Complementarians make husbands into neutered dogs

Lost Patrol commented on Tim Willard’s ‘lending strength’ segment which is the thrust of ‘servant leadership’ in my previous post.

This a good post, with a valid prescription that will be very hard for most people to fill these days.

The feminine primary social order is so ingrained in daily life that its terminology flows with ease.

  • In a partnership like marriage, it’s important to be able to pursue dreams and callings together.
  • we could be partners and supporters, in chasing after our dreams
  • being willing to change with each other
  • She hadn’t been kind to herself in years. She needed someone who would be an example of God’s kindness to her.

It goes on in this vein. All this is femme-speak. It’s as though only women answered for the couples referenced. 50/50 partners in dreams and callings, et al.

Tim Willard describes nothing more than the human version of a good dog, always standing by to respond to the pack leader. He adds the usual disclaimer that if anything is wrong in a marriage it is because the man has drifted from God. It’s all become very predictable.

I was thinking about this last night before he made the comment, and the analogy I thought of was this:

A neutered dog.

Responsibility without authority is slavery, although it doesn’t seem to actually fit the situation exactly.

The head — the husband —  stripped of his authority is neutered. Additionally, he’s just tagging along with her doing what she wants. Helping her out on her whim. He’s just her dog.

Complementarians make husbands into neutered dogs.

It’s no wonder that complementarian marriages are imploding. What wife would want to be married to a neutered dog?

This entry was posted in Godly mindset & lifestyle and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Complementarians make husbands into neutered dogs

  1. Robyn says:

    What would you say is the distinction between egalitarian and complementarian?

  2. Lost Patrol says:

    All right! Featured commentary!

  3. @ Robyn

    Egalitarians don’t believe what the Bible says about marriage instead taking a feminist position. They’re deceived but honest about their intentions.

    Complementarians attempt to combine what the Bible says about marriage and feminism. They’re hated by egalitarians because they “still adhere to sex roles” and they’re hated by us because they’re deceiving people into believing that “mixing feminism with the Bible” is fine. They’re deceived and actively deceiving other people.

    Both parties don’t build their marriages on the model of headship and submission, and so we shouldn’t be surprised to see their marriages implode.

    I’ve had quite a few posts about those distinctions, but this pretty much aptly summarizes it I think.

  4. Robyn says:

    Ok, I see, thanks! Perhaps it might be in the definition, the waters tend to muddy sometimes. D and me define our marriage as complementarian: with me (my feminine) complementing his masculinity. You can call it many different things, depending on who you’re sharing with: D/s, traditional gender roles, or even red pill.

    We’ve never considered ourselves to be egalitarian and didn’t realize that to some might view it as similar to complementarian. I’ll have to remember to specify in future, as required.

  5. @ Robyn

    “Complementarian” as defined by CBMW who coined the term:

    I wouldn’t use that term at all.

    The Bible uses Patriarchy. Natural law also works. Traditional gender/sex roles is OK but may get you in trouble as what is “traditional” is not always “Biblical.” D/s and red pill have annoying connotations though I don’t mind them.

  6. donalgraeme says:

    “Neutered Dogs.” Truly an ouch line there. I will keep that one in the back of my mind. I know at some point in the future I will have the occasion to use it.

  7. @ donalgraeme

    Yup. It’s quite true too, In an ironic and disgusting sort of way.

  8. Don Quixote says:

    Complementarians are always trying to appease feminists, following them like a shadow, always going along with the latest crazy thing. Never opposing them.
    I’m proud to be Patriarchal in my views. That is what is missing in many churches, a good solid understanding of who wears the pants.

    I read the testimony of Lysa Terkeurst and how she had an abortion before they formally got married. It’s a wonder that neither of them had the faith to keep the child. Her husband just said he would go along with her decision. [I’ve made similar mistakes] He should have told her that pregnancy is from God. Anyhoo…

    Later she wrote a book:

    Perhaps she should have paid more attention to his ‘other needs’ than his heart.

  9. @DS:

    It’s accurate and brutal.

  10. Robyn says:

    “The Bible uses Patriarchy. ” Where? in relation to marriage. I understand the patriarchy in reference to Abraham — the the 12 tribes — Moses … but marriage? (not the hierarchy … where is the term patriarchy?)

  11. Robyn says:

    Right, these are references to lineage and form, but not to any substance.

  12. @ Robyn

    The point is that model hasn’t changed.

    It is the same from (1) prior to the fall, (2) to the Law, (3) to the NT: Husbands are the head of wife.

    The model for marriage is Patriarchy.

  13. Robyn says:

    OH I absolutely believe that the husband is the authority and the wife is to submit to that headship. I just disagree that the ‘patriarchy’ is the healthy, Godly term that applies to the paradigm of marriage.

    The model for marriage of the world is patriarchy. The model for a marriage rooted in Christ is one-flesh. God linked it to marriage in both Covenants but drove it much deeper in the New.

  14. The model for marriage of the world is patriarchy. The model for a marriage rooted in Christ is one-flesh. God linked it to marriage in both Covenants but drove it much deeper in the New.

    That doesn’t make sense. Patriarchy is not a worldly concept.

    The world hates Patriarchy because it is a Biblical concept. They make up “abuses of authority” which colors many Christians’ opinions about it, which deceives them to fall for feminist thinking. Because “patriarchy” has become such a demonized term in the western world through the influence of feminism, it has even influenced you to eschew the term.

    Male led marriages are Patriarchy. It was perfect before the fall. The Law showed us the minimal requirements. However, Jesus restored and modeled what it was supposed to be in the beginning. Nothing changed about the way God created marriage — patriarchy — except our understanding of how to emulate God’s model of it.

  15. edlongshanks says:

    The church ladies have taken over. The Godly manliness of Peter Cartwright and Francis Asbury has turned into Mr. Mom vacuuming the carpet and emotionally supporting his wife. Even a man’s sexuality has been turned into “lust” and something that he has to get an accountability partner to help cure him.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s