A very long and personal post about men, women, childishness, and responsibility

Holy cow, more than 5000 hits today, the highest since the beginning of the year.  What gives?

One blog I read fairly frequently is Barb's Lucky White Girl.  She's got a powerful and deeply personal post up today about her own current relationship, her parents, men, women, and roles -- especially the ways in which we find ourselves playing the part of the child.  Here's an excerpt:

I don't want to be the mother in this relationship.  Children are afraid of getting into trouble.  They hide things from their parents.  I don't want to be the feared dictator, the enforcer of rules.

I don't want to be the child.  Children are dependent.  I've lived my own life for so long, I'm good at taking care of myself.  I don't want to, don't need to go backwards.

I want us to be two independent, mature adults.

What I don't know is this:

Is it possible to consciously mold this relationship into something different from what it is now?  Or are these things hidden too deep within the psyche to change?  If the old adage about not trying to change other people is true, is it fair/right/reasonable of me to expect or attempt such change within a relationship in which I am only a part?

I don't blog about relationships much, but this is a topic painfully near and dear to my heart.  In my past marriages and relationships, I found myself-- like so many men -- taking on the part of the "naughty boy" and the "helpless child."   Time and again, I turned wives and girlfriends into mother-figures, and the result was inevitably disastrous.

I'm not going to pretend to have all the answers as to why we do what we do, or even why I did what I did. I do know that I'm not the only man who found "courtship" easier than "relationship."  Over and over again, I devoted time and energy to "getting the girl", and when I succeeded, soon felt vaguely let down and confused about my role.  It was all too easy for me to become increasingly childlike.  I figured out that most of partners were students of my emotions, and most of them were eager to make the relationship work.  So they were the ones who took over the "feeling work" of the relationship.  They were the ones who brought up when something wasn't working, they were the ones who took on the primary role of keeping what we had "oiled and running", as it were.

When I lived with wives and girlfriends past, I'd quickly cede control over our living arrangements.  What went where, and what got done when were decisions I wanted my partner to make.  I thought I was being accommodating, telling myself and her "You know, honey, you care more about this (the color of the sheets, what kind of plants to have outside, what we have for dinner) than I do; why don't you decide?"  And my wife or girlfriend would make a decision, and whether I liked the decision or not, I didn't have much to say about it either way.  When pressed for my opinion, my favorite response was "Whatever you want, darling."  Of course, I liked having everything done for me -- my wife or girlfriend maintained the relationship, kept things running, and in the cases where we lived together, made the major decisions about the house.  I said loving things, bought flowers occasionally, and did my best to be faithful.  That, I figured, was my part.

Now, as the son of a feminist mom, I was always very big on doing my share of the housework. I was a loyal washer of dishes, a frequent doer of laundry (I actually LIKE doing laundry), and a good grocery shopper.  But I thought of what I was doing as "doing chores", in much the same way I did chores as a child.  I did not take responsibility for making decisions about the household, even as I seemed to be -- to the outside world -- an equal partner in the running of the home.  I was very good at avoiding conflict. When conflict did arise, I had two tactics in my arsenal:

1.  Get very indignant and threaten to leave the relationship.

2.  Act like a small child, launch into a pathetic list of self-recriminations (what Robert Bly calls the "I've always been shit" speech), and get wife or girlfriend to feel sorry for me, start soothing me, and get off my case about whatever it was that I was doing that was driving her up the wall.

Can I see a show of hands of those who know what I'm talkin' bout?

And of course, when it came to boundaries, I famously let the women in my life set them -- and then promptly resented them for having done so.    A partner would say something fairly reasonable like "Hugo, I don't feel comfortable when you go out with your ex-girlfriends without me." Realizing that these friendships with exes were usually tinged with something threatening to my current relationship, I'd quickly agree to my partner's request to stop seeing so-and -so.  Soon enough, however, I would resent my current partner for putting boundaries in place, and I'd either start sneaking around behind her back or let the hostility build up inside of me.  Instead of being an equal partner in setting boundaries, I made my wife or girlfriend the arbiter of what was appropriate behavior.

