41 Gazza,

You responded to pinklight,

I would feel that there are a great many ways in which a task may be shared by two people (or genders) without each exactly mimicking the other. I don’t think that verse 29 really speaks to the idea that the roles are identical. Am I wrong here?

There are no “roles” identified. There is a work identified and God doesn’t tell them how to “rule” the animals. He just tells them to do it. Is this task to be “shared” as if there is a division needed? Is it necessary that the man says he will take the dogs and she can take the horses? If they agree to do this, they are still “ruling” the animals as God intended, however if the man says to the woman, “You are not allowed to rule the dogs, they are my domain. You rule the pigs over there” then the “rule” has changed from an equal opportunity to one that is restrictive where the “rule” that the man experiences extends past the given rule (that of the animals) to a rule that has not been permitted (the man ruling the woman). God made it clear what they could rule and He never gave permission for either of them to rule each other. When we place the rule over humans into the rule that God originally ordained, we have gone past His permitted rule. Does this make sense?