Headship Authority is NOT “beat you over the head” Patriarchy.

Readership: All
Theme: The W!tchy War on Masculinity
Reader’s Note: A response to Derek Ramsey’s mischaracterizations of marital authority.
Length: 1,350 words
Reading Time: 7 minutes

“Submit” may not mean what you think it means.

In Derek Ramsey’s post, Talking About Old Women (2023/12/4), he writes,

“Never in the Bible is a Christian wife told to submit to her husband or a Christian husband told to rule over his wife.  No such imperatives exist.  Deti’s Patriarchy isn’t found in the Greek Bible.”

I’m not sure which translation Derek is using, but it’s quite clear.  In case you missed it, this structure is based on Genesis 3:16, Ephesians 5:22-23,* Colossians 3:18,* and Titus 2:3-5,** which were cited by Riuoku in the comments.  And let’s not forget Genesis 2:18-25, 1 Corinthians 11:3, 1 Timothy 2:9-15, 1 Peter 3:1-6,* and all the examples of righteous women in the Bible who submitted to their husbands, like Esther who saved her people by submitting herself to a pagan king (Esther 5) and Sarah who called her husband “Lord” and was deemed righteous (1 Peter 5-6*).

* Uses the word “submit / submissive”.
** Uses the word “obey / obedient”.

Furthermore, in regard to Genesis 2:18-25, Richard P said,

“There is an immediate hierarchy formed by distinguishing between the “help” and the “helped” that no amount of arguing can do away with.

To truly be a help, one must place their agenda lower than the agenda of the “helped” (see “submit”).

How can one truly help if the “helped” does not give the “help” any instructions on what he needs the help to do for him? (see “rule over”).”

This is common sense.  This is domestic order.  This is NOT “beat you over the head” Patriarchy.

There are so many descriptions of marital Headship in the Bible, and yet Derek cites one verse out of context (Ephesians 5:21) and gives a complex explanation of ‘elided verbs’ and ‘middle voice’ to claim there is no structure of authority in marriage. I admire his rhetorical card tricks in denying the obvious (Proverbs 10:19).

img-1783681834-6a50d32a2db778.20129695.gif

Stacking the Cards in One’s Favor

Headship is conditional on the Wife’s Submission, NOT on the husband’s brutality.

GBFM wrote,

“This is why ”beat you over the head” strict patriarchy isn’t necessary if you first lay out the conditions of a relationship with a woman (and she happily accepts them) at the very beginning of getting ”serious” with her and if she isn’t contentious to begin with, that is.”

Note the conditions: “…and she happily accepts them”, and “if she isn’t contentious”.  IOW, here, Patriarchal authority / female submission is the default structure from the start.  In that case, no problem!  You’re on the right track towards having a Christian marriage.

But what if these conditions are NOT present, and you’re already married?  This is the context that Derek routinely ignores, and it is the most common one experienced by men.

GBFM glosses over this situation, saying,

“You either make sure in the end to marry the right woman or not.”

…not recognizing that it is the nature of women to grasp for control over their husbands and men in general.  Furthermore, there is no such thing as “the right woman”.  You will always marry the “wrong person” simply because no one is perfect.

It is what it is, but not what you think it is. Thinking it is what it is not is a delusion — somewhat reminiscent of The Soul Mate Myth.

The only “right woman” is the one who willingly chooses to respect and submit herself to her husband, and this is highly conditional on her moral agency / spiritual maturity and her willing obedience to the Lord.  The problem is that most women are NOT like this and don’t want to be like this either.  But these women still get married and their husbands have to deal with it somehow.

img-1783681835-6a50d32b81c609.80461062.jpgBeing selectively deaf at will is a special magic trick that all married men must learn to master.

Magically Transforming Simp-like Marital Suffering into Christ-like Sacrifice

In the same post, Derek writes,

“When a man in modern society is frivolously divorced and loses his children, he needs to be humble and loving, enduring his suffering — just as the slave with a cruel master had to endure it — for the sake of Christ knowing that this suffering will end after he has died and been resurrected in glory.”

