Submission, an Obstacle to Overcome

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Huntn, May 9, 2012.

  1. Huntn, May 9, 2012
    Last edited: May 9, 2012

    Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #1
    I was in a recent online discussion when a woman said, "I believe in traditional values and I'd submit to a man." Initially I was surprised at the willingness to use the word "submit" as in I'd submit to person of another gender based on their sex, as if men automatically hold the dominant position in a relationship.

    Submission:
    I believe you can have a relationship where individuals will defer to their partner's judgment for a variety of reasons. I just don't think in modern society that the use of "submit" is the right word to use.

    If you take the ultimate meaning of the word and apply it to a place like Muslim culture in the Middle East, you'll find that "submission" goes hand in hand with "subjugate". Ultimately not nice words when used to describe a healthy relationship between two people.

    Buried Chest High.

    http://www.veoh.com/watch/v1047857CXRNxJHk
     
  2. kavika411 macrumors 6502a

    kavika411

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2006
    Location:
    Alabama
    #2
    May want to change title to: "Submission, an Obstacle to Overcome."
     
  3. Huntn thread starter macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #3
    Thank you. :)
     
  4. Daffodil macrumors 6502

    Daffodil

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2011
    Location:
    In a sunny state of mind
    #4
    I think this sounds like a pretty sensible differentiation. Equals defer to each others' wishes when they reach disagreements; the "suppressed" submits to the "suppressor." The language doesn't quite lend itself to the discussion, and perhaps may come across as needlessly harsh, but overall I think you've nailed it. Perhaps someone else can refine the terminology even further..?

    Now whether this applies to this particular woman is a little harder to discern. In my experience, most people are notoriously imprecise in their use of language, so I carry some hope that she did not intend it to mean she is her lording husband's willing subject...
     
  5. hafr macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    #5
    Some people are followers, others are leaders, some are all for perfect equality. If a follower is in a relationship with a leader and it doesn't have any negative side effects, who are we to tell them it's not healthy?

    If it was only the word you were talking about, then remember than language is dynamic. Submit can easily pick up an additional meaning. Such as the button "submit reply" so easily illustrates ;)
     
  6. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #6
    This notion of subservience in modern day is only allowed to live through religion because its the only place left that it socially has to be tolerated and i find it disgusting. Every person has strengths and weaknesses and you find a match that complements you best.
     
  7. hafr macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    #7
    It has more to do with culture than religion.
     
  8. Huntn thread starter macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #8
    There is absolutely no problem with one person being a leader and the other being a follower. The problem is when society regulates or makes one gender feel like they must give in to the wishes of their spouse.

    I'd argue that today, where it is most prominent, culture and religion are intimately entwined and religion is the bludgeon to enforce the cultural standard.

    I know what the standard is in Middle Eastern Muslim culture. Women had better know their place or else. I wonder how many fundamentalist churches in the West preach "honoring and obeying" your husband and not as just some quaint saying from the old days. My wife said it at our wedding ceremony, but she's not really lived up to that standard when "obeying" is involved. ;)
     
  9. hafr macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    #9
    Well, considering there is pretty much no difference what so ever in how the women are treated between the muslim societies and the christian societies in MENA, and that there are a great deal of different islamic and christian communities all around the world that has very different views on this subject (which most often concurs with the rest of their society's view on it no matter the religion), I'd say there's a greater correlation between culture and a woman's place than there is between religion and a woman's place.

    Not only religious people oppress their women, not all religious people do.
     
  10. MorphingDragon macrumors 603

    MorphingDragon

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Location:
    The World Inbetween
    #10
    Culture <==> Religion
     
  11. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #11
    I grew up in a very religious town and there was alot of the "honoring and obeying" mentality in the older portion of the community, funny enough I am in a portuguese/italian community here and its the same deal (all catholics, it seems). Its funny that my fiance will tell her aunt something and she won't listen at all, but if I tell her basically anything I said is gospel.

    Having been in a committed long term relationship for a while I think I would be bored if I were "obeyed" all the time. Even though it would be nice every once in a while, especially when the mastercard and clothes are involved. ;)
     
  12. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #12
    The only problem here is a culture that tells all women they must submit (or, indeed, all men that they must lead). "Traditional values" is, for some plurality of women, simply a convenient justification for getting what they'd want out of a relationship anyway. For every woman who sees Mad Men as Roots for women, there's another who wonders why it's so damned hard to find a credible Don Draper these days.

    That's to say nothing of men, particularly straight ones, who would rather have someone else take charge. As a matter of culture, those guys are largely just screwed.

    There is nothing inherently wrong with having defined roles in relationships, so long as everybody is in the role they'd pick. We must be careful that, in trying to protect people from oppression, we do not overreact by forcing upon them an equally oppressive vision of mandatory equality. That's still forcing people to live in the little cultural boxes you build for them.
     
  13. Huntn thread starter macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #13
    Could you clarify your point? Are you saying that religion is getting a bad wrap on this? Not that I'm an expert primitive cultures, but my impression is that the hunters were men, consequently became the leaders of their groups, and the child raisers were women is mostly accurate. My impression is that when the opportunity came about, men used and manipulated religion as a means of reinforcing this arrangement. What do you think?

    For readers of the thread, I've been told that Fox News and Hannity give this man credence. Can you imagine, lol? Lots of sexist gems in this video.

    http://youtu.be/NeFhA_sL38c
     

Share This Page