What impact does our new book The Marriage You Want have on people?
I was recently tagged in a post on Substack by Joy LaPrade, a woman I’ve met on social media whom I first encountered through her interview on the podcast Bodies Behind the Bus. She shared how our book The Great Sex Rescue was actually the catalyst to her seeing how dysfunctional her church was–and how her speaking out in support of the book on social media led to her being put on church discipline.
Now Joy has read The Marriage You Want, and wrote such a lovely piece I asked if I could share it with you all.
Enjoy!

From Joy LaPrade
I was just 22 when I learned I wouldn’t really matter in marriage.
My fiancé and I were college seniors, excitedly planning a wedding for after graduation. As we worked on papers and final exams, we met for premarital counseling with the pastor of our college church. He gave us a book to guide our discussions: “Reforming Marriage,” by a pastor from Idaho named Doug Wilson.
The book opens with what sounds like a beautiful goal: a call to create a Christ-like “spiritual aroma” in your home, one that would come from a healthy marriage.
All family relationships will depend on the health of the marriage, Wilson writes, “and the key is found in how the husband is treating his wife.” (pg. 10)
I wish I’d stopped reading right there, just a few paragraphs into the book. But I was too young and lacking discernment to see what was really happening on the pages in front of me.
All that matters in a marriage is how a husband treats his wife. In other words, who she is and what she does is insignificant.
You may wonder if I’m reading far too much into a single phrase — surely Wilson isn’t really saying that only the husband matters?
I wish I were exaggerating.
But on page after page, Wilson almost exclusively addresses his remarks to men, while making it clear there is a hierarchy of value and purpose before God.
God calls men to do important work, and calls women to help them: “the man is established by God as the authority in the home. Under God, he is defined by the work to which he is called, while she is defined by the man to whom she is called.” (pg. 30)
As a result of this, Wilson explains, women are to bear children “for” their husbands, to have sex frequently enough that the men will be protected from sexual temptation, to be “disciples” of their husbands rather than learning about the Bible on their own. A woman must submit to her husband at all times, even when she knows more or is stronger than her husband in a particular area, and should be careful never to usurp his spiritual leadership — which means she shouldn’t even encourage him to be a spiritual leader if he’s failing in that area.
Because he is the leader and authority, she should never directly address anything he does that offends her, but should ask for his permission to speak about it first. (pg. 95) If he thinks she asks her father for advice too often, she must stop. (pg. 83) She ought not speak to a counselor about their marriage without his knowledge. (pg. 81) She is called to primarily be a homemaker, and if the burden of childbearing and housework gets to be too much, she should not complain, because this is “fruitfulness.”3
A wife should understand that her husband is her “lord.” After all, “(God) has created us as male and female in such a way as to ensure that men will always be dominant in marriage.” (pg. 24)
There’s plenty more where that came from, but you get the idea. And if you’re not familiar with Wilson and his teachings, you may be wondering why I didn’t just throw the book in the trash. But I couldn’t see how bad it was.
Toxic teachings are hard to see under ‘Biblical truths’
The 22-year-old me couldn’t recognize the unhealthiness of Wilson’s teaching, because what’s summarized above was surrounded by plenty of language that softened and obscured the overall message of male dominance.
Wilson is careful to explain that men should not be tyrants in the home, but instead practice “loving and constructive dominion.” His repeated calls for men to take responsibility in the home can sound healthy — and are, at least in part — except that while doing this he continually diminishes and dehumanizes women.
We were still kids when we read this, kids who knew very little of the Bible and who were just starting to get into reformed theology, with a desire to study and apply the scriptures more diligently. We were easily taken in by Wilson’s appeal to “creation order” and traditional values, along with his use of Bible verses and straw-man arguments against modern marriage and feminism.
And if “Reforming Marriage” had been the only time I encountered these ideas, they may not have had much of an effect on me.
But what Doug Wilson introduced before I was even married created my mental framework for “Christian marriage,” one that other pastors and authors added to over the years. The concepts and vocabulary in “Reforming Marriage” — headship, submission, creation order, love and respect, spiritual leadership, etc. — were reiterated to me by many more well-known teachers, and almost all of our pastors.
Some of you may be familiar with Doug Wilson, and dismiss him as an extremist (which he is) who doesn’t represent mainstream evangelicalism. Some of you may have never heard of him, and are wondering how he made an impact.
The problem isn’t Wilson alone, as offensive and absurd as he can be.
