Anglican Archbishop of Sydney wants women to "submit" to their husbands in marriage vows

[Thumbwitch]

As described in this article.

He wants men to take more responsibility, to be the "man" of the family and achieve Christ-like status as befits a man - and for his wife to then submit to this set up.

Like hell! How to set feminism back by several decades. If not centuries.

blackcurrants, I like your cunning plan I'm pro-gay marriage too because I know that promising to stay together forever is important to some people, and because it is just so important to make society treat gay and hetero couples as completely equal. And I want everyone to have equal opportunities to reject it!

I'm also staunchly in favour of civil partnerships being opened up to hetero couples, polygamous arrangements and platonic arrangements too. Two equal systems for all, so people can choose one or neither, but can make a free choice of their own.

So women should submit to their husbands, and husbands have the more 'onerous obligation' of sacrificing themselves for their wives as Christ sacrificed himself for the church. Assuming that means just a general putting their wives first, rather than literally killing themselves, it seems to me that there has been a catastrophic failure among men, especially among Christian men to live up to this.

In these conservative Christian circles, it's the women who have to do all the sacrificing as well as the submitting. They have to sacrifice their dreams, their goals and subsume themselves in their husbands. The men get to swan around imagining that they're fulfilling their God given husbandly role because they think that if a mad gun man bursts in to the room, they'll happily take the bullet for their wives. I was in church for years and I've seen more heartbreak and anguish caused by these women submit marriages, then I've ever seen happiness and contentment.

this ^

What a load of shite. I love the platitudes in the article/comments that it's ok because the husbands have to submit to ....... to Christ.

Hmmmm ...... who would I rather submit to? An actual human being who demands I make his dinner, wash his socks and who makes major decisions that affect my actual day to day life, or a mythical abstract figure whose words I can interpret anyway I wish to suit my own needs? I wonder ....

Maybe he's been reading 50 shades of Grey ^^

Nah, only women read that. But perhaps his wife has been enthralled by it. "How come you don't treat me the way the man does here...?"

That's irreverent isn't it. Even if they're Australian.

Lotta's friend's mother sounds to have had a lot of oppression in her life. It must have been very restrictive for her to internalise those beliefs as a young woman. If her marriage is now in trouble, that's terrible for her; it's not karma.

The Archbishop for instance can fuck right off.

This sort of bullshit is one of the reasons we left Sydney Anglican.

Leftwingharpie, I do feel sorry for her, very much so. She's someone who lives to please other people and always puts others' feelings above her own and look where it's got her What makes me feel quite angry though is that she has passed on a lot of this thinking to her daughter, my friend. My friend has married a man who is a tosser dominant, chauvinistic, controlling and my friend seems to feel that he is the most important person in their relationship, her feelings always come second. They have just had a baby because he wanted to be a parent, while she was much more ambivalent about the whole thing. It makes me want to scream and give her a good shake but I know it's her decision and her life. That's her mother's legacy continuing and it will possibly be the same with her own daughter