• 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.

The biblical model for adding wives, is *NOT* about equality-MEN only

My @Well loved wife and I were talking about the issue of equality versus equity today. My mind oddly enough went to the parable of the Master with the three servants that he entrusted with various talents. The first received 5, the second 2 and the third 1. Now, all three of them were equally servants, however, they were entrusted with equity commiserate with their abilities and the level of trust the Master had in them. The one that had not earned a high level of trust was still given a chance to succeed or fail based on "her" own abilities. Did the master know that "she" would fail? Whether he (the master) did or not, the question is irrelevant. It didnt matter if he knew, he still entrusted the servant with a chance.
It reminds me of an old John Wayne movie where the Duke hires a man. In gratitude, the man thanks him for "giving" him a job. I'll never forget his reply. He said, (paraphrased) the only thing I'm giving you is a chance! If you keep the job it will be because you earned it!
I see quite a few comments in various discussions by additional wives where their unrealistic romantic expectations are not fulfilled and within a short time they are either having to redefine what a successful poly marriage is, or they become disenchanted and leave the relationship. Often times, it seems that they see a good mono relationship and automatically expect to have the same success with this man without realizing the blood, sweat and tears that have made the marriage what it is today. These relationships weren't created in a short time and trust and faith takes time to build. This cannot be achieved via long distance. True "oneness" is not just achieved miraculously thru consummation. I love @andrew 's tag line, Do you have the constitution, the faith, to go as far as is needed!
 
FollowingHim2 said:
There's plenty of materialist people here. I'm just not one of them, nor could I be in this house, where on earth would I put all my 'treasures'?
Righteo, lets go there then. That can't be equal. That seems entirely absurd. For example, right now I am heavily pregnant, and there's not much going on around here due to medical reasons. If that was equal with a SW then she wouldn't be getting any either, which would leave Samuel with 2 wives and no sex.
...
Exactly.
Click to expand...
Respectfully, that's a Straw man position. I didn't say it can't be equal.
The scripture which I quoted commands that the man can not reduce the conjugal time with his 1st wife (and other thigns) when he adds a 2nd wife.

There is no command regarding equality. It's a nice ideal, but since "cheta" sin is missing the mark then we must know what the mark is when we fire that shot (yarah (same root as torah, law,instruction) otherwise we risk more than pissing off our wives. The mark is, don't reduce 1st wive's sexy time :)
A more practical goal for guys aspiring to live this way, I think is properly managing expectations at the get go. If we overshoot then great.
  1. don't over promise
  2. don't promise equality
  3. do obey the commands, not to reduce what previous wives have when adding a new one (reflect deeply on this one as it will require exponentially growing effort on the man's part with each addition).
 
Last edited:
I am curious about how your above point translates in practical terms, @IshChayil.

If a man gets married to Wife #1, both 18 years old, they are going to want to enjoy their new relationship fully and often.
But Wife #2 drops in their lives just two years later, same age as them. Is the man supposed to maintain a very active relationship with both of his young newlywed wives, or is he supposed to offer Wife #2 the leftover energy he has? What I understand from your advice is he should reduce what he gives Wife #1 from the beginning of the relationship, but won't this cause him unhappiness too?
Or Wife #2 comes along years later, age 18, and they're now in their 40s. The man and Wife #1 aren't so active anymore. Is it okay for him to focus his intimate energy on the wife who really wants it? He hasn't reduced Wife #1's time, but she will get less than Wife #2.

I guess I just don't understand how one can prepare in such ways to have multiple wives.
 
This is taking an interesting turn. I have some thoughts on it, but since you addressed the question to IshChayill, Ill wait to see what he says
 
Lili said:
I am curious about how your above point translates in practical terms, @IshChayil.

If a man gets married to Wife #1, both 18 years old, they are going to want to enjoy their new relationship fully and often.
But Wife #2 drops in their lives just two years later, same age as them. Is the man supposed to maintain a very active relationship with both of his young newlywed wives, or is he supposed to offer Wife #2 the leftover energy he has? What I understand from your advice is he should reduce what he gives Wife #1 from the beginning of the relationship, but won't this cause him unhappiness too?
Or Wife #2 comes along years later, age 18, and they're now in their 40s. The man and Wife #1 aren't so active anymore. Is it okay for him to focus his intimate energy on the wife who really wants it? He hasn't reduced Wife #1's time, but she will get less than Wife #2.

