gengwall

I don’t agree either that females are universally the doormat victims of their abusive husbands. But I do think that women “put up” with bad behavior far more than men do. After all in Muslim countries where the women are mistreated and held back, they survive in that abusive environment with an incredible amount of patience yet having a desire to be free from the control. Women seem to be the strong ones who are able to carry on in almost any circumstance.

Culture has certainly been lopsided through history – there is no doubt about that. But I don’t think that Gen 3:16 is trying to tells how culture is going to tilt over the centuries. I believe it is telling us something fundamental about men and women and their equal potential for actions that are detrimental to marriage. After all, although most cultures have been patriarchal not all have, and although many men are the primary modeler of Gen 3:16 in individual marriages it is not always so. For every anecdotal patient, accommodating, doormat wife we can find a patient, accommodating hen-pecked husband. So, although I agree with your assessment of history in its practical application of Gen 3:16, I don’t believe that tips the balance in what the verse is saying about wives and husbands generically. In other words, I don’t think the verse is presenting a case of “bad spouse; worse spouse”, and it certainly is not presenting a “good spouse; bad spouse” scenario.

Consider: if the verse is saying that males and females both have equal potential to bring strife into marriage, and if the male version of strife is brought about through “rule”, what do we have left to identify the source of female induced strife? The only parallel term we have is “desire”, is it not? The idea that “desire” is “good in the husband’s eyes” and is merely an expression of patience and perseverance, or that it is an perfectly understandable “desire to be free from the control” of male rule, leaves nothing in the verse detrimental to the marriage related to wives. In this view, Gen 3:16 clearly labels men as tyrants because their “rule” is tyrannical (demonstrably so). But women get the opposite treatment. They are clearly labeled as martyrs because their “desire” is either a justifiable revulsion to the tyranny or a dutiful submission to the tyranny. If “desire” is the antithesis of “rule” instead of a parallel detrimental action, the verse is horribly unbalanced against men.

I’m sure you will understand that I, as a man, have a very difficult time accepting such a conclusion. I don’t believe men are more capable or inclined than women of bringing strife into marriage even though they have more often been guilty of it throughout history. And I certainly don’t believe that men are the only gender that brings strife, with women being the only gender that suffers from it. I also don’t believe that God, in the quintessential verse on division in marriage, would be so lopsided. So, I can’t come to your conclusion about what “desire” entails, even though I can not myself put my finger on it. I just know that whatever it is, its character contains no noble elements like patience, perseverance, and a desire for liberty. In my opinion, it is just plain bad, as bad as “rule”, and its manifestation is injurious to husbands just as the manifestation of “rule” is injurious to wives.