Do women rule in the home and in relationships? #74665

[vorpal blade]

http://theboard.byu.edu/questions/74665/

Thank you Concorde for your thoughtful answer. I'm not sure why one gender needs to rule over another. Ideally they should be equal partners, communicate deeply, and share responsibilities. But the way I see it actually working is like this:

From early infancy children learn that they are ruled by their mothers. As they grow boys learn through play to make things go; cars, trucks, trains, planes, and towers they are delighted to knock down as soon as they are built. Girls do similar things, but they soon learn to imitate their mothers and make things stay through managing relationships and bossing children and imaginary husbands around playing school or playing house. When a girl gets married her father feels the loss of his little girl. Mothers think ‘She has gone off to manage her own home, but she’ll still need my help.” When a boy gets married his father thinks that finally his son has learned to take on adult responsibilities. Mothers think, “Now my son is some other woman’s problem.”

In a non-LDS home the woman sets the tone. “When Mama’s happy, everyone’s happy. If Mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy.” She lays down the rules of what will and won’t be tolerated or accepted. She sets the standards of behavior; what is civilized and what is not, what is appropriate and what is not, what is kind and what is not. She dictates the words, expressions, and language permitted in her home. She may express this vehemently and vocally, or merely by an upraised eyebrow, or sad downward drooping of the corners of her mouth. She controls the checkbook. She treats her husband as one of the children, but sometimes gives lip service to the polite fiction that he is the head of the family and gives him permission to say so. In reality it is as she says, “The man is the head, but the woman is the neck. And she can turn the head any way she wants.” Often when the man breaks her rules he is in the doghouse or sleeps on the couch, and she makes his life a hell. If the woman breaks the rules there is no one to enforce her rules. Resistance to improper rule is manifested by passive aggressive behavior and rarely domestic violence. We hope that she rules wisely and lovingly.

In the LDS home the woman sets the tone, but if she is not happy it is the priesthood holder’s fault, because he "presides" as the head of the family. If the rules and standards of acceptable behavior that she lays down are not followed then he is failing to exercise his priesthood appropriately. If the words, expressions, and language she determined to be impermissible are used, it is his fault. If he does not follow her rules he is given hell by his wife and also his priesthood leaders for failing to support her in her divinely appointed role. If she does not follow her rules nothing happens, and her virtues are extolled on Mother’s Day. In the righteous LDS home the priesthood holder exercises inspired leadership under the covert direction (“encouragement”) of his wife to insure that his responsibilities are fulfilled. Those responsibilities include: daily scripture reading, family prayer, meals eaten together as a family, family home evening, weekly church attendance, obedient children, funding his wife’s checkbook for the needs and wants of the family, obedience to all gospel principles, and respect shown to his wife. We pray for his inspired leadership in the home.

[bobtheenchantedone]

Over the summer I met one of Marduk's uncles (who is now my favorite uncle seriously I love this man), and throughout the course of our week together we had several fascinating conversations. He's one of those people who can have a long-winded, civil, understanding discussion with someone he disagrees with, and also happens to disagree with Marduk and I about several political ideas and a few religious ones as well.

To my surprise, the one thing that he got the most hung up on in all our conversations was that I did not believe I needed to "submit" to Marduk when he was my husband - and note that he asked that question after I said I thought women should have the priesthood! Yet somehow the idea that Marduk and I intended to be as equal as possible without me always deferring to him when we differed was absolutely astonishing to him and his wife.

[vorpal blade]

I’m curious what it means to you to be as equal as possible with your husband. What would it mean in the following scenarios?

You feel strongly that you need to insist that your children and husband speak English properly in your home. Your husband really doesn’t care if they say things like “Dad is taller than me (instead of I),” or “a preposition is something you should not end a sentence with,” or “What we need are ( instead of is) more pots and pans,” or “between you and I (instead of me),” "If I would have ( instead of had) known you were looking I would not have done it," “I didn't know it was that long of a walk,” or “aren’t I.”

You are the one primarily doing the cleaning of the house because a clean house really matters to you much more than to your husband. Sometimes you take off your shoes in the living room or dining room and don’t put them away for a few hours or days. Or you leave some articles of clothing or makeup in the bathroom for awhile. Suppose this really bothers your husband and he tells you that you need to change your ways.

