The Power of a Transformed Wife: Lori Alexander, Submission, Control, Godly Marriage
-by Kathi
This is a book review series of The Power of a Transformed Wife by Lori Alexander. If you are just joining us, you may click on previous chapter reviews if you’d like to catch up.
Introduction & Chapter 1 Chapter 2 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 5 Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Chapter 8 – Part 1 Chapter 8 – Part 2 Chapter 9 Chapter 10 Chapter 11 Chapter 12 Chapter 13 Chapter 14 Chapter 15 Chapter 16 Chapter 17
****
Chapter 18 – A Way to a Man’s Heart…
When I saw the title of this chapter, I thought it would be all about food and sex. Turns out it’s only about food and really could have been combined with the last chapter review. Lori has a simple approach to meal planning:
My approach to meal planning is to have a small repertoire of healthy and delicious “go-to” meals and repeat them frequently. Too often women are burdening themselves by continually making something new and different. There’s no need to reinvent the wheel when it comes to preparing healthy meals.
Yawn… I get when you’re in the throws of babyhood, toddlerhood, and sports or activities that you might have a simplified meal system to get you through the crazy days. But to suggest that women have no need to expand their horizons and try something new is absurd. There are tons of websites to find quick, easy, and cheap meals that are healthy so that food doesn’t become dull and boring. Food should be enjoyed; so try new things! Or, how about seeing if your husband might like to cook a day or two to help out. I know…crazy thought!
Speaking of websites, Lori suggests people check out her old blog, Always Learning, to find more recipes. Which leads me to wonder why she started a brand new website titled after this book and has to direct people to her old blog to find recipes. Why didn’t she move everything from her old site to her new site so that it is streamlined in one place?
Chapter 19 – The Power to Become a Transformed Wife
We are at the very last chapter! Will we finally know the definition of what makes a “transformed wife?” Oh, we ask far too much I’m afraid.
Lori spends half the chapter talking about her “transformation” and how much we should focus on Jesus – which is ironic given that she has stated on her blog that Jesus’ teachings do not seem to be as important as Paul’s. It is also ironic given her lack of compassion, kindness, grace, and mercy seen in her blog posts and comments given to readers.
Lori exhorts her readers to put their lives in the hands of God:
If you will get your thinking right in this area of your life, when your husband says something unkind or treats you poorly, your mind will go to what you’ve practiced. Instead of just biting your tongue, staying silent, and calmly moving onto the next subject, focus on having the right heart. It’s much easier to do the things we are called to do when we allow Jesus to be at the forefront of our hearts and minds. When Jesus is behind our actions and decisions, a true and lasting impact can be made.
This is why I included the image at the beginning of the post. Lori thinks that a wife needs to endure unkindness and poor treatment from her husband because Jesus calls her to endure them as a “transformed wife.” There is absolutely nowhere in scripture where Jesus calls a wife to endure unkind and poor treatment, or mean, unreasonable and cruel suffering. Lori needs to stop this teaching now. It is not biblical in any way, shape, or form.
The last half of the chapter is dedicated to Ken having the final word. At this point I want to feel sorry for Lori because Ken is a jerk.
Ken starts with a look back to where they started out in their marriage (remember, neither really liked or loved each other when they got married):
Years of arguing and being told I needed to do things her way had taken such a toll on me that even her smallest requests or pithy comments could set off my frustrations with her.
Lori: “Do you want salad tonight?”
Me: “There you go again, trying to feed me rabbit food…”
Lori: “I was just asking if you want a salad or not.”
It’s ironic that for the past ten years or so I have mainly eaten huge salads with roasted chicken on top five to six nights a week. … The problem, however, was never with the salad itself, but with her desire to control so many areas of my life.
Remember last chapter….lots of salad! And, so much for the small rotation of meal ideas. Anyway, Ken lashed out at Lori because she has control issues. I can understand that. It would be frustrating to deal with a partner who is trying to control every aspect of your life. Pssttt….Ken, she still has control issues!
However, when Lori “transformed,” things became different for Ken:
There’s no greater sense of relief and peace than knowing that no matter what I do or say, my Transformed Wife will be at peace. Lori may not like it, and she may even say something about it, but she will deal with me in a graceful, loving, and respectful manner, honoring me as the one God gave to be her husband.
Let me get this straight. Lori’s transformation benefits Ken because that means he can do and say whatever he wants now because Lori will put up with it? Respectfully, Ken, you sound like a jerk.
Ken then goes on to say how Lori changed after she read Debi Pearl’s book, Created to Be His Help Meet. There they go again, plugging the Pearls wherever they can. Lori decided that she was not going to argue with Ken anymore. So, Ken tested her and tried to bait her on arguing with him. This sounds petty and childish. They did not have a healthy relationship going into marriage and I wonder if they have a healthy relationship today.
I’ll end out this final post with final words from Ken:
We both had lots to work on, but we’ve had fun doing it together. Instead of defending our rights, we invited each other to call out sin wherever we saw it in our home, but we did this in such a way that it fit with God’s design of me as the respected leader and Lori as my cheerful and submissive follower.
Practically, I would like to know how it works for the submissive follower to call out sin on the respected leader. This is quite the power differential and I don’t see it working out so well for the follower.
I would guess that Ken is fully aware that when it comes to The Transformed Wife, it’s all about Lori. That is, until he needs to ride in to save the day.
Thank you for persevering through this book review series with me. You have offered great thoughts to Lori’s teachings. I appreciate you all. I know some have offered book suggestions for another series, but I neglected to note them. Let me know if you have another amazing book that I can review on here. Yes, I am a glutton for punishment.
Spiritual Sounding Board 
The book should be entitled, How Wives Transform as Doormats and Keep Their Authoritarian Husbands Happy
Great job, Kathi!! I still can’t believe you paid money for this book. Thank you for taking it for the SSB team. You rock!
