Overheard on Facebook

[frugalnacho]

So what is their advice for a gay married couple?

To stop being gay and ask god for forgiveness?

[Margie]

I think a man who is willing to work hard outside the home so his wife can work part time or not at all when the kids are small is very attractive!  I would take it as an insult if my husband felt someone else could raise his kids better than me.  Does that make sense?   Really you typically can have money or time - hard to have both at the same time. 

I'm slightly embarrassed to admit this but it took me a few years (Yes, years!) to finally be able to cook, clean, etc without feeling like I was doing everything.  For our first six years of marriage We both worked full time but I was always home first so typically I would start dinner, etc...So, one day I freak out "I'm doing everything"  my poor husband is stunned he had no idea I was pissy about it.  We get in a massive fight, I go home and rant to my Dad.  After my Dad stops laughing at me He says - "You work 35 hours a week he works 50 and you want to sit there until he comes home and cooks for you?   Give your head a shake!  He can cook on the weekend!"
So, I am stunned silent I realize I probably should be doing most of it - I have more time!!  I go back home, my sweet husband has cleaned everything apologizing for not doing more and is completely confused when I say No, no, I am being unreasonable!    Give him the spiel my Dad gave me....
Long story short - it really is about being a 'helper' to your spouse and if that troubles you, you're probably not going to be married very happily.   Of course this goes both ways.  There are many things I don't do because my husband does them better, quicker, or I simply hate doing them.  Just like I don't ever "make" him do things he hates, I just do them so he doesn't have to.
Fast forward, we're now married over 20 years, have two kids and things are pretty good.  We have a decent balance of work/life responsibilities and everything gets done. 
I for one am glad my husband works hard outside of the home so I can balance the other side of things.  I can't imagine being in a relationship where someone is keeping "score"   If you see something that needs to be done and you can do it - then do it.  Simple as that.

[Mississippi Mudstache]

I think a man who is willing to work hard outside the home so his wife can work part time or not at all when the kids are small is very attractive!  I would take it as an insult if my husband felt someone else could raise his kids better than me.  Does that make sense?

Of course that makes sense. My wife has been a stay-at-home mom for the past 5 years, since we had our first child. What I object to is the way this note was framed as blanket advice to all couples. It is not. I have friends where the woman works as a successful business owner and the husband is a stay-at-home parent. This mindset implicitly judges that he is a failure, because his wife married him to be the provider. I mean, why else would a woman marry a man? And I utterly reject the notion (highlighted, I might add) that "expectations destroy relationships". You'd better believe that my wife and I have expectations of each other. The note is sexist and condescending and does not frame a marriage as a union of equals.

[Kitsune]

I can't imagine being in a relationship where someone is keeping "score"   If you see something that needs to be done and you can do it - then do it.  Simple as that.

You say that... until YOU'RE the one working 70 hours a week to your spouse's 35, AND doing all the dishes/cooking/meal prep/laundry/cleaning. Because it needs to get done, so you do it, and because if you don't you're gonna run out of clothes to wear to the office and won't have food you can eat, and so you just... do it. And get exhausted and resentful and angry. Not a great solution.

I agree with not 'keeping score' in functional, relatively balanced relationships - it's a recipe for nitpicking in a really disagreeable way. But sometimes, keeping score is the only option you have to work to get it at least mostly even again.

... or, y'know, you can just leave. But most of us are generally invested enough that we at least TRY to fix things before filing for divorce.

[MrMoogle]

So what is their advice for a gay married couple?

To stop being gay and ask god for forgiveness?

Yeah, probably. *sigh*

I'm not much of a Christian, but I've never seen something in the bible that says being gay is wrong.
I have seen:  If you're a married man, having gay sex is still cheating on your wife, and that is wrong.
Casual gay sex is still casual sex and that is wrong.  (You should be married before having sex)

[Warlord1986]

So what is their advice for a gay married couple?

To stop being gay and ask god for forgiveness?

Yeah, probably. *sigh*

I'm not much of a Christian, but I've never seen something in the bible that says being gay is wrong.
I have seen:  If you're a married man, having gay sex is still cheating on your wife, and that is wrong.
Casual gay sex is still casual sex and that is wrong.  (You should be married before having sex)

Check out Leviticus and Paul. Or don't. They were both assholes about the subject (and a few others).

[merula]

I'm not much of a Christian, but I've never seen something in the bible that says being gay is wrong.
I have seen:  If you're a married man, having gay sex is still cheating on your wife, and that is wrong.
Casual gay sex is still casual sex and that is wrong.  (You should be married before having sex)

The argument was (until Obergefell) that gay people can't get married, so any gay sex is therefore casual sex and wrong. The church I was raised in held this "compassionate" view of gay people and would allow openly gay clergy as long as they were celibate. (Important note: straight clergy were not required to be celibate, only to refrain from extramarital sex.)

Even post-Obergefell, the argument is that "marriage" is meant to be opposite sex according to the Bible, and so even married gay people aren't really married.