I guess I just don't understand how one can prepare in such ways to have multiple wives.
Click to expand...
Fair question...
answer I don't know but I think I have a notion...

It's a good hypothetical. In my experience many 18 year olds have no clue to recognize wisdom when they hear it anyway so even if we solve that hypothetical haha.
Look, let me ask you if that couple sleeps together 3 times a day the first month of marriage... how many months will it take to get to once a week sleeping together?

Ok in all seriousness; many women think they want everything as often as possible, and then when they have a man who does everything for them, they don't understand why they feel less for him. Maybe this part I should move to the guys' private forums ha.

Anecdotally in relationships, I've noticed, and many friends of mine have noticed, and I've read (doesn't make it true) that when a guy gives his all to a girl, there's a strange psychology that happens and women usually aren't aware of why it's happening.
This is hard to discuss because invariably someone will raise their hand "well people of faith aren't this way!"
or shouldn't be or something of the sort which .. o.k. In the end, people are people, and I've observed this and I think it's true.
Men usually learn this in the states in highschool. All the good guys are asking each other "why do the bad guys get the girls?"
We don't mean bad like doing drugs, etc. The observation that we all saw in highschool is that the guys who don't buy flowers, don't do all those extra girly things, see chick flicks, and get weepy in the film, etc. ... get the girls.

I'll try to express this concept but if I fail I hope wiser men will join in.
1st I'll take the absurd point to more clearly define the scenario,
Too many flowers, too many movies, everything is together, he learns to completely relate to her emotionally, he's always empathetic, always answers the phone when she calls, always texts back right away, etc. ad absurdem... she'll loose respect, emotion, etc. for the guy and not understand why.
In extreme cases the guy actually becomes more like a woman than a man and the lady can brag to her friends how sensitive he is, and this and that, and she's happy for a while... then the very things she fell for in him fade.
She will take him for granted.
It's always good to hold back something. My wives still don't know all the things I know about and I like to surprise them sometimes with knowledge in a certain area. Again, maybe better in mens' forum.

My best friend from college got dumped by his wife. I paid close attention to the details because a mutual friend shared with hiim this wisdom I'm sharing.
He noticed that ALL of his friends who had been married, had their wives cheat, leave, etc. and the one thing he noticed in common was they all were "sooo good" to their wives. So accomodating, etc. The guy giving the advice was happily married with kids. Everyone in the network of friends he knew were believers.
What was different? He observed that he's not really so amazingly good to his wife. Never buys her flowers, etc.
all the stuff that some people see on paper as being good.
No before we get spiralled off ladies into talks about my man does these things, etc. ok
the pointis about quantity.

Guys, you should hold something back.
Let's be fair, women are very complicated creatures and truly they often don't understand themselves.
There is a huge difference between what makes a woman happy, and what she *thinks* will make her happy.

This then scales a bit better to polygamy. If you've already been "giving your all" to the wife of your youth, how are you going to give something more to wife #2 without reducing what you give to her.
This really is supposed to be about adding a wife and the commandmenet to not reduce, but the same wisdom I believe applies to monogamous relationships too.

Does anyone watch "Last man standing?" Did you see the episode where he gives his wife flowers on Valentine's day and she's suprised? He explains his genius in that he NEVER gives her flowers on Valentine's day, he is now "the only man on the planet who can give his wife flowers on Valentine's day and surprise her".
I feel I didn't explain satisfactorily. Anyone care to help me out? (4 am here so I'm fading fast)

Now I should not be exposing this man secret to you; I may face ramifications at the next He-man club meeting.
 
Last edited:
Been thinking about this for a while and still not sure I have the answer but here goes my .02

Most of you should know that I'm not big on the Romantic Home Model. I am not what I would term a romantic guy. I fall far short of the cultural criteria for that. And yet, I love my wife more than I ever dreamed was even possible. I love to surprise her and do nice things for her. She's made the comment before that she has to be careful what she says because if I know she wants it, she usually ends up with that or better. Not immediately, not always, but I love to meet not only her needs but also her wants.

