On Submission

"Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting for those who belong to the Lord." 

Colossians 3:18

Submission. This is probably one of the most controversial concepts in Christianity today. It is frequently criticised as being sexist.
Indeed, the idea that a woman should submit to her husband is deeply problematic. It doesn't seem like how a healthy relationship should function.

But before I continue, what does submission even mean?
Surprisingly, this is also controversial, as Christians can't even agree among themselves as to what it means, and submission apologists try to twist and stretch the word till it is barely recognisable; an elaborate exercise in semantic smoke and mirrors.
But thankfully, we have the dictionary to tell us what submission means.
Dictionary.com defines submission as "an act or instance of submitting, or yielding control to a more powerful or authoritative entity."
Synonyms are: compliance, obedience, docility.
The Cambridge dictionary defines submissive as "allowing yourself to be controlled by other people or animals."
Synonyms are: Obedient, compliant, passive.

I have defined these words here and included their synonyms so that it is very clear what is implied when people say women should be submissive to their husbands.

But what does the Bible say about Wifely submission?
Well, Paul says women should submit to their husbands as they do to the Lord (Ephesians 5:22).
He also says "Just as the church is subject to Christ, so also wives ought to be, in everything, to their husbands."
(Ephesians 5:24)
That's weird.
According to Paul, the relationship between a husband and wife is supposed to model that between Jesus and the church. We see this same imagery in revelations where the church is described as Jesus's bride (Rev 21:2,9).
We're told wives should relate with their husbands the way the church relates with Jesus.
So, how does the church relate with Jesus? Let's see; they worship him as God, serve him, obey him and go in whatever direction he wants them to go in. To the church, Jesus has the final say.

Does this mean women are to worship their husbands as gods? Serve him? Obey him? Do whatever he wants? Their husbands are to have the final say in their lives?
What is the difference between this and being a doormat or a slave?
This is clearly a hierarchy, with the man being superior and the woman being subordinate and inferior.
The relationship between Jesus and the church isn't even an equal one as Christ is definitely above the church.
Presenting marriage as a hierarchy, with husbands being superior to their wives IS sexist.

This doctrine of wifely submission reflects the patriarchal and sexist mindset of the authors. It is rooted in male supremacy and satisfies the typical male desire to subjugate women.

But over the years, Christians and all other advocates of submission have attempted to defend this doctrine from attack by giving excuses and explanations for why submission is actually a good thing. An Apologetics of some sort.
Some of the defences I've heard from submission apologists/Christians are:

"But the husband is supposed to love his wife."
Sorry, but a man loving his wife and being nice to her is the bare minimum, and doesn't warrant her submission and subservience. Imagine expecting your wife should give up her agency and submit to you simply because you love her???
Also, this is a red herring, we're talking about the woman's "role" here not the man's.

"Submission just means respect"
No, it doesn't. There's no dictionary that defines it as simply respect. Submission goes beyond respect; submission is subservience, self subjugation.
Also, if it simply means respect, then why does the Bible say that it's wives that are meant to submit? Shouldn't husbands respect their wives as well?
It's because it doesn't just mean respect.

"Submission is the way you have authority over him, stoop to conquer."
Why? Why does/should any party have authority over another? A healthy relationship shouldn't have a hierarchy, regardless of who is at the top of that hierarchy. Also, why does the man get to have overt power and control over her while the wife has to "stoop to conquer"?

"Actually, husbands and wives are meant to submit to each other"
This is impossible. As we've seen above, submission means to yield to a superior authority. This implies that for submission to happen, there has to be an authority figure, the recipient of the act of submission and a subordinate, the one who does the submitting. So for two people to submit to each other, it means that they're both superior to, as well as inferior to each other. How could this work? This would mean equality, and that is obviously not what the Bible means.
The Bible has already made it clear that the man is the head/authority and the woman is the subordinate.
So how could they "submit to each other"?

"If you love her she will naturally submit."
This is perhaps the most upsetting defense, and I have three things to say about it...
First off, sources? Like, where are you getting that information from? Where are the studies that show that women become naturally submissive when they're loved?
This is simply an assertion and nothing more. There are no studies/research backing this, it's just the assumption of the submission apologist and is usually only supported by anecdotes.
Secondly, why would a man that loves you even want you to submit to him?
Where is the love in that? Why would a man who claims to love you see you as being inferior to him? Or why would he want you to make yourself subordinate to him? What exactly is loving about this?

Lastly, I don't think this is the case at all. On the contrary, if you're property loved, I think this should make you more confident, more assertive. Rather than subduing you, it should embolden you.
That is what true love does. If someone's "love" is making you shrink yourself, you might want to check that "love".

"The woman voluntarily chooses to submit."
Again, this is a red herring. Whether the woman chooses it or not is irrelevant.  The problem with submission is not that the woman is forced, it is that she shrinks herself, relinquishes her agency and is considered inferior to her partner. So even if she willingly chose it, it would still be problematic.
Also, is it really a choice? If a Christian woman declares that she doesn't want to submit to her husband, how will it be taken? How will her Christian husband take it? How will her parents and church take it? Will they respect her decision? Probably not. She will likely be shamed, stigmatised and vilified until she yields, which is tantamount to being forced.
So it's not much of a choice, is it?

It's funny, the lengths submission apologists go to when defending submission. They very often try to redefine the word itself to suit themselves. 

And it's quite telling, isn't it?
Because if submission was really a noble and healthy concept, it wouldn't require so much intellectual dishonesty to defend it.
All these are attemps to make a problematic concept seem more palatable.

                            –––––––––––––
        

When I think about this topic of Wifely submission, I'm reminded of the quote by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, "we teach girls to shrink themselves, to make themselves smaller... we teach females that in relationships, compromise is what women do", because at the end of the day, that's what submission comes down to – shrinking yourself and making yourself smaller and finally, compromising. A submissive wife constantly makes herself small relative to her husband; she compromises on things with her husband and concedes to him in everything.
Unfortunately, I hear this talk of how women should submit a lot, even outside of religious contexts (i.e divine femininity hocus pocus).
But if we're being sincere, a relationship/marriage should be a partnership of best friends where both parties have equal power and value, and respect each other equally. Healthy relationships and marriages don't have hierarchies.

However, even if I granted the idea that a hierarchy is good for some marriages, it can't be all marriages. Christianity presents a one size fits all approach to marriages (and pretty much everything), and the problem is that one size doesn't fit all. Marriages are different and so are the people in those marriages. Some marriages might work fine with a fixed, gendered hierarchy, and some might crash under such a system. Each couple would have to work out for themselves what works for them, but presenting your hierarchical approach as the only way to have a good marriage shows a lack of complex thought.