By that interpretation of the Bible, gay sex is always wrong because it's always extra-marital because gay marriages aren't real marriages.

I don't belong to that church anymore.

But, I now have a question. The "one man and one woman" interpretation of the Biblical definition of marriage is obviously inaccurate; one man and several women is A-OK, biblically-speaking. If two women married to the same man had sex with each other, would that be permissible gay sex? Does the husband have to be present?

[MrMoogle]

I'm not much of a Christian, but I've never seen something in the bible that says being gay is wrong.
I have seen:  If you're a married man, having gay sex is still cheating on your wife, and that is wrong.
Casual gay sex is still casual sex and that is wrong.  (You should be married before having sex)

The argument was (until Obergefell) that gay people can't get married, so any gay sex is therefore casual sex and wrong. The church I was raised in held this "compassionate" view of gay people and would allow openly gay clergy as long as they were celibate. (Important note: straight clergy were not required to be celibate, only to refrain from extramarital sex.)

Even post-Obergefell, the argument is that "marriage" is meant to be opposite sex according to the Bible, and so even married gay people aren't really married.

By that interpretation of the Bible, gay sex is always wrong because it's always extra-marital because gay marriages aren't real marriages.

I don't belong to that church anymore.

But, I now have a question. The "one man and one woman" interpretation of the Biblical definition of marriage is obviously inaccurate; one man and several women is A-OK, biblically-speaking. If two women married to the same man had sex with each other, would that be permissible gay sex? Does the husband have to be present?

I tried googling where it says it must be one man and one woman.  I failed.  I did find:

Ecclesiastes 4:9: “Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their labor:
If either of them falls down, one can help the other up. But pity anyone who falls and has no one to help them up. Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm. But how can one keep warm alone?"

That's gender nonspecific :)

Then:
Genesis 2:24 states: "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."
Is this one option, or the only option?  It doesn't seem clear to me...

[Mississippi Mudstache]

But, I now have a question. The "one man and one woman" interpretation of the Biblical definition of marriage is obviously inaccurate; one man and several women is A-OK, biblically-speaking. If two women married to the same man had sex with each other, would that be permissible gay sex? Does the husband have to be present?

That's an excellent question. I'm actually not familiar with any verse in the bible that seems to prohibit lesbian affection (aside from blanket admonitions against fornication) so I've always been confused by the Christian argument against lesbian women.

I'm not much of a Christian, but I've never seen something in the bible that says being gay is wrong.
I have seen:  If you're a married man, having gay sex is still cheating on your wife, and that is wrong.
Casual gay sex is still casual sex and that is wrong.  (You should be married before having sex)

Leviticus 18:22 - "‘Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable." Of course, Christians never mention Leviticus 18:19 - "‘Do not approach a woman to have sexual relations during the uncleanness of her monthly period."

Also Leviticus 20:13 - "If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads." For some reason no one brings up Leviticus 20:9 - "Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death. Because they have cursed their father or mother, their blood will be on their own head." Or Leviticus 20:18 - "If a man has sexual relations with a woman during her monthly period, he has exposed the source of her flow, and she has also uncovered it. Both of them are to be cut off from their people."

[merula]

I tried googling where it says it must be one man and one woman.  I failed.  I did find:

Ecclesiastes 4:9: “Two are better than one, because they have a good return for their labor:
If either of them falls down, one can help the other up. But pity anyone who falls and has no one to help them up. Also, if two lie down together, they will keep warm. But how can one keep warm alone?"

That's gender nonspecific :)

Then:
Genesis 2:24 states: "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."
Is this one option, or the only option?  It doesn't seem clear to me...

Many Old-Testament leaders had more than one wife: Esau (Gen 26:34; 28:6-9), Moses (Ex 2:21;Num 12:1), Jacob (Gen 29:15-28), Elkanah (1 Samuel 1:1-8), David (1 Samuel 25:39-44; 2 Samuel 3:2-5; 5:13-16) and Solomon (1 Kings 11:1-3).

However, New Testament interpretations vary. For example, 1 Cor 7:2: "But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband." compared to 1 Tim 3:2 "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach". (The implication is, allegedly, that the bishop is held to a higher standard than others who are permitted more than one wife.)

[Dezrah]

I'm slightly embarrassed to admit this but it took me a few years (Yes, years!) to finally be able to cook, clean, etc without feeling like I was doing everything.  For our first six years of marriage We both worked full time but I was always home first so typically I would start dinner, etc...So, one day I freak out "I'm doing everything"  my poor husband is stunned he had no idea I was pissy about it.  We get in a massive fight, I go home and rant to my Dad.  After my Dad stops laughing at me He says - "You work 35 hours a week he works 50 and you want to sit there until he comes home and cooks for you?   Give your head a shake!  He can cook on the weekend!"
So, I am stunned silent I realize I probably should be doing most of it - I have more time!!  I go back home, my sweet husband has cleaned everything apologizing for not doing more and is completely confused when I say No, no, I am being unreasonable!    Give him the spiel my Dad gave me....