LikeLiked by 4 people
Well, you should be commended for wading through this book so we don’t have to. Unfortunately, I am quite familiar with Lori’s blogging which is more than enough horror to expose oneself too.
In truth I feel a bit sorry for Ken. His wife is a total control freak. He’s probably quite happy she’s decided to take her wrath out on Christian women, rather than on him.
LikeLike
“It’s much easier to do the things we are called to do when we allow Jesus to be at the forefront of our hearts and minds. When Jesus is behind our actions and decisions, a true and lasting impact can be made.”
Truer words were never written. My divorce made a “true and lasting impact.” Jesus was behind that action and decision every step of the way and it was much “easier”
for me to walk that path knowing that was He calling me to take such action. Not that it was easy – it wasn’t – but I did have peace, truth, grace, and wisdom. He was “at the forefront of my heart and mind” the entire journey.
Still is.
LikeLiked by 3 people
My mom repeated the same few meals every week and although I love my mom, I prefer more variety. I bet Lori hates to cook.
LikeLike
I went to her site to find recipes and I found a bunch of ‘recipe for a healthy life/marriage/whatever’s.
And then granola and roast chicken and breakfast foods. That was several pages in.
LikeLike
I don’t because I think they’re both jerks, but I would feel the same as he did about salad every day. Of course, I would just cook something else, or have a calm conversation about it because I am an adult.
LikeLike
Kathi,
Many thanks for your time and talents in reviewing Lori’s book. You have pointed out many of the double standards and the hypocrisy that reside in the hearts and minds of many who are religious, yet fail in the ways of Christ. If this is what faith in Jesus Christ looks like through the lens of the Alexanders, then we are in a religious state of despair, for their pseudo christian lifestyle is troubling to me.
Now my faith and following Jesus, is a matter of the food that I cook and “serve” my husband. Wow! Just wow! I have heard of wives, coming home from surgical procedures at the hospital and bed ridden for a time, not receiving any nourishment in the form of meals, cooked by their husbands as their primary caretakers. Another words, they were neglected (abused), at the hands of their “christian” husbands. How would the Alexanders respond to these hard truths?
I will repeat it again, “Kathi, you ARE a brave and courageous woman for reading and reporting on Ken and Lori’s religious views.” Thank-you for sharing with us!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Genesis 3:16b (KJV)
…and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Lori and Ken Alexander, Trey, the Pearls et al, are all false teachers who celebrate the effects of God’s curse. They love the abusive fallout of the curse, promote the distress of the curse, teach that the bondage of the curse is God’s best for us (an evil teaching), admonish women for not obeying men who revel in the maximum effects of the curse.
They think it is ok for a husband to be mean, unreasonable, cruel and unjust (all wicked behavior)… and that the wife must obey him regardless. Lori says if women don’t obey (the effects of the curse), “they don’t truly love the Lord and His ways”. This teaching is entirely backwards and is in opposition to the Lord Jesus Christ, who came and died and was resurrected to deliver us from the effects of the curse. Hallelujah!
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thanks, all, for your kind words. I’m sure this will not be the last I write about Lori. I am a firm believer that Lori’s teachings encourage women to stay in abusive marriages. She always manages to put something out there that is unbelievable. And, as long as she lets “Trey” comment and affirms everything he states, there will always be something to write about.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Song of Joy – YES!!! Theology built around the curse instead of around the one who delivered us from the curse. So true!
Lori believes that the desire mentioned in Genesis 3:16 means that women want to be like men. Therefore, feminism is evil. I have come to believe that the desire is about the lost closeness and oneness experienced between the two. Where there was once mutuality, there is now a power struggle. I think Jesus and Paul called us back to mutuality as the way God intended.
LikeLiked by 2 people
After what you said, Kathi, about how Lori encourages women to stay with their abusive men, maybe to the point of death, I have to get this out of my system. Billy Graham’s death triggered it a bit. His daughter Ruth wrote a book about her life called In Every Pew Sits a Broken Heart. She wrote about her second marriage, to a widower. She keeps him anonymous, bless her. That part wasn’t written about, really, just how she ignored the red flags and paid dear for it. But what strikes me is, he “made me fear for my personal safety”. That was what helped me realize that, even though a such woman would ultimately be relieved to be with Jesus if she let him kill her, it doesn’t ultimately help him. Need I say more? Bless you for doing this.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Thanks, Lori, for your confirmation that I have a lifelong calling to singleness. 🙂
More seriously, due to a number of life events and vocational choices (think full-time overseas missionary and raising a relative’s children), I never had time to pursue or be pursued. But, I do know that coming from a home with an abusive parent, I was very careful about anyone I ever dated. My parent was not a Christian, but controlling, physically abusive, and sometimes appeared to be just plain nuts. I still have nightmares every now and then. Coming from that environment, I’ve always been extremely cautious around men I find overbearing and rude. My first thought-if you’re like this in public, what are you like in private? I also wonder what the rest of Ken and Lori’s personal hell might be like.
LikeLiked by 4 people
LOL. Listen, I would love to be married, but Lori’s view of marriage is terrifying! Just sit at home all day and be sad. That’s what I hear. I mean, if I had kids I’m sure I would love to play with them as I do with nieces and nephews, but is that really the only thing women can care about? No!
thank you for doing this series, kathi. It has been fascinating to show what a sad, bitter person Lori is and what a terrible marriage they actually have, behind all of her nonsense advice to people.