One of my friends once told me:  "Hugo, relationships are like stoplights at an intersection.  In order for the traffic to flow, both sets of lights have to work.  Sometimes the light for the east and west bound traffic has to be red; sometimes the north-south.  There's got to be partnership in setting limits; each set has to take responsibility for yellow, red, and green -- or there's chaos."  In my past, like a child, my basic approach to everything was "green".  In every area of my life, I waited for my partner to flash the yellow or the red light  She was the one who would decide how far we went.  We would always both end up resenting the hell out of each other for the other's role.  I would always end up seeing my wives and girlfriends as controlling, mothering, and judgmental; they would always see me as irresponsible, dishonest, and childlike.

I know damned well that I'm not telling a unique story here.  Anyone identify with me -- or my exes?

One of the things that I've been committed to in recent years has been the notion that transformation and change is a never-ending opportunity, and an unavoidable responsibility.  The battle-cry of my teens and twenties in relationship was "Accept me as I am!  This is my nature!"  The marital mantra of my late thirties is "Push me, and I'll push you!  Don't let me settle for less than I could be, and I won't let you be less than what I believe you are capable of being."  This doesn't mean that my wife and I sit around pointing out each other's shortcomings.  It does mean that we know we have an opportunity to grow and transform together. Yes, my wife and I each have our "baggage"  (In my case, it's a whole damn Louis Vuitton luggage set), but part of growing up in relationship is letting go of the idea that one's childhood, one's parents, or one's previous relationships are an excuse for not doing hard spiritual and emotional work.

I'm not proud of the fact that I prolonged a sulky and mercurial adolescence for nearly two decades.  I'm not proud of the fact that I chose to spend years and years stuck in the role of the irresponsible boy who wouldn't grow up, who both wanted women to take care of him and resented the hell out of them for doing so.  But with the help of God and a whole bunch of folks here on earth, I've been busy in recent years letting go of these old patterns.   I no longer believe anything is, to paraphrase Barb, hidden too deeply in the psyche to change.  When I came back to Christ, I became enchanted with the idea that we are, as C.S. Lewis writes in the Last Battle, always called "further up, further in."  I see too many of my male friends and family members stuck in patterns set years and years ago; they seem to lack the desire, the willingness, and the faith to change.   But where my faith and my pro-feminism intersect best is in my belief that my conditioning and my biology and my past excuses are not determinative of how I will live my life as a man.  There is no "nature" we have that we cannot overcome, no habits we cannot break, no baggage that we can't finally zip up and stow away for good.

I'm not ashamed to say that it is only now, in my fourth marriage, that I feel like I'm showing up as a fully adult man.  As tempting as it sometimes is, I will not go back to playing the part of the "naughty boy"; I will not place the burden of relationship maintenance on my wife's shoulders alone.  My mother is my mother, my wife is my wife, and never have the roles seemed as radically distinct as they do now. It has been a helluva lot of work to get here, and I've got miles and miles to go , but I'm on my way.

Comments

[Hugo]

One of the great virtues of our modern world, Amba, is that we've managed to make marriage less and less about economic necessity and more and more about personal happiness and personal growth. Sure, a marriage based on one person "parenting" the other can work -- but is it the best recipe for real joy and transformation? I don't think so.

Focusing on joy and transformation are luxuries, in a sense. In an affluent world where both men and women can support themselves, marriage can finally be about the choice to be together and grow together. That's a great gift, but also a considerable responsibility.

[Oriscus]

Great post, Hugo. I recognized myself in your experiences. I so hated feeling like a child in my marriage, and it's taken twelve years of mostly purely solitary life to get to a point now where I think I may, just possibly, have a chance to try being an equal, if I can stand surrendering the autonomy!

[Swan]

Amba,
What do you imagine "the marital roles that evangelical Christians prescribe for men and women" to be?

[Amba]

Swan, many evangelical Christians state that the practical application of Paul's injunctions to husbands and wives entails the man having the final say when the couple can't come to a mutual decision. As a non-Christian, this isn't something I can wrap my head around. If Jane Smith defers to John Smith when it comes to financial matters because he's a CPA and she didn't get past high school algebra, that strikes me as reasonable. Jane deferring to John because he represents Christ and she represents the Church, even if she happens to be the CPA in the family, strikes me as absurd.

