CTNAHM: Michael Talks to the Ladies

A Guest Post by Aletha

Originally Posted on Yllom Mormon

Created To Need A Help Meet, pp. 44—46

We’re still on Chapter 4, where Michael tells men why they need women. So far, we’ve established that women need to be needed; it’s the man’s job to sanctify his wife; and it’s the woman’s job to be her husband’s moral compass. More about that compass today.

I Need Her Morality and Conscience

It is well known that the women are the moral anchors of any society. When the ladies become depraved, families perish and society disintegrates. Men are less introspective and better able to ignore their consciences than are women. Wives and mothers are created with a nesting nurturing instinct that is not dependent upon religious beliefs. They feel secure in a moral environment, sensing the necessity of a structure and an ordered society based on values that protect them and their children.

This may be heresy to the Pearl’s, but I don’t believe that women as a whole are society’s moral anchors. I think there are inherent moralities in most people. Most people know what’s right and wrong, with or without religion. Very few people will murder just for kicks. A small percentage will steal. Across the world and throughout various cultures, there seems to be the same things that are considered criminal. Yes, there are cultural differences (and sociopaths), but in general, people seem to think things like murder, rape, lying, and stealing are wrong. Not just women.

Also, I’m curious what Michael means by “depraved”. I’m wondering if it’s women wanting to work, or lesbians, or what. I kind of wish when he makes statements like this, he explains his reasoning and what he really means. Are men really less introspective, or is that just something they’re cultured not to be? My husband has zero introspective skills, but that’s because in his family, emotion (any emotion) is unacceptable; so he doesn’t know what he’s feeling or have the skills to figure out why he’s feeling it. It’s a work in progress for us! And again, Michael tells us that women are magically gifted with a nurturing instinct.

Considering the vast number of laws, rules, and regulations that are a part of every society, I think it’s safe to say that people, in general, feel secure in a moral environment. There would be very few people that feel safe in a lawless world, female or male. Oh, and women are fully capable of protecting themselves, their children, and even their husbands.

Excuse the base comparison, but as men are the predators in the human kingdom, women are the prey. Feeling their vulnerability, women support a society based on the rule of law. We regularly read of a gang of men raping women, but not the other way around. A man may walk off and leave his children, but a woman of sound mind will walk three thousand miles to tend to her offspring—substance abusers excepted.

Wow. That’s not a base comparison, that’s an INSULTING comparison. It sounds to me like Michael’s reasoning could lead to a lot more lawlessness. “It’s not my fault I murdered her, officer! I’m just a predator! It’s my God-given nature!” Show of hands, ladies, how many of you “feel your vulnerability” and want to be protected? I’m more afraid of car crashes than I am of being robbed, murdered, or raped.

Speaking of rape, yes, we have heard of gangs of men raping women. It’s also statistically true that men are far less likely to report a rape. Does it mean gangs of women don’t rape? I honestly don’t know. Considering Michael makes the point often that women are illogical and governed by female emotions, it’s very odd to read him talk about women of “sound mind”. And that the only women that ever leave their children are substance abusers. What about the exodus of women in the 70s to communes and retreats to “find themselves”? Something I’ve learned in foster kid class is that just because a woman doesn’t leave, doesn’t mean she’s still around taking care of the kids. Plenty of children learn to take care of themselves and siblings at a young age because their parent(s) just aren’t capable of doing it. Sometimes leaving isn’t the worst thing a parent can do.

Some depraved women will view pornography, but most men will become addicted to it to the point of abandoning all nobility. Women never start or conduct wars, but men grow bored unless their generation settles some dispute with a river of blood. Mister, you need your wife’s conscience. She is the smoke and detectors waiting silently in the home…well, maybe not so silently, but she is there to sound the alarm when her conscience is pricked by your careless moral meanderings. So don’t take the batteries out.