LikeLiked by 4 people
LOL! I married a good man. Marriage is seriously a joy, nearly everyday. Submission is actually a beautiful thing too…..and than you have this deeply distressing perversion of the whole concept, like we see expressed by people like Lori. But it is still a perversion, it is not biblical, it is not the way things were designed. Ironically, when I first encountered Lori I thought, what a miserable, unhappy, domineering, control freak. That woman needs to surrender to the Lord, gentle herself, submit, place herself under God’s care, and bask in His infinite love for His daughters.
LikeLike
Song of Joy – you really nailed it on the curse topic. That seems to be a favorite verse that complementarian and Patriarchal adherers use to justify their ideologies. It is very upsetting in many ways for women, but also because it makes a mockery of Christ’s death and resurrection.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The opening exchange between Trey and Lori completely triggered me and sent me spinning. To actually teach that a wife should accept maltreatment from her husband is appalling. It is precisely the kind of teaching I lived by for 20 years – and brought me to the edge of a nervous breakdown at the end of it all.
Yet the Apostle Paul wrote, “So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church, because we are members of His body.” Ephesians 5:28-30
This powerful truth debunks Lori’s false teaching. And shouldn’t it be obvious?
Thank you, Kathi, for exposing this insanity…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Where does this idea come from that women should accept this way of being treated which is the absolute opposite of what the bible says, but men cannot possibly accept not being obeyed for three seconds? It’s nuts.
I mean…doesn’t that depend on what it actually means? Definitions matter here.
The way people like Lori, Trey/Ken, describe submission sounds like slavery, and there is no beauty there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cindy – I apologize that the opening image was triggering. You are absolutely correct that this teaching is appalling. My heart is heavy whenever I read things such as this because I know there are so many women living in this type of hell. Christians have supported this thought that women must submit to their husbands in all things for far to long. This teaching must stop!
LikeLiked by 1 person
CH.18 probably pisses me off more than most because my husband is a picky eater who couldn’t care less about food. He’d be very happy to eat the same 7 meals every week.
I’m the one who literally craves diversity in my meals. There’s many an evening where I make him something quick and easy then spend an hour and a half on what I want to eat. And I’ve gotten pretty good at taking the same base material and turning out two different meals, usually only using one or two more dishes than if I’d cooked only one meal.
LikeLike
Lea – “Trey” had a very lengthy comment that day (not unusual) and he did mention slavery as well.
Further comments from Trey on same post:
“How deep does this really go? In 1 Peter 3:6, it tells us that “Sarah obeyed Abraham and called him lord”. That word we translate into English as “lord” is the Greek word “kurios”. Kurios literally means an owner and master, a person who exercises absolute ownership rights. Sarah considered her husband to be her owner and her master and she is held up to you as an example to follow. Do you consider your husband to be your owner and your master? Does the way you treat him reflect this?”
I responded with a comment telling Trey that no, I do not consider my husband my owner and master because slavery is illegal. And, I called his comment about a wife taking abuse disgusting. I also stated that his promotion of slavery and abuse was criminal. I called out Lori for supporting his views of criminal activity.
For some reason she did not put my comment through.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Trey is disgusting.
He should stop focusing on women and look at his side of the equation. He is ABSOLUTELY NOT supposed to be treating his wife as a slave, and there are way more places in the bible that say that than that even mention submission.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kathy,
Thanks for suffering through reading this book for us. And for trying to talk some sense into Lori with that comment. Lori won’t approve my comments either so we must be doing something right!
LikeLike
Catherine – What is also noted by Ken in Ch. 19 is that he would often fix his own food for him and the kids after having salad for dinner. So, Lori, who thinks that you should serve kids their portion and nothing more, was causing her children to go hungry.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here’s something that Trey and so many people miss about the story of Sarah. Let’s put Sarah using the word “lord” into full context:
(Quoting from Katherine Bushnell’s writings)
1) “Jacob called Esau “lord” though it was God’s revealed will that Jacob should hold the place of superiority.” (Genesis 33:8)
2) “Aaron called Moses, his younger brother “lord.” (Exo 33:22).
3) Moses called the Egyptians fighting each other “lord.” (Acts 7:26)
4) Rebekah refers to Abraham’s servant as “lord” (Gen 24:18)
5) The jailer refers to Paul and Silas as “sirs” which is the same Greek word “Kurios” (G2962) translated in 1Peter 3:6 as Sarah calling Abraham “lord.”
Does this word mean that Jacob has to submit to full obedience to Esau?
Does this word properly translated, mean that Moses was being in full absolute subordination to the fighting Egyptians? Wasn’t Moses actually breaking up a fight and questioning what they were doing?
Same Greek word translated as “Sir” in these verses
Matt 13:27—”Sir, didn’t you sow good seed?
Matt 27:63—”Sir, we remember….”
John 4:11—”Sir you have nothing to draw (water out of the well)….”
John 4:15—Woman at well says “Sir, give me this water……”
John 4:19—”Sir I perceive you are a prophet”
John 4:49—”Sir, come down…”
John 5:7—”Sir, I have no man (to help him get into the water)..”
John 12:21—”Sir, we would see Jesus…”
There’s more verses we could study. But putting everything into proper context makes it clear that this isn’t talking about the absolute eternal subordination that people like Lori and Trey are teaching.
LikeLiked by 1 person
God’s design of me as the respected leader and Lori as my cheerful and submissive follower
Although I do not doubt the basic complementarian understanding of scripture as a framework is correct, the sentence above explains why, sooner or later, non-American complementarians distance themselves from the American brethren.
The concept of leading and following, if not wholly false, conveys to me something that goes beyond the text of the NT itself. Building a superstructure that the foundation won’t support. It eventually collapses, and great is the fall thereof!
Respect has to be earned, it cannot be demanded or assumed as due, submission as a word is OK I suppose, its what the text itself says, but follower? Treats the wife imo too much as a child. Worse than that, does he think he is the master? It’s hardly bestowing honour and living considerately, is it.
