Anyone in the military will attest to being instructed on the fundamentals of self-sufficiency. They make their bed, fold their own clothes, know (in great detail) how to clean a restroom, some are given potato-peeling duty, and with great diligence, are taught the importance of teamwork. While much of the military is still male-heavy – and I do not discount the biological differences between sexes – the framework of the training gives a solid foundation to teamwork in marriage. After boot camp, there is no excuse for a man to not share in the domestic chores unless deployed or preparing for or re-integrating from a deployment. Most assignments follow the same labor laws as any other company in the United States and apart from the uniform that is intended to evoke a concept of perpetually arduous working conditions, the jobs are limited to current workforce rules and regulations. But more important to my point, boot camps program their recruits that the military is not their mom.

Lost on a large swath of society is the fact that a wife is also not their mother. I would argue that this is the single, largest contributing factor to the perpetuating misogyny in the world. I believe that men initially want their wives to conform to the stereotype of cooking and cleaning for them as their mothers did. It is the mothers who have the power to change this stereotype for the next generations. As society continues the barrage of programming to consume and the requirements are needed for two incomes, the unfair expectation that follows for a woman to leave work at the end of the day and start her second shift at home while the man unwinds, is monumentally sexist and a form of pressured slavery and abuse. Those in psychology expect those who saw and/or survived that system to promulgate it to the next generation, and that exposes the cycle of abuse as unresolved trauma and conditioning.

How convenient for a man to “become a man” only to find a woman willing to give him sex (and potentially a lineage), cook, clean, and for some, provide a second income. Additional social pressures for a woman to retain a seductive figure leave the feminine class at a severe disadvantage when it comes to the perfectionist woman whose mind keeps her from getting a full eight hours of recommended sleep and wears herself out aging.

Adding insult to injury are those women who have sacrificed their youth, years of accommodating, and doting on their husbands only to be abandoned for a younger or more beautiful woman. Of course, this is cliché, but not uncommon. Often, the next wife is not nearly as submissive. Why? Because I would argue that most men don’t want a mother as a wife. This is not natural, and much could be said (and has) to the psychological issues that arise when pigeon-holing a wife into mothering him. A woman should not fill both roles to her husband.

When a wife becomes a mother, she understands the importance of repetition as a form of training her children to conform to becoming responsible adults. The problem arises when that subconscious understanding spills over into the motherly duties she does as a wife. Cleaning up after a grown man all of a sudden conjures feelings of anger. "How am I supposed to teach our children (particularly sons) to clean up after themselves when I have to constantly clean up after my husband?" a woman may ask herself. Anger is a signal that tells us we have one of two things happening:
1.) We did not clearly communicate our expectations/boundaries
2.) Someone else crossed our boundaries

Thousands of years of cultures and religious superstitions have exploited the woman into being free labor and sexual gratification. Why else has there been such resistance to change? Wives nag because they have blurred the lines of wife and mother. Men don’t want to be married to their mothers but do want to be taken care of in the same manner their mothers took care of them. Early in marriages, many women find it hard to get along with their husband’s mothers and the mothers-in-law are seeing themselves being replaced. This dichotomy causes problems because it is unnatural. Mothers should never be replaced but should be happy to see their independent sons showing off their ability to be self-sufficient in the new partnership and journey in life with whom they have chosen to share.

Women do not consciously marry to become a mother to their husbands, but unfortunately, much of society, antiquated societal norms, and archaic mythological religions continue to foment this toxic notion. Adding to the dysfunctional nature of this type of marriage are the cult-like ideals that a woman is to submit to her husband. So, a woman is expected to remain pure until marriage, be handed off from her father to her husband, please him in the bedroom, mother him in the kitchen, but have no real authority (as she would mothering her own children). And people wonder why women get emotional – we’re being given contradictory information and expected to comply. We’re told in the first chapters of Genesis that we were created as an afterthought when Adam couldn’t find a suitable partner among the animals.