You and your husband share cooking and clean up responsibilities, but there are some cooking utensils that you consider your own. He sometimes borrows then and doesn’t immediately remember to clean them or put them back where you want them. He thinks everything belongs to the two of you equally, but his lack of consideration for what you consider your own things bothers you.

You have a child who is misbehaving terribly at dinner time. Your husband sends the child to his room hungry. You think this is too severe and want the child to finish eating dinner. You tell your husband that he is a cruel authoritarian tyrant. Next time, does he do it your way or his way? If he does it your way, does he then get to do it his way the time after that? Are you happy with this equality?

Sometimes when guests come to your house your husband makes fun of the way you talk, the way you keep house, the way you discipline the children, and the way you cannot stay on a diet. He thinks you are overly sensitive and says he wouldn’t mind if you teased him in the same way.

You and your husband cannot agree on how you should spend your day at home while he is at work. You are willing to work, but cannot find a suitable job, and you hate being out of the house anyway. You would like to spend your time on the Internet, watching movies, playing computer games, and sleeping. He thinks you should be doing more productive things, but resents it if you try to tell him how he should spend his day.

You cannot stand to eat with your husband or children unless they sit up straight at the dinner table, hold their silverware properly, pass food around in the proper direction, never talk with food in the mouth, and never pick up a soup bowl or a cereal bowl and drink from it. Your husband, on the other hand, feels more or less that everyone should be free to eat as they choose.

You want to do most of the shopping for the family but sometimes you go into credit card debt. Your husband wants to tear up all the credit cards and the checkbook. All purchases are to be equally agreed upon in advance and paid with cash. For you, however, this is terribly inconvenient and you want your own credit card.

Now, how do you think the end result of these scenarios would be different in the home of Marduk’s aunt and uncle?

Are you going to be happy if you find out that being as equal as possible brings irreparable serious harm to you and your children? What would you do about it?

[mic0]

I don't even know how to respond to this thread without just anecdotes and rambling and possibly getting emotional. I will say two things:

(1) Many relationships have a person who is a little more dominant. Many, not all. It is not always the wife, it is not always the husband. It depends on the relationship, but I think it is likely that many relationships have this dynamic. That's not the worst thing if you recognize it, and if both people are able to recognize their status and speak-up if necessary (and, yes, necessary changes depending on the circumstance of course). Which leads me to...

(2) THERE CAN STILL BE EQUALITY. In my mind, at least, equality in a relationship means something like respecting each other's opinions, and respecting each other's... humanness, I suppose. Recognizing that both people have things to contribute, things they are better at, and things they are not better at. Equality doesn't mean "I never make a decision without you" (unless you agreed upon it), but more like "I trust you to make your own decisions, and you should trust me, and furthermore if a problem arises we need to be willing to discuss it reasonably."

IMO.

[Dragon Lady]

I'm with mic0 here. Honestly, I probably am more dominant in our home than Yellow. I manage the money, the house, the kids. I have very strong opinions on birth, (and at one point birth control), and spend much more time disciplining. I plan and cook meals. I decide when we do what in the evenings/weekends.

It's not that I'm dominating Yellow, though. In most things, he just doesn't care. Whenever I want to make a bigger purchase and I ask him (because I feel I should), he usually just shrugs and asks, "Do we have the money? You know better than I do." He rarely wants to make big purchases (or really, any purchases at all. He's just not the shopping type.) or cares how our home is decorated or our yard is arranged. He's happy to help with what I need, but he doesn't care. I typically choose how to discipline, because I'm the one with the kids all day. We both feel that discipline should be consistent, so he just goes along with what I do. Sometimes he does something I don't approve of, but in the moment I stay quiet, and I discuss it with him afterwards, explaining why I didn't like it. So he stops. He lets me be the judge of when we have kids. In his words, "It affects you the most. You should have the final say."

I incorporate him in all major (and many minor) decisions. I'm always asking his opinion on things. (And seriously, 89% of the time, he has no opinion.) In involve him in every way I can. But I still end up being the dominant one. But it works for us. I think in part because we are both super easy going. We're both people pleasers. But we've both learned to speak up when we do have an opinion. When Yellow has an opinion on something in our relationship/family, I usually bow to it pretty quickly, because it's so rare. And if I have a strong opinion on something, he does the same to me.