I love this story.  It's a frustration that is very relatable.  You must have a great relationship with your dad that you could talk to him about this and get such eye-opening advice out of it.  Plus it's not like he lets your husband off the hook completely since he still has to cook over the weekend.

DH and I are in a bit in flux now with our domestic balance.  In the past we traded dinner duty pretty evenly by simply having him do all the grilling while I would do prep and/or cooking.  But now we're in an apartment that only has charcoal grills instead of gas, so I've been doing a lot more of the cooking lately.  I actually don't mind but I can tell DH feels guilty about it and tries to find other things to do.  Win-win for me.

[Margie]

I am pretty lucky my dad has always been very honest and upfront about everything (he is an engineer - imagine that!?)  and seriously, I didn't even see it that way until he said it. 
Many life skills he passed on simply by being honest - on the money front when my husband and I were first dating we were spending tons of money having fun, etc...My dad sat us down and said you guys have an opportunity to set yourselves up save some of it, combined you have more than I do"  We laughed "what, you have to be making great money"  He actually showed us his paystub and all the deductions and then all his bills, mortgage etc...it was a massive eye opener.   We did indeed have more money because we were both still living at home (late teens early twenties)  So, we opened up rrsps and the first time home buyer's plan (government gave matching grants, and no land transfer taxes) just so he'd shut up about it.  When we got married and realized how far ahead we were we were very grateful we had listened.
But, yes, the world would be a much better place if more men were like my dad.  My mother on the other hand is a nut!!  lol     
I just always try know to remember my kids are watching how I treat everyone, not just my husband, but everyone so I really do try to be kind and remember that everyone is fighting some kind of battle and no one need anyone else's negativity!

[Mississippi Mudstache]

You did have an awesome Dad. Good thing you took his advice. Mine tried to talk me out of buying a house in 2008. Wish I had listened :)

[I'm a red panda]

One of my female friends just put this on Facebook. What the ever-loving fuck?

So is it okay to expect him to be my provider and protector?  Why is that expectation an okay one?

(And did I really get married for that? I don't remember that part. Did he marry ME to do household chores? He made a HUGE mistake.)

[druth]

Notoriously bad with money FB friend:

Friend: "When you make food for today and forget all of it and are flat broken til tomorrow. That."
Her friend: "Can I bring you food to your work?"
Friend: "Actually the awesome folks at my Caribou heard me lamenting to a coworker and gave me my drink for free. So I have five bucks to get something at the convenience store. That should get me a microwave pot pie :D  I really appreciate you offering."

Wait...  so you weren't broke.  You had $5.  And you had no lunch so you had to spend it on Caribou?  And because the Caribou people knew you and gave you a free drink you can afford lunch now?   You can't afford to buy lunch at the end of your paycheck but you have something that you deem "my Caribou".  I...  just....  what?

She is constantly posting about all the clothes and plastic fandom paraphenalia she bought.  Literally yesterday she posted a $200 backpack that she is going to try to get the money for before the kickstarter ends.

Same person who is still living paycheck to paycheck (and who has been as long as I have known her which is about 15 years), now needs a "decent sofa".  So a $600 loveseat from Wayfair.  I would personally consider it a cheap PoS. I don't really want to get into it with her but the reason she apparently needs a new one from the internet is that they don't have a car/way to pick one up.

We have two sofas, one was 150$ from craigslist + another $150 for a new cover, fit in a borrowed SUV and a Prius, and was originally $900 at Ikea.  The other was $40 also like new at Goodwill + $50 van rental to get it home, it was probably $600 new.  Also we probably make 4x the household income she does.  Also my ass can't tell the difference between a new and a used sofa anyways.

I know it isn't that uncommon but if you are living paycheck to paycheck why would you think you need these sort of extravagant purchases? 

Also can people stop quoting the picture above?  It's really annoying to scroll past the same photo 6 times.

[Papa Mustache]

You did have an awesome Dad. Good thing you took his advice. Mine tried to talk me out of buying a house in 2008. Wish I had listened :)

Every parent ought to have a frank conversation about money and bills with their teens or twenty-somethings. Even if they feel compelled to omit a few details to simplify or maintain some privacy.

[gaja]

Part of my extended family is what I'd call Appalachian Baptist. I went to two of their weddings and the entire homily (not sure if that's a baptist word) and vows were in the spirit of the above. As an 8 year old at the time, I found it quite hilarious. Looking back, it's a bit sad.

My cousin married a baptist last year. My whole family are feminists, from my 80 years old uncle to the youngest third cousins. It almost turned into a spectator sport when her father spoke in church and told the young wife to obey her new husband. My klan descended on her as soon as they got out of church, to explain that in our family, no women will or should obey anyone, and to make sure my cousin hadn't gotten any wrong ideas. To smooth things over, even her mother gave a speech at the dinner about how they both needed to support each other.

