SC Republican: Women to Blame for 95% of Divorces


Det Bowers is one of half a dozen far-right Tea Party types running in the Republican primary challenging Sen. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina. He delivered a sermon at a church in that state recently in which he claimed that women are responsible for 95% of all divorces because they love their children more than their husband.

“I find that in about 95 percent of broken marriages, though the husband’s the one that ran out on his wife, the wife loves her children more than she does her husband,” Bowers said. “That is an abominable idolatry.”

He then directed his comments, his voice rising, to the women in his congregation, which he led from 2000 to 2012.

“Do you hear me, ladies?” Bowers said. “It is an abominable idolatry to love your children more than you love your husband, and it will ruin your marriage. And yet you blame it on him because he ran off with some other woman! He did run off with some other woman, and you packed his bags. All of his emotional bags, you packed for him. Is that true in every case? No, but it’s true in the vast preponderance of them.”

He described “abominable idolatry” as “unlawful worship” as he continued lecturing women.

“You just ran him off,” Bowers said. “You paid more attention to your children than you did to him. ‘Oh, he doesn’t need me?’ He needs you more than they do. He chose you, they didn’t. An abominable idolatry.”

Must be part of that Republican outreach program to women that is working so well.

Comments

  1. says

    Also another example of that famous Republican “personal responsibility.”
    Husband abandons his wife for a different, and probably much younger woman (see Gingrich, Newt), and runs out on his kids? Oviously it is the wife’s fault.

  2. busterggi says

    But loving her husband more than her children is an acceptable idolatry?

    Not according to the ten suggestions if I recall.

    Bowers…hehehe, love her stuff.

  3. sinned34 says

    Fifthdentist:

    It also was the fault of the woman who he ran off with, because she was an evil temptress. So really, he has zero percent culpability in the whole mess. Isn’t it great to be a guy?

  4. Randomfactor says

    So the way to reduce the divorce rate is to make same-sex marriages mandatory for men.

  5. dingojack says

    And if the man dumps his wife (for a younger girlfriend say) because she’s got cancer — is that ’cause she loves her tumour more than her other useless lump?
    Dingo

  6. Richard Smith says

    You paid more attention to your children than you did to him. ‘Oh, he doesn’t need me?’ He needs you more than they do.

    Because hubby can’t dress himself as well as the kids.
    Because hubby can’t cook as well as the kids.
    Because hubby is having far more trouble at school than the kids are.
    Because hubby can’t drive himself where he needs to go, unlike the kids.

  7. dingojack says

    WWJD*? [see Mathew 5:32].
    Hmmm. seems women loving you’re children still makes re-marriage for him a big no-no. Bummer.
    Dingo
    ——–
    * Who Would Jesus Divorce?

  8. sigurd jorsalfar says

    95% of the time when people are just making up a bullshit statistic they use the number 95%.

  9. eric says

    the wife loves her children more than she does her husband,” Bowers said. “That is an abominable idolatry.

    No, its common sense for both parents; your children need you in ways your spouse doesn’t. It makes perfect sense that if you have to prioritize giving attention to the grown adult or the helpless child, you pick the helpless child. What sort of emotionally stunted baby are you that you get upset at the thought of another adult helping the toddler deal with their needs more than you deal with yours? Now emotionally, your spouse may love them and you both equally. But in terms of time and material attention, you need to hitch up your britches and deal with being second place for the first 5-10 years.

    He needs you more than they do. He chose you, they didn’t.

    They are FU**ING MINORS, you ass. The littlest ones will literally die if you don’t attend to their needs. Of course they need you more than he needs you.

  10. Robert B. says

    Let’s have a big round of applause for FAMILY VALUES!

    (Also, wouldn’t this logic imply that romance rather than reproduction is the most important part of marriage? Kinda shoots all that anti-marriage-equality rhetoric right in the foot.)

  11. Sastra says

    What sort of scale measures the sort of love you have for your children against the sort of love you have for your husband? Time? A forced choice?

    This is just stupid. There may be a reasonable “parents, don’t forget to take some special time together” sermon lurking in there somewhere, but Bowers strangled it before it got out.

