Should Wives Have to Submit to Their Husband’s Perverse Requests?
A look into what a conservative Christian has to say
If I said to you that wives don’t get to decide the moral or proper use of their bodies, only their husbands do, what would be your response? That sounds off putting to say the least right? I find this statement to miss the mark on what traditional gender roles are within the Bible, and I have been seeing an increasing number of conservative Christian accounts sharing the same sentiment.
There is a specific post that I wanted to go over, but the account that it came from seems to have magically disappeared, and I didn’t think to take screenshots. Thankfully, I did the majority of research before it became unavailable and I can share that with you.
The original post was made as an attempt to debunk a statement made by Micheal Pearl that says, “When a porn addict demands anal sex, or practices some form of perverted abuse, or any unnamed deviant and degrading acts, she should know that he is no longer the Christ figure that she should obey. She should just say ‘No, I am worth more than that.’ Do not follow him down the dark path to depravity. Wives should obey their husbands in all things ‘as unto the Lord,’ not as unto the devil.”
The OP tries to debunk this statement by using Scripture, but he does so poorly. Not only are his arguments poor, the sentiments that he is portraying through his faulty interpretations are actually dangerous to Christians and overall moral thinking.
Bible Verses as Evidence
The original poster (OP) uses a handful of Bible quotes to justify the following positions:
The women in marriage don’t get a say in what is considered an immoral use of her body
Husbands get to decide what is moral for anything outside of the Bible
Women must submit to their husbands in everything without exception, even if her morals are violated
We are going to go through the arguments one by one and take them apart because there is a lot of missing context, incorrect use and interpretation of the Bible verses, and overall misinformation.
1 Corinthians 14:35
We’ll start with 1 Corinthians 14:35 because OP takes this verse completely out of its context. The verse says, “If they [women] want to find out about something, they should ask their husbands at home. It is a disgraceful thing for a woman to speak in a church meeting.” OP uses this verse to say that husbands have the final say in what is right or what is moral when it comes to the woman’s uncertainty about sexual conduct. He also conveniently omits the last part of the verse that says it is disgraceful for women to speak up during church meetings. This is clearly not the correct interpretation, because all the verse really says is that women shouldn’t disrupt anyone at church. It seems to me to be an incredible leap to use this verse as a means to grant the husband complete sexual authority over his wife.
It seems that OP uses this verse as a justification to say that anything that is not clarified by the Bible or the church is then left up to the husband. I don’t really have a problem with that part of the argument. The problem that we run into however, comes from the fact that the husband should have strong moral character and the ability to think critically and empathetically when it comes to decisions about sexual morality, and morality in general.
If he does not show himself to possess this moral character and chooses his own gratification over the concerns of his wife, is he acting as the Christ-like figure that he should be? And if he’s not, then she has a right to refuse him, as we’ll see when going over the next verse.
1 Peter 3:1-2
OP does not agree with Pearl’s statement about wives disobeying their husbands if the husband is not being led by Christ. 1 Peter 3:1-2 says “In the same way you wives must submit yourselves to your husbands, so that if any of them do not believe God’s word, your conduct will win them over to believe. It will not be necessary for you to say a word, because they will see how pure and reverent your conduct is.”
It’s clear from this passage that wives can rightfully disagree with their husbands if they are not acting as the Christ-like figure. Wives can do so with their actions, not their words, which seems to suggest that men are responsible for becoming aware of themselves without being told, especially if they aren’t acting through Christ. The contradiction mentioned by OP says that a woman still must obey her husband even if he does not show himself to be the Christ-like figure that he should be. If a husband is not loving his wife as Christ loves the church, then the woman has every right to let him know through her actions his error.
1 Peter 3:7
1 Peter 3:7 says, “In the same way you husbands must live with your wives with the proper understanding that they are the weaker sex. Treat them with respect, because they will also receive, together with you, God’s gift of life. Do this so that nothing will interfere with your prayers.” OP says that this verse does not provide a valid argument for refusing to submit to a husband’s perverse or dishonorable request. OP refers back to 1 Corinthians 14:35, using it as justification to say that women don’t get to determine what honorable treatment is. When, again, this verse simply states that a woman should not disrupt church meetings. Here, we again see the need for the man to possess strong moral character to know that if he is making a perverse request, that he may be dishonoring his wife.
Hebrews 13:4
I’m not sure if there is a difference in translation between the Bible I’m reading and the Bible OP is reading (which appears to be the King James Version), but he says that this verse claims that all sexual relations must be between a man and a woman in marriage. In my Bible, which is Today’s English Version, it says, “Marriage is to be honored by all, and husbands and wives must be faithful to each other. God will judge those who are immoral and those who commit adultery.” The King James Version does speak about sexual relations in this verse, but what God considers to be immoral must be taken into consideration. If the Bible does not specifically state what is immoral in regards to what happens in a marriage bed (which it may very well in other verses that I haven’t included or am not aware of), then it is up to the man to give very careful consideration of what would be deemed moral.
It’s true that God permits sexual relations only between husbands and wives (Leviticus 18), and any sexual relations outside of the marriage bed between men and women is to be considered immoral and adulterous. A husband’s request to his wife to be allowed to have sex with other men therefore would be considered an immoral request that a wife can openly refuse. However, OP seems to limit the woman’s ability to deny any request that could otherwise be deemed immoral. This is due to the fact that what is considered immoral is explained generally in the Bible and not with specific details in matters beyond the basic rules for marriage. You won’t find instructions on whether or not it would be okay to tie your spouse up and whip them, even if they requested it. For these kinds of considerations, moral common sense should be utilized.