It was obvious that before they saw my family's reaction, not one of the baptists saw any problems with the father's choice of words. But I don't think my aunts will ever get over it. I saw several of them taking the poor girl aside at a family gathering this summer, to ensure that she still understood that she wasn't supposed to obey, but to rule. My cousin is in the green, since he posts on SoMe all the time about how proud he is of his wife's academic success, and about how he loves taking care of their daughter.

[kayvent]

So what is their advice for a gay married couple?

To stop being gay and ask god for forgiveness?

Yeah, probably. *sigh*

I'm not much of a Christian, but I've never seen something in the bible that says being gay is wrong.
I have seen:  If you're a married man, having gay sex is still cheating on your wife, and that is wrong.
Casual gay sex is still casual sex and that is wrong.  (You should be married before having sex)

Every time it asserts and presumes heteronormative, it is a strike against homosexuality. For example, in 1st Corinthians Paul goes on lengthly talks about female widows. He says they can take a husband but it is preferred they don't. Similarly, an old man with a deceased wife can get married. Never once is it said that a female widow can take a wife. Similarly, Peter says "Wives obey your husbands. Husbands honour your wives and love them like Christ loves the Church". The criteria for an elder in the Church is to be a single-woman man (presuming a man has a wife, not a husband).

If homosexuality was condoned, it is a very striking omission to continually miss out paralleling commands or choosing not to make them be generic. Gay people existed back then believe it or not. For centuries prior to the New Testament, the Greeks had known that some men solely preferred the company of other men. Similar for some women.

If you read modern feminist critique or LGTB activists, any assertion or presumption of heteronormativerty implicitly is anti-LG. The NT is strictly heteronormative.

[kayvent]

Part of my extended family is what I'd call Appalachian Baptist. I went to two of their weddings and the entire homily (not sure if that's a baptist word) and vows were in the spirit of the above. As an 8 year old at the time, I found it quite hilarious. Looking back, it's a bit sad.

My cousin married a baptist last year. My whole family are feminists, from my 80 years old uncle to the youngest third cousins. It almost turned into a spectator sport when her father spoke in church and told the young wife to obey her new husband. My klan descended on her as soon as they got out of church, to explain that in our family, no women will or should obey anyone, and to make sure my cousin hadn't gotten any wrong ideas. To smooth things over, even her mother gave a speech at the dinner about how they both needed to support each other.

It was obvious that before they saw my family's reaction, not one of the baptists saw any problems with the father's choice of words. But I don't think my aunts will ever get over it. I saw several of them taking the poor girl aside at a family gathering this summer, to ensure that she still understood that she wasn't supposed to obey, but to rule. My cousin is in the green, since he posts on SoMe all the time about how proud he is of his wife's academic success, and about how he loves taking care of their daughter.

Your klan is pretty insensitive. Perhaps ignorant to be honest. Racist at worst. That clause is a single part of a larger affirmation. Christians know it so well that we just need to say the first part of it to acknowledge the whole; similar to how for a famous song of Seinfield skit you only need to say a single part to reference the whole (synecdoche?).

It is especially ignorant that " her mother gave a speech at the dinner about how they both needed to support each other". Did she lack a smartphone to look up that the verse being quoted DID say that?

[gaja]

Part of my extended family is what I'd call Appalachian Baptist. I went to two of their weddings and the entire homily (not sure if that's a baptist word) and vows were in the spirit of the above. As an 8 year old at the time, I found it quite hilarious. Looking back, it's a bit sad.

My cousin married a baptist last year. My whole family are feminists, from my 80 years old uncle to the youngest third cousins. It almost turned into a spectator sport when her father spoke in church and told the young wife to obey her new husband. My klan descended on her as soon as they got out of church, to explain that in our family, no women will or should obey anyone, and to make sure my cousin hadn't gotten any wrong ideas. To smooth things over, even her mother gave a speech at the dinner about how they both needed to support each other.

It was obvious that before they saw my family's reaction, not one of the baptists saw any problems with the father's choice of words. But I don't think my aunts will ever get over it. I saw several of them taking the poor girl aside at a family gathering this summer, to ensure that she still understood that she wasn't supposed to obey, but to rule. My cousin is in the green, since he posts on SoMe all the time about how proud he is of his wife's academic success, and about how he loves taking care of their daughter.

Your klan is pretty insensitive. Perhaps ignorant to be honest. Racist at worst. That clause is a single part of a larger affirmation. Christians know it so well that we just need to say the first part of it to acknowledge the whole; similar to how for a famous song of Seinfield skit you only need to say a single part to reference the whole (synecdoche?).

It is especially ignorant that " her mother gave a speech at the dinner about how they both needed to support each other". Did she lack a smartphone to look up that the verse being quoted DID say that?

All baptists are black and all feminists are white? Please explain who is the racist here? In this setting, most of the people were so white, they almost glowed in the dark. The only exception is on my grandfather's side, due to some mixing with Spanish pirates in the 17th century. Other southerners have not been willing to move to these remote areas.