Pretty much, we take on the traditional roles of men/women. He goes to work and provides for the family. I stay home with the kids and manage the household. We both support each other in those roles. When he needs to work late, I let him. (Though, he knows I *hate* it, so he doesn't do it often.) He comes home (up the stairs?) and becomes dad. Right now he's got the girls out on a walk, simply because he thought it would be good for them. He reads books, plays games, does reading lessons, and always washes dishes.

Right now, where I'm dealing with morning sickness and pretty much spend most of my day on the couch, he's been cooking dinner (which is not a oft-used skill of his. Tonight I asked him to make mashed potatoes. A few minutes later he responded with, "Ok. I've got potatoes and I've got a bowl. Now what?" Hah! But he's still willing to do anything to help, without complaint, which makes me love him SO MUCH!) and taking care of kids all evening, doing bedtime, and cleaning up. All so I can lay on the couch. Isn't he great?

So, yes. I'm more dominant, but I believe both of us would feel that we are equal. Different can still be equal.

And Vorpal, I'm gonna have to disagree. In my home, “If Mama ain’t happy, ain’t nobody happy.” And I don't blame Yellow. I usually blame my kids.

[bobtheenchantedone]

Vorpal, literally none of those scenarios will happen in my future home. Why? Every single one of them relies on a lack of communication and understanding between spouses, and communication and understanding are things Marduk and I have in spades. We've already discussed specifics in a lot of those cases (division of chores, daily schedules, child raising) and have set a groundwork of discussion to properly deal with any that come up in the future, and that is why I expect we can be equal.

Now, how do you think the end result of these scenarios would be different in the home of Marduk’s aunt and uncle?

Marduk's aunt mentioned that sometimes her kids tell her she's too hard on her husband. I think she meant it as an admittance of her own failings as a wife. I saw it as a lack of respect in her children. Does that answer your question?

Are you going to be happy if you find out that being as equal as possible brings irreparable serious harm to you and your children?

You and I have a very, very, very different idea of "equal" if you think it would in any way bring harm to children. In what world would a loving, stable, understanding relationship between spouses cause harm to anyone?

[mic0]

It's not that I'm dominating Yellow, though. In most things, he just doesn't care.
...
So, yes. I'm more dominant, but I believe both of us would feel that we are equal.

Word! This is how it is with me and Mr. Mico - if one of us feels strongly about something, that is who makes the decision (not all the time, but a lot of the time). And I also agree with bob, again, that most of these things would be things I would discuss. And that ability to discuss is a part of being equals (in that our opinions are equally heard/evaluated, blah blah blah).

[Dragon Lady]

And yes to bob. Communication is the key to fixing all of those scenarios, Vorpal. Yellow and I have excellent communication skills.

And as I think about it more, while I may dominate in the house, kids, money portion of things, he definitely dominates in the spiritual side of our relationship. And the logic side. And tact side. And education. So I suppose in that way, we do balance out to be equal. We are not equal in every thing. But overall, we are equals.

[Katya]

My parents have what I consider a very egalitarian marriage, even though their personalities are quite different, as are their daily responsibilities vis-a-vis house and home. In each of your examples, VB, they would have done what they always did when they had major disagreements: Talk to each other about what they wanted and why until they could work out a compromise that they were both satisfied with.

[Portia]

There's a somewhat vulgar term for the kind of man Vorpal is describing. (Basically that the woman is a shrew and a harridan and the man accedes to her every whim.)

If a man is a take-charge fellow, then he's a "leader" or "presiding." If a woman is assertive, she's a nag.

I want an egalitarian relationship monetarily (not in management, but in earnings), but I want the guys I date to, basically, do what I say. More easygoing guys tend to be interested in me, and I'm super high-maintenance. That doesn't mean I berate or belittle or think that it's my way or the highway. I don't think I have very gendered relationships at all.

I do think being equal in the little things matters a lot to my overall relationship happiness. If there's a big imbalance in our earnings, free time, happiness, veto power, then it starts to feel oppressive.

