How To Live A Simple Life

[infowarrior1]

And a man makes it easy and natural for his woman to follow his lead when he's a good, wise, strong leader. It's a RELIEF when you can trust a man's good leadership and finally relax. The problem is this is so rare. The only time my mom asserts her own leadership is when my dad's leadership is totally misguided. With power comes responsibility, and a whole lot of men these days just aren't willing to step up to that.

A wise wife is well and good. And she should give advice to ensure good decision making.

But does the Husband still have the final say in those times? If not then he truly isn't the Head of his Wife. But the Wife is the real Head of the family.

That is where I think it goes wrong if that is the case.

Otherwise I don't see no problem with that.

Given that there isn't any conditions where such a thing doesn't apply in a marriage. Just as Jesus Christ doesn't stop being the Head of the Church at any time.

I watched a TV show based mostly on real history called: "Three Kingdoms" set in China after the Han Dynasty fell and I would see scenes where a King would consult his ministers. His ministers would urge him one way or another. They will even beg with tears and bow themselves before him. But at the end he makes that final decision and they assent.

And when things go wrong they come up with advice for the new situation that arises.

 

[infowarrior1]

I agree with you that a lot of men these days are too subservient to women and that's the wrong approach, probably because they've been taught how to interact with women by single/divorced or disgruntled mothers. And why is that? Because so many fathers failed to be involved and teach their sons well as they should - ultimately, a failure of weak male leadership.

There is also the family court system kicking Fathers from homes and forcing them to be separate from their children as Dalrock has amply documented.

If you haven't heard of him. I will link you.

 

[Aboulia]

Show me in scripture where it's the duty of the wife to "identify blind spots" in her husband. That is feminist crap, trying to be a husband's personal Holy Spirit. This leads to nagging and resentment. It does not work. It is not a wife's job to convict her husband, that is God's job. Her job is to submit, run the household, and pray for her husband.

Proverbs 9:8, but given the modern culture and the aforementioned liberal background I understand where you're coming from. The Church Fathers are not to be approached the same way scripture is approached in Protestantism. The whole person with all his writings have to be taken together. St John says in a homily (sermon):

Neither let a wife say to her husband, Unmanly coward that you are, full of sluggishness and dullness, and fast asleep! Here is such a one, a low man, and of low parentage, who runs his risks, and makes his voyages, and has made a good fortune; and his wife wears her jewels, and goes out with her pair of milk-white mules; she rides about everywhere, she has troops of slaves, and a swarm of eunuchs, but you have cowered down and livest to no purpose. Let not a wife say these things, nor anything like them. For she is the body, not to dictate to the head, but to submit herself and obey. But how, some one will say, is she to endure poverty? Where is she to look for consolation? Let her select and put beside her those who are poorer still. Let her again consider how many noble and high-born maidens have not only received nothing of their husbands, but have even given dowries to them, and have spent their all upon them. Let her reflect on the perils which arise from such riches, and she will cling to this quiet life. In short, if she is affectionately disposed towards her husband, she will utter nothing of the sort. No, she will rather choose to have him near her, though gaining nothing, than gaining ten thousand talents of gold, accompanied with that care and anxiety which always arise to wives from those distant voyages.

Homily 20 on Ephesians

There is nothing wrong with what you said initially, provided your vision is perfect, and you're not missing anything, nor is @TexasJenn wrong when she says

helps her husband identify his own blind spots - not out of an egoic desire to be right, but with a focus on keeping the marriage and family on the right path.

If (St) Theodora did exactly what you prescribe and not point out blind spots, then (St) Justinian would have been ousted. A well-ordered man properly understands who he is, he understands his weak and strong points, but if a husband is not aware of one of his weaknesses, who better than his wife to shine light on it (in private of course)

The husband, being the masculine figure in marriage, is to be in the overt leadership role, he's the one overtly making the decisions, and being the border guard of the family to fight off subversive elements that try to destroy it, whether that's by working to provide, or to set the bounds of what is/is not permissible in the household.

The wife, as the feminine figure, gives of herself to bring forth children, which she cares for and nurtures, is subtle in her ways, overtness is not a feminine quality (It's also why yoga pants are gross). This article "Sacred Space, Sacred Art and the Power of Women" describes aspects of the feminine far better than I ever could. I think this feminine element is something that Protestants miss, since the sole emphasis is on Christ.

Was it Sarah’s choice to not trust God’s plan; and to have Haggar conceive a child with her husband, Abraham?

Sarah herself bade the patriarch take Hagar. She herself directed it, no one compelled her, nor did the husband attempt it; no, although he had dragged on so long a period childless, yet he chose never to become a father, rather than to grieve his wife. And yet even after all this, what said Sarah? The Lord judge between me and you. Now, I say, had he been any one else would he not have been moved to anger? Would he not also have stretched forth his hand, saying as it were, What do you mean? I had no desire to have anything to do with the woman; it was all your own doing; and do you turn again and accuse me?— But no, he says nothing of the sort — but what? Behold, your maid is in your hand; do to her that which is good in your eyes. He delivered up the partner of his bed, that he might not grieve Sarah. And yet surely is there nothing greater than this for producing affection. (St John Chrysostom, Homily 20 on Ephesians)

 

[SeekingTruth]

If I can make it to 42 years of age without a wife, perhaps God has ordained celibacy for me. I wait to discover if that is the case.

Don’t totally give up on this! We are around the same age, and I was just married this summer. My wife is also of an age to still have a very large family, she’s a woman of faith, and from a small town...hint hint.

 

[Cartographer]

And a man makes it easy and natural for his woman to follow his lead when he's a good, wise, strong leader. It's a RELIEF when you can trust a man's good leadership and finally relax. The problem is this is so rare. The only time my mom asserts her own leadership is when my dad's leadership is totally misguided. With power comes responsibility, and a whole lot of men these days just aren't willing to step up to that.