I live very well with my loud, insentive family. They are in your face honest, and genuinely love and care for all the members of the clan. The moment the girl married into our family, she became part of us, and got all the inherent loyalty and protection. It was very clear from the mother's speech that she wasn't referring to scripture, but trying to correct the bad impression the father made. These people are used to living in a secular community, but obviously not used to attending marriages that include a large number of atheists and other types of heathens. Do not presume things based on your culture; the rules of politeness are very different in different parts of the world. Being insensitive to inequality between genders is a much larger gaffe in the Nordic countries, than being insensitive to religion. Notice how uncomfortable people Sweden and Denmark get when this American pastor asks them if they believe in God. They are happy to talk about science, culture, all other things, but religion is private: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVc1ab2RcMs


Edited to add: This TED talk about cultural differences, behaviour and politeness, is highly recommended: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-Yy6poJ2zs

[Goldielocks]

So what is their advice for a gay married couple?

To stop being gay and ask god for forgiveness?

Yeah, probably. *sigh*

I'm not much of a Christian, but I've never seen something in the bible that says being gay is wrong.
I have seen:  If you're a married man, having gay sex is still cheating on your wife, and that is wrong.
Casual gay sex is still casual sex and that is wrong.  (You should be married before having sex)

Check out Leviticus and Paul. Or don't. They were both assholes about the subject (and a few others).

Paul was a bit of an asshat on his views of women, too. What can you expect with his history pre conversion?

[VladTheImpaler]

I think a man who is willing to work hard outside the home so his wife can work part time or not at all when the kids are small is very attractive!  I would take it as an insult if my husband felt someone else could raise his kids better than me.  Does that make sense?   Really you typically can have money or time - hard to have both at the same time. 

I'm slightly embarrassed to admit this but it took me a few years (Yes, years!) to finally be able to cook, clean, etc without feeling like I was doing everything.  For our first six years of marriage We both worked full time but I was always home first so typically I would start dinner, etc...So, one day I freak out "I'm doing everything"  my poor husband is stunned he had no idea I was pissy about it.  We get in a massive fight, I go home and rant to my Dad.  After my Dad stops laughing at me He says - "You work 35 hours a week he works 50 and you want to sit there until he comes home and cooks for you?   Give your head a shake!  He can cook on the weekend!"
So, I am stunned silent I realize I probably should be doing most of it - I have more time!!  I go back home, my sweet husband has cleaned everything apologizing for not doing more and is completely confused when I say No, no, I am being unreasonable!    Give him the spiel my Dad gave me....
Long story short - it really is about being a 'helper' to your spouse and if that troubles you, you're probably not going to be married very happily.   Of course this goes both ways.  There are many things I don't do because my husband does them better, quicker, or I simply hate doing them.  Just like I don't ever "make" him do things he hates, I just do them so he doesn't have to.
Fast forward, we're now married over 20 years, have two kids and things are pretty good.  We have a decent balance of work/life responsibilities and everything gets done. 
I for one am glad my husband works hard outside of the home so I can balance the other side of things.  I can't imagine being in a relationship where someone is keeping "score"   If you see something that needs to be done and you can do it - then do it.  Simple as that.

A++
Thank you for posting. You sound like an amazing woman.
Your husband is lucky guy.

[clarkai]

Part of my extended family is what I'd call Appalachian Baptist. I went to two of their weddings and the entire homily (not sure if that's a baptist word) and vows were in the spirit of the above. As an 8 year old at the time, I found it quite hilarious. Looking back, it's a bit sad.

My cousin married a baptist last year. My whole family are feminists, from my 80 years old uncle to the youngest third cousins. It almost turned into a spectator sport when her father spoke in church and told the young wife to obey her new husband. My klan descended on her as soon as they got out of church, to explain that in our family, no women will or should obey anyone, and to make sure my cousin hadn't gotten any wrong ideas. To smooth things over, even her mother gave a speech at the dinner about how they both needed to support each other.

It was obvious that before they saw my family's reaction, not one of the baptists saw any problems with the father's choice of words. But I don't think my aunts will ever get over it. I saw several of them taking the poor girl aside at a family gathering this summer, to ensure that she still understood that she wasn't supposed to obey, but to rule. My cousin is in the green, since he posts on SoMe all the time about how proud he is of his wife's academic success, and about how he loves taking care of their daughter.

Your klan is pretty insensitive. Perhaps ignorant to be honest. Racist at worst. That clause is a single part of a larger affirmation. Christians know it so well that we just need to say the first part of it to acknowledge the whole; similar to how for a famous song of Seinfield skit you only need to say a single part to reference the whole (synecdoche?).

It is especially ignorant that " her mother gave a speech at the dinner about how they both needed to support each other". Did she lack a smartphone to look up that the verse being quoted DID say that?

Having been raised in a Christian family, I beg to differ, strongly. The emphasis was always on the women being submissive, obedient, and even less intelligent and worthy than men. Maybe it is part of a bigger speech, but the men's obligation is completely obliterated, aside from that idea that they ought to be the ones making decisions and money. Always it was on the woman to obey, even if she disagreed or actually knew more than the man. Much more important to be submissive at all times.

