>>55639
if you think about it, women are the only ones that can give themselves to their man totally with their body. its not something a man can possibly do like her. fur her, this giving of herself is the natural expression of her body when in union.
a man likewise can claim and mark his woman fur himself, in a way a woman cannot possibly do to her man. it is the natural expression of his body, in the climax of his union. thats just what it does to her.
as such, i think we can conclude it is the law of nature and design from God, that a women should truly belong to her man; that her purpose is to love him with self giving devotion; and that fur a man, a being who is truly filled with incessant desire, his purpose is to claim her fur himself quite completely; and to love, care fur, and take care of what he has made his.
far be it from some freak perversion! this is fulfilling the unitive purpose of marriage and expresses a most profoundly deep romantic love. Belonging binds one together, if it were a perversion, it would not unify, but seperate, fur a perversion is simply that which takes you away from something's true purpose, and the purpose of marriage is to unify. by this reasoning, we know it is really the simps and feminists who have perverted things, fur they would have man submit to woman, when it is woman that should submit to man, they have twisted our purpose and minds alike, and rebeled against nature.
Even the scriptures say, that wife must submit to husband as if to the lord. i dont actually know if what im saying is an 100% morally pure catholic/Christian position as i totally winged it, but considering i could argue fur it via both natural law and scripture, and even typology, as marriage is a reflection of christs relationship to the church, where the church very much is to submit to christ, i can't help but feel this is a perfectly upright position, but take it with a grain of salt none the less.