Cervin's own conclusion undermines egalitarians: kephale means 'preeminence,' not source — and he connects it to male dominance

Cervin concludes that kephale does not mean 'authority over' (as complementarians assert) but also does not mean 'source' (as egalitarians assert). He says it means 'preeminence.' He then asks: 'How can the husband be preeminent over his wife? In the context of the male dominant culture in which Paul was a part, such a usage would not be inappropriate.' So Cervin's own conclusion supports the husband having a preeminent, dominant role — yet egalitarians constantly cite him.