This variety of complementarian need to explain why ‘head’ means ‘leader’. It’s not even ‘servant leader’, an expression the bible never uses.
The claim that this is ‘God’s design’ seems presumptious to me, especially in view of what follows. It brooks no discussion.
LikeLike
Do you ever just put a book down and go have 15 margaritas?
Because. Reasons?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I absolutely doubt the basic complementarian understanding of scripture as a framework is correct for reasons I get into in several of my blog posts on my Daisy blog.
For one reason among others I disagree with the term and the concept: “Complementarian” in “Complementarianism” is not really communicating that the two sexes are complementary but their use of the term includes the concepts of Male Hierarchy and Female Submission.
I’ve only stopped to glance at the screen capture of Lori’s post for now.
In the screen cap taken from some site of Lori’s, someone named Trey says:
The Bible does not teach any of this.
The only partial crumb Trey gets biblical here is in the book of Ephesians, after mutual submission is called for, wives are asked to submit to their spouses (note wives are being asked, it’s not a directive that men may demand of wives, and it’s not for men such as Trey – or even other women such as Lori – to demand from other women).
I don’t agree with the complementarian understanding of Eph 5.22-23. Putting that aside for the most part: that portion only asks wives to submit to a husband.
The Bible does not say that God demands that wives “obey” or “serve” their husbands.
Trey is reading a lot of concepts in the text that are not there, and/or he’s conflating the word “submission” with other words or ideas, such as obey.
The Bible also, so far as I can recall, does not ask anyone to suffer for “unjust” reasons, but may in a few parts, indicate that if one is a follower of Jesus Christ that one may be unjustly persecuted by pagans who hate Christianity.
There is also a portion of the Bible where either Paul himself or Paul tells someone else to escape slavery if he/they have an opportunity. This would suggest that Paul is fine with Christians avoiding or leaving abusive situations or abusive relationships.
The Bible no where asks any one to suffer just for the sake of suffering, which is what Trey is saying or at least implying.
I do not see Jesus demanding that Christians follow and obey him. He asks them to follow and obey him out of love, but he does not demand it the way complementarians such as Trey demand obedience from women.
Also, I don’t think the Bible’s use of the word “submit” is to be understood in the way that Trey is understanding it.
I have long been interested in what complementarians do with Christian women who say, “I refuse to submit to my husband in the way you teach.” What do comps do in these situations?
What do they advise Christians husbands to do if and when the wife refuses to go along with this incorrect, demeaning, and sexist teaching?
A few years after I began wondering about that topic, this blogger sort of tackled it:
_Control: The Reason The Gospel Coalition and CBMW [and other Complementarians] Cannot Actually Condemn Spousal Abuse _
(via Diary of an Autodidact blog)
Lastly, I’ve noticed for a long while now that the Christian complementarian view of women reminds me less of how Jesus of Nazareth regarded and treated women and more of how many Muslims view women.
Some Muslims also believe that women should have less agency than men, that women should fully submit to men (and men should not submit to women). Why would any Christian want to mirror the teachings about marriage and gender that Islam does?
Complementarians like to go about saying how “counter-cultural” their views are – well, how counter cultural is Gender Complementarianiam, when at some points it is reminiscent of Islam and in others, Mormonism.
I also told Julie Anne earlier today on Twitter that what Trey and Lori are promoting in that post is not even a view that says that the feminine complements the masculine and vice versa, but they are advocating Codependency for women, and through out the Bible, God pleads with and warns against anyone from behaving in a codependent manner.
Complementarians want to sanctify Codependency, something God is against, in women, and say it’s “God’s plan,” or “God’s design for women,” which is putting words in God’s mouth and is therefore taking God’s name in vain.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think I gave the wrong link above.
Sorry, I meant to link to the post about CBMW and abuse, but accidentally put in the URL for a post about Fundamentalism.
CORRECTED LINK:
_Control: The Reason The Gospel Coalition and CBMW [and other Complementarians] Cannot Actually Condemn Spousal Abuse _
(via Diary of an Autodidact blog)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Quoting Julie Anne:
Or:
“How Lori Alexander Makes Lifelong Singleness, Even For Women Who Had Hoped to Marry, Look More Appealing and Say, “Thank you God that I Never Married”
snort, snort, LOL
LikeLiked by 1 person
insanitybytes said,
Something about your post got me to thinking, and I’m not quite sure why this popped into my head, but why does Lori blog about all this stuff?
Why can she not just be content to live out her Doormattish Susie Homemaking Submitting to Ken Life and keep it private? Why does she want to broadcast it to others, especially women? Why is she trying to convince other women to follow her lifestyle?
Is it about money? I take it she gets ad revenues or whatever from some of this Doormat Activism she’s into.
Also, why are dudes of the male biological sex, such as Trey, visiting her site? I would assume that her site is purportedly by a woman for other women, where one woman (Lori) lectures other women how to be more Doormatty?
If this was really about convincing women that it’s more godly to be a Properly Submitted Doormat, shouldn’t she make her blog or Facebook group set to private and only allow people with feminine names to join and be able to read her content????
Personally, I don’t see the Bible forbidding womanly leadership and teaching, but isn’t Lori, by opening her group / blog to men, in effect teaching men, such as Trey? Doesn’t that go against her own world view?
And something about insanitybyte’s observation – yes, Lori seems to come across as controlling, which, IMO, contradicts the complementarian teachings and views about women, on multiple levels.
