Are Our Standards Too Low?

[McScribe]

For a moment then I am asking that we put aside the subject of confrontational approach to talk about how to reach an understanding between a couple as to how to have such standards. Sure they will vary. What I would like to welcome is ideas about how to actually implement a higher standard in marriage. If you do not believe that is possible then don't worry about it.

 

[chaz345]

For a moment then I am asking that we put aside the subject of confrontational approach to talk about how to reach an understanding between a couple as to how to have such standards. Sure they will vary. What I would like to welcome is ideas about how to actually implement a higher standard in marriage. If you do not believe that is possible then don't worry about it.

Well the how to do it comes down, quite simply to communication. It really seems to me that you are making comming to agreement on these standards into something much bigger than it really is. Why does it have to be any more complicated than the two sitting down, and each honestly expressing their picture of what this should look like and probably more importantly listening to what their spouse has to say?

Of course that process would involve a pretty decent degree of several of the standards anyway so maybe there's somewhat of a chicken and egg thing involved. Or maybe a small level of some of those things is what's required to build a bigger level of them.

 

[Conservativation]

I think that this thread has gotten hijacked by this issue. There's been such a terror that people MIGHT get emotionally bullied that there has been almost no actual discussion of the standards themselves, just what is seen as their inevitable abuse. More than one person, mkgal1 included, have tried to bring things back to discussion of the OP only to have this whole confrontation thing brought up over and over again. Furthermore, I feel that more than one person has agreed "Unpleasantness in discussion of an issue is bad" only to insist that it is the idea of aiming for good communication, mutual respect and prayer that are being discussed as standards.

And yes, chaz brought up the idea that confrontations about someone else's prayer life are really unpleasant. I really wish that both of you would get this: this thread is about AGREEMENTS, not about one person tyrannically imposing standards on someone else. It's about a couple at some stage in their relationship finding compromise and understanding.

As I'm writing this I'm thinking that the praise reports I've put on this forum about my marriage have come with difficulty. There are times even lately when it's hard to keep trying, just because of the sense at times of being overwhelmed. Part of what has helped is raising the bar for our marriage as part of an agreement I have with my wife that is constant effort at humbling ourselves, being willing to try harder next time, praying with greater wisdom and understanding and many other things. It may seem like I'm being pat or smug or something, but I'm not. What I've been trying to do is share my own struggle with the idea that it might help someone else.

So when I came up with these standards I have been trying to share what I thought was effective for us. We've agreed that we will always bring prayer into problems that are not easily solved by something routine; we've agreed that we will always respect one another, not treat one another with any form of contempt. (even when it comes to teasing--no teasing that is really a form of insult) We've agreed that we will be honest with one another and have the courage to receive that honesty from the other person; we've agreed that we will not be an emotional island but will reach out to others and minister to them.

In other words we are trying to put what the Bible says about love into practice for one another and for ourselves, frankly. I think that this is a standard people can live up to. I don't intend to say things like "Hey, you're not praying enough" but I will say things like "Honey, I would like for us to pray about this." I think that frankly if she had to confront me on whether or not we were praying it would probably be because I wasn't holding my end up. It would probably mean that I wasn't responding to her requests for prayer, or failing to lead the children in prayer at bedtime or all of us at saying grace or whatever, roles I have already agreed to do.

Im really surprised you see it this way, and m,ake references to specific individuals who "seem" to get it.
I understand what you said, since page one. What is happening in the thread is exactly what I am pointing out happens in the marriage. Its really obvious.

Person 1: lets talk about thes etandards and how couples can raise the bar in their marriage

person 2: OK great , what IS the best way for me to get this through to my partner?

Do you not see that? Thats what you are getting as "cooperation" and keeping the thread on track. And thats what Im trying to speak against! In a way, Im more in agreement with you than those you see as agreeing. Its just they are so subtle in the manner in which they very kindly and gently surround their words with all the right modifiers and soft expressions....IN ORDER to bring it back to how to motivate THEIR SPOUSE to get on with the standards.

 

[Conservativation]

For a moment then I am asking that we put aside the subject of confrontational approach to talk about how to reach an understanding between a couple as to how to have such standards. Sure they will vary. What I would like to welcome is ideas about how to actually implement a higher standard in marriage. If you do not believe that is possible then don't worry about it.