Oh, those depraved women! How terrible for them to have a desire to see a naked hunk or babe! Surely the sight of one’s husband, ready for action, should be more than enough for them! And once again, Michael lowers men. “Most men” will become addicted until he’s lost his “nobility”. First, who says that all men are noble? What defines manly nobility? Second, not all men want to view porn. Finally, not all men that view porn are addicted, nor do they ruin their lives because of it. This is a trend in Mormonism, too. Porn=addiction=failed marriage. Obviously, this isn’t true 100% of the time.

I’m kind of aghast that Michael claims wars start out of men’s boredom. Like men have a desire to kill thousands on a whim. I guess this goes with his comment that men are predators. During the Vietnam War, just as many men (if not more) as women protested the war. Not all men are violent. That should be an obvious point.

Kind of like last post, I want to emphasize that women are not a catch all for man’s emotions! People in general should be able to be decent, law abiding citizens. Men, if you’re using your wife as a smoke alarm, you’re doing it wrong. Yes, it’s good to have someone to help us toe the line, but if the only thing keeping you from a bloodbath started by boredom is your wife, please see a shrink ASAP. And what does Michael mean by taking the batteries out? I get the feeling he thinks he’s being a clever wordsmith with a fine joke…

Men will hide their sin from their wives while boldly displaying it before others. Why? Because she is a resident judge who will not let us lie to ourselves. A good woman, like a clean mirror, will cause a man to see his shame. Some men are angry with their wives for that very reason. Rather than accept the judgement of their wife’s conscience, thy rail at the messenger. If a man is every successful in corrupting his wife to the point of causing her to join him in depravity, he will go to hell faster than a drunk in a Ferrari.

It seems odd that a man will boldly display his sin to everyone but his wife. In thinking of the lousy men of my past, all of their despicable deeds were done in secret to everyone. My dad would hide his drugs and take them locked in the bathroom. My ex would find girls on craigslist and sneak them over to his house. I think it’s a rare man that will loudly proclaim his evil. Another thing that’s bugging me in this paragraph is Michael calling women “judges”. In Debi’s book, I seem to remember her saying “never judge or complain”, just shower with respect. If a woman is following Debi, then how will the husband accurately use her as a moral compass, if all she’s allowed to point to is how amazing he is?

Two problems can arise from the reality of a man’s wife being his moral stabilizer The first is she becomes immoral and can no longer fulfill her role. The second is that she becomes haughty and judgmental, denigrating her less-than-righteous husband. Certainly the second is to be preferred but will causes a man to stay on the golf course or put in extra hours at work.

Ok, Michael. First you say it’s women’s nature to be a moral compass. Then you tell us how this causes problems. How about if each spouse is their own moral compass, and touch base with the other often to make sure everyone is law-abiding and decent?

I have known many men who have just enough Bible teaching to know that God commands their wives to submit and honor them, but not enough grace to seek to be worthy of that position. It is the lowest form of hypocrisy to be immoral and expect your wife to draw the curtain on her conscience and honor you as if you were honorable Stupid jerk. Such a man becomes the predator demanding the prey be silent while eaten, and all in the name of God. Woe, woe, woe unto that man.

I agree. With the whole paragraph. I’ve been wondering how Michael and Debi’s books would actually work in tandem, but here it seems to be saying “Don’t expect her to worship you while you’re being a cad.” Excellent point!

“Render therefore to all their dues…honor to whom honor. (Romans 13:7)” A good wife will interpret that passage to mean that she should honor her husband because of his God-appointed office, just as we honor a police officer or judge irrespective of his character. But a righteous man will interpret that passage to mean that he should come to be worthy of that honor. Don’t expect your wife to pretend you are honorable when you are not. Many men don’t want their wives to be moral help meets; they want them to be covers for their immorality.

Gah! I feel sometimes like his logic runs in circles. “Be worthy of the honor your wife gives you. A good wife should honor her husband because he’s God-appointed. Don’t expect your wife to pretend you are honorable.” It just doesn’t’ seem like these sentences go together. Either a wife’s honor is conditional or it isn’t. You can’t say “Don’t be a jerk, but your wife will honor you anyway” and “Be honorable and your wife won’t have to pretend.” Or maybe I’m just missing the point here. My brain is starting to hurt from the doublespeak. Also, I don’t know about the men Michael is around, but the guys I know don’t need women to be their moral compasses, because they are capable of doing that themselves. Why are Michael’s men so helpless?