[With This Herring]

My cousin married a baptist last year. My whole family are feminists, from my 80 years old uncle to the youngest third cousins. It almost turned into a spectator sport when her father spoke in church and told the young wife to obey her new husband. My klan descended on her as soon as they got out of church, to explain that in our family, no women will or should obey anyone, and to make sure my cousin hadn't gotten any wrong ideas. To smooth things over, even her mother gave a speech at the dinner about how they both needed to support each other.

It was obvious that before they saw my family's reaction, not one of the baptists saw any problems with the father's choice of words. But I don't think my aunts will ever get over it. I saw several of them taking the poor girl aside at a family gathering this summer, to ensure that she still understood that she wasn't supposed to obey, but to rule. My cousin is in the green, since he posts on SoMe all the time about how proud he is of his wife's academic success, and about how he loves taking care of their daughter.

Your klan is pretty insensitive. Perhaps ignorant to be honest. Racist at worst.

[Herring added a break here for clarity.]

That clause is a single part of a larger affirmation. Christians know it so well that we just need to say the first part of it to acknowledge the whole; similar to how for a famous song of Seinfield skit you only need to say a single part to reference the whole (synecdoche?).

It is especially ignorant that " her mother gave a speech at the dinner about how they both needed to support each other". Did she lack a smartphone to look up that the verse being quoted DID say that?

All baptists are black and all feminists are white? Please explain who is the racist here? In this setting, most of the people were so white, they almost glowed in the dark. The only exception is on my grandfather's side, due to some mixing with Spanish pirates in the 17th century. Other southerners have not been willing to move to these remote areas.

*snip*

I may be butting in a bit, but is kayvent's complaint about "racism" due to gaja's use of "klan"?  Looking at some of gaja's posts, it looks like gaja may be from Norway and was not aware of the very negative implications of this word choice.  I think gaja probably would have used "clan" had gaja known of this issue, and that the use of "klan" was either a typo or due to not being aware of the very specific use of that spelling.

clan = A group of people, usually bound by kinship/family relation.  This is a word with positive connotations.
Klan = A shorthand way to refer to the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), a group of white supremacists of the southern United States who are best known for horrible crimes against black people, including lynchings.

I can't see anything else in gaja's post that would indicate racism.


As for kayvent's assertion that "Christians know it so well that we just need to say the first part of it to acknowledge the whole," this may be regional.  In my area, the majority of my feminist Christian friends are firmly of the opinion that the onus to serve/obey is solely on the wife in that passage, and they get miffed whenever it is read.  (Also, A+ for the use of "synecdoche"!  I can never think of that word when I need it. :)  )

[gaja]

Thanks, Herring. Yes, since we don't use the letter c, I often mess up translating words that are the same in Norwegian and English, except for the c/k-issue. C usually just hangs around the alphabet for decorative purposes, together with z and x.

[HairyUpperLip]

Klan = A shorthand way to refer to the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), a group of white supremacists of the southern United States who are best known for horrible crimes against black people, including lynchings.

These pathetic losers aren't only in the South. They are all over America.

[Pooperman]

Klan = A shorthand way to refer to the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), a group of white supremacists of the southern United States who are best known for horrible crimes against black people, including lynchings.

These pathetic losers aren't only in the South. They are all over America.

Strongest in Ohio. A little bit of a funny coincidence: my great grandfather was a freemason. His brother was a Klansman. His brother died, so he married his sister in law. My grandfather's half brother is also his cousin.

[ender]

The section containing the word "submit" that you guys are railing against also tells the husband to love his wife the way Christ loved the church, which turned out that he loved it so much he literally died for it. And to love his wife as himself and to nourish and cherish her, as his own body (repeated in a variety of ways).

It also comes immediately after the words:

"submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ."

Context is important.

I don't really mind if you think that Christians in general shouldn't submit to each other, out of reverence for Christ, but cherry picking a single word and blatantly throwing out the context of the previous verse (and section, realistically it's a section that starts much earlier) is fairly intellectually dishonest.

If your primary objections are people who do this - pick the one word to the exclusion of the rest of the section - that's fine. But recognize that those who do this are doing so contrary to the fairly obvious intent and meaning of the overall passage where that verse is contained.

[Gin1984]

The section containing the word "submit" that you guys are railing against also tells the husband to love his wife the way Christ loved the church, which turned out that he loved it so much he literally died for it. And to love his wife as himself and to nourish and cherish her, as his own body (repeated in a variety of ways).

It also comes immediately after the words:

"submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ."

Context is important.

I don't really mind if you think that Christians in general shouldn't submit to each other, out of reverence for Christ, but cherry picking a single word and blatantly throwing out the context of the previous verse (and section, realistically it's a section that starts much earlier) is fairly intellectually dishonest.

If your primary objections are people who do this - pick the one word to the exclusion of the rest of the section - that's fine. But recognize that those who do this are doing so contrary to the fairly obvious intent and meaning of the overall passage where that verse is contained.