  12. iknklast says

    After my divorce, I had to sit and listen to the mealy-mouthed explainers telling me that there are two parties to every divorce, therefore I had to be equally blamed that my husband decided he wanted to live with a man instead of a woman (I AM at fault for that, I admit, simply by having decided to be a woman – or, if we want to be totally honest, my father is at fault for contributing an X chromosome instead of a Y). Now we’re moving from that ridiculous construct that every divorce must be the fault of both parties equally to the worse construct of divorce (nearly) always being the fault of the woman.

  13. says

    After my divorce, I had to sit and listen to the mealy-mouthed explainers telling me that there are two parties to every divorce

    Glad you brought that up. That one annoys me. Of course there are times when both people make substantial contributions to marriage failure, but individuals are quite capable of wrecking marriages all on their own.

  14. sigurd jorsalfar says

    There were always two parties to my divorces. One party when the divorce papers were filed, and the other when the divorce was finalized.

  15. illdoittomorrow says

    Eric at 12,

    “No, its common sense for both parents; your children need you in ways your spouse doesn’t. It makes perfect sense that if you have to prioritize giving attention to the grown adult or the helpless child, you pick the helpless child. What sort of emotionally stunted baby are you that you get upset at the thought of another adult helping the toddler deal with their needs more than you deal with yours? Now emotionally, your spouse may love them and you both equally. But in terms of time and material attention, you need to hitch up your britches and deal with being second place for the first 5-10 years.



    They are FU**ING MINORS, you ass. The littlest ones will literally die if you don’t attend to their needs. Of course they need you more than he needs you.”

    Well, see, that just proves that they need to learn personal responsibility. If they would just pull themselves up by their bootstraps and work harder, they wouldn’t be such weak little whelps.

    Please excuse me while I vomit.

  16. Ellie says

    But…preacher Mark Driscoll says divorces are caused by ugly wives who are riddled with sex demons. I’m so confused…who to believe? Perhaps it’s sex demon riddled ugly wives who love their children too much?

  17. says

    And if it’s the wife’s fault for loving the kids more than the husband it can’t be the husband’s fault for loving neither. It’s win-win; victim-blaming and patriarchy!

  18. Doug Little says

    And what about the vow he made before god…til death do us part?

    They never read the small print.

  19. sigurd jorsalfar says

    Now that I think back on it, a woman was to blame for every single one of my divorces – I was never the one who went and told my wife about our affair.

  20. greg1466 says

    That’s right! because as all good Christian women know, you should only love Jesus more than your husband.

  21. lofgren says

    You can’t read this and not think this guy is talking about his own personal issues.

  22. AsqJames says

    If the wife is spending so much time looking after the children that the husband feels ignored…somebodies not doing his share of the parenting.

    Those kids didn’t appear by magic, and I hear parthenogenesis is pretty rare in humans these days. They’re your f*cking kids too you selfish wankstain. It’s your f*cking house too as well – how about helping out with the cleaning. You eat the meals right? Well f*cking help cook them too.

    This may be hard for some people to grasp, but you didn’t buy a combined house-slave, concubine and brood mare, you voluntarily entered a partnership, and you voluntarily engaged in acts which added to that partnership and its responsibilities.

    Seriously! Am I the only one who noticed the gender roles policing going on behind the scenes?

  23. lofgren says

    Dr X, I am not qualified to interpret that link you posted but I am very interested in hearing more. I’m asking for a friend.

  24. leni says

    Seriously! Am I the only one who noticed the gender roles policing going on behind the scenes?

    No, no you weren’t.

    But yeah that whole “she loves her children more than she loves me” thing was super subtle. Takes a real keen eye to spot that ;)

  25. Childermass says

    I thought the right claimed that the purpose of marriage was for children? Sounds like to me that this idiot has admitted that it is not. Thus we will hold him to it the next time the issue of same-sex marriage comes up.

    That being said, it is hardly surprising that many women love their kids more. Biology tends to suggest that, on average, that they would. It is closest possible biological relationship and one you can be 100% sure of. Plus it is often reenforced by cultural attitudes that result in the mother spending more time with the kids than the father.

  26. moarscienceplz says

    Unless you are old AND white AND straight AND a guy AND has peanut butter where your brains should be, WHY would you vote for any Republican, ever?????

  27. raven says

    Unless you are old AND white AND straight AND a guy AND has peanut butter where your brains should be, WHY would you vote for any Republican, ever?????

    A woman voting for the GOP is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders.

    It’s a big mystery.