If God gave us what we deserve, we would all be in hell. If wives gave us what we deserve, we would be chained to the doghouse, eat leftovers, and have to potty in the yard. God’s mercy and free gift of righteousness motivate us to walk in conformity to his most undeserved favor and grace. Likewise, when a good woman honors her dog-of-a-husband, he should have the humility to seek to be worthy of her most undeserved grace.

I don’t think I like Micheal’s God. Sure, He hands out mercy and grace, but he makes sure we know we don’t deserve it? It’s like giving a 3 year old a birthday present, and every time they use it, reminding them “You really shouldn’t have gotten that. You’re not good enough. Aren’t you glad I was nice enough to give it to you?” Ick. I don’t think I want to be the wife Michael thinks women are. If I truly gave my husband what he deserved, I would be better to him because he is wonderful to me. It seems, in PearlWorld (TM), that men are rakes and women are shrews. I also think it’s interesting to note where women (courtesy of Debi) are threatened with duplexes, divorce, and infidelity for not “properly honoring”, men are sternly told they “should” be worthy. No scare tactics, no threats. Just a sentence that they really should be honorable. No consequences for not being so.

A warning to wives: That’s right. I’m aware that some of you nosy wives are reading this book while your husbands are at work so you can “help” them remember it-or hold them to it. My warning to you is that just as husbands are prone to read “Created to Be His Help Meet” and demand their wives obey them—a most inappropriate response—wives may read my scathing exhortation to their husbands and decide not to honor the dog until he can do his tricks properly—again a most inappropriate response. One of you must do his/her duty before God regardless of what the other is doing if this marriage stands a chance of getting any better. A husband can make a marriage half good if he loves and cherishes his wife no matter her response, and a wife can make her marriage half good by honoring her dishonorable husband. A marriage that goes completely bad is one where both parties hold out until the other fulfills his or her duty. That’s no marriage at all. It’s a war where everybody loses.

Ooooh. Shame on me for reading this book! And honestly, I think more husbands would read CTBHHM and expect their wives to obey, than wives would read this and expect their husbands to love them. For one thing, obedience is easier to spot than love. Love can manifest in lots of different ways, but obedience is pretty obvious. For another, Michael really hasn’t said HOW men can do these things. Just vague sentences like “bring her to the place” and “sanctify your wife.” Despite Michaels’ claims, I have yet to read any scathing exhortations. At most, he calls guys a selfish jerk. Debi’s book is more scathing, promising madness, poverty, cold beds, and ripping apart letter writers. Michael is just making a case that men “should” be decent.

And I disagree that one person can change their marriage. Why would you only want your marriage to be “half good”? I suppose it’s better than all bad. But what I have an issue with is: if a man is being a selfish jerk, how would his wife suddenly submitting and acting like he’s great provide him with motivation to change? If anything, he would think “Oh, there’s no problem here . . . see how well she treats me.” I do agree that a bad marriage is where both parties are holding out, but I think the problem is easier solved by saying “Let’s both work this out, even if we try marriage counseling” rather than a unilateral attempt to “half fix” things.

I remember a lesson my daddy taught me when I was learning to drive. I asked him “What do I do if the other guy keeps his lights on bright after I flash him a warning? Should I just put mine on bright and teach him a lesson?” He answered, “One blind drive is enough; no need for two blind fools.”

It’s a good anecdote. But I’m not sure how well it applies. In PearlWorld, women are commanded to submit. Men are suggested to love. Whereas Debi firmly lays out exactly how wives should submit, Michael hasn’t really said how men should love. Unless you count his “let her know you need her.” Which I’m not sure I do.

Here’s some free advice—if your marriage is unhappy, communicate and work together to come up with a solution. Involve professionals if you feel the need. Simply unilaterally trying to change the other spouse (and the marriage) is going to result in hurt feelings and burn out. It took 2 people to begin the relationship, it will take 2 people to fix it.