IMHO this issue @Lili is so confused because often we read Scripture and try to apply it without understanding the societal norms and culture in which it was written. I believe the answer is to be found in defining needs versus wants.
In the ancient culture, since the garden there seems to be an understanding that the man is considered upright if he follows God's requirements and takes care of his family by the sweat of his brow etc. The woman however found cultural acceptance by her ability to land an Adown and then to produce children. Part of her understood responsibilities in the marriage was to have children. As late as the New Testament times, apparently, this was considered to have something to do with her relationship with YHWH.
1 Tim 2 :14,15 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
(Now before everybody beats up on me, I have studied this out quite a bit and sadly have not found any smoking gun yet to clarify this definitively. I am still researching so if anyone knows of source material either way I'd appreciate it. This is just my observation based upon statements especially throughout the OT by barren women or women who want more children.)
In the culture in which Exodus 21 was written, a married, childless woman was an anomaly. It was perceived that she was in disfavor by either her Adown or by God. Either way, it was a huge cultural shame. Her primary need was that her husband perform his duty of marriage so that she could have children and remove her shame. If her husband helped her light a few fireworks, that was a bonus.
She was also banned from having intercourse the week of her menstruation and 7 days following. This means that for the women who have extra wants, you have 2 weeks ish to make it happen. At best, in ancient cultural perspective, she was entitled to half of his time.
There are some that view intercourse as being for children only. If this is your position, that's your prerogative, I just don't happen to agree with it.
In short, what we need and what we want are often two different things. To have a need for children is not wrong and neither is wanting more from the physical relationship. We take comfort that "my God shall supply all your need according to His riches in glory," but never does he state that supplying our wants is anything but conditional. "Delight thyself also in the Lord and He shall give thee the desires of thy heart."
So much of this discussion comes down to our cultural perspective. For so long we have viewed this dilemma through the lense of Monogamy only. In this perspective . . . . Well, lets just say that there are many issues with the results from it. However, if viewed through the perspective that the Adown is a husbandman, entrusted with a garden, orchard or livestock, several things have to be in perspective to scale the model. 1) With one apple tree, he's gonna have a lot of extra time and energy on his hands that he may invest in this particular tree. That may be beneficial, but it can easily become overbearing and could be detrimental: overwatering, too much digging around, too much pruning etc. 2) With the proper amount of care and attention this first tree will bring forth great fruit. 3) The Master sees what a good job the husbandman is doing and determines that because he has been faithful in that which is least, he can be trusted with more, so he entrusts him with additional trees. 4) As long as the husbandman is diligent to provide for the needs of all of the trees, he is meeting the expectations of the Master and is a faithful steward.

In a nutshell, that is what is required. That all the needs of the women are met. How to determine what the needs are will require a man smarter than I am. I just think that needs and desires have been confused. It would be up to the individual husbandman to determine what is fundamentally needs versus wants by knowing his women. Any additional attention should probably be best realized by delighting in your Adown.

The Romantic Model is all about my happy time, my needs, my wants, how I am fulfilled.
The Biblical Model is all about having a spiritual covering, being content with lot that you've been given, counting your blessings, serving others and the seed or fruit, from Christ all the way to the fields.

I now pick up my cross and await my pending crucifixion.
 
Last edited:
Building on what you have said @IshChayil - a lady who works for me has candidly said something like the following to me: No woman really wants a man who gives her everything she wants. She'll demand it, but what she really wants is to know he is man enough to stand up to her and tell her no when she pushes it too far. When a woman has a man who meets her every need, he is no longer the man she wants.
 
aineo said:
Building on what you have said @IshChayil - a lady who works for me has candidly said something like the following to me: No woman really wants a man who gives her everything she wants. She'll demand it, but what she really wants is to know he is man enough to stand up to her and tell her no when she pushes it too far. When a woman has a man who meets her every need, he is no longer the man she wants.
Click to expand...
And its not just women. Children want this also. The happiest children I know are those who have been taught boundaries and the word no.
 
This:
Verifyveritas76 said:
1) With one apple tree, he's gonna have a lot of extra time and energy on his hands that he may invest in this particular tree. That may be beneficial, but it can easily become overbearing and could be detrimental: overwatering, too much digging around, too much pruning etc. 2) With the proper amount of care and attention this first tree will bring forth great fruit. 3) The Master sees what a good job the husbandman is doing and determines that because he has been faithful in that which is least, he can be trusted with more, so he entrusts him with additional trees. 4) As long as the husbandman is diligent to provide for the needs of all of the trees, he is meeting the expectations of the Master and is a faithful steward.
Click to expand...
 
Verifyveritas76 said:
And its not just women. Children want this also. The happiest children I know are those who have been taught boundaries and the word no.
Click to expand...
And the most miserable monsters you'll ever see, are spoiled over indulged brats who's parents bend over backward, and turn flips, and buy candy and puppies and expect every other child to accommodate their precious darling's whims.

