Alison

@ gengwall and SM: I’ve heard the same answer and it’s about as satisfying as three-day-old brussels sprouts (ick). It leads back into the question of proof, which leads back into the unsatisfying arguments about the Fall, and God’s intention in creation, neither of which can be proven in the patriarchalists’ favor, unless the texts in Genesis 1 and 3 are manipulated past recognition. And so, round and round and round we go, and where we stop, only God knows. It’s a self-perpetuating argument, one that if we look at the texts, simply becomes a non-issue.
I think that’s why we get the “God intended it” answer from the comps, because it then becomes the ultimate “Because I said so, da** it!” The appeal to God’s authority (possibly fallacious) is intended to quell the argument and justify clinging to nothing more than religiously veiled prejudices that have been held for thousands of years about women being inferior to men. (I realize that a lot of complementarians will be offended by that statement, and I apologize if I’ve offended anyone.) But the methodology of appealing to God as the ultimate authority to justify one’s prejudices is fallacious at best, and at worst idolatrous. Until we see that, we will stay on this sick cycle carousel of an argument until Christ returns. 😛