How odd that someone such as her cannot meekly, quietly, and humbly just do her Submission Thing, but she has to go public with it, have an entire group or blog, where she commands others to do so as well, and writes posts where I think she criticizes women who don’t do this stuff? That’s not conveying a meek, gentle, quiet spirit that some Bible verse asks of NT Christian women.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Kathy commenting in the OP:
Given Lori’s focus, how she is always telling other women to fixate on their husbands, I don’t think she focuses on Jesus, nor is she really telling married women to focus on Jesus.
I find that gender complementarianism (wrongfully) asks Christian women to focus on their spouses, when you’d think complementarians would want Christian married women to focus primarily on Jesus Christ.
Complementarians turn the male biological sex, and husbands particularly, into Mini Deities who compete with Jesus or replace Jesus for their wife’s attention, affection, and dedication.
Complementarianism = Idol Factory
LikeLiked by 1 person
Exactly, Daisy. There’s nothing quite like having a controlling,dominating woman shrieking at you about how women should be quiet and never teach, Well, isn’t she being loud and hostile? Isn’t she teaching?
And the men who come to her for advice, what’s with that? Now she is actually teaching them and exercising her authority over men. It’s total hypocrisy. She engages in the very same thing she condemns all other women for.
My personal theory is that God is actually telling her, “Lori, be quiet! Lori, stop teaching.” But she is so consumed by herself that she thinks that message is for her to deliver to everyone else. In other words,she is totally projecting her own self onto everyone else.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Quoting Lori, from the OP (original post):
She’s asking women to repress their feelings and true thoughts, which is a facet of codependency.
I know it well, because both my parents raised me to be and think this way. It doesn’t work. If you spend months to years repressing your opinions, needs, feelings, and you don’t speak up and tell the other person their attitude or behaviors are making you angry or hurting you, and you bury it, even if you try to “have the right heart,” it doesn’t matter, because those feelings stay repressed.
All of the repressed feelings ferment into anger, resentment, and usually, the anger will burst out of a person like an alien from the Alien’s Sci-Fi movie, or like Lava from a volcano.
Years of swallowing anger and trying to be sweet and nice all the time, even in the face of being mistreated, can turn into depression, too.
Lori, your advice just does not work.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BTW, I think Complementarians should stop using the term “Complementarianism” and make a switch to my phrase above, “Doormat Activism.”
Someone on another blog suggested Comps rename themselves as “Female Subordinationists,” (hope I spelled that right), while a person I saw on yet another site said that Comps should call their view, “Permanent Female Caste System.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kathi said, Re: Lori and Ken,
Well, good grief, why’d they bother marrying?
I guess Lori’s true reason for blogging now is that she wants other women to be as miserable as she is.
That ex I was engaged to? He was awful, so I did NOT marry him. I wouldn’t marry someone who I cannot stand.
Kathi said, quoting Lori and Ken,
Oooooh. Oooh. This reminds me of the Coffee Cake example argument in the book
_The Verbally Abusive Relationship_, by P. Evans.
(link is to free book excerpts on Google books)
In that book, the author describes a conversation she had with a woman who divorced her husband. T
his woman’s husband’s “coffee cake” tiff is what made the proverbial light bulb go off over the woman’s head and made her realize that her husband was a verbal abuser, and she had had enough and finally left him after years of his irrational angry out-bursts over stupid things, where he berated her, like over their coffee cake incident.
You can probably do a search on that Google books page I linked to above for the phrase “coffee cake” or “cake” and find the story.
There was another example early in the book of something like Evans used an example of a husband who brow beat his wife (verbally) when she asked him if he’d like some shrimp salad, since she was fixing herself a bowl too.
In that example, the husband screamed at his wife that no, he didn’t want any shrimp salad, how dare she ASSUME he wanted any, etc.
There is nothing wrong, demanding, or picky about Lori asking Ken if he’d like a salad or not – as the book author, Evans, explains in her book on how verbal abuses operate, Ken’s answer is pretty much a form of verbal abuse.
And here Lori is defending this and saying she was to blame – the reverse is true.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ken (Lori’s husband) in the OP:
“My Transformed Wife”? “My Transformed Wife”? What a dopey, stupid phrase.
Also, is his wife a Decepticon? Is Lori secretly Megatron or Optimus Prime?
(If you have no idea what I’m referring to, please see this page at Wikipedia:
_Transformers_)
Transformers, robots in disguise! Transformers, more than meets the eye!
LikeLike
Kathi said:
NO. NO they do not. A big, fat, resounding NO.
To quote Darth Vader from Revenge of the Sith:
“Noooooooooooo!”
(Video: _Darth Vader says “Noooo!” (on You Tube)_)
But I think you already knew that and it was a rhetorical. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I can understand why she is completely brainwashed if Debi Pearl is her role model. That woman literally tells wives if they’re physically abused to thank God they are counted worthy of suffering for His name’s sake. The woman is a piece of work.
I don’t think the author of this book gets a pass. She is still controlling…she just does it in a passive-aggressive way. Her “submission” is on the outside so God will be impressed with her. This isn’t a mutual, love-based submission by husband and wife. This is a nonsense book. Thank you Julie Anne for reviewing it.
LikeLike
I hope that the Loris and Kens of the world realize that they make Christianity look ten times more bizarre, sexist, and impractical to the already-atheist, the agnostics, or the “sitting- on- the- fence- wondering- if- I- should- stay- or- leave- the- faith” types.
Nobody but those who are already brainwashed and living in their little complementarian bubble would possibly view their teachings as being acceptable or normal. Everyone else looks at it and thinks, “That is messed up.”
Quoting Ken:
Kathi criticized this very well in her post, the part I noticed was this phrase by Ken:
…Instead of defending our rights…
There is so much I could say about this alone. I’ll start by saying, Ken, in this patriarchal relationship he has with Lori, gets all the benefits.
So of course Ken is thrilled with the status quo. He does not have to worry about “defending his rights,” since all rights have been conferred to him by way of complementarianism in the first place, der!