About Libby Anne

Libby Anne grew up in a large evangelical homeschool family highly involved in the Christian Right. College turned her world upside down, and she is today an atheist, a feminist, and a progressive. She blogs about leaving religion, her experience with the Christian Patriarchy and Quiverfull movements, the detrimental effects of the "purity culture," the contradictions of conservative politics, and the importance of feminism.

  • attackfish

    Excuse the base comparison, but as men are the predators in the human kingdom, women are the prey.

    Oh, my F***ing God, this is where all the problems start right here! We’re the same freaking species! One of us is not the predator and the other the prey. If that were the case, men would want to eat us, not have sex with us, and women wouldn’t want anything to do with men ever, any more than a zebra wants to hang out with a lioness. This is the same ridiculous logic that says a woman can’t hurt a man, or rape a man, or do a thousand other things that women can and some absolutely have done, just as some men do, because if women are prey, well, rabbits don’t hunt wolves, do they? This is that same ridiculous logic that says that sex is something men win from women, not getting sex is losing to a woman, so any steps used to get the sex are part of the game. This right here is a license to rape. In nature, men and women are both apex predators of other animals. Women are not the prey, and this is not a hunt!

    • Saraquill

      This should be tattooed on Mr. Pearl

  • Saraquill

    “Women never start or conduct wars, but men grow bored unless their generation settles some dispute with a river of blood.”

    To which I point out the military women The Dahomey Amazons, Lyudmila Pavlichenko, and Agustina of Aragon. I will also name the male humanitarians Aki Ra, Paul Rusesabagina and John Rabe.

    • kraut2

      Remember Margret Thatcher?

      • attackfish

        Or Michele Bachmann, or Queen Victoria, or Empress Dowager Cixi, or…

        Why is it that if women are so wonderful and peaceful, and men are so bloody and violent in these people’s minds, it should be men ruling everything? Oh yeah, because God.

      • http://gamesgirlsgods.blogspot.com/ Feminerd

        Or Eleanor of Aquitaine, or Matilda of England who contested Steven I for the crown and damned near won. The compromise for the war to be over was be her son taking the throne (he became Henry II).

      • attackfish

        Women are just as power hungry and warlike as men. And we are equally as wise and compassionate. Why does equality to these people sound like claiming women are better?

        And Eleanor of Aquitaine did it with ten kids. Keeping us busy with babies will not protect you.

      • Saraquill

        Same with Caterina Sforza.

      • Lyric

        Granuale, Ching Shih, Anne Bonny, Mary Read . . .

      • Sally

        Boudica, Joan of Arc, even Queen Elizabeth I

    • attackfish

      Raoul Wallenberg

    • persephone

      I always refer people to the site Badass of the Week when they think women should be in the kitchen.

      The Soviets had a number of female snipers in WWII, and found that the women were often better than the male snipers. Women were the last fighters at the Winter Palace protecting the last tsar.

      • Saraquill

        That site is where I got all the names I listed.

      • persephone

        I’ve been reading it for a few years. I even contributed to the Kickstarter for the decks of cards. I can’t wait to get them, and they’re promising more decks in the future.

  • Squire Bramble

    ” And what does Michael mean by taking the batteries out? I get the feeling he thinks he’s being a clever wordsmith with a fine joke…”

    Shit, after reading so much about the Pearls’ marriage the first thought that came to my mind was freshly turned earth in the back garden.

    “A warning to wives: That’s right. I’m aware that some of you nosy wives are reading this book while your husbands are at work so you can “help” them remember it-or hold them to it.”

    Love the thuggish warning: “Nice marriage you got there, shame if somethin’ happened to it because some bint got all *curious*.” No, neither Michael nor Debi intended you to read both CTBHHM and CTNAHM: they thought they could get away with writing whatever contradictory rubbish that came into their minds – so don’t you dare them out on it, they’ll know just how nosy you’ve been. The audacity of critically analyzing their relationship advice!

    I’m now convinced this is purely a money-making scheme, concocted by two sociopaths.