If a woman only follows a man when she feels like it, it completely negates his role as a leader. Women aren't exempt from stepping up to their role as a follower either, which is just as hard. Two wrongs don't make a right and this kind of "I can't follow my husband because he has a speck in his eye" attitude is the log in a woman's own eye. I'm not saying a man can't be rebuked by his wife either but it seems like women these days are too eager to do this...although maybe that's always been the case, due to original sin.

As a man, I think it's incumbent on men to be strict and careful with themselves if they want God to trust them with a wife. The thing is, it's unseemly for a woman to be saying this to men and often just accomplishes the opposite result. Although I do think having women on the forum is a good way for us to discuss these things in a respectful context.

 

[SamCru]

Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband. - Ephesians 5:22-33

Wives, likewise, be submissive to your own husbands, that even if some do not obey the word, they, without a word, may be won by the conduct of their wives, when they observe your chaste conduct accompanied by fear. Do not let your adornment be merely outward—arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel— rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God. For in this manner, in former times, the holy women who trusted in God also adorned themselves, being submissive to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, whose daughters you are if you do good and are not afraid with any terror.

Husbands, likewise, dwell with them with understanding, giving honor to the wife, as to the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered. - 1 Peter 3:1-7

It's very clear that wives must submit to their husbands. This husbands must obey wives stuff is absolute nonsense. If a man does this, his household will be destroyed. I submitted to my wife on some important matters in the past, and it ended badly. She took no responsibility and blamed it all on me. Needless to say, I don't do that anymore. It's sad that Roosh has given up all of his red-pill wisdom concerning women because he feels guilty about his fornication. I am married and can tell you that your red-pill stuff is correct, and this blue-pill false Christianity which isn't even in the Bible is wrong. Get married or stop writing about marriage, Roosh.

 

[NotaBene]

With power comes responsibility, and a whole lot of men these days just aren't willing to step up to that.

I actually agree. These are multi-generational problems for both men and women. Bad men --> Raise horrible women --> Crappy single mothers ---> Raise bad men.

I spent most of my life so far very blue-pilled, and only in the last couple years realized that women have any real problems or tendencies to sin at all. So I tend to over-emphasize because I believe our culture (and even churches) tend to downplay the part of women in these cycles.

These all can and should be her duties first of course.

This is wise. Keep in mind that the burdens wives often feel to keep their houses immaculate often come from *other women*, perceived expectations, and petty comparison rather than actual need or a husband's demands.

I wish wives would just ask their husbands: "What do I need to get done today?" I guarantee you that his answer will be a really short list. Everything else is optional! That doesn't mean be a lazy wife, it just means get rid of the resentment that comes from perceived expectations where none actually exist.

Get married or stop writing about marriage, Roosh.

I really don't mind, it raises some interesting discussions, and that's what we're here for. But yeah, be careful you don't fall of the horse on the other side. Don't become a white knight in your penance

 

[christie2]

(........) rather than actual need or a husband's demands.

I wish wives would just ask their husbands: "What do I need to get done today?"

This is reasonable advice, I think you're right.
My husband becomes my manager who can guide me in daily tasks if I only ask.


The last couple of days I've been thinking of hours of work and when I quit when I get married, would my husband*my new employer* have me working more or less hours per week than when I was single and working for strangers 40 hours a week like I do now?

My thought is that because the type of work for a husband and marital home is entirely different and pleasing and healthful for us both, I'm predicting time won't be kept track of.
A different paradigm to live in that is challenging for me to imagine, as I haven't experienced it yet.

I'll remember this question NotaBene, thanks

 

[Viktor Zeegelaar]

As an evil world, especially in the Western hemisphere as we see the absence of God we see the absence of simplicity. I was talking to friends about this recently, about how many choices one has to make every day. Get a bottle of milk, 20 choices. Get peanut butter, 20 choices. Having to get something done, 5 forms at the municipality, 4 people you have to call. There's so many choices in daily life, what choices did one have to make 100 years ago and all time before that? What you were going to do was decided by your family lineage, especially by what your father did, or as woman you were to be a mother and good wife for your family. There were vastly limited goods, everything was local, you didn't knew anything outside your region, probably not much outside of your own village or city. Communities were tight, you never moved to another place. You never moved to another job. It was just as it was. The peace, structure and tranquility going along with that order has obviously been removed on purpose for the chaotic, all opportunities available, gotta make the most of it, gotta develop myself the most attitude of destructive society.

 

[Laus Deo]

As an evil world, especially in the Western hemisphere as we see the absence of God we see the absence of simplicity. I was talking to friends about this recently, about how many choices one has to make every day. Get a bottle of milk, 20 choices. Get peanut butter, 20 choices. Having to get something done, 5 forms at the municipality, 4 people you have to call. There's so many choices in daily life, what choices did one have to make 100 years ago and all time before that? What you were going to do was decided by your family lineage, especially by what your father did, or as woman you were to be a mother and good wife for your family. There were vastly limited goods, everything was local, you didn't knew anything outside your region, probably not much outside of your own village or city. Communities were tight, you never moved to another place. You never moved to another job. It was just as it was. The peace, structure and tranquility going along with that order has obviously been removed on purpose for the chaotic, all opportunities available, gotta make the most of it, gotta develop myself the most attitude of destructive society.

In its past PUA life, this forum would’ve encountered the maxim “options = instability”, which as you’ve well stated could equally be applied to all aspects of modern life. There is absolutely no doubt the system is currently geared to make as many people as unstable as possible.

Striving for a simple God-filled life ensures stability in all areas.