This second point I want to make, I don’t know how to go about it.
I don’t know how to explain why I find that protest against anyone defending their rights to be so odious.
It’s not just complementarians and Ken who do this. A few years ago, on Christian sites, I saw Christians (and even some atheists) sharing a photo of a church sign. The church sign said something like, “And Satan also demanded equal rights.”
I find it so demented that if there is injustice against an entire group or category of people (such as wives in regards to sexism, in complementarianism, where men get all rights and control and power), that when the victims, when those who are trampled, rightfully and understandably complain about being treated unjustly, those who already hold all the power say, “You’re demanding your rights. That is so selfish and Satanic.”
It’s convenient for those already in power to make that claim.
I think maintaining the status quo, when it hurts people and is unfair, is selfish and satanic.
_NC Church Says “Satan Was the First to Demand Equal Rights”… Like It’s a Bad Thing_
-(via a Patheos blog by an atheist guy)
BTW, is this not an Apples Vs. Oranges case? It’s one thing for Satan to make himself out to be God, but another for one human to expect to be treated on a level playing field to another human!
God even says in the Bible several times over not to favor the rich or powerful, but to show equal consideration to anyone who enters your church. God is arguing for equality and equal rights among humanity.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ken really, really hates salad.
LikeLike
Right? Qui Bono, folks, when people start talking about giving up rights.
LikeLike
Daisy, I think part of the problem is that they never define rights when saying this. You know they have some definition in mind, but if I’m going to be giving up a right, I definitely want to know what it is. Am I giving up my right to life? To making my own choices? What is it you want me to give up and why?
As I said, who benefits from this. Because it sure isn’t me and I’m pretty sure it isn’t Jesus either.
LikeLike
Julia -Hahaha! Wine did help me get through this book. And exercise/yoga pants. I needed to be comfortable!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Daisy:
“Why can she not just be content to live out her Doormattish Susie Homemaking Submitting to Ken Life and keep it private? Why does she want to broadcast it to others, especially women? Why is she trying to convince other women to follow her lifestyle?”
Because she believes that as an older woman, she is called by God to teach/mentor younger women on how to live a godly life. (Titus 2:3-5) The thing is, she says she mentoring, but she really isn’t. She’s only putting her beliefs on the internet for all to read. A mentorship means there is some type of relationship between two people. She does not have relationships with any of these women, only wordy comebacks.
“Also, why are dudes of the male biological sex, such as Trey, visiting her site?”
Very good question! I’m not into conspiracy theories, but I really wonder if Trey is Ken is disguise or very close to Ken. She fawns all over him. At one point Trey had a FB account and Ken was his only “friend.” Makes you wonder. When she was blogging at Always Learning Ken offered many posts. Why? Is he “pastoring” these women? It’s a woman’s site. Now, on Transformed Wife he leaves lengthy comments. I got into it with him on FB once and finally told him if Lori can’t tell men how to live because she’s a woman, then he has no right being on her site telling women how to live. I was banned after that. Poor Ken.
“How odd that someone such as her cannot meekly, quietly, and humbly just do her Submission Thing,”
Bingo! She is far from living the way she exhorts women to live.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Daisy:
“And here Lori is defending this and saying she was to blame – the reverse is true.”
Lori and Ken with both start with the woman. What was the woman doing to cause this? Remember the post I did with the comparison pictures of raging women vs. raging men? Lori and Ken will call the alarm out on women who are verbally abusive toward their husbands, but when a husband is verbally abusive toward his wife, they tell the wife to reflect upon what she did or said that brought that on. Remember, wives, you also have a bad attitude toward your husband. If you change that, you can change him. I call BS!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mike – No, I don’t give Lori a pass at all. There are times where I feel sorry for both of them because I can see how the both are to each other. They started off in a bad relationship and the only “fix” seemed to be when she turned around. That’s still a bad relationship.
LikeLike
And so ends Serena Joy’s latest lecture to all the Handmaids…
LikeLike
Anyone here with an egalitarian husband:
Maybe consider leaving a comment on Lori’s blog/group to her and/or Ken (and/or Trey), saying something like this:
“My husband says you are totally wrong about gender roles, he does not want me unilaterally submitting to him.”
-and see how they react, and report back to us about it..
Would that not sort of put them in a bind? Lori and Ken tell women to “obey” their husbands, but if you have a husband who tells the wife,
“Do NOT follow Lori and Ken and Trey’s teachings or complementarianism” what are they going to do?
Wouldn’t Lori and Crew be going against their own views by telling a woman to NOT obey her husband when the husband says, “Wife, don’t obey me, let’s be equal partners, ignore and disregard what Ken, Trey, and Lori are teaching.”
LikeLike
Daisy,
We’ve tried to join the discussion on Lori’s blog but she won’t approve our comments.
LikeLike
1 Peter 3:6 “Sarah called him lord” is cross referenced to Genesis 18:12 where Sarah asks if she will have pleasure in bearing a child at such an old age since her lord is equally old.
It’s interesting. Although these words are very similar (one Greek, the other Hebrew) the word used by Sarah in Genesis is from “unknown origin.” I’m not sure what that means; however, some lexicon translations and a couple commentaries have translated this word “lord” simply as “husband.” Merriam-Webster agrees. Under the primary definition of today’s English word “lord” – the 3rd and 4th sub-definition (now obsolete) is, respectively, “male head of household” and “husband.” In today’s terminology – I am the female head of household…so there’s that.
I would tender a guess that most words defined/used in Scripture are archaic/obsolete as determined by today’s use/cultural relevance. Old Testament culture is not anything like ours today, obviously. We are also several centuries removed from understanding what life was like in the 1st century or how words were used. Trying to read scripture with today’s 21st century context implied is a mis-step, in my opinion.