    • persephone

      I think that’s a big part of it, but I also think that their books are justifications to themselves, not just their congregation and other readers, for their situation and behaviors.

  • kraut2

    “Unless you count his “let her know you need her.” Which I’m not sure I do.”

    If that is love, than being an addict is love too. Need has nothing to do with love, need is for yourself, not for the other.

    I btw have no short answer to define love. Is it loyalty, the appreciation of the other as a person, a feeling of belonging together, the joy to be together (but please, leave me space), the commitment to support each other at any cost, even to the cost of your own life? A warm and fuzzy feeling?

    We have been married for fourty years, experienced our life together, and I feel more committed and cherish my wife more now than ever before.
    And yes, we are both atheists from early on.Not that that was a criteria for being together.

    • attackfish

      They advocate obsession supplemented by rigid adherence to restrictive rules and roles, not love. They call it love, but it isn’t.

      • http://www.carpescriptura.com/ MrPopularSentiment

        It’s a performance.

        We see this over and over again. We talked about this in relation to courtship. There’s never real intimacy – there can’t be. There’s just a script that gets handed out based on gender, and you get your points for adhering as strictly to it as possible.

        Not only is that not love, I would say that the extent to which a couple follows the rules is inversely proportional to the amount they are able to love each other. How can you love someone you don’t know? How can you love someone when they are just a stand-in for their gender?

    • Amtep

      My ex-wife gave me a succinct definition of love that I’ve held on to ever since: Love is when their happiness matters as much to you as your own.

      • http://abasketcase.blogspot.com/ Basketcase

        What would you term it when their happiness matters more than yours? Co-dependence? (Honest question, no snark. I love this definition, I’m just trying to expand it for safetys sake – someone is sure to take it too far otherwise!)

      • James Yakura

        I think there was a Heinlein quote that was similar to that.

    • http://www.carpescriptura.com/ MrPopularSentiment

      “Love is when you let someone have the last cookie, and you don’t demand that they do the dishes in payment.”

  • TLC

    “Such a man becomes the predator demanding the prey be silent while eaten…”

    Well, yes, I demand that my prey be silent, because I prefer that my meat be killed and cooked before I eat it! ;-D. Kidding aside, I do believe that this lifestyle the Pearls advocate does devour women and their spirits, their hopes, their beauty, and almost everything that is unique and precious about them. So maybe the analogy isn’t that far off.

    • attackfish

      I remember a scene from Buffy the Vampire Slayer, when the Master gives a woman to his followers to be eaten instead of eating her himself because she keeps looking at him, and it puts him off his food.

    • http://abasketcase.blogspot.com/ Basketcase

      Perverted a bit, I know, but I cant help reading this specific quote in light of all the other sexual innuendo in these books (which maybe I’m imagining to make these posts survivable)…

      • http://yllommormon.blogspot.com/ aletha

        Well, if you’re imagining them, I am, too. It’s almost like half the book is telling men how to be, and the other half is Michael patting himself on the back for his manly sex drive…

  • Gillianren

    Women don’t leave unless they’re drug addicts? Hasn’t he even seen Kramer Vs. Kramer?

  • ako

    Wives and mothers are created with a nesting nurturing instinct that is not dependent upon religious beliefs.

    Again, women with the magical inborn instinct we’re all support to have. Women aren’t homogenous, and some of us don’t nest.

    Feeling their vulnerability, women support a society based on the rule of law.

    Men with any sense will support the same thing. Nearly all men won’t be the biggest or strongest man in the area, most won’t be the most well-armed, and all will need to sleep eventually. Life is so much easier when you have a system of mutual cooperation and your safety is predicated on something stronger than your personal self-defense skills.

    (And going back to his rape example, recent research suggests that male-on-male rape is far more common than previously expected, and while female-on-male rape is significantly less common, it certainly happens, and has included gangs of women. Just as being a woman doesn’t create automatic moral superiority, being a man doesn’t mean automatic safety.)

    Some depraved women will view pornography, but most men will become addicted to it to the point of abandoning all nobility.

