“Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge,
honor unto the wife as unto the weaker vessel.” (1 Peter 3:7)
Since God created men and women to fill different, yet complementary, roles in the home and in society, those roles are in accord with our nature. Moreover, because He designed the relationship of husband and wife to reflect the relationship of Christ to His church, that relationship was intended to be an expression of kindness and love, not oppression. God wants husbands and wives to work together as a team, not compete with each other. That is why the men living in Christian countries have traditionally taken upon themselves the harder, dirtier, and more dangerous jobs, while allowing their women to enjoy a less oppressive role that women in other lands could only envy.
At the time my grandfather was born, over ninety percent of the population of this country lived on farms, and prior to that time the percentage was even higher. Therefore, if the roles that our society has traditionally assigned to men and women were really designed to oppress women (as the feminists would have us believe) we might expect to see all of the hard or unpleasant jobs assigned to the women. However, the opposite is true! It was the men, not the women, who chopped down trees, labored long hours under a hot sun, shoveled manure out of the barns, cleaned out the outhouse, built cabins, and dug wells. Does that sound like oppression to you? It certainly does not sound like oppression to me, and I believe that any honest person will admit that it was not oppression. Out of a kindness that was rooted in Christian love, women were protected from danger and allowed to take the lighter tasks.
During the same period of history, many of the families living in town had their own family business. Again, there was a distinction between the roles of men and women, and again it was men, not women, who got the more difficult jobs. It was the role of men to build the buildings, lift the heavy loads, and unload freight. Yet the men were willing to shoulder the more difficult tasks and even got a satisfaction out of doing it. At the same time, the women were not locked away, but often worked along side of their husbands in the family business, doing those tasks that were less oppressive than those shouldered by the men. All in all, husbands and wives worked together as a team as God intended.
I do not deny that there were some unfortunate women who, because of circumstances beyond their control, wound up working for meager pay in sweatshops and mills. The conditions under which they worked amounted to little more than economic slavery. Yet, the same feminists who condemn the traditional distinction between the roles of men and women as oppressive are now claiming that those sweatshops and mills actually “liberated” women. However, what they never say is that most of the women who labored under those conditions longed to find a husband, so that they could be liberated from the mills and sweatshops. They also never mention how that women were often given preference over the men. For example, when the British luxury liner Titanic sank, there were not enough lifeboats for all of the passengers. Nevertheless, instead of grabbing all of the boats for themselves, hundreds of men went to a watery grave so that the women and children might live. In contrast, not even one feminist was willing to die so that a man might live.
In her book “Domestic Tranquility,” F. Carolyn Graglia not only presents a well reasoned case against the “feminist movement,” but also explains why that movement (contrary to its claims) was really an attack on marriage and morality. Other sources trace the roots of that attack on marriage back to a Luciferian organization that was started in 1775 by Dr. Adam Weishaupt (professor of Canon Law in the University of Ingolstadt).
After Dr. Weishaupt’s organization was discovered and driven underground, some of its members set up the “League of the Just [i.e. sinless]” – of which Karl Marx was a member, and from which grew the “Communist Party.” In keeping with the original program outlined by Adam Weishaupt, the “Communist Manifesto” (written in 1848) called for the abolition of marriage and the family. In fact, one former communist has been quoted as admitting that the real aim of Communism was to destroy the family and Christianity. Communist economic theories were simply used as a means to achieving that end. [Note: Because growing immorality threatened Communist rule, during the 1930’s the Communists were forced to strengthen marital commitment in the Soviet Union, even though they were subverting it elsewhere.]
In 1798, one of the leading scholars in England, John Robison, published a book exposing Adam Weishaupt's organization. The following quotations are from his book.
Adam Weishaupt obviously drew some of his ideas — such as putting women into the military, using them to breed soldiers for the state, and raising children in government indoctrination centers — from Plato’s “Republic.” Moreover, Adolph Hitler, (a left-wing socialist) sought to implement that plan by encouraging members of the “League of German Maidens” (women chosen on the basis of race) to breed with SS men (also chosen on the basis of race) in order to produce soldiers for the state.
Far from helping women, the so-called “Women’s liberation” movement has led to an increase in physical abuse, broken homes and illegitimate children. The incidence of rape has soared more than six hundred percent. In addition, many women are now doomed to lives of tedious and boring work on an assembly line, while those trying to support a family without a husband often live in poverty. And, if that is not bad enough, the so-called advocates of women now want to force them into combat.
The fact that the feminists care nothing about the women who would be crippled, blinded, or disfigured by combat, should tell you that what they really want is to destroy the family, not help women. Moreover, their anti-family mentality is rooted in a hatred of men that produces a twisted and distorted concept of womanhood, and leads them to view the traditional role of a wife and mother as a curse when they should see it as a blessing.
What God wants, is for husbands to shoulder responsibility, act as His representative, and exercise spiritual leadership in the home. At the same time, He wants wives to work with their husbands in training the children, and guiding the household according to God's Word (Titus 2:3-5). That means that parents have a responsibility to study the Bible, know what it says, and apply it to their lives. Because the spiritual education of the children is of eternal importance, their instruction should never be left in the hands of unsaved schoolteachers or anyone else whose thinking is not in accord with Scripture.
Because God designed men and women to have complimentary roles, and a relationship that reflects the relationship of Christ to His church, He intended for those roles to be carried out in a spirit of love, teamwork, and mutual support (Ephesians 5:23-26). When that is done, women do not serve men; instead men and women serve each other as an expression of Christ's love. The man serves the woman by protecting her, while shouldering the responsibility to guide the family and provide for its needs. Moreover, because he is allowing Christ to live through him, it is not he who is doing those things, but Christ. The woman then responds to that service of love, and shows her love for Christ, by caring for her husband. The man provides the food; the woman prepares it. The man provides the house; the woman makes it a happy nest.
For further reading, I suggest:
“The Way Home” and “All The Way Home,” by Mary Pride, “Domestic Tranquility” by F. Carolyn Graglia, and the books, “Earthly Images of the Heavenly Bride (Women and the Church)”, and “He Her Honour and She His Glory” by Vernon Grieger.