Women should not obey men
I wish to speak to this notion of obedience of women required by certain men because it is not until women realize that they are no longer required to obey a man with whom they are in a relationship that they will respect themselves enough to leave an abusive man long before he inflicts his will on her to the degree that it requires her life.
I do not wish to change these types of men because they are of little consequence in the long run. Once women have opened their eyes to the fact that abusive men have absolutely no right to beat women – not even for the ridiculous notion of forcing a woman to submit to his will – that is when those men become insignificant.
Moreover, the more the system gets its act together and puts these abusive men and murderers away for good, the more these men will realize that it is not worth the time in jail to force a woman into “obedience.”
My oldest daughter recently got engaged to a wonderful young man she has known for years. The wedding will not be until late next year, but we were so caught up in the excitement that we were going over even the smallest details. This is when I wanted to know if she intended to include the word “obey” in her wedding vows.
Her emphatic answer was no. Her father and I have taught her well. Quite honestly, she is so full of personality and brains that I would hate to see any man try to control her for even one second. Luckily, she has found a man who loves her because of her personality and brains and would never want her to become anything else.
Not all women are so lucky. Some men only want a slave to take care of him, his house, his food, his clothes – him, him, him. An eighteenth century English author named Mary Wollstonecraft once said, “…as blind obedience is ever sought for by power, tyrants and sensualists are in the right when they endeavor to keep women in the dark, because the former only want slaves, and the latter a play-thing.”
This notion of female obedience to a male master is just pure rubbish. Nonsense. Gibberish. Babble. Drivel. Jabberwocky. Skimble-skamble. Balderdash. Baloney. Bilge. Blatherskite. Piffle. Pishposh. Poppycock. Tomfoolery. Flummadiddle. Horsefeathers. Hogwash. Fiddlesticks. Malarkey. Twaddle. Windbaggery. Hooey.
You get the point.
It is a non-issue as to whether the men (those who do not like giving up their female slaves) ever embrace the fact that women are not subject to them, women do not have to submit their wills to their husbands and women are no longer required to obey men. All that is important is that women know these truths and start acting on them.
Germaine de Staël, a French novelist and literary critic who lived in the early 1800s said, “Every time a new nation, America or Russia for instance, advances toward civilization, the human race perfects itself; every time an inferior class emerges from enslavement and degradation, the human race again perfects itself.”
This is what the judicial system must keep in mind as they advance toward human perfection by ridding society of wife-beaters and wife murderers. To close this essay, I am going to provide a short poem that speaks to the notion of coerced obedience that was first written in 1555.
Your brutal goal was to make me a slave
beneath the ruse of being served by you.
Pardon me, friend, and for once hear me through:
I am outraged with anger and I rave.
— Sonnet XXIII, Oeuvres (1555)
A Book of Women Poets, Aliki and Willis Barnstone, eds., 1980
(BTW, if you want a good look at how some men still think this way, check out the post ‘Because “surrendered” sounds so much better than “abused”‘ from feministing.com).
Entry filed under: feminism, feminist, misogyny, Stella Ramsaroop, women, women's issues. Tags: abuse, christianity, equal rights, morality, religion, sexism, spirituality, women's health, women's rights, women's studies.