[The Countess]

Hugo, I know you're changing your habits. I'd like you know, if you don't mind my asking, how you've changed in relation to your latest marriage compared to your past marriages. Lots of people, both male and female, can understand what you mean by doing things around the house you should be doing anyway as "chores". How did you change your point of view on that? For instance, I understand your view of chores. I used to hate food shopping because I saw it as a chore. That has changed since I've learned that I like to cook. Rather than seeing food shopping as a chore now, I see it as preparation for what I know will be a great meal on my part. I see the end product. Hence, my view of shopping as a "chore" has changed. I'd like to hear how you've changed your point of view. You seemed to have changed quite a bit over the years, and I'm sure that will enhance your marriage. I hope I'm not being too forward or personal. If I am, I apologize. I really am curious to see how you've changed now as opposed to the way you used to be. I'm sure a lot of people can learn from that.

[Hugo]

Countess, it's a great question -- and I look forward to answering it once I get through the election post-mortems.

[Uzzah]

Swan, many evangelical Christians state that the practical application of Paul's injunctions to husbands and wives entails the man having the final say when the couple can't come to a mutual decision. As a non-Christian, this isn't something I can wrap my head around.

A difficult issue no doubt. The problem is, in life, certain life decisions must be made. When a difficult problem concerning a family pops up, a decision has to be made. There is no choice. If a husband and wife both disagree strongly, then how is that decision determined? It's easy to say that each has an equal share in the decision making process, but if both disagree with the solution strongly, how is that decision reached.

The old saying, lead, follow, or get out of the way has a legitimate source. We can't just lock up and reach no decision because it might be seen as a weakness in the other partner. A decision, no matter how difficult must many times be reached. So who makes it?

[Amba]

As I intimated in my previous post, Uzzah, I think the person who has the greater knowledge and expertise in any given situation should have the final say: that's how things work in my marriage, anyway. My husband and I have never reached a serious impasse in our relationship, but if/when we do, I'd far rather we try our best to come up with an alternative plan of action, than have unilaterally impose a course of action on the other.

[Uzzah]

As I intimated in my previous post, Uzzah, I think the person who has the greater knowledge and expertise in any given situation should have the final say: that's how things work in my marriage, anyway. My husband and I have never reached a serious impasse in our relationship, but if/when we do, I'd far rather we try our best to come up with an alternative plan of action, than have unilaterally impose a course of action on the other.

Well, yes. Those are the easy decisions. That is the way my wife and I generally do it too. I figure it doubles my chance of making a smart decision. But sometimes both of us feel we have "greater knowledge and expertise" and both of us are pretty hard headed (probably why we have been together so long and still love each other). While I certainly don't subscribe to the notion that "I'm da man" and I make all the decisions, at times there has to be a "tiebreaker" to reach beyond an impasse. It's either A or B. There is no C and making no decision is not an option. A decision has to be reached and implemented. Who makes that decision? Who makes it in your family and why?

[Caitriona]

Uzzah, from what you've written, I'd guess that you and your wife probably deal with issues like that in a manner not too far removed from how we deal with them. The more difficult the decision, the more we discuss how we each see things. If decision A is made, what are the pros and cons we each see? If decision B is made, what are the pros and cons?

In the final analysis, if we can't come to a concensus, my husband either makes the decision or asks me to make the decision, depending upon the issue. Farm issues are his, budgeting issues are mine. Family goals are usually his, implementation is usually mine.

[Lynn Gazis-Sax]

I've found that having the one with the greater expertise make the decision has worked for nearly everything, with Joel and me. And all the remaining decisions either could be worked out readily enough by talking, or were ones where the obvious tiebreaker was "status quo until we both agree." So, we've never actually needed one person to be the tiebreaker (though Joel always tells people that I'm the boss).

[Amba]

Uzzah, as I've said before, my husband and I haven't yet reached an impasse where we simply couldn't find an option that was agreeable to both of us. Neither of us are particularly stubborn or contentious people, so I have a hard time imagining what such a situation would look like. It's a bridge that we'll cross when we get to it, but we're not going to appoint one person the tiebreaker beforehand; that would impact our day-to-day interaction in ways that we both would find unpleasant.

[Caitriona]

LOL... Chewy tells folks I'm the boss, too.

