Myself and most of the women around here make it a point to obey our husbands, some of us even call our husbands by titles such as “master”. This pretty much universally bothers feminists, who generally assume we have sad little lives that we live out under our husband’s boot heel. An example of just one such conversation:
— Shannon Hunter (@Shananigans) May 3, 2014
There’s something that these feminists miss when they object to this particular hierarchy. Look at it this way, who is more likely to come to your aid? Someone who loves you, but sees you as an equal and knows you are perfectly capable of taking care of yourself, or someone who loves you, is responsible for you and has a vested interest in your well being? The latter naturally. Any master has a vested interest in the well being of those in his care, because if he does not care for them properly he stands to lose them.
I’ll use a personal example. Most of you know I have a horse. She is housed in someone else’s barn with their horses. I like the other horses and often attend to their needs, but the majority of my attention is focused on my own horse. I love my horse very much and that love and dedication to her well being drove me up to that barn every single day for a year to tend to her injured leg. In heat, in snow, after school, on weekends, everyday I went up there and spent three hours of my precious time on that horse. Why? Because she’s mine. She brings me pride and pleasure, we achieved some unbelievable things together, and I will ensure that she lives out her days peacefully just to repay her for that.
Would I do any of that for someone else’s horse? Not for free. Why not? Because they aren’t my responsibility. I have no desire to see them suffer and I enjoy their presence, but they aren’t my responsibility. They are someone else’s.
In return for that love and dedication, my horse responds with respect, obedience, and great concern for my safety.
The relationship between a master and a servant, or a husband and a wife is one of mutual caring. They both have responsibility to the other, but what those responsibilities are differ with their position. The master must make the final decisions and the servant must respect those decisions. These things are both difficult. The master must struggle with putting the needs of his subordinates first and dealing with the consequences if his decision is wrong. The servant must struggle with the fear of allowing someone else to make decisions on their behalf and obeying even when they disagree with those decisions. Through it all they have to see to the other person’s needs and try to fulfill some of their more reasonable wants.
When a couple succeeds in this type of hierarchy they both receive the kind of love that they need most. Men crave respectful love, women crave protective love.
It’s kind of funny that so many feminists have a problem with this, because the articles on feminist ethics that I have read suggested that men should make a point to care for the members of their family first. As if this was some radical new idea and that men needed to be told that. Most men will do that if you let them. However, feminists tell men that they should do this, then promptly refuse to let them do that in a day to day manner. They insist that they can take care of themselves, but scream for help (from men) as soon as trouble rears its head, while simultaneously berating men for allowing trouble to exist at all. And despite what their ethics may say, feminists do not actually want men to only look after their own wives and families, they want all men to look after all women while receiving no benefit for doing so.
Around here we posit something a lot more simple. Every woman is cared for by her husband, every man is respected by his wife. All children, the sick, and the elderly are cared for by their own families. In this case there are no questions about whose responsibility anyone is.
A woman wouldn’t have to live in fear of whether the man taking her home at 3am is a white knight or a rapist. Of course, if she were married the woman probably wouldn’t be out there at 3am at all, which seems to be the part feminists have an issue with. Having their “fun” curtailed is something they cannot stand, so they delay marriage as long as possible, abort their children, pursue a degree in something useless so they can maximize their partying during college, and date men who maximize their tingles. On top of all this, they want a world where it is safe for them to do that.
I’ve already voiced my confusion about how that lifestyle is fun, so I won’t rehash it here. What I will rehash is how much I appreciate NSR’s love and support. Especially during these last three weeks. He has attended to my physical, mental, and emotional well being during a time of incredible stress. He encouraged me to pursue my faith more and was my sponsor when I was baptized. He holds me together when I start to fray at the edges, he helps me whenever I need help, and stands by my side even when I’m being horrid. I would not trade our marriage for the world, or seek to change the dynamic in any way. In return I try my best to love him, respect him, and provide him with a clean house and good food.
If feminists think I’m like a dog for that, fine by me. I’m one well loved and cared for dog.