The problem is how mainstream evangelical speakers and teachers conveyed the same messages — of male dominance and “headship,” female submission and insignificance — only in softer, more marketable language.
They may have discussed marriage as a “partnership,” but the practices they taught didn’t encourage us to actually relate as partners.
Christian marriage means playing a ‘role’
I decided to dig up our old copy of “Reforming Marriage” recently, after finishing Sheila Gregoire’s excellent new book, “The Marriage You Want.”
The most important theme of the book (to me) is partnership. It encourages the reader to think of marriage as something you and your spouse are creating together, rather than a relationship where each person is called to a separate role and behaviors based on gender.
This encouraged me, but also left me wondering:
why is this so different from what I’ve always been taught? Shouldn’t I expect to hear marriage described as a partnership?
These questions prompted me to look back through the Christian marriage books we still have.
By now, I knew enough about Doug Wilson and was prepared for the worst. But as I skimmed through his book, I realized he wasn’t all that far out of the mainstream. Wilson’s teaching was essentially the same as what I heard from names such as John Piper, Tim Keller, Mark Driscoll, and a host of other teachers, along with the infamous “Love and Respect,” which I read during a difficult season in our marriage.
These authors share the same essential framework for teaching about marriage. It is not a partnership of equals. As a man, my husband was called to be a leader in our marriage, in our family, and in the world. As a woman, it was my privilege to be his helper.
Love and Respect
One Sheet
Everything Harmful with Love and Respect Summarized on One Sheet!
Enter your email to get the free printout to share with your friends, family, and pastors
These Christian teachings on marriage may have talked about partnership as a concept, but they didn’t encourage us to actually live as partners. Instead, we had “leadership” and “submission.” We had “roles.”
Here are just a few examples of how husbands were consistently prioritized in the Christian resources recommended to us:
- “God’s remedy for a man’s thirst for sex is sex – overflowing sexual joy with his wife … A man’s wife is his own personal, divinely approved wellspring of endless sexual satisfaction.” (Ray Ortlund, “Marriage and the Mystery of the Gospel,” 2016)
- “What of a case where both parties cannot agree, but some kind of decision must be made? Someone must have the right to cast the deciding vote and (thus) take the greater responsibility for the decision. This should be the place where the one the Bible calls ‘head’ [the husband] takes the accountability.” (Tim and Kathy Keller, “The Meaning of Marriage,” 2011, pg. 243)
- John Piper speaks repeatedly of a husband’s “headship” and a wife’s “submission” in sermons and books.
All these concepts were reinforced by Sunday sermons. Headship and submission were woven into every discussion of marriage. Our pastor in North Carolina loved to talk about how this hierarchy allowed “the husband to thrive and the wife to flourish,” a phrase I liked less and less each time I heard it. (A friend and I joked that we didn’t really want to “flourish” like houseplants.)
Over the years, I learned my lesson well: male headship and female submission were the foundation of a God-honoring marriage.
What I didn’t realize, however, was how this arrangement trained me to erase myself and my desires, to treat my time as less valuable, to ignore and dismiss my own thoughts and feelings. He was the one with the calling to be a spiritual leader. He was the one who deserved respect as a “servant leader.” It was important that he feel respected; that his needs be met.
This kind of marriage was not a partnership.
It was a hierarchy, a corporate structure with the husband as CEO and the wife filling multiple subordinate roles. And despite the many pastors and authors who argued that “headship and submission” means husband and wife are still equals, I took in the implicit message: my husband was more important because he was a man.
It took me nearly 15 years of marriage to start becoming aware of my own beliefs. Complementarian teaching said one thing but did another. I was told explicitly that we were equal partners, but was trained to prioritize my husband’s “needs” while denying my own. (It’s important to mention here that my husband didn’t push these beliefs on me. Unlike him, I had grown up evangelical and was primed to go along with the culture’s practices.)
It wasn’t until 2021, when I read Sheila Gregoire’s “The Great Sex Rescue,” that I began to see some of the problems with what I’d been taught.
That book changed my life, and I’ve recommended it many times over the last few years. But I didn’t realize how many additional layers of unhealthy beliefs I needed to dig up. Gregoire’s new book, “The Marriage You Want,” is helping me identify these while pointing to a better way.