Just because the approach is not overtly confrontational, that doesnt make it what you seek, which is a bilateral exchange about the COUPLE working TOGETHER to raise the bar.
Read carefully the posts of those who you seem to see as working with you on this, and you will see it is clearly "how do I get my spouse to improve without being confrontational?"...that is NOT working together as a couple to improve the couple...that is psuedo gently STILL trying to fix THE OTHER PERSON.

 

[Conservativation]

duplicate

 

[McScribe]

So then how do you see such a bilaterial approach (which is what I am suggesting) working? I don't think it matters btw if there is a belief in egalitarianism or head of the household approach of some kind--short of utter tyranny people need to cooperate in order to have a genuinely good relationship.

I think that the low standards I mentioned involve things like:
- poor communicaiton
- belief in telepathy (why can't you read my mind?)
- martyrdom (give and give until you cant' give no more)
- fear of change or loneliness (putting up with stuff just because of these fears)
- dreamlike beliefs (love conquers all, love is a natural feeling that doesn't require any serious work)

 

[Conservativation]

I've never considered anythiing tyrannical or such, in any of this topic. In my opinion thats got nothing to do with it and I agree on that.

All Im saying , truly ALL Im saying is that the tendency to change the partner...regardless how sweetly and softly its packaged, is what im trying to get past, and you seem to be missing that thats what is defining "the other side" of any debate Im having or chaz is having.

Its so strongly that way that, if you read back, its insurmountable even. Its worded and reworded, circumnavigated and diluted, repackaged and rephrased...and every time is "how to I get HIM/HER to do this (in the kindist softest way)? Which as I understand is what you are actually NOT wanting to discuss.

 

[Psalm63]

If mutual submission is missing, the standards won't work. The poor woman will be doing all the flexing and bowing, while her husband "rebels" against her attempts to "fix him" (because of his unresolved authority issues left over from an abusive childhood: he assumes she doesn't/shouldn't have any, while he as "the head of the household" gets to control everything) Males as HOH is a christian myth BTW, a consequence of the Fall, and unsupportable by actual biblical instructions. There is no scripture proclaiming the male as exclusive head of the household (except the account of the law made by a drunken pagan king- click here)

Laboratory observation of couples demonstrates the results of living a Fall-based marriage where the man feels entitled and justified ruling over his wife and even the household and refuses her influence: From Gottman “The Marriage Clinic”

his observation led me to formulate the hypothesis that marriages work to the extent that men accept influence from, share power with women. Next I applied this to a longitudinal study of 130 nonviolent newlywed couples and found that, amazingly, those in which the men did not accept influence from their wives wound up divorced. The prediction rate was very good, 80% accuracy, and it did not work the other way around: Most wives accepted influence from their husbands, and the acceptance predicted nothing.
​

 

[Psalm63]

For a moment then I am asking that we put aside the subject of confrontational approach to talk about how to reach an understanding between a couple as to how to have such standards. Sure they will vary. What I would like to welcome is ideas about how to actually implement a higher standard in marriage. If you do not believe that is possible then don't worry about it.

In some cases, one will have to do some painful boundary work before any negotiation is even possible. And I would not rule out "confrontational". Sometimes it is necessary when someone has become accustomed to their bad habits.

See link and link, both quotes from "Boundaries in Marriage" by Cloud and Townsend. The first is an example of the bad habits, and the second describes what to expect when one starts standing up to the entitled, controlling spouse.

 

[chaz345]

If mutual submission is missing, the standards won't work. The poor woman will be doing all the flexing and bowing, while her husband "rebels" against her attempts to "fix him" (because of his unresolved authority issues left over from an abusive childhood: he assumes she doesn't/shouldn't have any, while he as "the head of the household" gets to control everything) Males as HOH is a christian myth BTW, a consequence of the Fall, and unsupportable by actual biblical instructions. There is no scripture proclaiming the male as exclusive head of the household (except the account of the law made by a drunken pagan king- click here)

Laboratory observation of couples demonstrates the results of living a Fall-based marriage where the man feels entitled and justified ruling over his wife and even the household and refuses her influence: From Gottman “The Marriage Clinic”

his observation led me to formulate the hypothesis that marriages work to the extent that men accept influence from, share power with women. Next I applied this to a longitudinal study of 130 nonviolent newlywed couples and found that, amazingly, those in which the men did not accept influence from their wives wound up divorced. The prediction rate was very good, 80% accuracy, and it did not work the other way around: Most wives accepted influence from their husbands, and the acceptance predicted nothing.
​

The "the man is always the problem" assumptions built into the above would truly amaze me if I hadn't been hearing the same from you for over a year. Virtually no one that advocates the man as the head of the household comes anywhere close to suggesting that he should exercise that headship without input from or influence by his wife.