Parents like that are usually horrified at the thought of spanking, and that means they deserve a good dose of what the kid needs too, for not being willing to actually parent the child!

My dad liked to say "Joy is an inside job." But the right forces, externally applied, have a miraculous effect on a child's perspective. ;)

Women want a man they can respect, not one they can control.
 
I agree that if a man is to do absolutely everything a woman wants he will become a doormat that she may no longer respect, and will make it difficult to add a second wife without causing serious issues. But there are two different ways to approach this, and these are being a bit confounded in the comments here, I would like to tease that out. Any man should be giving his woman what she needs, and some of what she wants - but there are three very different reasons why a man may do what he does:
  1. Not give her everything she wants, because he is a busy man, trying to achieve many different things in life efficiently, and his wife fits into that life as a very important component but is not the primary focus of his life (his primary focus being God).
  2. Not give her everything she wants, because he is choosing to deliberately manipulate her in a particular direction.
  3. Give her everything she wants, because he is scared of losing her and is manipulating her to stay.
For instance, a man may not reply immediately to his woman's text messages because (1) he was in an important meeting, didn't see any need to keep looking at his phone every minute, and responded to text messages in the time he had scheduled for that later in the day, or because (2) he saw the message immediately, had time to respond, but thought "I don't want her to expect instant responses, so I'll wait for 2 hours before I reply". Or (3) he could immediately pick up the phone and interrupt a critical meeting to send her a soppy love-note just to keep her happy. The first man is being a strong, rational leader and will make a good husband. The second is being a manipulative jerk. The third is insecure and poorly focussed.

But both the second and third men actually have an over-obsession with their woman, and how she'll respond to their communications.. They just deal with that in opposite ways. The third is worried she might leave, and immediately responds to keep her happy today. The second is worried she might leave, and deliberately "holds something back", delaying his response to keep her sitting by the phone waiting for him, to keep her dependent on him and with the "right" expectations.

The first has his priorities right. He's not worried about her at all. He's not trying to respond slowly, or quickly. He's trying to just do what needs to be done, and he responds to her when he gets a chance. Sometimes he'll respond immediately (when he's free), sometimes he may not respond at all (when he's really busy), and what her reaction will be to that doesn't even cross his mind.

Same thing when it comes to sex. An insecure man will do everything for his woman and give her high expectations, a manipulative man will deliberately hold back something to keep her dependent on him and leave space for a hypothetical second wife (who may never even come along). Both are worried about how much fun they give her - too little or too much. A rational man will just enjoy his wife whenever he gets a chance, and not enjoy her when he's too busy. He won't worry about having too much fun, nor will he worry about the times when they're not close for a while due to circumstances. They're just a team and things change over time.

The same goes for money. An insecure man will buy his woman everything she wants even if it means going into debt. A manipulative man will carefully plan exactly how much would be best to spend on his woman to give her the "right" expectations. While a rational man will just team up with his wife, say "this is all the money we have and this is why we're spending it here and not here". Sometimes he'll treat her, sometimes he won't, and he'll be completely honest about why. Again, they're a team. One day they might add someone else to the team.

An insecure man may buy his wife flowers every Friday and panic when he forgets. A manipulative man may deliberately never buy her flowers except for at a particular calculated timing - for instance only on special occasions, and only every third occurrance of that occasion so she doesn't expect it. A rational man will usually not buy her flowers but sometimes see them on special on his way home and buy some for no reason at all.

One day each of these men may try and add a second wife.
3's wife will struggle to cope because she's come to expect that EVERYTHING the man does is for her, and he'll have to double both his income and spare time to possibly try and double this, which will usually be impossible.

2's wife may cope because she's been trained to be ready for this very situation, her man has always left her with low expectations to leave "space" for another wife. And she's often wondered if he's having an affair anyway given he tends to not respond to her messages and seems to have unexplained space in his timetable, she's already worked through this emotionally and is already resigned to what bit of him she gets. But if he never takes another wife, he's missed out on the enjoyment he could have had with her in that "space" for no reason.

1's wife will cope because she's used to change and unpredictability. She knows that there is always a good, rational reason for her man doing what he does, he never does anything to manipulate her. She trusts that he'll make this work also. Alternatively, if he never takes another wife but tells her that they're going to Africa as missionaries, or they're going to sell the house to invest in a risky startup business venture, or whatever, she'll also trust him with that and be able to take that change in her stride also.
 
Bam. Perfect.
 