  28. says

    raven “A woman voting for the GOP is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders. It’s a big mystery.”
    No it isn’t. The Democrats coddle those chickens. Republicans will free them from the terrible yoke of having a government that in any way even pretends to work for them. Did you know that those chickens are lazy, violent, slutty, soft on crime or in some other way hate Chickona and everything it stands for?

  29. mordred says

    Did my mother love her kids more than her husband?

    Hell yeah, and I will be gratefull for that as long as I live, because if she had not kicked him out when he started drinking and wasting all the family’s money, my childhood would have been really bad!

  30. neonsequitur says

    It’s no mystery. GOP women know which party is looking out for their husbands!

  31. anubisprime says

    Republicans = Petulant Toddlers

    Sexually immature, whining and usually incontinent.

  32. caseloweraz says

    @modusoperandi (#17):

    Modus, your closets must be bursting with all those Internets you keep getting.

  33. StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return! says

    @ 20. illdoittomorrow :

    Please excuse me while I vomit. …

    21.doublereed :

    ..And remember. Don’t masturbate.

    Whilst vomiting or in general? I would think its hard to simultaneously spew and wank – but not having tried it I can’t say for sure.

    Interesting juxtaposition of comments there!

    As for this Det Bowers clown, what a nasty fool he seems to be. Wonder if he’s any relation of Betty Bower who also has some interesting things to say about marriage and biblical values :

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFkeKKszXTw

    Although unlike the polly, she’s actually worth listening to!

  34. eric says

    Lofgren @30:

    You can’t read this and not think this guy is talking about his own personal issues.

    God I hope not. That would imply that he is a father, which would be a very sad thing for those kids.

    Childermass @37

    I thought the right claimed that the purpose of marriage was for children?

    It is…the purpose of marriage is for the women to have children. And raise them. And cook. And clean. And attend to the husband’s every whim. The purpose of marriage for men is to uh, “manage” the family. Don’t ask what that entails, its very important stuff and you shouldn’t worry your pretty little head about it.

  35. says

    “is that ’cause she loves her tumour more than her other malignancy?”

    FTFY.

    “95% of the time when people are just making up a bullshit statistic they use the number 95%.”

    That’s why I always use “99&44/100ths% Pure!” when speaking of KKKristianist StatistiKKKs.

    “Modus, your closets must be bursting with all those Internets you keep getting.”

    No, actually, I cut a small hole in the back of his closet and I remove a “Netty” every time he puts one in. I sell them to the IIMS* at a hefty mark-up after expenses. Did I mention that I’m a memb, no, I’m the PRESIDENT of the IIMS, yeah, that’s the ticket!

    Wow. Look at this: http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20140425/PC1603/140429567

    His only female opponent in the primary has a photo in the article. She looks like a slightly younger Missy Bachmann–SWEET FUCKING JESUS!!!

    * Intertoobs Impaired Maroonz Society

  36. neuroguy says

    @31:

    If the wife is spending so much time looking after the children that the husband feels ignored…somebodies not doing his share of the parenting…

    They’re your f*cking kids too you selfish wankstain. It’s your f*cking house too as well – how about helping out with the cleaning. You eat the meals right? Well f*cking help cook them too…

    Seriously! Am I the only one who noticed the gender roles policing going on behind the scenes?

    Well, I certainly notice the gender roles policing ubiquitous among the right wing, but… you’re letting your own prejudices show here and it is irrational prejudices that lead to gender roles policing in the first place; moreover, your particular prejudices are the very same ones which spawn MRAs. If the husband feels ignored it must be his fault. Uh-huh. You’re just as bad as the SC Republican who says it must be the woman’s fault.

    Let’s see how this reads….

    If the husband is spending so much time at work that the wife feels ignored… somebody’s not doing her share of paying the bills…

    They’re your f*cking kids too you selfish incubator. It’s your f*cking house too as well – how about helping out with the mortgage. You eat the meals right? Well f*cking help with the grocery bill too…

    I am sure you would react with paroxysms of outrage to this but your own rant is just as bad.

    The fault is with the model that puts all financial responsibility on the husband and all the childcare responsibility on the wife, not necessarily so much with either party when the model fails.

  37. scienceavenger says

    What a woman feels towards her children is a totally different emotion than what she feels for her husband. Using the same term for both clouds the issue and tempts inappropriate comparisons.