Also, Vorpal's putative woman in this scenario just sounds like a she-jerk. Get over yourself and stop trying to cloak your dysfunction as a feminist issue, I would say to this non-existent woman.

[Portia]

Sometimes when guests come to your house your husband makes fun of the way you talk, the way you keep house, the way you discipline the children, and the way you cannot stay on a diet. He thinks you are overly sensitive and says he wouldn’t mind if you teased him in the same way.

I'd divorce the jerk in the blink of an eye. What the h*** is his problem that he publicly humiliates me? This is why we date people to see what their personalities are like, ladies! If you do this to your wife, stop.

[Portia]

Also, this is a time when your generational differences are extremely apparent. I will put myself up as an example of the non-LDS relationship, as are most those in my family, and this is a very Hagar the Horrible kind of mid-century relationship model. I don't treat men as children and laugh at their lack of domestic skills. (Any man under 50 can operate a dishwasher and stove just fine.) No one, NO ONE my age who is not Mormon gives full control of finances to the woman. (And we don't use checks.) And passive aggression and wifebeating aren't ho-ho-ho how funny issues, but considered serious problems that would necessitate outside intervention.

You're describing Don and Betty Draper, not any real non-LDS couple. Don't project.

[vorpal blade]

To Mic0

I’m not talking about one person being dominant, I’m talking about one person ruling. I’m using the term “rule” to mean make the final decisions with or without input from the spouse.

The couple might well decide that the woman will do the cooking. As a result it makes sense that she does the grocery shopping and manages the kitchen. The woman, by mutual consent, rules in the kitchen because it is extremely frustration to be in charge of something and have others make the decisions regarding how things are to be done in the kitchen. Naturally, if she is wise and loving she will respect her husband’s opinions, understand the ways he can contribute, and she and her husband will be willing to discuss any problems that arise. For his part the man will trust her to make good decisions regarding the management of her kitchen. So yes, there can still be equality in the kitchen, as you have defined it, even though the woman rules there.

What applies to the kitchen may also apply to the kind of language used in the home, the kind of polite and social behavior expected, and other family rules. After discussions between husband and wife it may be decided that the one who is most concerned about it, the one who knows most about English grammar and etiquette, be in charge and make the relative decisions. In most homes this is the woman. So, the woman ends up ruling. If she is wise and loving she will involve her husband in the rule making process. While she rules there can still be equality in the sense that she respects her husband’s opinions and he trusts her judgment. There will problems if she rules unwisely. There will be problems if she is inflexible, and intolerant.

I believe what Dr. Laura means when she says that women rule in the home is that in most of the day to day living in the home, and in the management of the children, the women shoulder the greater responsibility and have the keener interests. They have very definite ideas about how things ought to be done and are not easily persuaded that they are wrong. The husband may not care, or may not wish to pick his battles over these things, and so does not contest her right to rule. This doesn’t make him weak, especially if he suspects she is in the right and harmony in the home is more important to him than being macho and stubborn. Is this equality? Maybe not if he is resentful and only compromises because she is totally unwilling to compromise. But it can be viewed as equality if she genuinely wishes to be respectful and find common ground with her husband. In other words, if she rules wisely and lovingly.

To Dragon Lady,

That’s the kind of thing I’m talking about. I wouldn’t use the word “dominant” because it implies a sort of superior/inferior relationship, even though your discussion makes it clear that is not the case. I’d say you rule wisely and lovingly in your home and in relationships, and that is a good thing.

Okay, blame the kids then. But seriously, don’t you think men have a responsibility to do what they can to make their wives happy? And often the husband has failed to do all he could do?

To Bob,

I agree that communication is very important, but I disagree that the problems I described are a result of a lack of communication. I think the problems come from different ways of looking at child rearing and what is proper behavior in the home. Those differences don’t go away with communication. For example, suppose you think spanking your children would bring lasting harm to your children, and your husband thinks NOT spanking children will bring lasting harm to your children. I’m not saying Marduk thinks that, I’m just using this difference as an example. No matter how much you talk about it you may never reach an agreement. Unless one or both of you decides you are wrong then someone is going to feel that their spouse is doing serious harm to their children, no matter how loving, stable, and understanding their relationship is between them. What usually happens is that one or the other gives in with a “Fine! Do what you want to do. You be responsible for their later troubles in life!” Then you hold resentment and ill will. It may not have to be that way, but nothing you’ve said indicates that this won’t happen just because you talk about it. I don’t see how handling this in an equal manner solves the underlying problem of different philosophies. All couples have such differences whether or not they think it worthwhile to try to hold what turns out to be discussions that never resolve the differences because they cannot be resolved. Perhaps if you could illustrate how any one of the scenarios I gave would be fixed by discussion it would be helpful.

