The below is written in the style of a comment responding to Matthew Chiglinsky who made a series of comments challenging Jojo’s article “Submission” at Simple Southern Spirit as part of a debate or discussion between Jojo and Matthew Chiglinsky in the comments section:
Matthew Chiglinsky, your exchange with Jojo here has been very interesting. First of all I wonder why you seem to be personally invested in Jojo turning feminist on everybody, it is like you are irritated by her publicly declaring her intention to be submissive as a woman and as a future wife. What is it to you? It is interesting to me why a feminist man (you certainly seem to be a feminist man) doesn’t like the idea of a submissive woman out there being submissive even when the feminist man has no contact with her in his daily life. It is almost like the very idea of a submissive woman somehow undermines the feminist man’s ego of how great he is because of his belief in “women’s equality.” I suppose the implicit criticism of the feminist man is obvious when a woman declares her intention to submit publicly in a feminist world like Jojo is doing here. But why in the world would a woman actually reject a man who believes in “gender equality?” That is impossible isn’t it? It makes no sense! I’ll tell you why a woman might not like a feminist man. It is because the feminist man is refusing his duty to provide for and protect the woman as he should, as he is obligated to do as a man by falsely and disingenuously declaring the woman “equal” in order to absolve himself of his responsibilities towards her.
Responding to some of the specific things Matthew said in his series of comments:
Matthew Chiglinsky said:
“This is how I would talk to a submissive female like you:
‘You’re wasting my time. Shut your stupid mouth, go in the kitchen, and make dinner. Later on, we’ll have sex. Got it? Now, go.’”
I realize Matthew is being rhetorical here, that this is not really how Matthew tends to talk to women, but what Matthew is assuming here is that a man with a submissive wife will tend to view his wife in an aggressive and hostile and demeaning way as if a woman submitting all by itself means that the wife is deserving of nothing but contempt. This fits with the idea that a man wanting submission in a woman is automatically or presumptively an abusive man because only a man wanting to abuse women would want a woman who submits to him.
Matthew has got the psychology of male dominance and female submission all wrong here. A woman submitting to a man is a very intimate and love promoting thing for both the man and the woman; it indicates strong trust and strong approval of the man by the woman and a man knows this and can feel this. A man is grateful and is honored by a wife who submits to him encouraging the man to love the woman and care for the woman even more strongly. Also a woman who is submissive is a very safe woman, a safe woman to invest in, a safe woman to dedicate ones purpose in life to as a man. It feels very unsafe to strongly invest in and gives ones purpose in life to a feminist wife because the feminist wife will betray you and rob you every time because the feminist wife ultimately has contempt for you as a man. This is why the woman is a feminist in the first place; because of her fear of men and because of her contempt for men, her attitude that she must abuse the man first because she knows the man has nothing but bad intentions towards her anyways and she must and has the right to attack / defend herself from the man.
Another issue I’d like to bring up, the way Matthew is suggesting dominant men talk to submissive women is certainly abusive in tone and attitude. It does bring up the issue of how such an abusive attitude by a husband should be dealt with. First such behavior by a husband towards his wife is certainly contemptible and not acceptable especially if it is a routine thing and not the result of a current hopefully occasional argument. Matthew seems to be presenting such behavior by a husband as routine or ordinary if the husband is dominant overall in which case such behavior by a husband would certainly count as abuse against the wife. If in addition to such emotional abuse and insults by the husband being routine the husband could be shown to be neglecting or abusing his wife in material or practical ways then I would be inclined to treat such abuse by a husband against his wife as criminal or grounds for divorce with the husband being at fault meaning the husband would bear full financial responsibility for the support of his wife after a divorce based on the husband’s fault on the grounds of mental cruelty perhaps. It is tricky to try to determine what level of abuse should be criminal or grounds for divorce but at some point of severity certainly abuse by a husband towards his wife should reach a criminal threshold or be grounds for divorce with the husband at fault meaning full financial responsibility in continued support of his wife after the divorce for the husband.