And for every man that's dysfunctional in the marriage because of issues from their childhood, there's a woman with similar issues. They, of course, are not necessarily always married to eachother though.

And of course your study leaves out one critical to your case piece of information. Of those 130 marriages that were studied, how many were there where the man didn't accept influence from their wives?

 

[chaz345]

In some cases, one will have to do some painful boundary work before any negotiation is even possible. And I would not rule out "confrontational". Sometimes it is necessary when someone has become accustomed to their bad habits.

See link and link, both quotes from "Boundaries in Marriage" by Cloud and Townsend. The first is an example of the bad habits, and the second describes what to expect when one starts standing up to the entitled, controlling spouse.

And of course, in your world that person that has become accustomed to their bad habits is nearly always the man, right?

 

[Psalm63]

And of course, in your world that person that has become accustomed to their bad habits is nearly always the man, right?

Depends on how steeped he is in bad theology and how far he takes it (and how much his poor wife buys it and gives him that shiny apple full of death) Click Here

 

[chaz345]

Depends on how steeped he is in bad theology and how far he takes it (and how much his poor wife buys it and gives him that shiny apple full of death) Click Here

You missed the point. Are angry and controlling men inherently more common than angry and controlling women? In your world, the answer is obviously yes. In the real world, most definitely not.

 

[Conservativation]

McScribe: Let me introduce you to the poster child for the side I argue against. If you can read the following from Psalm:

The poor woman will be doing all the flexing and bowing, while her husband "rebels" against her attempts to "fix him" (because of his unresolved authority issues left over from an abusive childhood:

and not see what Im getting at, Im sorry. But, read other posters here that are arguing that same exact side...just buried and hidden behind soft fluffy language, and see the full spectrum of how its approached. TBH, I prefer psalms manner because it isnt hidden, it isnt nuanced and it makes no apology. IOW I rather disagree with someone who other readers can READILY see where she and I are both coming from. When these beliefs are filtered through powerfully emotional and victim language, and scriptures are referenced and statements are made about NOT blaming (but the issue then is semantics because to see another person as responsible, but say you are not blaming them is a distinction without a difference) its much easier to miss whats at play.

 

[Conservativation]

You missed the point. Are angry and controlling men inherently more common than angry and controlling women? In your world, the answer is obviously yes. In the real world, most definitely not.

Actually its been representatively studied (albeit this is a subjective matter) when a couseling group made a survey, counting the numbers of relationships that were troubled as defined by "controlling behaviors" of where that behavior came from. I need to dig it up, and I dont tend to fill my posts with colors and links, but the vast majority of that personality (more than 60%) causing marital issues came from the female side.

If you can imagine the underlying assumptions that inform the thinking behind psalms assertions...that men are stunted emotionally and sexual predators and porn addicts etc by nature, its quite easy to see WHY women would feel the need to be so controlling, sadly though most of the men are NOT stunted and perverted and its just a pure example of controlling behavior rationalized as she does, and there are other ways too, that have to do with perceiving themselves as superior at tasks and home management, childcare, spending, scheduling, basic social comportment, all these things. The bottom line is controlling is an equal opportunity affliction that affects more women than men. The WHY? may reside in some of these male bashing theories, that are ubiquitous if not spoken quite as bluntly as this.

 

[McScribe]

On the one hand I understand how it is frustrating to have it assumed that there's some kind of problem with your sex. On the other hand I have to point out that Psalm was presenting a kind of resource specifically aimed at women and which is I gather empowering to women suffering from a subtle form of emotional abuse. For women who have suffered from this and have felt the censure of their church or family for not remaining in a marriage they felt was soul killing such resources are important. So I see what Psalm is saying as a necessary encouragement for such women.