Well said Samuel!!
As a wife I would sure hate to lose out on time with my hubby, because he's afraid of spoiling me. At this point, after fifteen years of being open to polyyny, that would be a lot of accumulated loss!

I like feeling there is mutual trust, and someone manipulative is, to my way of thinking, demonstrating a definate lack of trust.
 
FollowingHim2 said:
I hope so. Women need security, not manipulative nonsense.
Click to expand...
To be fair, calling a well-reasoned,
planned attempt to show love to Hashem by keeping one of the only commandments from G-d we find concerning polygamy
...calling this "manipulation" is, ahem,
less than kind.

If you are coming from the perspective that all of a husbands extra time and resources should go to the wife, then that makes the wife G-d.
My perspective is that from the beginning, most of his attention should be in studying the word, worship, writing worship songs, etc.. and the left over goes to wife number 1.
If he gets the go-ahead from G-d to take another wife, that's G-d who is then allowing a reduction in resources and time from his account... not the first wife.

This is not manipulation of the woman, this is wisdom and having a high opinion of G-d's laws.
 
FollowingHim said:
I agree that if a man is to do absolutely everything a woman wants he will become a doormat that she may no longer respect, and will make it difficult to add a second wife without causing serious issues. But there are two different ways to approach this, and these are being a bit confounded in the comments here, I would like to tease that out. Any man should be giving his woman what she needs, and some of what she wants - but there are three very different reasons why a man may do what he does:
  1. Not give her everything she wants, because he is a busy man, trying to achieve many different things in life efficiently, and his wife fits into that life as a very important component but is not the primary focus of his life (his primary focus being God).
  2. Not give her everything she wants, because he is choosing to deliberately manipulate her in a particular direction.
  3. Give her everything she wants, because he is scared of losing her and is manipulating her to stay.
For instance, a man may not reply immediately to his woman's text messages because (1) he was in an important meeting, didn't see any need to keep looking at his phone every minute, and responded to text messages in the time he had scheduled for that later in the day, or because (2) he saw the message immediately, had time to respond, but thought "I don't want her to expect instant responses, so I'll wait for 2 hours before I reply". Or (3) he could immediately pick up the phone and interrupt a critical meeting to send her a soppy love-note just to keep her happy. The first man is being a strong, rational leader and will make a good husband. The second is being a manipulative jerk. The third is insecure and poorly focussed.

But both the second and third men actually have an over-obsession with their woman, and how she'll respond to their communications.. They just deal with that in opposite ways. The third is worried she might leave, and immediately responds to keep her happy today. The second is worried she might leave, and deliberately "holds something back", delaying his response to keep her sitting by the phone waiting for him, to keep her dependent on him and with the "right" expectations.

The first has his priorities right. He's not worried about her at all. He's not trying to respond slowly, or quickly. He's trying to just do what needs to be done, and he responds to her when he gets a chance. Sometimes he'll respond immediately (when he's free), sometimes he may not respond at all (when he's really busy), and what her reaction will be to that doesn't even cross his mind.

Same thing when it comes to sex. An insecure man will do everything for his woman and give her high expectations, a manipulative man will deliberately hold back something to keep her dependent on him and leave space for a hypothetical second wife (who may never even come along). Both are worried about how much fun they give her - too little or too much. A rational man will just enjoy his wife whenever he gets a chance, and not enjoy her when he's too busy. He won't worry about having too much fun, nor will he worry about the times when they're not close for a while due to circumstances. They're just a team and things change over time.

The same goes for money. An insecure man will buy his woman everything she wants even if it means going into debt. A manipulative man will carefully plan exactly how much would be best to spend on his woman to give her the "right" expectations. While a rational man will just team up with his wife, say "this is all the money we have and this is why we're spending it here and not here". Sometimes he'll treat her, sometimes he won't, and he'll be completely honest about why. Again, they're a team. One day they might add someone else to the team.

An insecure man may buy his wife flowers every Friday and panic when he forgets. A manipulative man may deliberately never buy her flowers except for at a particular calculated timing - for instance only on special occasions, and only every third occurrance of that occasion so she doesn't expect it. A rational man will usually not buy her flowers but sometimes see them on special on his way home and buy some for no reason at all.

One day each of these men may try and add a second wife.
3's wife will struggle to cope because she's come to expect that EVERYTHING the man does is for her, and he'll have to double both his income and spare time to possibly try and double this, which will usually be impossible.