What partnership actually looks like
It’s been surprising to realize that while I believed we were functioning as partners, I’d actually placed myself in a subordinate role in many aspects of marriage. Again, my husband didn’t push me towards this. Instead, it was the combination of unhealthy Christian marriage advice and conservative evangelical culture that set me up to dismiss my own feelings and ignore my own needs, which wasn’t just a “me” problem: a lack of true partnership harms the marriage overall.
If a couple believes the man has “authority over” his wife, they will both suffer because of it. As Sheila Gregoire and her husband Keith explain,
“A marriage in which only one person matters is not a thriving marriage because it’s not a true partnership.”
A few of you still reading might argue this isn’t a fair presentation of complementarian teaching: Husbands aren’t “more important;” they’re called to be servant leaders, to sacrifice. Women are just as valuable as men.
I get it. I heard that and believed it, too. But I can’t anymore. Every one of the pastors I mentioned above — and all our pastors over the years, too — always made a point to emphasize that a husband’s headship didn’t allow for abuse, that it shouldn’t encourage a man to be domineering. But a lack of abuse isn’t the same as a healthy marriage.
When a couple’s fundamental assumption is the husband’s automatic, God-ordained, authority over his wife, it creates division instead of unity.
It does this even if the husband never takes advantage of his role or abuses his power in any way. Belief in a gender hierarchy within marriage will subtly affect how the spouses interact, training the wife to see herself as less important, less valuable than her husband. That’s what it did for me, even though we heard nothing but “good” advice about how a husband’s leadership means serving, not domineering.
Following prescribed gender roles prevents both spouses from authentically expressing their own desires, and this disconnect will spill over into decision-making, sex, household chores, childcare, family communication, handling conflict, etc. Playing “roles” in marriage promotes division, not partnership.
Since we read “The Marriage You Want,” my husband and I have been talking about how to improve our partnership. I’m trying to be more attentive to what I want and need, instead of ignoring or suppressing my feelings. I’m asking him for help with things I’d been trained to see as “a woman’s role.”
If marriage is organized around who has power and who needs to submit, we’re going to miss the beautiful opportunities God provides in bringing us together as partners.
As the Gregoires explain:
“Your unique gifts are all part of how God can bless his creation through you, not just as individuals but as a couple. God has a unique calling on your marriage too. And it depends on each of you showing up with your personalities, your strengths and gifts, your interests. You can’t have a thriving marriage if one of you is holding back or trying to be someone you aren’t.”
Thank you, Joy!
Joy LaPrade writes at her Substack “Remembering Her.” Head on over and follow her! And listen to her story on Bodies Behind the Bus.
Even just the headline was a gut punch. Yes, EXACTLY this.
There are many complementarian websites that start off by proclaiming that God created men and women equally, but then later on, in the details, say that men have all the administrative and leadership roles, and women have all the supporting and submission roles.
And, of course, women get 1 vote, while men get 1 and a half votes.
Yeah, and how interesting—and convenient—that the supporting roles encompass all the scut work of life. 🙄
Absolutely! I’m amazed by how many marriage authors proudly and loudly declare that men have a God-given need to have the wife do the housework.
Yep! And they say that you can still be equal even if he always leads and she always follows.
This post reminds me of a realization I had not that long ago. It hit me that, raised as a good little evangelical, I was taught to think of marriage as a performance. A performance for God, to show how committed we were to meeting his expectations. A performance for the “unbelievers,” to show how much different and better it was to do things “God’s way.” And a performance for our own communities, to show we belonged to the in group and adhered to its norms. The measure of a good marriage, at least in part, was the quality of the performance, not how happy or fulfilled the actors were. And not just marriage-it seems now like all of life was like that. My “witness” or “God’s law” or “creation order” was always more important than what I thought or felt. “Jesus then others then you spells joy,” right?
I had that same thought as well.
“And it depends on each of you showing up with your personalities, your strengths and gifts, your interests. You can’t have a thriving marriage if one of you is holding back or trying to be someone you aren’t.”
Much of the “practical christians living” I’ve heard doesn’t have any of that even on the radar. You as a person are sinful, so the entire christian life is having to be something you’re not! (They attach “grace” and “by God’s power” clauses, of course. But the base concept is the same) Sure, they pay lip service to “using your gifts”. But, try having gifts outside of the normal “spiritual gifts” list. Or not being a social butterfly.
Interests are also frequently heavily edited. If your interests aren’t very “standard christian” or popular, you learn it’s best to keep them to yourself to avoid random censure. I remember being surprised when a local church announced their Fall Festival, and mentioned that someone would be dressing as a fall fairy for kids to take photos with. In most churches I know of, you would *not* mention liking something as magic-themed as fairies!