    I grew up after teenage internet access became common, and this is just not true. The vast majority of men who view porn at some point won’t develop any kind of compulsive behavior or addiction, or abandon all nobility. You can certainly find cases where guys viewed porn and behaved horribly (in which case you want to be careful about cause-and-effect assumptions), but that’s a tiny subset of men who’ve seen porn.

    The second is that she becomes haughty and judgmental, denigrating her
    less-than-righteous husband.

    Because not only do you have to take moral responsibility for the choices of a whole other human being, you have to sugar-coat your moral judgement enough that he doesn’t feel uncomfortable or judged, otherwise he’ll avoid you and you have another reason to blame yourself for his failings.

    If wives gave us what we deserve, we would be chained to the doghouse, eat leftovers, and have to potty in the yard.

    Michael, indulge your personal masochistic fantasies all you want, but could you not insult my friends and family? Many of them are men, and none of them deserve to be chained up.

    A husband can make a marriage half good if he loves and cherishes his
    wife no matter her response, and a wife can make her marriage half good
    by honoring her dishonorable husband.

    It doesn’t work like that. It’s not a neat little thing where there’s a certain quantity of goodness that counts as A Good Marriage, and each spouse can contribute up to fifty percent, regardless of circumstances or what the other one is doing. Sometimes, the only way to fix things is if both spouses are wiling to change. Sometimes the problems are too big, and in spite of all his efforts to be loving, she does so much harm the marriage isn’t even close to good. You can’t control other people with love.

  • onamission5

    I don’t think I was born with a “nesting nurturing instinct.” That had to be carefully cultivated, often at the expense of my own damn sense. Then, once I had kids of my own, I had to unlearn almost everything I’d been taught about motherhood and start over again from scratch building something that actually worked for everyone. (which is still an incomplete process, even some 22 years in)

    • http://www.carpescriptura.com/ MrPopularSentiment

      When my son was born, I had no clue what I was doing. They just handed me this thing that had needs and I was petrified. My husband, on the other hand, just seemed to click into place as a father. He’s even the one who figured out how to breastfeed and was able to teach me how to properly hold our baby.

      And I was the one who read all the books. My husband is just much more of a natural nurturer than I am.

  • Rilian Sharp

    If your relationship is terrible, you probably aren’t understanding each other’s feelings. One person has to make the first move to fix it, but the other person has to join in too, or else it won’t work. Eventually you just have to give up or else you’d just be being taken advantage of. I think it’s just that last one the pearls don’t acknowledge.

    • Lyric

      Or one of you understands perfectly but doesn’t care. In which case, as far as I know, the only solution is to get the hell out,. Which is another thing the Pearls don’t acknowledge.

  • Scott_In_OH

    During the Vietnam War, just as many men (if not more) as women protested the war.

    Oh, but those weren’t real men. If they were, they’d have acted just like Michael describes.

    This overwhelming commitment to confirmation bias–the only examples that are considered real are the ones that fit the stereotype–is key to perpetuating his worldview.

    Ok, Michael. First you say it’s women’s nature to be a moral compass. Then you tell us how this causes problems.

    And this is how you gaslight/bully. You pretend that you are stating immutable truths that show a clear path to success (whether success means finding love, pleasing God, being my friend, getting a job, whatever). Whenever it suits you, however, you pretend that the immutable truths and the path to success are the opposite of what you said earlier.

  • Sally

    Some of my favorite quotes from this post:
    “It is well known that the women are the moral anchors of any society.”
    Yet Debi tells us women are not to play this role for their husbands. She especially speaks out against woman being spiritual at all, let alone more spiritual than their husbands. Yet where do these Christians claim their morals come from?

    “Women never start or conduct wars, but men grow bored unless their generation settles some dispute with a river of blood.”
    -Addressed below in a series of posts listing woman who have conducted war and men who have led in avoiding war.

    “…but if the only thing keeping you from a bloodbath started by boredom is your wife, please see a shrink ASAP.”
    Love this advice Aletha! This should go on a sign somewhere or on a t-shirt.