To Katya.

Again, I don’t think compromise is the answer, even if it were possible. Compromise means to me that both people walk away dissatisfied with the outcome. It means that things are not going to be resolved the way either one would wish that it be resolved. I have no faith at all that the scenarios I gave necessarily have solutions that are satisfactory to both. It might be possible, in some cases, to find common ground and both are happy. I’d be interested to see if you can suggest a solution to any of these scenarios where I wouldn’t feel that one or the other would walk away unhappy. If you have solutions you might have a future in Congress. So, there is a challenge for you.

Ideally the man and the woman would mutually seek a revelation from God instructing them on how the problem should be handled in their particular situation. It will mean one or both of them will have to admit that they were wrong. Outside of such revelation that both independently receives I don’t see a mutually satisfying solution happening.

[Dragon Lady]

Okay, blame the kids then. But seriously, don’t you think men have a responsibility to do what they can to make their wives happy? And often the husband has failed to do all he could do?

I think that's a dangerous road to walk. If I start blaming my husband every time I'm in a bad mood because he hasn't done enough to make me happy, I'm going to start living a lonely and resentful life. I am responsible for my moods. Not my husband. He has a responsibility to treat me well, sure. But he is not responsible for my moods. I am an emotional girl. My moods are up and down and everywhere and can be triggered at a moment's notice. When Yellow does do something that triggers one of my moods, it's generally because I've had a buildup of emotion all day and he was simply the trigger for my meltdown. When he makes me talk about it (and he does, bless his beautiful soul), it usually is discovered that there was some deeper, much more important cause buried way down inside me. And then we fix it together.

I usually blame my kids because they are excellent at finding and pushing those emotional buttons. I am very much emotionally attached to my kids, which is a good thing in some ways and an awful thing in ways like this. When they are cranky, disobedient, or screaming at a pitch that literally makes my ear drums feel like they are rattling in my head, especially over a prolonged period of time. I get grumpy back. That usually happens when Yellow is at work. There is absolutely nothing he could do about it. So no, I don't think that often the husband has failed to do all he could do. I think he does an excellent job and I just need to learn better to reign in my emotions and not let little munchkins have control over what I, a grown woman, feel.

[vorpal blade]

That's an excellent way to look at it, Dragon Lady. I think you are an exceptional person. Not all women think that way.

[bobtheenchantedone]

To Bob,

I agree that communication is very important, but I disagree that the problems I described are a result of a lack of communication. I think the problems come from different ways of looking at child rearing and what is proper behavior in the home. Those differences don’t go away with communication. For example, suppose you think spanking your children would bring lasting harm to your children, and your husband thinks NOT spanking children will bring lasting harm to your children. I’m not saying Marduk thinks that, I’m just using this difference as an example. No matter how much you talk about it you may never reach an agreement. Unless one or both of you decides you are wrong then someone is going to feel that their spouse is doing serious harm to their children, no matter how loving, stable, and understanding their relationship is between them. What usually happens is that one or the other gives in with a “Fine! Do what you want to do. You be responsible for their later troubles in life!” Then you hold resentment and ill will. It may not have to be that way, but nothing you’ve said indicates that this won’t happen just because you talk about it. I don’t see how handling this in an equal manner solves the underlying problem of different philosophies. All couples have such differences whether or not they think it worthwhile to try to hold what turns out to be discussions that never resolve the differences because they cannot be resolved. Perhaps if you could illustrate how any one of the scenarios I gave would be fixed by discussion it would be helpful.

I did not say that the problems were caused by a lack of communication. Rather, they are caused by lack of respect, maturity, or understanding, and can only be solved through communication and understanding.