What if Genesis 18 was said with a bit of humor or sarcasm or sass? We tend to read the Bible as if everyone in it had white bread personalities, straight-laced and flat affect. At least, I know I can be guilty of that. But, that cannot be true! And because we do not know these people, we miss out on so much. What if Sarah was a sassy lady full of spit-fire and intelligence. What if she advocated for herself, set boundaries, spoke her mind? She had quite a life – full of adventure, tragedy, and discord! It rivals anything Hollywood could dream up. But we tend to whitewash her story by imagining she was mealy mouthed, just going along with flow.
What if a better translation of Gen 18 was: “Really? And am I gonna enjoy sex after all these years – now that I’m old and wrinkly like a discarded dress? And what about my husband…he’s all wrinkly, too.”
They named their son Isaac – meaning “to make laughter” which, by the way, is a Hebrew euphemism for sex. So…there’s got to be more to the story that we so are missing because of cultural context and personality.
Just my 2cents.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“What if Genesis 18 was said with a bit of humor or sarcasm or sass?”
I love your theory! I’ve read some interesting articles about the sass,sarcasm,and gallows humor to be found in the bible and how it all relates to the culture of the time.
Sarah really was, “a sassy lady full of spit-fire and intelligence,” as were many women in the bible. I’m not sure where we get this concept of women as passive,meek and mild doormats, but it really isn’t biblical.
LikeLike
Kathi, thank you for reviewing this book and for sharing your insights.
The interchange between Trey and Lori as well as Lori and Ken’s writing
literally make me feel physically sick. BTW, who is Trey?
Maybe the book Love and Respect by Emerson Eggerichs has been
reviewed but if not, would you consider it? It’s a little old, but it’s still being taught by a couple in my church and the Love and Respect marriage conferences are still being promoted. It is very dangerous teaching and I’m appalled at the number of ‘Christians’ who follow it.
LikeLike
Also? Puns. A bunch of puns.
There was that whole thing where Abraham was not admitting she was his wife and a foreign ruler was involved and then god was like ‘listen to your wife, idiot’, right?
LikeLike
Daisy, you wrote:
“Wouldn’t Lori and Crew be going against their own views by telling a woman to NOT obey her husband when the husband says, “Wife, don’t obey me, let’s be equal partners, ignore and disregard what Ken, Trey, and Lori are teaching.”Wouldn’t Lori and Crew be going against their own views by telling a woman to NOT obey her husband when the husband says, “Wife, don’t obey me, let’s be equal partners, ignore and disregard what Ken, Trey, and Lori are teaching.”
Methinks, this has already been covered in an older blog post here on SSB, hasn’t it?
Kathi, haven’t you written about it in a post about one of the first chapters or about something else by Lori?
Greetings
Exing
LikeLike
Exing – In Chapter 4 Lori discusses how men should lead and that wives should follow unless her husband is asking her to sin. If a husband wants his wife to work, she should work, but continue to talk to her husband about how the Bible says a wife is to stay home and to figure out the finances to make it work. So, it is a bit confusing that yes, a woman should do what her husband wants, but if her husband wants her to do something that is out of God’s “design” she should do her best to help her husband see that he needs to change his mind.
Chapter 4 also addresses the horrors of mutual submission. She doesn’t really see that it can work because there is not one main person in charge. And here I thought that all things were possible with God and enough faith. I suppose not.
LikeLike
Cindy – “BTW, who is Trey?”
That is a very good question! Trey is a regular commentor on the The Transformed Wife blog. Some have been suspicious about who he really is. When you click on his name on a comment there is not identifying information. He usually writes very long comments about how women should be — submissive, waiting on the husband’s every call, apparently property of the husband even though that is illegal, and can be treated any way the husband chooses, even if it includes criminal behavior. A wife is to deal with it because that is her lot in life according to how God made her. He is disgusting.
Thanks for the idea of reading Love & Respect. While I know the basics behind it, I’ve never actually read the book. My initial thought to it is that all people deserve love and respect no matter what gender you are.
LikeLike
“My husband says you are totally wrong about gender roles, he does not want me unilaterally submitting to him.”
-and see how they react, and report back to us about it..”
I think they would say something along the lines of what is mentioned at the bottom of this post
http://lorialexander.blogspot.com/2013/03/for-husbands-who-dont-want-submissive.html
Lori:
“So husbands, if you don’t want your wives to submit, it is completely your
fault when your marriage falls apart.”
Basically, if a husband doesn’t agree with submission or Lori’s version of submission he is wrong (even though we are suppose to listen what our own husbands want) and its assumed your marriage will also far apart. Note she said “when” your marriages falls apart, not if.
LikeLike
Kathi,
Just in case this info might be helpful—here’s a little background on the Love and Respect book by Emerson Eggerichs. His whole theology is that women’s main need is to feel loved (implying they don’t need to feel respected) but men are wired to need respect (implying that their primary need isn’t to feel loved–that’s a female need).
Emerson totally misses the point that women can’t feel loved if they’re not feeling respected!! The further you read of Emerson’s writings, the more it becomes painfully clear that he ignores and denies the need for women to feel respected too.
It gets even worse. I listened to a radio interview where Emerson kept blabbing on and on about how mothers must focus on meeting their sons need for respect. Something didn’t feel right about it. So I did a research study on how many times the Bible tells sons to respect their mothers—-lots of verses! Yet NOT ONCE did the Bible ever tell mothers to respect their sons.
Let’s get this straight. Emerson will blab on and on, telling mothers to focus on respecting their sons, but he TOTALLY IGNORES God’s command for women to be respected too. It’s really disturbing. I’ve read and listened to a lot of Emerson. NEVER ONCE did he ever teach that women actually need respect too. Maybe because he thinks that’s only a male need!