2's wife may cope because she's been trained to be ready for this very situation, her man has always left her with low expectations to leave "space" for another wife. And she's often wondered if he's having an affair anyway given he tends to not respond to her messages and seems to have unexplained space in his timetable, she's already worked through this emotionally and is already resigned to what bit of him she gets. But if he never takes another wife, he's missed out on the enjoyment he could have had with her in that "space" for no reason.

1's wife will cope because she's used to change and unpredictability. She knows that there is always a good, rational reason for her man doing what he does, he never does anything to manipulate her. She trusts that he'll make this work also. Alternatively, if he never takes another wife but tells her that they're going to Africa as missionaries, or they're going to sell the house to invest in a risky startup business venture, or whatever, she'll also trust him with that and be able to take that change in her stride also.
Click to expand...

I think there is suddenly an obsession with manipulation here.
The woman is not the boss, and a man choosing to not respond to her immediately as she asynchronously disrupts his day (prayer time, study time, work, thinking etc) is not a manipulation. If we had an earthly king and we texted him, I would suspect he replies when he darn well feels like it. I think we are now responding to estrogen in this thread and I realize it was a mistake create this thread outside of the man's area.
There are many things about women that women don't understand about themselves; and I know the guys get this; they may be too scared to respond about it haha, but they get it.

The woman should be preoccupied with things of G-d in the home as well so that she shouldn't be "sitting by the phone waiting for a text response from hubby" that makes hubby into G-d. There is an order to the house and home. People who married their highschool sweetheart at age 20 will not have observed these things probabl so if you guys / gals fall into that category then let's not pretend that we have experience with these scenarios.

I've tried it both ways; and when I give too much too fast, the woman is unhappy. When you with hold, and be a man, responding when you're ready, doing gifts as you please when you're moved, it's all more meaningful.
And if... if you guys who aren't in polygamy yet want to take a 2nd wife, it's best to not violate G-d's command (don't lessen what wife 1 has; it's not fair to her as it's gonna be hard enough for her growing into polygamy).
The bible doesn't say treat your wives equally; the Koran says that.
This is why the wise man will manage expectations of the 2nd wife before adding her.
Setting the expecatitions lower, so when she agrees he can exceed them. Usually if people have their expectations exceeded they are happier than the opposite scenario. Yeshua illustrates this with the story of the man with 2 sons, 1 says I'll go and doesn't and the other says I won't go but then goes. Better to say you won't go, then go afterall... This is the crux of what I was trying to get across.

We should expect that everyone posting in these forums is a godly person with a heart that loves the L-rd. I don't think there is a desire to "manipulate" by anyone here so let's not make assumptions like that; it's not edifying.

BTW this is not all in response to your post @FollowingHim ...just more convenient to piggy-back these ideas on to what is a small response to what you wrote :)
Should we move this to the men's area guys? Since this really is an issue for men managing their home; obeying G-d's command in *how* to do that,
and I think it's not edifying for the ladies to see this stuff anyway.

My mistake as the op to post it here. Lesson learned, more wisdom gained...
BTW I think @Verifyveritas76 and @aineo posts did much better jobs explaining what I was failing to explain well...
 
Last edited:
aineo said:
Building on what you have said @IshChayil - a lady who works for me has candidly said something like the following to me: No woman really wants a man who gives her everything she wants. She'll demand it, but what she really wants is to know he is man enough to stand up to her and tell her no when she pushes it too far. When a woman has a man who meets her every need, he is no longer the man she wants.
Click to expand...
You hit it right on the head @aineo

That's manliness.
 
Everyone's agreeing here. I might put it this way: a man in charge is self-contained. The appearance of difference here comes up because of how we each use different words to frame things.

I'm practicing self-containment lately by not attempting to smooth over other people's differences in the forums and elsewhere, which I'm often tempted to do. But I step into this one to comment on something I just noticed about a certain common phrase:
FollowingHim2 said:
we should all just be acting as adults
Click to expand...
The term "adults" within this familiar Western idea-construct has no gender; it refers to a mythological being, a platonic ideal of a generically sensible person that does not operate in the specific manner of man or woman. But such gender-differentiated modes of operation are exactly what we here seek to regain and affirm.

In a sense we seek here to not be adults but rather men and women.

So while the phrase is a useful one we had better be mindful that it has limits and can subtly redirect our thoughts back to the egalitarian (equality-emphasizing) Greco-Roman forms that brought us monogamy. (Plato, from whose name the word platonic derives, was Greek after all.)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top