifiable cause for. God being my helper.

My covenant is a conditional covenant, not an unconditional covenant. Under the right circumstances, IMO she could be justified to leave/divorce me. Those circumstances are listed in Exodus 21:10 whether I take another wife or not. Likewise, under the right circumstances, I could be justified to put her away or divorce her, primarily for rebellion though covenant breaking covers a lot of ground.

Most people believe that if you take this stance, you are setting up your household to inevitably culminate in divorce. I thoroughly disagree. I believe it will do just the opposite, provided that both/all understand their roles as God established them, and are both under authority.

In other words, God has vessels of honor and vessels of dishonor in His household for a reason. Not that I would intentionally bring a dishonorable woman into my household to make a point, but if a wife becomes dishonorable, and creates chaos in the home, or vexes the other wives, or refuses to follow clear directions, in my home, she would become a dishonorable vessel that would no longer be allowed to stink up my home, and if unreconcilable after a time, would then be free to live outside my covering.
Click to expand...

By off the table, I meant as a argumentation tactic. Though my taking divorce off the table in my marriage played a big part in her not only not using it, but us staying together through difficult times. I don't think your stance set's you up for divorce, I just think it's indistinguishable from no-fault divorce in practice.
 
rockfox said:
By off the table, I meant as a argumentation tactic. Though my taking divorce off the table in my marriage played a big part in her not only not using it, but us staying together through difficult times. I don't think your stance set's you up for divorce, I just think it's indistinguishable from no-fault divorce in practice.
Click to expand...
No fault is very different from what I described. What I described was a for fault. Big difference.
 
Verifyveritas76 said:
No fault is very different from what I described. What I described was a for fault. Big difference.
Click to expand...

I sympathize with your idea. It intuitively makes sense. But I can't square it with scripture. And I've seen enough of the excuses people offer up to justify divorces that I can see that your standard, while yes it is a big difference in theory from no-fault, would be little different in practice.

Anyway, that's all I have to say on this as we're veering off topic.
 
rockfox said:
Another similar standard all men should set around arguments is the D word. It is common for some women to threaten divorce in arguments as a catchall way to win.
Click to expand...
For years, every time my wife would bring up the "D" word, I would tell her that we don't use that word in our household. It would still come up from time to time, and I think the one time she was most serious about it, was when it became clear that I was not going to back down from my desire for polygamy, because she had me sitting there with a "Marriage Counselor", who was against polygamy, and I caved in just a little bit.

The most recent incident where she "threatened" divorce, I told her that that was not a threat. I told her that the moment she files for divorce, she is granting me tacit permission to take a second wife. She got real silent. I had determined that she needed a lesson in submission, which she chafed at. She also threatened to call the police on me. I told her that the police were not going to do anything about it. After I dropped her and my little boy off at our home, I gave her a chance to see what life would be like without me. I went out that evening, hung out at the park, went to a bookstore and a music store and hung out there, started driving around, and eventually she called me. She told me to come home, and I told her to beg. She said, "No", and I said, "Call me back when you are ready to beg." Since then, any issues where she refuses to submit, are resolved rather quickly. No more periods of three or four days where she treats me coldly. For example, I will tell her to hold my hand, which was the most common form of retaliation she used against me, but now she knows the consequences of refusing to do so. I told her that I am teaching her how to submit, and that she will get used to it. It is interesting to see how she is progressing, because I am pretty sure that polygamy will not work with a rebellious wife. Man! I LOVE the things I am learning here at Biblical Families!
 
Frank S said:
From Dictionary.com...
A word I hope no man reading this will ever have hung around his neck:

henpecked

adjective
browbeaten, bullied, or intimidated by one's wife, girlfriend, etc.:
a henpecked husband who never dared to contradict his wife.
Click to expand...
Walking on Eggshells

Verb[edit]
walk on eggshells (third-person singular simple present walks on eggshells, present participle walking on eggshells, simple past and past participle walked on eggshells)

  1. (idiomatic) To be overly careful in dealing with a person or situation because they get angry or offended very easily; to try very hard not to upset someone or something.
  2. (idiomatic) To be careful and sensitive, in handling very sensitive matters.
Been there....Done that. Ain't goin' back.
 
Daniel DeLuca said:
Walking on Eggshells

Verb[edit]
walk on eggshells (third-person singular simple present walks on eggshells, present participle walking on eggshells, simple past and past participle walked on eggshells)

  1. (idiomatic) To be overly careful in dealing with a person or situation because they get angry or offended very easily; to try very hard not to upset someone or something.
  2. (idiomatic) To be careful and sensitive, in handling very sensitive matters.
Been there....Done that. Ain't goin' back.
Click to expand...

Walking on eggshells can happen when either Humpty Dumpty or his lady counterpart is "off the wall"

(If you remember that last expression - you've been around a while;))
 
Frank S said:
From Dictionary.com...
A word I hope no man reading this will ever have hung around his neck:

henpecked

adjective
browbeaten, bullied, or intimidated by one's wife, girlfriend, etc.:
a henpecked husband who never dared to contradict his wife.
Click to expand...

You know you're dealing with an old word when it has an agricultural origin.

henpecked (adj.)
said of a husband whose wife rules him by superior force of will, 1670s, an image from hen + peck (v.).

The henpect Man rides behind his Wife, and lets her wear the Spurs and govern the Reins. [Samuel Butler, "Genuine Remains," 1759]
The verb henpeck (1680s) apparently is a back-formation.
Click to expand...

A similar adjective for submissive men...browbeaten.
 
That's funny, and I think the husband generates more sympathy, if he didn't realize that the floor was recently mopped when he stepped on it, especially since the officer is already aware of that fact, so I don't know that humorous tale could be improved to where it fits the "Walking on Eggshells" concept. I suppose you could insert the word "accidentally".
 
steve said:
Maybe he couldn’t take it anymore and chose to leave this life through the kitchen?
Click to expand...
ROTFL!!! If only he had understood Biblical Gender Roles!
 
frederick said:
So the take home is; never walk on wet floors again. Got it. :(:eek:
Click to expand...
Unless you are so henpecked and unwilling to consider male headship, that you are ready to leave this world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top