I'll go through your scenarios for you, and perhaps this will make my point of view clearer.

Proper English - first of all, this is a poor example for us simply because Marduk is an English major and I used to be one and still take writing classes for fun. To make it more general, this is an example of getting worked up over something that doesn't matter too much (as a side note, many of the rules you mention are incorrect or unnecessary). At times when Marduk or I have gotten upset over something small, the other one is there to provide a loving reality check.

Cleaning - Marduk and I do not approach any issue with "this is wrong and you need to change your ways." That's far too didactic and starts a conversation off on the wrong foot. When one of us is lacking, we sit down and talk about the discrepancy and what could be done better in the future - or sometimes a simple reminder ("have you done the dishes yet?") will suffice, since we are both mature enough to know what needs to be done and do it without resentment.

Cooking utensils - I do not understand how I would get it into my head that there are cooking utensils that are somehow "mine" as in "not his," and not just because Marduk is the one who does the cooking. There are zero things that one of us owns that the other is not able to use (with the exception of, say, clothes that are physically impossible to wear). We share each other's computers. I use his car on a daily basis. I'm using some of his old textbooks for my classes. Part of the reason why we're easily able to share is because we are careful with things and also respect reasonable boundaries - for example, while it is generally understood that I can use Marduk's car when I need to, I do always ask if there's a specific errand I want to run outside of my usual errand running, and I take a turn filling the tank when I can.

Misbehaving child at dinner – assuming that Marduk and I have actually not done all the discussing of child raising we have done (and practice we've had with other small children), and that one of us did something the other disagreed with, there is no way on earth the other would respond with "well you're cruel and a tyrant." That is not how respectful adults, especially partners, talk to each other. Even if something was said in the heat of the moment (which occasionally happens) once we've calmed down we discuss it and come to an understanding.

Insulting in front of guests - Marduk teases me frequently, but he does not insult me. Same goes for me to him. We understand the line between the two, and also know when teasing is and isn't appropriate. The few times one of us has been hurt by something the other said, we mention it calmly in private, apologies are made, and if necessary behavior is changed.

How to spend time at home - This is actually one of the hardest to gauge right now (yes, even harder than child raising) but we have discussed it. We both expect to be contributing both financially and physically to the household. The current idea is that he will probably be working outside the home while I work from home, and I will clean house while he takes care of the yard and cooks. We both trust that we will take care of our responsibilities, and plan to respect when we choose to relax and what we choose to do while relaxing.

Table manners – Another example of getting really worked up over something that doesn't matter too much. As with English above, I expect my children to pick up basic manners simply because they are eating with two adults who have basic manners, and gentle corrections will be made when necessary. Most of the rules you mention are outdated and I don't follow them myself; even if I did care somewhat, I'd be much more concerned about fostering a loving family environment and good attitudes toward food than turning dinner into another chore.

Finances – Classic case of husband and wife taking unreasonable stances (they may not have been in your day, but they are now) on something and then acting like children about it. Credit card debt is not to be taken lightly, but credit is essential (which can be done without actual debt, but not without the card). Wanting to tear up the checkbook is ridiculous. Checks come straight out of accounts and have nothing to do with debt, and are a necessary form of payment for some of my bills. Only paying with cash is outright impossible – that would mean hundreds of dollars and/or making frequent and unnecessary trips to the bank, plus being entirely unable to buy anything online (which is highly inconvenient and expensive). It's even likely that most couples will have at least some separation to their finances, considering how many households are two-income; in our specific case it's required because I am running a business. Also, your scenario requires one spouse to be so controlling as to insist that all purchases be run past the other, which is certainly an untrusting and unequal situation.

To reiterate, I still believe that every problem you are suggesting in every quarter of a relationship can be solved through communication and understanding, and I have my relationship to prove it. There is nothing, I repeat nothing, of importance in our relationship now or foreseeable in our future that we do not agree on. For any one of your scenarios to happen would require us to take several steps back from our current maturity and understanding of each other. Also, not a single one of your scenarios is an example of a problem arising due to an attempt to be equal – in fact they all rely on inherent and huge inequalities. Some of this may be due to the generation gap, but even with that I struggle to understand how you could think any of these scenarios are supposed to happen within a loving and equal relationship.