But it's kinda like in a business. (I know people hate that analogy, but it's just so difficult to find anything better.) The CEO's in charge, except that s/he has to verify with finance before making any big purchases. S/he has to check with other departments to see what the status is before making any decisions WRT those departments. Otherwise, the business folds.

[midwestmind]

Having the one with the most expertise make the decision is very rational. And ideal.

But it is perhaps *part* of the problem, when we raise men to believe they aren't required to cultivate certain types of expertise, such as any emotional intelligence of their own. If a man isn't an "expert" on emotions, then it is never incumbent on him to come to any conclusions about the emotional life of the relationship.

Or parental expertise -- surely all of us have watched marriages turn sour after the arrival of a baby, as a woman proclaims to the man he doesn't know how to hold the baby, feed the baby, talk to the baby, dress the baby (a cultural phenomenon that is endlessly enshrined in tv commercials structured around the narrative of Incompetent Dad rescued by Competent Mom). But even if she is right (certainly, there are men for whom the experience of handling small children is foreign and unnerving) incessant carping on a man's lack of expertise only alienates him further from cultivating any skill in that arena, or taking any responsibility for it.

[stacer]

I think there's also the sociological issue of women being gatekeepers as far as home-related things go, though. This is only a small subset of the issues being discussed here, but a few studies have shown that even though, like you talked about, men share the household responsibilities in many homes, in some of those homes, not only do the men see their responsibilities as "chores," but so do the women. Instead of being co-partners in running the house, with perhaps specializations where necessary, the man has to be directed by the woman because, like midwestmind talked about, the woman doesn't feel he can do it "right" without her there.

Often, though, there is no "right" way to do some things--like, is there a right order to wash the dishes in? (my stepmother thought so, and would yell at me if I washed the silverware before the glasses) Is there a specific way clothes should be folded? Unless there is some sort of extenuating circumstance, there really isn't, but it can be very hard for women to reliquish control over what is traditionally her domain, especially if she was raised traditionally and/or has family members who pressure her in that regard.

So we all have to work on how we work out such issues, I think. Like I've seen you post before, Hugo (I discovered you through FMH), good marriages and relationships are a constant push-pull at helping each other grow.

[Hugo]

"but it can be very hard for women to reliquish control over what is traditionally her domain, especially if she was raised traditionally and/or has family members who pressure her in that regard."

That's a great point, Stacer. Helping wives to relinquish that sort of control is a task that men, especially those who also come out of a conservative background, ought to consider embracing.

[Caitriona]

Often, though, there is no "right" way to do some things--like, is there a right order to wash the dishes in? (my stepmother thought so, and would yell at me if I washed the silverware before the glasses) Is there a specific way clothes should be folded?

The problem with your examples is that YES, there is a right way to wash the dishes (glasses first, before anything that may have grease and other things from food, then plates and silverware, then the dirtier pots and pans) and there IS a right way to fold laundry so that it comes out neat rather than wrinkled.

Helping wives to relinquish that sort of control is a task that men, especially those who also come out of a conservative background, ought to consider embracing.

Uhm, just how do you propose that men "help" their wives relinquish control in these areas?

[Anna]

I think it is important, however, that things be done in a way in which the end result is satisfactory. For example, dishes need to be clean and put away for the task of "washing dishes" to be considered finished. Same with clothes but add the qualification of put away in such a way that they are not crumpled up in a corner or hung askew so that they require excessive ironing. The bathroom should be clean in such a way as to be hygienic and presentable and floors should be vacuumed in such a way that all debris was removed. In our case, some simple instructions that came, not from me, but from the internet and a book on keeping a home we got when we got married, helped us have a neutral voice as the instructor for both of us, rather than one of us being the standard-bearer for household tasks.

[Grace]

Now tell me how you managed to build this cerebral AND very heartfelt bridge between child and adult?

i was disappointed to see that you're not available, but perhaps if ONE man can be so thoughtFUL and articulate, maybe there will be more.

May i please quote you and your quotes from this post?

[Hugo]

Grace, you may quote me at will -- thanks!

And as for "how" it happened, I will consider posting on that as well.

[ipod]

adult friend finder - adult friend finder
adult swingers - adult swingers
adult movie dvd - adult movie dvd
adult sex toys - adult sex toys
adult personals dating - adult personals dating
adult toys store - adult toys store
adult models directory - adult models directory