  38. lofgren says

    Bitches be all “I love my kids. I want to feed and clothe them.” Fuckin’ all the time, amirite, fellas? Bitches be so selfish. What about me and my needs?

  39. AsqJames says

    neuroguy @50,

    Go read the full “sermon”. This is in the context of discussing marriages which break down because of the husband’s adultery. He’s talking about marriages where the man has enough spare time, money and energy to go wooing some other woman.

    If (in the extremely unlikely event) a pastor were to blame 95% of divorces in which women left their husbands for some other guy on the husband for not earning enough to keep his wife happy, you’re damn right I’d be ranting about that too.

  40. says

    Let’s see how this reads…If the husband is spending so much time at work that the wife feels ignored… somebody’s not doing her share of paying the bills…

    Um, no, paying bills is not the same kind of activity as tending to kids’ daily needs, and the work isn’t necessarily divided the same way; so this false-equivalency argument fails.

    Also, it’s perfectly reasonable to connect a husband feeling ignored to possible failure to share in child-rearing duties — you generally get less attention from people when you’re outside their normal sphere(s) of activity. If a man works more closely with his wife in good faith in daily child-care, they’ll feel closer because they ARE at least that much closer, they’ll have that much more in common, and she’ll be more likely to want to be closer to him in other ways.

  41. lofgren says

    Frankly all three of you are making the same mistake. Those 95% of husbands who left their wives because they were pushed out of the marriage by children DON’T EXIST. They are fantasies. Talking about what they should have done differently is a waste of time. Bowers could very well simply reply that the husbands were too busy fighting dragons in Westeros to help out with childcare. It’s not like we could refute him. It’s his delusion. You shouldn’t nod along with schizophrenics and you should never just accept the premises of misogynists’ hallucinations.

  42. says

    Unless you are old AND white AND straight AND a guy AND has peanut butter where your brains should be, WHY would you vote for any Republican, ever?????

    You forgot, “AND wealthy”.

    I’m having a hard time understanding why anyone would vote for Republicans aside from extreme fear, hate, and a desire to dominate, even if it comes at your own expense.

    They support: cuts to food stamps and other welfare programs, cutting unemployment benefits, cutting education, cutting science, mass imprisonment, people not having health care, environmental destruction, an increasing wealth and income gap, gender pay inequity, no increase to the minimum wage (or even its elimination), no sexual or reproductive rights for women, no equality for LGBT people, no rights for children, no rights for immigrants, no rights for workers, no respect for the rest of the planet, media concentration, corporate subsidies and deregulation, greater corporate power, the destruction of unions, increasing indebtedness, the criminalization of dissent, religion in government,….

    These policies have led, are leading, and will continue to lead to mass suffering and death, including among those voting for them. And it’s not even like they try to cloak their program in any rhetoric of compassion or reason anymore. They’re often openly misogynistic, homophobic and transphobic, racist, callous, victim-blaming, arrogant, authoritarian, theocratic, bullying, violent, anti-science, reality-rejecting, destructive corporate bootlickers who despise poor and rebellious people, don’t care about human needs, and view the citizenry as raw material for the rich and the military to exploit..

  43. Snoof says

    SC (Salty Current), OM @ 58

    I’m having a hard time understanding why anyone would vote for Republicans aside from extreme fear, hate, and a desire to dominate, even if it comes at your own expense.

    Aside from? I’m fairly sure that’s their prime selling point in some areas.

    Though there’s also social inertia: “My grandparents were Republican, my parents were Republican, and I’ll be damned if I won’t be too!”

    Then there’s ignorance, deliberately cultivated or not. The way the media operate in the US makes it very easy to live inside a protective bubble of ignorance where one doesn’t have to know anything but how to vote R on a ballot.

    Then there’s the wannabe plutocrats/theocrats/whatever. The ones who are sure that if all those annoying Others were gotten rid of, they’d be the ones with all the power. Clearly they’ve forgotten that nobody ever became powerful by sharing power.

    There’s the “idealists” who are certain that their models of how society should work are correct, damnit! They’re just being hamstrung by the Others who are too stupid/evil/elitist to understand how much better everything would be if they’d just sit down, shut up and stop whining about being exploited. Possibly these overlap with the “ignorant” group.

Leave a Reply