Most people are aware that many Christians pick and chose which parts of the bible to use/misuse.  However, when a rather large group of Christians has been using it in this manner, addressing that without the other parts (that the group itself is ignoring) seems logical.

[Mississippi Mudstache]

Most people are aware that many Christians pick and chose which parts of the bible to use/misuse.

Not most, I would argue, but all. It isn't possible to create a self-consistent doctrine if you accept all of the bible, because the bible itself is not self-consistent (which is why we've ended up with several thousand Christian denominations, each emphasizing their own preferred texts).

[Papa Mustache]

Having been raised in a Christian family, I beg to differ, strongly. The emphasis was always on the women being submissive, obedient, and even less intelligent and worthy than men. Maybe it is part of a bigger speech, but the men's obligation is completely obliterated, aside from that idea that they ought to be the ones making decisions and money. Always it was on the woman to obey, even if she disagreed or actually knew more than the man. Much more important to be submissive at all times.

I'll second that. Adults ought to be regarded as adults with all the responsibilities and opportunities life has to offer. To put ~50% into a different category of person b/c of their anatomy is utterly ridiculous. I do some things better than my wife and she does things better than I. Otherwise we share our responsibilities together. We should recognize that the genders can be very different (personalities, big sweeping paint brush) but we need to be very equal. She's more thoughtful than I am, I'm a tougher, stronger person. Good - we compliment each other and make a great team of two.

I think it is time for the church to get out of the homosexuality business. Its none of their business.

So many other important things that the church could be worrying about and contributing to their communities. 

[Papa Mustache]

Klan = A shorthand way to refer to the Ku Klux Klan (KKK), a group of white supremacists of the southern United States who are best known for horrible crimes against black people, including lynchings.

These pathetic losers aren't only in the South. They are all over America.

THIS!

[Papa Mustache]

The section containing the word "submit" that you guys are railing against also tells the husband to love his wife the way Christ loved the church, which turned out that he loved it so much he literally died for it. And to love his wife as himself and to nourish and cherish her, as his own body (repeated in a variety of ways).

It also comes immediately after the words:

"submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ."

Context is important.

I don't really mind if you think that Christians in general shouldn't submit to each other, out of reverence for Christ, but cherry picking a single word and blatantly throwing out the context of the previous verse (and section, realistically it's a section that starts much earlier) is fairly intellectually dishonest.

If your primary objections are people who do this - pick the one word to the exclusion of the rest of the section - that's fine. But recognize that those who do this are doing so contrary to the fairly obvious intent and meaning of the overall passage where that verse is contained.

Just know that depending on which church or where you live - that term submit or submission is used by some to keep women in the old fashioned roles of the first half of the 20th century.

[frugalnacho]

Can we take all the feminist/bible foam to another thread? Take that shit to the off topic forum because it's off topic and I don't care about it.  Let's get this thread back on track and post what actually is important: random facebook posts from friends of random message board users.

[TexasRunner]

Can we take all the feminist/bible foam to another thread? Take that shit to the off topic forum because it's off topic and I don't care about it.  Let's get this thread back on track and post what actually is important: random facebook posts from friends of random message board users.

This.  I'm sorry I even brought it up at this point.

[Pooperman]

Can we take all the feminist/bible foam to another thread? Take that shit to the off topic forum because it's off topic and I don't care about it.  Let's get this thread back on track and post what actually is important: random facebook posts from friends of random message board users.

This.  I'm sorry I even brought it up at this point.

Black sabbaths are usually orange or red ;)

[MgoSam]

One of my favorite instructors at my gym (kickboxing) moved to Vegas to train at a larger gym. He's commented in the past about how he fights because it's the best way for him to make a living and how he wish he could just fight and not have to have a side job. Well that same person has been posting nearly daily about eating out a steakhouse and other fine dining establishments.

[infogoon]

One of my female friends just put this on Facebook. What the ever-loving fuck?

Huh. I've never seen a man with handwriting like that, but it was definitely a sentiment from a husband.

[dragoncar]

Can we take all the feminist/bible foam to another thread? Take that shit to the off topic forum because it's off topic and I don't care about it.  Let's get this thread back on track and post what actually is important: random facebook posts from friends of random message board users.

Scripture tells us that foam is holy because Jesus walked on the waves.

[frugalnacho]

Can we take all the feminist/bible foam to another thread? Take that shit to the off topic forum because it's off topic and I don't care about it.  Let's get this thread back on track and post what actually is important: random facebook posts from friends of random message board users.

Scripture tells us that foam is holy because Jesus walked on the waves.

Do you think that's why Cappuccino was Jesus' favorite...

[dragoncar]

Can we take all the feminist/bible foam to another thread? Take that shit to the off topic forum because it's off topic and I don't care about it.  Let's get this thread back on track and post what actually is important: random facebook posts from friends of random message board users.

Scripture tells us that foam is holy because Jesus walked on the waves.

