Taming the Barbarian

I referenced a Huffington Post article by Carina Kolodny a short time ago where she openly and warmly admits that she believes and hopes that "marriage equality" will put an end to "traditional marriage". Her idea was that marriage as it has been defined since the beginning of time was misogyny and redefining marriage to include same-sex couples would remove that feature. Some of her key points included the changing of names, so that a woman would not share her husband's last name. She was concerned about having children and hoped that women, liberated from marriage ("traditional marriage") would be delightfully free not to reproduce and, if they did, wouldn't have to have her child/children share their father's last name. And, of course, she wanted women everywhere to be able to throw off the yoke of oppression and not have to do the housework anymore. Basically, from her perspective, women could "get theirs". They could become the center, the point, the main issue of their own universe. Or, to put it another way, she would like to perfect the trajectory feminism started for women -- the final and ultimate self-centeredness of a woman.

Some of what she wrote was clearly a misunderstanding of the concept. She indicated that marriage was originally a property agreement (and indicated that we who disagreed were liars). Like any abuse of an idea or definition, this would be just such a one. God made Adam and Eve and made them to be coworkers, complementary, a pair that is one entity who fill in the gaps in the other's abilities. God defined marriage not as a property agreement, but as a man and a woman joined as one to reproduce, to work together toward common ends, and to hold one another up. So when some decided that the best way to carry that out was by property agreement (or multiple marriages or by abusing their wives or ...), it didn't affect the definition. It simply reflected a failed understanding and sinful attitudes and an improper, unintended way of carrying out the definition.

Some of what she wrote was, frankly, horrifying to me. If she got her way, we could, in good conscience, cease to reproduce. "Don't worry about it! Do whatever you want! Don't let anyone tell you what is right, best, good, or required. We lesbians won't be reproducing (obviously); why should you?" Her notion would be a world purely determined by "what I like", a terrifying proposition.

But there was, in her article, a hidden secret. It's something feminism missed. It's something most of us miss. It's something that I even missed until she wrote the article. Indeed, she didn't even write this fact; she merely pointed it out to me. It is, I believe, one of Satan's hidden agendas.

It has long been known that women and men are different. Sorry. Can't deny it. It's true. God designed us differently. That also is true. He designed men for certain roles, tasks, jobs, and women for others. And He designed it so that men and women would complement one another. (Complement: to complete; to join one or more items that makes the whole more perfect.) He would have strength and she would have compassion. He would have courage and she would have tenderness. He would be linear in his thinking and she would be multitasking. Each has its strengths and weaknesses. Together they cover all the bases. In this sense, it has also been understood that wives "tame the barbarian", so to speak. Men are wild until they are married, and then they are domesticated. Men are focused on fun and self and women teach them to focus on other than themselves. Men know how to work hard; women know how to prepare them for it with dress and nutrition and ... well, you get the idea. For most of time men needed to be tamed and wives were the ones who did it.

Enter feminism. The aim was "equality", but the sights appeared to be set for "equivalence". That is, not merely "equal in value", but "no significant differences". Oddly enough (that is tongue in cheek), instead of elevating women to new heights, the outcome was lowering them to the level of their very complaints about men. Consider sex. Men and women are not equal in terms of sex. Men are biologically driven while women are driven by other forces. Thus, women are in the driver's seat. In earlier times, then, they could hold out sex for marriage and, further, continue to use that control element for marital fidelity. As long as the majority of women operated on the same basis, it worked fairly well. But women have decided to lower themselves to the male concept of "breeding like rabbits", so to speak (although modern contraception eliminates the "breeding", doesn't it?). Instead of becoming more unified in sex for marriage and sex for fidelity, they plummeted to sex for no better reason than recreation. And so it goes.

Now women are no longer taming their men. They aren't trying. They don't care. They're no better. They can't teach their husbands to be more kind, considerate, tenderhearted, and selfless because they've abandoned it in favor of self. They once had a notion of enlightened self-interest that dragged their sphere of influence into a better place. Now they've degenerated into simple self-interest where "Do whatever makes you feel good" is the rule.

That is a plot, plain and simple. No, not a lesbian plot. Not a feminist plot. It's Satan's ploy to make men as bad as he can and women as bad as the men. And we, in the name of "equality", seek the lowest common denominator. Carina Kolodny and the like glorify the lowest common denominator. This does not bode well. "Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up ..." (Rom 1:22-24). "Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them" (Rom 1:32). This does not bode well at all.