Friend's husband wants her to be a submissive housewife (relations, physically, yelling)

[Braunwyn]

Originally Posted by Oleg Bach

You would be surprised that SOME woman do not have maternal instincts..that sometimes the male is more maternal. Even in the animal kingdom..both male and female protect and raise the kids... If the woman is best at making money (hunting) ...and the father is good at protecting the household and the kids..let who is better at doing a job - do the job. This thread is slightly bitter and a touch feminist eccentric...You see the term "submissive" - we all submit when it is needed.

This business that some how a woman is the weaker submissive one and needs the protection and support of another woman...or a third party is absurd...


Not everything is "spread evenly"-----------for instance I would cheat when it came to dealing with a new born...if the child cried in the middle of the night...I would fain being asleep and let the wife get out of bed and be the fatigued one in the morning...men can be sneaky.

It may be absurd to you, but it works for many. It's one of the many reasons women tend to thrive following divorce or death of a spouse and men tend to do poorly.

[jasper12]

That is why smart women teach their kids first words to be..."Daddy"...Da Da...

My husband felt like the kids loved him more or needed him when they always called his name. Little did he know....I never taught them to say..."mama".

And...I got plenty of sleep.

[Idon'tdateyou]

Originally Posted by Jay F

At least he expressed his view on this upfront.I honestly didn't know there are still men who insist women not work. I hope they make good money.

The quickest way to change our culture where no men have these (IMO) backwards gender role ideas is for all women to boycott such men. The problem is the men who are the most sexist and traditional on gender roles often have the"real man" qualities women can't resist such as machismo, excess muscularity, and an overall dominant disposition.

Luckily he told me this before I met him. At first he would make like comments about "career women" and he then would clarify it by saying the women who were workaholics and how they weren't fun. I would agree that male workaholics are not fun either so I didn't take it as sexist. That is until he started talking about that women shouldn't work at all (or work part time during the weekends if they needed money)and how working moms made it bad for everyone. THEN he emailed me this horrible book about female submission and blamed abused and cheated on women for their mistakes by not submitting and obeying their husband. Finally after several months he brought up abortion (he protests at clinics)and said he believe abortion should always be illegal, even in cases of rape, incest and health of mother (in his view women should die so the fetus will live possibly). I told him I didn't agree with the Catholic view on that and he got off Yahoo messenger at that moment. He later emailed me and said he "accidentally" disconnected because I kept him up late talking (yep, blaming me already).

He had a great job where he made fantastic money but I knew it would have been a horror for me had we connected, but luckily we didn't. Months later he would still email me and view my dating profile (I deleted it). His emails incidentally were besides sexist, extremely racist. Yep dodged a bullet there.

[Jay F]

Originally Posted by jasper12

I know a lot of families where the mother stays home. But...just because you are a SAHM, does not mean "submissiveness". I stayed at home...more for economics, and common sense. Three babies in daycare....there is no point to working. Would have cost about $3600 a month.

That makes sense. I know a father who became "Mr Mom" purely for financial reasons and he isn't submissive. Most SAHMs aren't submissive. But I guess there still are some guys out there who demand women not work for the power dynamics aspect of it more than the financial.

[Idon'tdateyou]

I know plenty of stay at home parents who aren't submissive but also know people (mostly men but some women)who demand their parents stay at home because of them being dominant or in the case of one guy because of his religion.

[kat949]

Originally Posted by Idon'tdateyou

I am astounded by this one. A friend of mine just had her first child and her husband has become very controlling. It started right after birth. She wasn't sure she was going to breastfeed but her husband in the delivery room pulled down her gown and put the baby to her breast. She eventually decided to nurse because her husband insisted it, though she was leaning against him. However it gets creepier than that though where he insists at home she breastfeed without a top on all the time saying the skin contact is better. She does this instead of arguing.

If that isn't weird enough he's insisting she quit her job (she's on leave)to be a stay at home mom and bullying her about it. In his world his mom and his sister were stay at home moms and so his his sister in law (brother's wife). He makes good money so technically she could quit but she loves her job and worked hard for it He said though having a wife at home then homeschooling is important to him. He also wants her to be nude in the house and he said he's always believed marriage was where he works, and comes home to a wife who caters to him.

I think this is creepy and I told her to stick her ground and leave if need be (she makes enough to support herself). She is confused because she loves him.

Stories like this are scary to me because before she was pregnant her husband was sane and proud of her job. Now he's acting like a domineering man.


Mod Note: Moved from Parenting forum

I bet somewhere along the line, if she had more of a keen eye, she could've spot these behaviors early on.

It's the little things that say the most.

I'm not very nonchalant about reading people and their intentions.

With him wanting a woman at home and insisting it? A part of me wants to think it's his protective instinct (high testosterony side kickin in). People with high testosterone can be pretty insistent and persistent in dominating.. I could be wrong, but I don't think that hormonal surges are limited to females. Hormonal fluctuations can change for people at various stages. I wouldn't doubt there is a hormone similar to oxytocin, but one that has more of an instinctual protective feeling. Doesn't negate the fact that her values, needs, wants shall be neglected, either.