[Katya]

I am responsible for my moods. Not my husband.

That's an excellent way to look at it, Dragon Lady. I think you are an exceptional person. Not all women think that way.

That's a nice little backhanded compliment. "Dragon Lady is mature enough to take responsibility for her own emotions . . . unlike most women."

If you think the average woman is fundamentally incapable of being emotionally mature then, yes, an marriage based on equality is unlikely to be successful.

[vorpal blade]

Sometimes when guests come to your house your husband makes fun of the way you talk, the way you keep house, the way you discipline the children, and the way you cannot stay on a diet. He thinks you are overly sensitive and says he wouldn’t mind if you teased him in the same way.

I'd divorce the jerk in the blink of an eye. What the h*** is his problem that he publicly humiliates me? This is why we date people to see what their personalities are like, ladies! If you do this to your wife, stop.

I thought of this example when the guy is being really bad, a horrible, disrespectful, insensitive jerk. We can hope that a quiet conversation where she expresses to him how much this hurts her would be sufficient to get him to see the error of his ways. But my question is, what if that isn't sufficient? How do we find a solution where someone doesn't want to change, but needs to change? You cannot go half way, you cannot compromise on this issue without someone feeling unhappy.

It is interesting that you don't suggest talking this over. Basically your attitude is that if he isn't willing to show you at least this much respect then the relationship is over. Undoubtedly you will communicate this well while you are still dating. And this illustrates the power you have in the home and in the relationship. He will have to measure up to your standards or the relationship is over. Some things, maybe a lot of things, are just not negotiable. Knowing this a perspective boyfriend is going to be careful not to show to you any tendencies to tease you about something you are sensitive about. He is going to learn where you draw the line. He might not like it, and he might not show you what he is really thinking, but you will rule in your home because you won't tolerate certain things.

[vorpal blade]

I believe I understand your point of view, Bob. You believe that you can discuss issues and potential problems with respect and courtesy and find a solution. You believe that the situations I described are either much ado about nothing, or melt away once communication has established how each of you feels about the matter. Love, respect, and consideration bring peace and harmony and end any potential discord in the relationship.

I attempted to give scenarios, imaginary and for illustrative purposes, where two people have differences of opinion, which to them are very important and which they do not wish to yield. In essence you have answered my scenarios by denying the reality of them. Because you and Marduck to not disagree on these issues then they are not important issues for some people. I'm sorry if I phrased it too much to sound like a discussion of your particular situation.

I do not say that these situations arise from an attempt to be equal, rather I attemted to give situations of differences of opinion where no attempt to be equal would solve the problem. If there are no differences of opinion then there are no problems. But my question is, how do we solve the problem when there are differences? Being as equal as possible doesn't resolve the underlying differences.

Thank you for your answer. I believe that problems such as the ones I indicated are real problems for millions of couples. About half of all marriages end in divorce over differences no greater than these. I'm glad that you don't have problems now, but I've never known a couple not to have significant and real differences which were extremely important to them, even if outsiders don't see the importance. And those differences cause a great deal of friction unless one or the other just suffers in silence. Wouldn't it be great if communication could solve the problem? In many cases I'm sure communication is the answer, but in other cases someone is going to have to defer to the other and not like it. Unless you just learn not to care about anything.

[vorpal blade]

If you think the average woman is fundamentally incapable of being emotionally mature then, yes, an marriage based on equality is unlikely to be successful.

I think the average person, whether a woman or a man, is very likely to blame their spouse for their unhappiness. If that is being emotionally immature in your opinion, then most people are emotionally immature in my opinion. I do not say that anyone is incapable of becoming emotionally mature. And none of this has anything to do with equality in marriage.

What the men are told in the LDS church is that they have a responsibility to act in such a way that their wives will be happy. If their wives are not happy it is probably because the men are doing something wrong. This is not to say that a woman is incapable of taking responsibility for her own happiness. It doesn't say that she is emotionally immature. It simply outlines a man's responsiblity not to bring grief to his wife. I don't hear anything in Church about a wife's responsibility to make her husband happy. Maybe they say that in secret Relief Society meetings, but I never hear it.

This isn't an important point to me. If you think I'm wrong, fine, forget I said it.