    “Because she is a resident judge who will not let us lie to ourselves. A good woman, like a clean mirror, will cause a man to see his shame.”
    This is so opposite of Debi’s teaching, it just makes my head spin.

    “If a woman is following Debi, then how will the husband accurately use her as a moral compass, if all she’s allowed to point to is how amazing he is?”
    You said it, Aletha. Amen.

    “It is the lowest form of hypocrisy to be immoral and expect your wife to draw the curtain on her conscience and honor you as if you were honorable Stupid jerk. Such a man becomes the predator demanding the prey be silent while eaten, and all in the name of God. Woe, woe, woe unto that man.”
    This is probably the harshest thing he has said so far. Yet again, it does not match Debi’s book. Debi’s book says, “Lie down and take it. If that doesn’t fix it, lie down lower and take it better.” If the books were internally consistent *and more healthy* hers would say, “It is the lowest form of hypocrisy for your husband to be immoral and expect you as his wife to draw the curtain on your conscience and honor him as if her were honorable. If you find yourself in that situation, you need to bring this to his attention. After all, you are the woman, his moral compass. I will tell you how to do this respectfully and in a way that he will hear you, not tune you out.” (This isn’t quite how I would say it, but I tried to make it somewhat Pearl-like, if the Pearls weren’t so mean and if the books were internally consistent with each other.)

  • Trollface McGee

    So.. depravity..is porn? I’m getting really sick of “porn addiction” as defined by fundies (which, from what I understand, is defined by watching any amount of porn and is cured by a submissive wife who puts out and Jesus).
    The problem isn’t porn – it’s people who objectify their partner, see them as another species, see them as something for their own gratification, see them as a parent-figure that’s supposed to do all the hard adult stuff for them..for Godsakes, who see their partner in terms of predator and prey.

  • http://www.carpescriptura.com/ MrPopularSentiment

    If women are so introspective and guided by their conscience, if it’s women who are civilizing, shouldn’t women be the leaders? I’d rather my laws be written by someone civilized than by some guy who thinks it’s okay to create a “river of blood” whenever he’s bored.

  • NeaDods

    That whole long repeated list of how men are depraved and “deserve” to be chained up outside only strengthens my theory that Michael shows the scars of having been brought up exactly how he says all children should be brought up. He has a stunted, degrading view of his whole gender and seems to think (as I bet he was told as a child) that he doesn’t deserve to be treated as a human being.

    • Sally

      I think this is a fair theory. Another theory I have is that both he and Debi spend a lot of time tearing down their readers so they can reshape them.

      • NeaDods

        That makes sense. “Who are you going to believe, us famous people or your own sinful heart?”

  • James Yakura

    If God gave us what we deserve, we would all be in hell. If wives gave
    us what we deserve, we would be chained to the doghouse, eat leftovers,
    and have to potty in the yard.

    And take out the d__ned trash once in a while.

  • Hilary

    Bingo! My gender cliche bingo card just got filled on every square, with extra points for total compartmentalzed contradictions. This is such a word and cliche salad it’s barely comprehensible.

  • Jaded

    Hands up depraved women.

  • AAAtheist

    “… Another thing that’s bugging me in this paragraph is Michael calling women “judges”. In Debi’s book, I seem to remember her saying “never judge or complain”, just shower with respect. If a woman is following Debi, then how will the husband accurately use her as a moral compass, if all she’s allowed to point to is how amazing he is? …”

    Hmm. Could it be (not accidentally and pretty much intentionally) that Michael tells men one thing in his books (women are your moral compass since you, inherently, as a man, have none) and Debi tells women another in her books (never judge men to their faces, sit patiently, smile sweetly, and hope your submission changes him) so that both men and women are doomed to fail? That’s quite a little scam the Pearls have got going. The readers who take them seriously can’t win, continue to need the Pearls’ instruction, buy more books, get more bad advice, the Pearls make out like bandits, wash, rinse, repeat.

    (Cue evil, mocking laughter from both Michael and Debi as they jointly come up with even more underhanded ways to defraud their flock.)


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X