Having said that, Psalm: how would you suggest that a couple build an effective understanding between them of how to treat each other well? I do understand that some women have really suffered in their relationships and I don't discount that; I'm more talking here about how a couple can work effectively together. I think that the subject of how one partner or another can be badly treated is another subject altogether.

 

[Psalm63]

Having said that, Psalm: how would you suggest that a couple build an effective understanding between them of how to treat each other well? I do understand that some women have really suffered in their relationships and I don't discount that; I'm more talking here about how a couple can work effectively together. I think that the subject of how one partner or another can be badly treated is another subject altogether.

Sometimes they cannot "work effectively together" until they have gone through a very difficult and painful season of establishing boundaries. Did you look at the quotes from "Boundaries in Marriage" I posted earlier? The first one (click here) reminded me of one of your posts where you talked about your response to your exhausted irritable wife. You sound more like Frank. KUDOS for that!

 

[McScribe]

I did look at them, and even talked to my wife about them. I have to say I was deeply moved by some of the stories there. I do very much understand your point of view. I'm also touched that you had noticed the story of my wife and I in the other thread.

In one sense I disagree with you in that I believe I need to take a role of leadership in our marriage. Maybe I wouldn't advocate that universally but it works for us. Bear in mind--my wife has her own job, she spends time with friends, goes on business trips, and certainly I can attribute being a christian to my relationship with her. It's simply that the way our relationship works I'm the one who courts, she is the one who invites. I'm the one who is more likely to be objective at the end of a hard long day, she is more likely on the other hand to know when the kids just need a hug. I think that this leadership in part involves being protective, making sure that your home and indeed your arms are a safe place where she can reveal herself without dreading being judged or ill used.

I wouldn't advocate this for everyone. There are couples who frankly need some form of mediation just to talk to one another; too much has happened for them to regain trust readily on their own. There are couples where it is the woman who is abusive or neglectful; there are couples where there really IS no couple, just roomates who share cost of living and sex.

 

[Psalm63]

I did look at them, and even talked to my wife about them. I have to say I was deeply moved by some of the stories there. I do very much understand your point of view. I'm also touched that you had noticed the story of my wife and I in the other thread.

In one sense I disagree with you in that I believe I need to take a role of leadership in our marriage. Maybe I wouldn't advocate that universally but it works for us. Bear in mind--my wife has her own job, she spends time with friends, goes on business trips, and certainly I can attribute being a christian to my relationship with her. It's simply that the way our relationship works I'm the one who courts, she is the one who invites. I'm the one who is more likely to be objective at the end of a hard long day, she is more likely on the other hand to know when the kids just need a hug. I think that this leadership in part involves being protective, making sure that your home and indeed your arms are a safe place where she can reveal herself without dreading being judged or ill used.

I wouldn't advocate this for everyone. There are couples who frankly need some form of mediation just to talk to one another; too much has happened for them to regain trust readily on their own. There are couples where it is the woman who is abusive or neglectful; there are couples where there really IS no couple, just roomates who share cost of living and sex.

The "leadership" talk doesn't bother me so much when its REALLY about being Christlike rather than being alpha male. I love Kim's blog and Ken Nair for constructive "leadership" talk, but men like this are few and far between IMO. IMO, in practice, "leadership" is mostly used as a deceptively sanctified trump card and that is why divorce is so high in "christian" circles.

 

[Psalm63]

In one sense I disagree with you in that I believe I need to take a role of leadership in our marriage. Maybe I wouldn't advocate that universally but it works for us. Bear in mind--my wife has her own job, she spends time with friends, goes on business trips, and certainly I can attribute being a christian to my relationship with her. It's simply that the way our relationship works I'm the one who courts, she is the one who invites. I'm the one who is more likely to be objective at the end of a hard long day, she is more likely on the other hand to know when the kids just need a hug. I think that this leadership in part involves being protective, making sure that your home and indeed your arms are a safe place where she can reveal herself without dreading being judged or ill used.

It sounds well and good, but some men are not protective. Instead they are selfish, and sometimes even evil (I was just reading this today about some elders in a church). One of the commenters there asked "where were the mothers?". The fact is that God commands women to protect their household. HE is quite clear about that (link) though it has been obscured by translation and tradition.