- As long as you remember that he's stating that he prefers emotional abuse to physical abuse, it all makes perfect sense - it just isn't actually very nice.
He's not saying that women should be beaten just for the fun of it. He's saving that if a woman gets beaten, its her own fault because either she was disobedient and gave her husband no choice or she chose to marry a non-believer, and neither option is an acceptable choice for a woman.
2 comments:
I was on a discussion board recently where Christian men equated a wife's sexual refusal with "rape" because she is "exercising power and control over him". Yet this same group of Christian men cannot see the hypocrisy of turning around and advocating their "husband gets the final say" theology.
Being an adult woman who is "not allowed" to make adult decisions without being "punished" feels like emotional rape to me. I know that sounds hyperbolic, but that is how it feels. (BTDT) It is definitely emotional abuse! Shocking that "christians" are so blind while self professed "infidels" see that apart from ANY battering, adherence to this theology of male superiority is ABUSIVE to women! (Personally I don't think it is good for the men either... Sadly, posts like this one make me wonder if some of the men might be less abusive if they had never darkened the door of churches which teach this stuff)
Its not hyperbolic. Yes, its completely abusive without the battering. But try to convince a pastor of that.
Post a Comment