CMT and Marina, agree 100% with your analysis. The last thing that I would mention is that the “secret sauce” on top of it all is that if you are really yielded to the Holy Spirit, the promise is that he will come in and take your performance and your striving to override your own thoughts and interests and desires and transform you into the person you are trying to be, so it’s no longer forced, but actually the real thing. A fancy theological way of saying, fake it and eventually you’ll make it. Thinking about who you are and what you want will only lead you astray, the most important thing is to obey.
“If you are really yielded to the Holy Spirit, the promise is that he will come in and take your performance and your striving to override your own thoughts and interests and desires and transform you into the person you are trying to be, so it’s no longer forced, but actually the real thing.”
Gah. Yes you are 1000% right. This is exactly what I thought was supposed to happen. Fake it till you make it. And of course when that doesn’t actually make you the joyful, spirit-filled person you’re supposed to be, you’re primed to assume that YOU are the problem.
I’m actually really glad now that Holy Spirit doesn’t work that way.
Absolutely! I remember thinking that too: that my marriage was my main witness.
It’s not just marriage books that have the “say one thing, mean another” issue. I see this over and over with sermons and theology books, at least in the ones aimed at the lay category. I wonder if this is another underlying issue in “popular theology”, alongside the power structure addiction. For example, one day, a pastor in my church preached a sermon on tithing. He tried to have it be “give as you feel led” and “give out of a cheerful heart, not obligation”. But then he included the “not paying tithes is robbing God” angle, along with the standard accompanying verses. It’s like, did you even review your sermon for coherence? You are putting forth two opposite ideas here! I don’t think the duplicity was entirely purposeful, though. This pastor is a former music minister turned lead pastor, and it kind of shows sometimes (no shade to music people, I just get the impression that he never really refined his theology and logic skills). I imagine he was hired for his general people skills, not practical knowledge.
I don’t think this pastor was at all unusual. This paradox comes up frequently with regard to: 1) giving money, 2) church attendance (aka “meeting together”, 3) Christian service (of the type most valued by the pastor), 4) acts of personal piety and 5) wives having sex they’d rather not have. These things only count if you do them with a willing, joyful heart, BUT if you DON’T do them (like, right now!) you are sinning, depriving, rebelling, being selfish, etc. The solution is usually for you to comply on the outside and beg God to change your heart in the meantime.
“It was a hierarchy, a corporate structure with the husband as CEO and the wife filling multiple subordinate roles.”
Yes, and how many people, if asked, would answer that the CEO is equal to the other workers? Or if the janitor is equal to the CEO? If these men believe they are then why do so many men aim so much to climb that “ladder of success?” (FWIW, I have much greater respect overall for those in the “lower” positions of work than most “upper-level” workers.)
And that whole ‘He has the weight of the responsibility of decision-making” trope… yes, some decisions may come with that, yet isn’t sharing that “burden” something you’d think a couple should bear together as an equally-yoked couple? I used to think the unequally yoked passage was simply about marrying another Christ-believer, but I now see it as more. Marry someone with whom you can share life’s burdens and weights together.
After 8 years in a church in Eastern Europe, my sister recently found out that some of the elders believe that only Scottish Presbytarians are “real Christians” and that it’s better to be no Christian at all rather than the “wrong” kind, meaning not Scottish Presbytarian. I had to explain to her that that was Doug Wilson’s theology. How in the world does he have such reach??? That Eastern Europeans now believe the only correct form of Christianity is Scottish Presbytariansim?!
The Scottish Presbyterians aren’t the only ones who believed they were the only “real Christians.” Quite a few of the Church of Christ churches believe that too.
It’s really awful how quickly cults spread!
I know! If having the decision making power is such a burden, then why do they fight so hard to not give it up?
Seems like someone once said to bear others’ burdens… But since I’m justa woman, maybe I’ve got that wrong. 🙄
(That’s sarcasm, BTW. Gal 6:2)
Quite a few other good verses in Gal 6… I guess us women weren’t gifted the special male-filter to “properly” understand, like a former pastor.🤦 Gal 6:6 was ‘obviously’ instruction to only share positives with him. If you had anything sad, such as any tears shed over losing a grandparent, you needed to take that to the theraist that the pastor recommended (any guesses how healthy they were?), not the pastor. It wasn’t his “gifting”… 😶