Roles are gender-specific because society has perpetuated them as such and dangerous religious texts, including the bible, are riddled with contradictory passages. Hypocritical women such as Lori Alexander make it a point to ignore these contradictions and have deleted my comments on her public posts when I pointed them out. She claims to teach the bible to younger women but fails to provide them with even meager accommodations found in that very bible. Framing the passages in context, the readers are not privy to the letters from the churches that prompted Paul’s responses and the New Testament letters of Paul that state he desires women remain silent in churches (the Greek word ekklesia means assembly and does not refer to a building), shame-faced, sober, modest, submissive, subservient, and obedient in all matters to her husband. Lori adamantly impresses upon her followers that this includes providing sex to husbands even when a wife doesn’t feel like it. Non-consensual sex and marital rape are not okay, and I am appalled that social media platforms have not removed her accounts. Teaching younger women to subject themselves to repeated sexual trauma is nothing short of abhorrent and should be illegal on all fronts.

As a Christian, I used to point out the Proverbs 31 woman who considered a field (vineyard) and bought it, who sold belts to the tradesmen, who was honored by her family, and praised in the gates of the city. It should not go unnoticed that the Proverbs 31 woman, also had servants of her own. Sarah had her own servant Hagar. Rachel watered the camels and later both her and her sister Leah, had servants. I would also highlight the story of Deborah, who is said to have been a wife, a prophetess (you cannot be silent in church as a prophetess), a judge (anointed by God for 40 years), and a general in the army (whose second in command would not fight without her presence on the battlefield). Hannah went to the temple without her husband to pray and it’s also noted in the story that her husband asked, “Am I not better to you than ten sons?” Jacob cooked. Adam was commanded to tend to the garden. The disciples prepared Passover and distributed food to thousands. In the story of Joseph, the Pharaoh’s baker was a man. The Samaritan of John chapter four was a woman and the first recorded missionary in scripture. As I stated in Crucifying the Bible, there are five Old Testament female prophets (Ex 15:20, Num 12:2, Judg 4:4-6, 2 Kings 22:14-15, 2 Chron 34:22, Neh 6:14, Is 8:3) but there are several in the New Testament as well (Lk 2:36-38, Acts 21:9) which contradict the notion that women should remain silent in church as the Greek makes it clear some of Anna’s listeners were male as she was led by the Holy Spirit to speak about Jesus to all who were looking for redemption.

Not to advocate as a liberal Christian would, the Proverbs 31 woman is unnamed, and Deborah didn’t get the privilege of judging from the temple; she had to judge on a hill between two trees.

I couldn’t see it then, but not even the bible conforms 100% to gender-specific roles. Neither my husband nor myself, changed overnight. It was my husband who recognized the hardships that women face in both societies and religion. My ambitions and drive to succeed in life blossomed when I left my faith. My husband became less stoic and serious – he softened to my needs and became more understanding and supportive. I still love his assertive nature and protective instincts, but we have both come to appreciate a partnership and mutual respect for each other’s strengths and contributions rather than archaic expectations based on mythology. Without having expressed or communicated the need for the change, the alterations in our marriage happened organically and slowly over time. It was good that it happened that way to not shock our systems or force it begrudgingly. Releasing the bonds of religion allowed growth in both of us and deeper love.

I don't operate the tractor or mow the lawn, but I do help trim the hedges, spray the weeds, paint (which I love and am good at), and care for my roses. We share the laundry, take turns loading the dishwasher, and I'll sweep and mop while he vacuums. I consolidate the trashes and he takes it out.

Looking back on our time as believers, it is no wonder some women stuck in "traditional" role arrangements end up nagging their men. While a man may find a very possessive relationship to be a sign of masculinity to others, the extreme situations inevitably expose a codependent and juvenile nature wherein he requires – and even demands it in some cases – for his wife to fill a mother role. This may reveal an unhealthy obsession in rare cases, perhaps even sexually, with his mother. For some, religion contaminates a marriage by fostering an abnormal display of maternal coddling to grown men.

Ironically, the bible commands a man to leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife. It does not say to replace a mother with a wife, whereby the letters from Paul were added as canon to scripture to add restrictive and submissive characteristics to a “godly” woman. Analyzing these relational dynamics, I have to wonder if the motivation for moving women into an underclass was rooted in fear of leaving his mother, laziness, or if it was a desire for control that prompted these societal changes from the ages of worshiping goddesses? Women used to be revered. There is not a single person alive who cannot give credit to a woman for their life. I don't advocate returning to mythological superstitions and worship of unproven deities, but I do advocate for the return of balance. I respect and honor my husband's divine masculine energy, but he equally respects and honors my divine feminine engergy.