Do you think that's why Cappuccino was Jesus' favorite...

Scripture says he prefers independent coffee shops because Starbucks always spell his name wrong

[LeRainDrop]

You guys are cracking me up!  And just to add a little something humorous that I saw on facebook:

[TheGrimSqueaker]

One of my favorite instructors at my gym (kickboxing) moved to Vegas to train at a larger gym. He's commented in the past about how he fights because it's the best way for him to make a living and how he wish he could just fight and not have to have a side job. Well that same person has been posting nearly daily about eating out a steakhouse and other fine dining establishments.

Unless he's trying to recruit them as a sponsor, he'd be better off staying far away from restaurants. Too much salt, and kick boxing is a sport with weight divisions. Maybe his side job is at the restaurant and he gets meals as an employment perk?

[MgoSam]

One of my favorite instructors at my gym (kickboxing) moved to Vegas to train at a larger gym. He's commented in the past about how he fights because it's the best way for him to make a living and how he wish he could just fight and not have to have a side job. Well that same person has been posting nearly daily about eating out a steakhouse and other fine dining establishments.

Unless he's trying to recruit them as a sponsor, he'd be better off staying far away from restaurants. Too much salt, and kick boxing is a sport with weight divisions. Maybe his side job is at the restaurant and he gets meals as an employment perk?

I doubt the sponsorship part as it's a variety of restaurants. Knowing his personality, I think this is the par for the course for him. He's a heavy-weight so he isn't too constrained by the weigh-in, for him it's more about getting to the ideal weight for a fight as too much weight means less speed, but too little weight means not enough power. He works as a bouncer on the side, so I doubt the food is a perk. I suspect he's spending his money on having a good time, but expects to earn significantly more in the future as now he's training with a professional gym (the gym I go to is great, but limiting once you're a pro).

[Papa Mustache]

One of my favorite instructors at my gym (kickboxing) moved to Vegas to train at a larger gym. He's commented in the past about how he fights because it's the best way for him to make a living and how he wish he could just fight and not have to have a side job. Well that same person has been posting nearly daily about eating out a steakhouse and other fine dining establishments.

I can't imagine setting up a long term career around beating someone or getting beaten by someone. A coworker's son did that for a while and has a laundry list of physical (and possibly mental) issues from it. Basically an old man's body in his 20s.

[MgoSam]

One of my favorite instructors at my gym (kickboxing) moved to Vegas to train at a larger gym. He's commented in the past about how he fights because it's the best way for him to make a living and how he wish he could just fight and not have to have a side job. Well that same person has been posting nearly daily about eating out a steakhouse and other fine dining establishments.

I can't imagine setting up a long term career around beating someone or getting beaten by someone. A coworker's son did that for a while and has a laundry list of physical (and possibly mental) issues from it. Basically an old man's body in his 20s.

Yeah I completely agree! He's in great shape, but he's 30 years old and I don't know how long he will be able to compete. With anything physical, there's no guarantee how long your body will hold out or what the lasting damage will be done is. One advantage he does have is that he's an excellent instructor, and so he can make a decent living as a coach after he's done fighting.

[TheGrimSqueaker]

One of my favorite instructors at my gym (kickboxing) moved to Vegas to train at a larger gym. He's commented in the past about how he fights because it's the best way for him to make a living and how he wish he could just fight and not have to have a side job. Well that same person has been posting nearly daily about eating out a steakhouse and other fine dining establishments.

I can't imagine setting up a long term career around beating someone or getting beaten by someone. A coworker's son did that for a while and has a laundry list of physical (and possibly mental) issues from it. Basically an old man's body in his 20s.

The bit with the cranial impact isn't long-term, any more than a career in bull riding or barrel racing is. The idea is to use competition to establish your credibility, and to draw attention to the business that will provide you with bread and butter for the rest of your life. In rodeo that might be your horse training business; in martial arts it might be the school you own or the line of gear you manufacture.

Depending on the sport, a very few athletes can make enough seed money through competition to start up such a business. For the vast majority it costs more to compete than you can make with even if you win 90% of your competitions.

[Papa Mustache]

All true - I wonder if coworker's son was either very bad at his chosen sport or he was so determined to win that he took too much of a beating for his own good.

Not my son so I'll not dwell on it.  ;)

[Metric Mouse]

Can we take all the feminist/bible foam to another thread? Take that shit to the off topic forum because it's off topic and I don't care about it.  Let's get this thread back on track and post what actually is important: random facebook posts from friends of random message board users.

This.  I'm sorry I even brought it up at this point.

Black sabbaths are usually orange or red ;)

I've seen some that are yellow striped. :D

[Taran Wanderer]

"Super proud of you Eddie! Buying your first pickup is a big deal and you worked hard for it!"

Accompanied by photo of college-aged kid with a shiny 4wd Toyota quadcab with stock wheels, so surely there is a future wheel and tire upgrade pending.  At least it sounds like he saved up for it?  Maybe?

How would life be different if the money went into a year or two of maxing his Roth IRA?