If the husband is starting to be abusive towards his wife but things are not severe enough for divorce or criminal sanctions then certainly other men should be intervening on the woman’s behalf telling the man his behavior towards his wife is disgraceful and unmanly and unacceptable and that some kind of social punishments or loss of face will be inflicted upon him if he doesn’t stop. Maybe the husband’s male friends could intervene in this way, maybe the wife’s male relatives, maybe male authority figures from the church the husband goes to could intervene and counsel him, maybe the husband’s male neighbors he is friends with. An intermediate level of abuse not criminal but also not right and not acceptable should definitely elicit a protective response on behalf of the woman by men influential in the husband’s life to let the man know that he has crossed a boundary in how he is treating his wife that will not be tolerated.
If Matthew thinks a man is a law unto himself and he can treat his wife however he wishes and get away with it he is very wrong.
Matthew ends his comment where he is addressing Jojo saying:
“Why the hell should I care what you think, when you don’t even respect yourself enough to argue? If my opinion is the final say, then the words that come out of your mouth are just noise.”
This comment reflects a very messed up idea of how a dominant man presumably would or should view his submissive wife. Why should a husband care what his wife thinks? Because she’s his wife! Because she’s the love of his life and the mother of his children! Because she honors and respects and loves him as a man which is what her submissiveness towards him is telling him. Because the husband needs to know what his wife is thinking in order to be able to make good and competent decisions as a husband and to be able to manage and control and keep harmonious his relationship with his wife. Because it’s easier to meet your wife’s needs if you know what your wife’s needs are.
A wife doesn’t respect herself if she’s not always ready and eager to get into an argument and power struggle for dominance with her husband? This is a rather strange idea. This implies a woman’s self-respect is based on her relative power vis a vis her husband in the masculine realm. Surely a woman can respect herself and feel proud of herself because she is a good wife and a good mother and her children being well behaved and her husband being happy to see her will provide the feedback to her that she needs to reassure herself and build her confidence that she is succeeding as a woman; that she is succeeding as a wife and a mother. Surely this kind of positive reinforcement is enough for a woman to feel confident and respect herself.
If the husband has the final say the words coming out of the wife’s mouth are just noise? This is ridiculous on so many levels for so many reasons. In addition to the reasons I have already mentioned what about the joy of talking with your spouse, the intimacy of conversation, just sharing feelings and desires with someone who cares about you and is on your side? This idea that only power struggle and who gets their way matters is very wrong headed.
Matthew also addressed the issue of sex and emotional connection:
“Submissive wives are also wives who won’t enjoy sex. They’ll just lie there and let their husbands go to work, maybe even faking an orgasm just to try to please their husbands and make them feel like they accomplished something. There’s no real emotional connection. The husbands don’t care. The wives are numb.”
Matthew, haven’t you heard the news? Women love dominance in a man. Dominance is hot and a prime need for a woman to feel sexually attracted to a man. Also the emotional connection between a dominant man and a submissive woman is very strong because of the trust and positive affirmation and caretaking and sense of responsibility involved in the man being dominant and the woman accepting and surrendering to the man’s dominance. Also as I said before a submissive woman is very safe to emotionally and materially invest as a man because you as a man don’t have to watch your back or fear attack all the time or worry that the next power struggle on the horizon might go horribly wrong. The idea that fighting for dominance and angling for advantage all the time is the basis for “real emotional connection” is completely crazy. Dominance and submission is much more conducive to emotional connection than constant fighting and looking out for number one.
Matthew closes things out with a zinger against Jojo trying to undermine her self-confidence as a woman and create fear in her regarding her ability to attract men. Ironically enough trying to get Jojo to shut her damn mouth at the end of his tirade against her as a submissive woman. I actually think the comment is quite underhanded and is a low blow, though it is a routine style of attack feminists use quite often against their women foes. Here it is!
“I hope the irony of arguing about being submissive is not lost on you. Even if I wanted a submissive wife, how could I trust you to be one when you don’t know how to shut your mouth?”
I’ll close with Jojo’s own brilliant response to Matthew’s nonsense attack against her. These are the words of a very wise woman:
“I don’t see any irony. Submission does not equate to passiveness. The two work together at times, but they are different things. As a matter of fact, because I value my femininity and because submission is a vital part of femininity, I would be wrong if I were passive about it. There’d be no point in me valuing it if I’m not going to defend it.
I believe I do know when I should “keep my mouth shut.” When someone’s belittling me or degrading me, what I believe, and my role as a woman, that’s not one of those times.”