[cpg35223]

This is just controlling and borderline abusive behavior. She needs to lay down the law and, if he balks, walk.

[LeGenDary_Man]

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

How parents deal with their children is a separate issue from my pov. I don't have an opinion in that area. I do know that a spouse treating his/her spouse as a child is screwed up.

Obviously, mature adults do not treat their spouses like children. But we are talking about HUMANS here; not disciplined ROBOTS. Humans can experience hormonal changes during their lifetimes. A genuinely committed spouse should learn to accept the flaws of his/her partner as well and not just his/her perfections. In no way or from this means that people should cope with routine abuse. However, people should not be hyper-sensitive either. The relationship shouldn't be just about YOU and YOUR feelings only.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

So, I don't think the two situations are comparable.

Not every individual will be comfortable with the idea of hitting a child as well, even for the sake of disciplining. I have met such parents. But these people also represent extremes IMO.

It is possibly acceptable for you to hit a child for disciplining purpose, if you feel necessary to do so. For you, this is justifiable. But this may not be the case with all parents. Now should you be judged and/or negatively evaluated for your stance in this regard? I do not think so. This does not makes you a bad parent because you know what is best for your child unless you routinely hit.

As far the act of disciplining a spouse is concerned; people do this more often then you think. The act of disciplining is not necessarily restricted to physical assault. It can be done by withholding affection or not sleeping in the same bed and/or verbal admonishing. Their are rules in some cultures on how to discipline your spouse, if he or she is hurting you.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Anyhow, the only grey area I would concede when it comes to violence is self-defense, temporary madness (protecting/revenging for a loved one, etc), or something professionally trained like the police or military. A person that loses his/her temper and reacts violently exhibits personality tendency. What you're arguing here is for two dispositions and I don't buy that. It suggests mental illness. While that may not be a person's fault, it's not acceptable.

Since you conceded about temporary madness (if this is the appropriate term to use), we can move on. Yes, temporary madness should be tolerated.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

That's typical abuser talk. I don't know if it's how most relationships survive, although I wouldn't be surprised as quite a large portion of the planet's population is not civilized like the west and uneducated. It's not acceptable behavior among a civilized and educated populace.

Lot of things happen in privacy in the so-called civilized WEST as well. Do not generalize. Not everybody is like open book in terms of relationships. In fact, their is much greater tendency to cheat on a partner during rough phase of relationships in the civilized WEST then it is in other parts of the world. And cheating is as bad as routine abuse, if not worse. If people were perfect then we wouldn't be having these debates/conversations.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

I'm not really worried about what I will do when it comes to my husband. He would never. He does not hail from that kind of stock. I wonder how you will cope when a woman seriously damages you in return. You never know what a person is capable of until you lay your hands on them. I suggest that you be careful.

Oh! I am very careful. I believe in effective communication so that I may know about limits and dislikings of my partner early on during the relationship. In this manner, it becomes a lot easier to adjust with the partner in a marriage and/or serious relationship. But I know that I am not perfect and neither I would have same expectation from my partner. If the partner does exhibits temporary madness, I would be forgiving and rather be assisting my partner in getting counseling, if necessary.

Long lasting relationships seldom survive with hyper-sensitivity involved. Maybe your husband is an exception but only time will tell. At personal capacity; I wish you happiness.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

I learn from strangers, just not from people like you who think abuse should be tolerated, or ex-cons like posterior who think it's normal, or whoever else on this forum that holds to a worldview I reject.

I am tolerant to temporary madness but not routine abuse. I do believe in reconciliation effort much more then you ever would. Your worldviews are not perfect either.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

I learn from people that I respect and that's reasonable. Really, I think you are projecting this "me" factor. Your opinion is not always going to be valued. Just because you exist doesn't mean what you have to say should be valued or even considered, especially if it showcases substandard, wanting worldviews.

So you can be subtle at pointing fingers at others! Interesting. Like it or not, you are far more sensitive and defensive of your perceptions then me and many others here. Obviously, I am not expecting my opinions to be always valued or even appreciated. However, I do appreciate/expect healthy debate from mature people at minimum. IMO, it is better to be rational then being judgemental.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Only you can answer that. You lay in the bed you have made in your life just as we all do.

No, you implied that my worldview is indicative of what is happening to me in my personal life. Now tell me what is happening to me in my personal life.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

That's not a discussion. It's a statement that I'm familiar with the filth the world has to offer and that filth has been exhibited in this thread and it's text book. An abuser excuses the abuse, blames the victim, and has an expectation of keeping it private. Really, it could be coming from some 20-year old kid in his criminal justice class reading from his first assignment.

Once again! I see Black and White perspective. Until and or unless, you know the truth and/or have full picture of the topic of discussion; you can never be rational but will be judgemental in your assessment.

We are agreed on how habitual abusers behave. However, you should also know that habitual abusers do not necessarily keep things private. They can defame their partners even in the public.

And you need to differentiate between habitual abusers and those who are not (the ones who may exhibit temporary madness or whatever you would like to label them).