Romans 1:18-27
OP specifically cites Romans 1:27 as a principle that he identifies through this statement, “God says sex is ‘the natural use of the woman.’” I’ve included lines from Romans 1:18-27 because this statement is bereft of the context from the rest of the reading. Romans 1:27 says, “In the same way that men give up natural sexual relations with women and burn with passion for each other. Men do shameful things with each other, and as a result they bring upon themselves the punishment they deserve for their wrongdoing.”
I have no idea how OP derived his interpretation that sex is the natural use of the woman from this verse. The lines from 18 through 27 speak about the wrath and punishment that God offers for those who sin against Him, and how abundantly clear His divine nature is. Despite the perspicuity with which God makes his nature known, these people continue to indulge in their sinful ways. The point of verse 27 is to show that these men who give themselves to sin abandon their natural relations with women in order to follow their sinful passions. Not that the natural use of a woman is sex. Is OP even reading the Bible?
Ephesians 5:21-33
These verses in Ephesians make it clear that a wife should submit to her husband in all things. However, there is a precondition to his absolute authority: he must love his wife as Christ loved the Church.
“(21) Submit yourselves to one another because of your reverence for Christ. (22) Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands as to the Lord. (23) For a husband has authority over his wife just as Christ has authority over the church; and Christ himself is the Savior of the church, his body. (24) And so wives must submit themselves completely to their husbands just as the church submits itself to Christ. (25) Husbands, love your wives just as Christ loved the church and gave his life for it. (26) He did this to dedicate the church to God by his word, after making it clean by washing it in water, (27) in order to present the church to himself in all its beauty—pure and faultless, without spot or wrinkle or any other imperfection. (28) Men ought to love their wives as they love their own bodies. A man who loves his wife loves himself. (33) But it also applies to you: every husband must love his wife as himself, and every wife must respect her husband.”
OP states that a woman’s refusal of a perverted sexual act violates the reverence to which the husband must be granted. But, as we just read, the husband who does not treat his wife as Christ treated the church is no longer entitled to that reverence. This brings up the question, if a man truly loves his wife and is meant to keep her pure, clean, and without blemish, should he ask her to do anything that is considered perverted? We’ve already established that a wife can correct a husband through her reverent actions, so if the husband is not acting with love and reverence, how could a wife be expected to submit to him? If a man would not pervert himself, he would also not pervert his wife, and these verses from Ephesians are good evidence of this.
A Note About Sodomy
I’m not going to get into a list of all the different kinds of sex acts and whether or not they should be deemed moral or immoral, but I do want to talk about the most prevalent sex act that people have questions about: anal sex. The dictionary definition for sodomy also includes “oral copulation,” but I’m going to limit the discussion to anal sex. The Bible is very clear about the immorality of sodomy between men, but it does not give specific clarification if it is okay between a husband and a wife. People have used this lack of clarification to justify engaging in anal sex.
The reason I bring this up is to make the point that just because the Bible doesn’t outwardly oppose something, doesn’t automatically make that act or thing morally acceptable. Here is where moral common sense has to come into play.
Let’s start with the obvious: anal sex is physically dangerous. There are high risks of infections for both men and women, and a high chance of intestinal issues for women as a result of penetration. The anus, rectum and colon do not naturally lubricate or expand in anticipation of intercourse like the vagina does.
Pain is also a huge factor that is either overlooked or subverted because the wife wants to show her husband that she loves him, but the very fact that the husband is willingly inflicting pain on his wife alone should put the act into moral questioning.
The anus, rectum and colon all serve the function of removing waste from the body, and no amount of cleaning will ever remove all of the bacteria in the colon and rectum. The spiritual concerns here are indicated by the fact that anal sex would make someone ritually unclean as would having sex with a woman on their period.
Lastly, and this is my own thoughts about the subject, if sodomy is the kind of sex in which men “know” other men (knowing pertaining to intercourse between a husband and wife), then if a man chooses to “know” a woman as he would a man, shouldn’t that be deemed immoral and inappropriate? At the very best, it’s morally gray, but I do think that between the physical aspects mentioned above along with this consideration, that sodomy, even if it is between two consenting adults, is still considered immoral in God’s eyes. It doesn’t seem to be what God has in mind when it comes to the kind of love and physical intimacy a man and his wife should share. That is just my opinion on it, but I think it holds some fairly strong moral ground.
What is OP trying to do/say?
Besides the difference in the translations, the conclusions that OP comes up with are complete distortions of the Scripture. When we start to ask why, it becomes clear that OP has an agenda that is separate from the teachings of the Bible.
I’ve noticed this issue with other conservative Christian accounts that place a lot of emphasis on traditional gender roles. I can understand their sentiment, but, for many of them, it seems like their understandings are misguided or have missing pieces. It’s not anything new that people use bits and pieces of the Bible to meet their own needs. There is real danger in the prevalence of these kinds of accounts because of the misinformation they spread by interpreting the Bible for their own purposes, which, ironically enough, OP claims is wrong for people to do.
When going through the scripture, I kept things as objective as possible to show clearly what the Bible says, not what I want it to say. I made my opinions frank and clearly separated from the Scripture itself.
So, should wives have to submit to their husband’s perverse requests? Firstly, they both have to decide together what is considered perverse by carefully studying the scripture and using moral considerations where the Bible is too general. These moral considerations might include questions like, “Is it right for me to inflict pain? Is it right for my wishes to overrule your concerns? Is this what God wants for our marriage? How important is sex and how right is it of us to focus on physical gratification rather than spiritual fulfillment?” Etc. etc. It seems clear to me that this is the kind of process that is necessary if a husband truly wants to honor his wife.
My thought is that a husband would be dishonoring his wife if he does not go through this detailed process and if he does not do his own spiritual work to become as close to the Christ-like figure described in the Bible. If he does not meet this criteria, then the answer should be no, wives should not have to submit to their husband’s perverse requests without much consideration from both sides first.