Derek’s prescription is that these men should let a rebellious wife walk all over them, and they should suck it up and suffer patiently and righteously under their ex-wife empresses — a very fatalistic view that only enables and supports more female rebellion.

News flash — this is NOT a Christian marriage!

Deti’s approach is one proven strategy that can implement the Headship Authority structure in the context of having an extremely rebellious wife.  The alternative is either a debased marriage or divorce, both of which harm the children.

But instead of recognizing the value of a sanctified marriage that honors God, Derek dismisses Deti’s approach as equivalent to an unholy vengeance.

“Deti is suffering, having been injured by the woman or women in his life.  When he reads 1 Peter, a letter written just for men like him, rather than rejoicing in his suffering, he decides to spend his days working to make sure that women are made subservient to atone for what they did to him.”

So which will it be?  Embrace the struggle to have a Godly marriage, or give in to “Happy wife, happy life” for the sake of suffering a morbid “peace”?

Apparently, Derek has never had to make this difficult choice.

img-1783681837-6a50d32d55a7f5.31659145.gif

The Sleight of Head

GBFM continues,

“The strict or should I rather say strictest patriarchists are the ones who failed to do the above to their detriment as I pity them for it (especially Deti who I have always liked even when we have disagreed).”

This really gets to the heart of the matter.  Men hear all this talk about complementarianism, egalitarianism, “mutual submission” (e.g. Derek’s analysis of scripture), and “servant leader” stuff, and come away with the idea that hierarchy / Patriarchy is abusive / wrong / “beat you over the head” stuff.  So then they don’t bother to check a woman’s submission during vetting, assuming they’re even aware of its importance.  Then after they get married, they learn from the bitter teacher of experience that Headship Authority / Tingly Respect is the most fundamental element of a successful marriage, and that, contrary to the “beat you over the head” trope, wifely submission is the most important characteristic trait of peace and order in the home.  In fact, wifely submission is the most crucial constituent element of a sanctified Christian marriage that glorifies God and blesses the children.

In effect, Derek is actively spawning more “strict patriarchists” by directing them towards the harsh teacher of life experience, using the scriptures no less, which is sure to dampen the joy of their faith over the long haul.

img-1783681838-6a50d32ec87928.00955010.gif

What is the Secret to Derek’s Magic?

Every man wishes he had a Proverbs 31 unicorn. Derek actually has one. Derek’s wife is and has always been a submissive helper, and he and his family have always been greatly blessed as a result.

The question is, how does Derek evoke his invisible magic authority over his wife?

The truth is, Derek probably doesn’t know the secret to his man magic. Like a fish doesn’t know what water is, Derek can’t see the forest for all the trees.  He can’t see the value of hierarchy because he’s been submerged in it his entire life — thanks to a community that teaches women to conform to the scriptures.

For this reason, Derek will never admit that he has a defacto Patriarchal marriage that glorifies God.  Derek is afraid to identify his marriage for what it is — a glorified Christian Headship arrangement, which I’ve described as Peaceful Unity.

Moreover, it is hypocritical of Derek to slam male / Patriarchal authority and wifely submission in marriage.  So what is his motivation for doing so?  I suppose it is because he is afraid of condoning spousal abuse.  If so, that’s cherry picking.  That’s throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  Or maybe he thinks that would be humblebragging.  Or maybe he’s afraid that he’ll dishonor or offend his wife or jinx himself.  Or maybe he’s uncomfortable with all the responsibilities of being a Head.

In a word, Naïve Hypocrisy.

Or maybe he’s simply taking an opposing position for the sake of argumentation, or in order to allow both the supporting rhetoric and the public awareness of Headship Authority to develop.

Perhaps we should applaud his dexterous performance.

img-1783681840-6a50d3302e95c8.28902540.jpg

The Grand Finale

Derek could improve his performance as a mental magician if he focused on explaining the Peaceful Unity model, of which he is an expert, instead of lambasting the Headship Authority model, which he apparently knows nothing about.

I kindly urge Derek to find the answers to these questions for himself in order to achieve an awareness which will help his writings become more circumspective of the opinions and life situations of men who didn’t marry as well as he did.

Related