Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

19th Century Marriage Manuals: Advice for Young Husbands

mimimatthews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: 19th Century Marriage Manuals: Advice for Young Husbands

#81

Post by pm90 »

barry-cotter wrote: post #66
TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And an empire with the world's largest military, ruled by a despotic aristocracy which had made most of its money from slavery, drug running, and land + resource grabs in distant countries. "Moral" is perhaps not quite the most apt word. >I'm glad we're finally living in an era that has gotten past that. We haven't. The product has become American Neoliberal Capitalism instead of British Imperial Capitalism, but it's…

> And an empire with the world's largest military, ruled by a despotic aristocracy which had made most of its money from slavery, drug running, and land + resource grabs in distant countries. Calling the ruling class of the British Empire a despotic aristocracy is a very big stretch, or better a contradiction. Despotic regimes have non-existent or vestigial aristocracies, e.g. the Ottoman Empire or most Chinese dynas…

Excellent comment. While the American revolution and American Civil War is well known[1], the British Civil War and the Glorious Revolution are probably not given the attention they deserve. If you look closely at history, you can see similar patterns: despotic monarchs run out of money, give more power to the nobles in return for taxation rights. Nobles use their new power to restrict the absolute powers of the monarch and then the monarch and nobles struggle. Britain was the one country where the nobles were successful in restricting the absolute power of the monarch and continued the tradition of sharing power, bringing democracy to Western Europe after a long time.

Anyway, that was completely off topic. I agree that the British Empire, while most certainly not the most moral or fair, cannot be characterized as despotic.

[1]: Perhaps I hear more about it because I currently live in the US. Not sure about how popular that part of history is in the rest of the world.

Re: 19th Century Marriage Manuals: Advice for Young Husbands

#82

Post by jmaistre »

ap22213 wrote: post #63
DougN7 wrote: post #3

Call me old fashioned, but as a father and husband I do try to act this way: "He should always be ready to sacrifice his present personal pleasure to the future well-being of those who have the first and best claim to his regard.”

Old fashion. :-) But, more seriously, as a counter, I've spent most of my adult life trying to be less 'manly' and more male (xy-chromosomer ). The western traditions of what it means to be 'a man' have not made my life better. Instead, they've given me anxiety, panic attacks, and caused a lot of feigned aggression, defensiveness, self medication, and regret. I'm not against tradition, and I have a lot of respect for…

"But, more seriously, as a counter, I've spent most of my adult life trying to be less 'manly' and more male (xy-chromosomer )."

Out of curiosity, what does that mean? Were you getting in bar fights or what?

I've spent time trying to become more manly in some ways. I started lifting weights, speaking with my deeper vocal cords rather than head voice, having a bit more of a sense of command, learning how to dish it back or take it in stride if someone gives me some jocular ribbing (rather than getting defensive or avoiding that person), not being whiny under any circumstances, etc. I think that modern western culture overly feminizes men, and it has been a good experience for myself to try to be more masculine.

Re: 19th Century Marriage Manuals: Advice for Young Husbands

#83

Post by marrs »

kenbellows wrote: post #75
notdonspaulding wrote: post #6

From the article: > Indeed, in many conservative religious denominations, > the same tenets are echoed today. While I'm not going to claim I hold the same tenets as a book I've never read, I guess that I'm in one of the "conservative religious denominations" which the author is indicating here. I can certainly see some resemblance between a few of the examples cited from the book and my current (religiously-inspired)…

I don't know, man. Consider 1 Corinthians 14:34-35: Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

Examining religious scripture in isolation like this is a pointless exercise. It's like trying to imagine what it's like to eat at a banquet by tasting a single ingredient you pinched from the kitchen. You taste salt and you think the meal was salty, you taste sugar and you think it was sweet. In reality it contained elements of both, but tasted nothing like either.

Re: 19th Century Marriage Manuals: Advice for Young Husbands

#84

Post by jmaistre »

Zelphyr wrote: post #72
ap22213 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old fashion. :-) But, more seriously, as a counter, I've spent most of my adult life trying to be less 'manly' and more male (xy-chromosomer ). The western traditions of what it means to be 'a man' have not made my life better. Instead, they've given me anxiety, panic attacks, and caused a lot of feigned aggression, defensiveness, self medication, and regret. I'm not against tradition, and I have a lot of respect for…

Same here. Take crying for example. In our society we're seen as weak if we cry. Except crying is a perfectly valid human emotional response. Sure, we naturally don't cry as often as women but I still can't understand how we got to the point where we have to deny ourselves a basic physiological response lest we be shunned by the other monkeys who also need and want to do it!

> In our society we're seen as weak if we cry.

Isn't this the case in most societies? My sense from history is that is only acceptable for men to cry at extreme events -- such as death of a wife/child/brother, or the loss of a kingdom. The other common trope for crying is if a peasant or low-level official is begging the forgiveness from a king who is about to terminate him. But in the modern society such tragedies happen less often. I cannot think of a time in my own adult life when crying would have been justified.

