NN

To SM (comment 200 & in general)
May I again ask that we stop bouncing back and forth between comment strings here and at my site – I find it difficult to keep track of what questions you think answered and what you are currently trying to ask. May I ask that we either establish a specific thread at my site so that I can better keep track of the conversation and be certain to answer your questions and ensure that I have answered them to your satisfaction? (Alternatively, if you would like we could establish a Google chat – which might facilitate the whole process more if we can find a mutually satisfactory time…. It’s really too bad this conversation didn’t happen two years ago – I got my PhD in Physics from Rice and could have simply met you for coffee to actually discuss this in person…)

To answer your question “how or why NN equates the existence of “eros” within marriage as the basis for a “natural, God-made asymmetry” which is patriarchal.”
– I made the earlier answer (at my site):

“In the marital relationship the husband is not the wife and the wife is not the husband – these two people are inequivalent upon interchange.”

And you agreed – furthermore we note that the apostle gives distinct instructions to husbands and wives (whatever the reason he did this for – the instructions are consistently different: we can at least agree on this?) So the husband-wife relationship in that context was an asymmetric (inequivalent) relationship.

…. So thus far we have proved inequivalence – but not the nature or origin of it…. This further and complete proof is going to be a longish one, and I want to be extremely careful not to skip a step. I ask again if we can move venues to make it easier to keep track of.