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Please, don't try to control people online. It's goofy. If anything, I think you are too sensitive. You are looking for validation from a stranger online. This is not the place to obtain that. And as if you have the first inkling of what is a rational argument.You have no idea why violence should be tolerated.

No one is trying to control you. I adviced you on how to discuss subjects that may be sensitive for you. Being rational is important. If you equate suggestion with attempt to control; you have strange perception of control. In addition, if you will judge stangers on the basis of their worldview that may not be compatible with your own; expect some to get defensive and point flaws in your worldview in return. This is why rational approach is recommended. With a rational approach, you do not accuse (directly or indirectly) but rather reason with facts and/or logic or your observations.

As far as my senstivity is concerned, premature judgement does makes me uncomfortable. And as far as validation is concerned, it is indicative of the outcome of a debate in the first place; nothing wrong with this expectation. You are seeking validation of your perspective; I am doing the same for mine. Good thing is that we have managed to reach some middle ground thus far with the the term "temporary madness" and suggestion of tolerance to it.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

You have no idea why violence should be tolerated. You have not offered reasoning behind any of your statements. A rough patch is meaningless. You are under the erroneous assumption that your ability to type words on a computer screen, however grammatically compromised, is equivalent to a reasonable argument. In the end, what you are doing is attempting to reconcile your stuff, you, your behavior/whatever, just like people always do.

I find this assertion funny and ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Expect to be judged. It's the nature of life. And expect to be challenged, especially on the internet. This forum is not PC and I'm certainly not PC. As you say, don't be so sensitive.

Their is nothing wrong with making judgement as long as it is not done prematurely.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Let's educate you.
Should You Be Worried if He Hit You Just Once?

I find it funny that you have posted material that also provides one-sided or simpleton perception of domestic violence based issues. Once again, I will stress that this subject is not so black and white in reality. In many many cases of domestic violence, both spouses involved are at fault. Your link seems to suggest an extreme case in which one spouse steps beyond the line while the other is innocent. Sorry, this is why greater research is important.

Now read following:

http://mhaweb.squarespace.com/storag...Sarantakos.pdf (Deconstructing Self-Defence in Wife-to-Husband Violence)

http://www.divorce.usu.edu/files/uploads/Lesson2.pdf (Can unhappy marriages become happy again? How?)

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Now, read the above and try to digest it. Note yourself in what is highlighted in RED.

I have and I am baffled that you continue to accuse me of being abuse supporter. You really need to look beyond the box, lady. Otherwise, you will be forever stuck in your narrow worldview.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Uncanny if you ask me. Rates of repeating the violent behavior are high enough for concern. Further, one act of violence incites a return act of violence, which increases the probability of repeat behavior. By the time a person gets to the point of becoming violent, it's preceded by other forms of abuse, and it just becomes easier.

This are EXPECTED. But not ALWAYS the case. Decent people do possess the capability to do self-analysis if things go wrong due to their actions. Not everybody who gets violent at some point in his/her life is a mental patient and incapable of being rational. Try to grasp this grey shade.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

I cannot stand when men on this forum try to debate me via PM. No way. It's here or not at all. And there's reason you don't want to make it public.

You are being paranoid about this. Some people value privacy more then others. Not everybody is open book or wants to be. Though I have realized that it wouldn't be wise to share private details with you.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

You just stated above the person who gets hit usually deserves it. So, if someone hits you shouldn't you just take it since you likely caused it? That is your rationale, however irrational.

If I am at fault, I will excercise restraint. I am good at controlling my temper. Though I will convey my feelings to my partner. Communication is important for me.

In contrast, If I get hit when I am not at fault OR not at fault alone then I will retaliate in same manner. But this will not be deal-breaker for me.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

You are contradicting yourself. You are saying people are hit because they caused it.

No. Two scenarios are common in domestic disputes; either one spouse is responsible or both.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

You are saying that people should not be sharing abuse with friends because it's private.

Then you are not paying attention to my reasoning. As I have pointed out before, privacy has its own importance in relationships. It is not healthy do disclose every dispute in your relationship to your friends or outsiders in general. People tend to be judgemental and can disrupt your relationship. If the abuse becomes norm, then it is wise to seek external help. Relatives are good to start with first.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

You are saying that it's realistic to expect some level of violence in a relationship because things can get rough. That's all nonsense. It doesn't add up.

This is not nonsense. Please stop being so simpleton.

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Are you married? If so, how long and how often has violence surfaced in your marriage and other relationships?

I have/had female friends and have my obeservations and exposure to rely upon. In my relationships, disputes have never reached physical level.

As far as marriage is concerned; I have met an amazing lady and we may tie the knot soon.

And I read a lot as well.

[BradPiff]

Both men and women want to be "traditonal" when it benefits them

[chielgirl]

Originally Posted by Braunwyn

Frankly, any woman who is informed as to why it's beneficial for a baby to be breast fed (only line of immune defense IIRC), and still doesn't do it, isn't starting out as a great mom from the get go. A husband most defiantly should have a conversation with his wife and inform her so she can then do what's right. With that said, people should really know each other very well before they bring kids into the world.

Not every woman can breast feed.
Your second point is very well made.