Re: 19th Century Marriage Manuals: Advice for Young Husbands

#85

Post by _urga »

kenbellows wrote: post #75
notdonspaulding wrote: post #6

From the article: > Indeed, in many conservative religious denominations, > the same tenets are echoed today. While I'm not going to claim I hold the same tenets as a book I've never read, I guess that I'm in one of the "conservative religious denominations" which the author is indicating here. I can certainly see some resemblance between a few of the examples cited from the book and my current (religiously-inspired)…

I don't know, man. Consider 1 Corinthians 14:34-35: Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

The 2 verses you quoted have a specific context in chapter 14 and in the rest of the letter to the Corinthians, within which they must be understood (not speaking/reading/praying in general).

If anything, the Bible has always been counter-cultural in promoting the equality of men and women, and the countless greetings and references to prominent women in the early church in the various letters reflects the critical contribution they made.

Re: 19th Century Marriage Manuals: Advice for Young Husbands

#86

Post by cauterized »

zensavona wrote: post #80
ap22213 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old fashion. :-) But, more seriously, as a counter, I've spent most of my adult life trying to be less 'manly' and more male (xy-chromosomer ). The western traditions of what it means to be 'a man' have not made my life better. Instead, they've given me anxiety, panic attacks, and caused a lot of feigned aggression, defensiveness, self medication, and regret. I'm not against tradition, and I have a lot of respect for…

Similar experience here - I have some "old fashioned" ideas but also a lot of progressive ones, I don't think they need be mutually exclusive. One thing I've realised over the past few years (I'm 22) is the importance of feeling masculine. Not in the generic socially prescribed sense necessarily, but in my own way, that took a lot of contemplation about "what makes me feel masculine?" and obviously the specifics will…

Please don't try to tell me what I do or don't need to feel.

Re: 19th Century Marriage Manuals: Advice for Young Husbands

#87

Post by ap22213 »

jmaistre wrote: post #82
ap22213 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old fashion. :-) But, more seriously, as a counter, I've spent most of my adult life trying to be less 'manly' and more male (xy-chromosomer ). The western traditions of what it means to be 'a man' have not made my life better. Instead, they've given me anxiety, panic attacks, and caused a lot of feigned aggression, defensiveness, self medication, and regret. I'm not against tradition, and I have a lot of respect for…

" But, more seriously, as a counter, I've spent most of my adult life trying to be less 'manly' and more male (xy-chromosomer ). " Out of curiosity, what does that mean? Were you getting in bar fights or what? I've spent time trying to become more manly in some ways. I started lifting weights, speaking with my deeper vocal cords rather than head voice, having a bit more of a sense of command, learning how to dish it…

Yep - lots of fighting - bar fights, street fights, amongst other things (at least as a kid).

I turned 40 this year, so it could be an age thing. When I was 20, I probably seemed more similar to you. At least, I was certainly motivated by similar things. I lifted a lot of weights (when I maxed out I weighed around 230 lb), etc. and really identified with masculinity and various male roles.

When I say being more male, I'm not talking about being more 'feminine' (which would just be the opposite), just more Human. For instance, in the past, I would (subconsciously) say to myself, 'what is the right thing to do as a brother, father, son, husband, man?'. Now, I say, 'what actions should I take so that I enjoy my life, the people I care about, the ideas I believe in, etc.?'

Re: 19th Century Marriage Manuals: Advice for Young Husbands

#88

Post by kenbellows »

_urga wrote: post #85
kenbellows wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, man. Consider 1 Corinthians 14:34-35: Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.

The 2 verses you quoted have a specific context in chapter 14 and in the rest of the letter to the Corinthians, within which they must be understood (not speaking/reading/praying in general). If anything, the Bible has always been counter-cultural in promoting the equality of men and women, and the countless greetings and references to prominent women in the early church in the various letters reflects the critical c…

I've read it in context, thoroughly, and it doesn't help. And really, in what context could this become okay?

As for the claim that the Bible has "always been counter-cultural in promoting the equality of men and women", that is a very limited viewpoint on history; it has been used toward both oppressive and egalitarian ends since it was written. And if you mean that the early Christian writers like Paul were especially egalitarian for their time, this too is controversial at best in scholarly circles. The mere mention (even praise) of certain women does not demonstrate a culture of gender equality; Roman society at large is also known to have venerated certain female figures in the same way, so this was hardly a counter-cultural practice.

Re: 19th Century Marriage Manuals: Advice for Young Husbands

#89

Post by rthomas6 »

ap22213 wrote: post #87
jmaistre wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" But, more seriously, as a counter, I've spent most of my adult life trying to be less 'manly' and more male (xy-chromosomer ). " Out of curiosity, what does that mean? Were you getting in bar fights or what? I've spent time trying to become more manly in some ways. I started lifting weights, speaking with my deeper vocal cords rather than head voice, having a bit more of a sense of command, learning how to dish it…

Yep - lots of fighting - bar fights, street fights, amongst other things (at least as a kid). I turned 40 this year, so it could be an age thing. When I was 20, I probably seemed more similar to you. At least, I was certainly motivated by similar things. I lifted a lot of weights (when I maxed out I weighed around 230 lb), etc. and really identified with masculinity and various male roles. When I say being more male,…

As a younger man and husband (28) who is struggling to find his own way, I find that saying "what actions should I take so that I enjoy my life, the people I care about, the ideas I believe in, etc.?", and following through with it, takes a lot of mental and emotional fortitude that must be built up and trained. I believe that having the self-respect to make a decision based on what you truly want, and then standing firm as everyone in your life fights against it, is something that is very masculine, though not exclusively masculine.
Post reply on HN