Plus, the examples he gives in the book about how he treats his wife are really disturbing. Emerson brags about how he and his sons leave the house messy and expect their mom to clean up after them. Then when his wife goes on a trip to visit family and returns, they tell her that they didn’t miss her at all. They thought she’s “nagging” too much by trying to teach them to clean up after themselves. Well, those sons are in for a rude awakening when they move out of the house. Roommates are not going to be cleaning up after them!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kathi,
I definitely think you are onto something as to who the real Trey is. Here’s some more evidence to back up your theory:
Just out of curiosity I was reading through the reviews on Lori’s book on Amazon. Trey made this comment in reply to a negative review:
“Neither I nor Lori condone a husband yelling at his wife and children.”
Doesn’t that sound like a husband describing his wife?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Charis,
Really great point on the story of Sarah. I agree with you that too much theology has missed the whole point of the story—how Sarah learned to set boundaries with Abraham.
When she finally stands up to Abraham and tells him that she won’t put up with the situation anymore—then God backs her up. God actually has to tell Abraham to listen to her. That’s the same Hebrew word translated as “obey” in a whole lot of other verses.
Hmmmmmmmm……………
LikeLike
Avid Reader – Yes on Trey’s response! I admit I’ve totally forgotten what he said. It’s so bizarre. I left my Amazon review last night. Glad to count myself in with the 1 stars – even though I wish I could give it a 0.
LikeLike
Thank you, Kathi. That was what I was thinking of.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting how wives are taught to follow Jesus (i.e. be a doormat), yet Jesus did not let himself be disrespected. Yes, he served others, but there are many instances where the Pharisees tried to verbally tear him down and he fought back.
But… I guess the lesson we’re supposed to learn only God and church leaders can demand respect.
LikeLike
It does. Trey always seemed to have a screw loose, wonder why Ken thinks he needs an alter-ego to be an even meaner person than he already is?
LikeLike
There’s an important principle in Scripture, in which we reap what we sow.
Lori and Trey seem to be suggesting that a husband who sows misery, brutality, and discord should be prevented from reaping the normal expected fruit thereof. A wife’s duty is to enable and reward her husband’s sin by protecting him from the natural consequences of his own behavior.
This just doesn’t sound right to me. I don’t believe it’s the job of any Christian to make it easier or more comfortable for someone else to continue in sin. Nothing in Scripture supports that idea.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“A wife’s duty is to enable and reward her husband’s sin by protecting him from the natural consequences of his own behavior.”
Exactly. I actually call that thing blasphemy. It’s a perverse form of goddess worship. Men have a Savior already and He is not their wife. To place a woman in that position is actually to undermine the finished work of the cross. It converts a wife into a martyr, it makes her into a spiritual idol. Christ and Christ alone died for their sins.
LikeLike
This is all very confusing. From the fundagelical viewpoint, it is supposed to be the husband who saves, nurtures, protects, sanctifies his wife. Yet, it seems that more often than not, it’s the church telling the wife to do that for her husband – that she should selflessly sacrifice herself for his convenience. So I wonder what the true theology is here. It seems like the complementarian church is admitting to egalitarianism by trying to force wives into the head and spiritual leader role that they claim only men can hold. If the husband’s role is to sanctify his wife and yet the church is telling the wife to sanctify her husband, isn’t the church swapping their roles?
LikeLike
Re: post by “Anonymous Grandma” above.
Absolutely spot on.
I’ve said this before on my Daisy blog, but Complementarianism is nothing but Codependency for women with Bible verses slapped on it to make it appear as though it’s “godly” or “biblical.”
Complementarians do not want women practicing normal, healthy boundaries, especially not around men generally or husbands specifically (if they are a married woman).
One aspect of a woman who forgos codependency to develop healthy boundaries would including something like a married woman allowing her husband to suffer the natural consequences of his irresponsibility or misbehavior, rather than constantly bailing him out all the time, making excuses for him, or always putting up with the behavior if it bothers her.
LikeLike
Mark said,
Very astute point!
In some cases, married Christian women (or even Non C. women) have no choice but to take on the role of the husband.
I have a post on my Daisy blog about it,
_Gender Complementarianism Does Not Adequately Address, or Address At All, Incompetent, Loser, Or Incapacitated Men_
Complementarians don’t address those situations either, or the one you’re describing, where they encourage wives to take on what they (the comps) teach are the husbandly duties or characteristics.
LikeLike
Insanity bytes said,
<
blockquote>“A wife’s duty is to enable and reward her husband’s sin by protecting him from the natural consequences of his own behavior.”
Exactly. I actually call that thing blasphemy. It’s a perverse form of goddess worship. Men have a Savior already and He is not their wife. To place a woman in that position is actually to undermine the finished work of the cross.
It converts a wife into a martyr, it makes her into a spiritual idol. Christ and Christ alone died for their sins.
<
blockquote> And, at the same time, many complementarians teach that all women need a “male covering,” or some kind of male human in their life, to act as some sort of mediator between them and God.
So, at other times, Complementarians set up men (or specifically husbands) to be some kind of “Mini- Christ” figure to a woman (or specifically a wife).
Some complementarians teach that a husband will be held accountable to God before God in the future for the sins of his wife, or something like that.
All this is even though the Bible says there is only one mediator between humanity and God, and that is Jesus Christ.
LikeLike
I placed this on another thread on this blog, but thought it would be good here, too:
From a blog called “Redemptive History & Theology”
_Submissive to One Another_
LikeLike
Mark, the reason it is confusing is because everything that goes wrong is a woman’s fault, and the theology is twisted in whatever way they can make that work. There is no logical consistency.
LikeLike