MARIANNE writes:

Your blog continues to be fascinating and I am a big fan.  

But I’m writing to express a concern, and I hope you will not take it the wrong way, because I truly admire so much of what you have to say. My concern is this: I think it’s a mistake to encourage a man to use “Game” techniques on his wife, even as a last resort, if his wife is treating him with contempt. After all, one of your readers already tried that, because he couldn’t stand his wife’s lack of “obedience” as he termed it. Although he said Game techniques were “working” — because he could actually win an argument once in awhile, for example — it was plain from his description of what sounded like a living hell that his decision led to nothing but a dead end. After all, he said himself that he was without any hope at all for a loving marriage. That’s not a successful outcome! (After searching your archives I was unfortunately unable to find the post I’m referring to, but I remember it vividly, because it was such a dreadful situation he described.) 

So what should a man do, if his wife is treating him with contempt? I personally don’t know the answers. I’ve been happily married to a wonderful man for over ten years, but I don’t know what advice to give other people. But there are people who have helpful suggestions to make. I am thinking of Dr. John Gottman,who has done research on what makes marriages end in divorce, and what makes them last. Interestingly, Dr. Gottman says that contempt is one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalype of a marriage.  

Apparently Dr. Gottman has written more than 40 books. Although I haven’t read any of them myself yet, I would certainly encourage anyone whose marriage is in trouble to take a look. From what I’ve read of Dr. Gottman’s articles on his website, his thinking makes a lot of sense. 

Laura writes:

Thank you for writing. No, I don’t take your concern as offensive at all.

I only know Game second-hand. I do not read Roissy, who is an advocate of sexual conquest and license. I think of Game as Youngfogey described it, as “acting like a man.” When someone says a man should “use Game” in a particular situation, I can, with a fair degree of accuracy, predict what he means. Game strategies make sense in some circumstances and I think Game is a necessary response to a feminized society. The dynamic between men and women has been upturned by feminism, excessive individualism and sexual freedom. However, I can’t comment on the ideas of many of those who write about Game. 

Many men find themselves, because of feminist indoctrination, trying to appease and gratify the emotions of women. This can be a tremendous mistake and that is a valuable insight of Game. We live in a feminized, therapeutic culture where many people think that if we are always sincere and let all our feelings hang out, relationships will thrive. This is not true. Neither men or women like to be involved with someone who is a pushover or who has no will or mind of their own. However, women especially are better off when their spouses are more assertive. Game advocates a return of male dominance. But marriage involves the whole of our personalities. It’s a complicated affair. Game is not applicable in many situations.

I am not familiar with Gottman. Thank you for the recommendation. By the way, I believe I know the earlier post you are referring to and will add a link to it shortly.

                                        — Comments —

Peter S. writes:

One of the fundamental tensions at play here is the recognition on the part of husbands of the quite legitimate need to manage their relationship with their wife, on the one hand, with the sense of the inappropriateness and ultimately degrading character of a deliberately manipulative technique such as “game” in order to do so, on the other. 

In light of this, the suggestion regarding John Gottman‘s research is a very timely one, as it provides another way forward for husbands – and wives as well – to consider.  Of Gottman’s various books and resources, Ten Lessons to Transform Your Marriage and Seven Principles for Making Marriage Workare helpful non-technical introductions to his research and findings.  In a nutshell, Gottman claims, on the basis of extensive couples research, that the single greatest indicator of marital stability is the pattern of behavioral interaction between spouses, that men and women have very typical and distinct patterns of potential maladaptation with respect to one another, and that these patterns can be recognized and, at least to some degree, reformed. 

There is another researcher, also worth mentioning, who is at once less well known and less accessible than Gottman, but who also has marital research findings that complement those above.  Ted Huston‘s PAIR Projectis a long-term longitudinal study documenting the relationship between courtship and early marital patterns and eventual marital satisfaction and stability.  Neither Gottman’s nor Huston’s research findings are terribly surprising: spouses who get along better are happier and more stable in their marital lives and the interaction between spouses in courtship and early marriage is largely continuous with their interaction in later marriage.  What distinguishes the work of both researchers is that their findings are at once research-driven – and this in an arena filled with subjective and unsubstantiated advice – and, to varying degrees, specific and actionable. 

To my knowledge, neither Gottman nor Huston specifically address the changing character of women – and men – in light of feminism and contemporary mores.  This is an interesting point to ponder and may indicate either a limitation of their research or possibly that other factors predominate in practice.  The utility of the work of both researchers – particularly for men, given the contemporary risks of marriage – is the insight that entering into marriage is not merely a crapshoot in which misery and divorce may or may not happen depending on how the dice fall, but that both the selection of one’s spouse and managing of one’s relationship can be, at least to some extent, intelligently directed along well characterized lines with reasonably anticipated outcomes.

Mabel Le Beau writes:

I married in 1979 in a Catholic ceremony. After we’d been married a year, I stopped attending Mass 20 years after the priest assisting in our pre-cana preparation was arrested for solicitation of young men in the big town miles away (Denver), as my husband was sceptical of the Church, anyway. I attended occasionally after that when my sister died.

I returned to attending Mass more regularly (and frequently) when a co-worker gave my name as a church volunteer in a ministry for which I’m trained. In those 20 years, some things in the Church seemed just a little different, but not too much.

I didn’t hear about all these theories and conjectures on marital relationships until I started reading Catholic blogs a couple years ago. On the other hand, perhaps the ideas are not Catholic. I suppose Catholics would be more inclined in light of other religions to avoid divorces and attempt to maintain a marriage sham if that was the issue. Games, alpha and beta and other terminology in the context of husbands and wives sounds just sickening. We do not have a conventional (like his or my parents’ marriage) but we have always loved and respected each other in sickness and health; been true to each other in good times and in bad, for better and worse, and for richer, for poorer and I hope until death. I am glad my husband’s most familiar language is not English as I’m sure he’d find it appalling to read about marriage partners manipulating each other.

Raising children (why is the sky blue, how far away is the sun, how does your pancreas work, etc.), working, and attending to activities of daily living doesn’t leave much time to create artificialities in ones’ mind. Thank the good Lord for that.

Laura writes:

I agree that the language of Game is dehumanizing. Again, I don’t read Game authors or subscribe to the idea that men should follow Game as some kind of manual for their relations with women. However, we live in a culture that in many ways has stripped men of their confidence in dealing with women, that derides normal masculine responses and that has built up a vast therapeutic industry that revolves around and honors feminine emotions. Perhaps there are other worthy sources of advice for men who find themselves in the situation where their entire marriage suddenly hinges on the moods of their wife and he is paying for a therapist who is telling his wife to divorce him. Perhaps the authors mentioned above do help men with this scenario.

Let me give two examples, one in which the general ideas of what I think of as Game should be applied and one in which they should not. Again, I am not a reader of Game writers and I do not accept all the ideas put forth as Game. I am referring to what I have perceived as the general drift of it. 

Let’s say a wife expresses discontent to her husband about a specific problem. Perhaps she is unhappy that he is not spending enough time with her or perhaps she is not content with their physical relationship or wants more intimacy from him. Now, if she comes to her husband with a specific problem and genuinely wants to resolve it, the ideas known as Game do not apply. He should listen to her with sensitivity and talk about the specifics. If her unhappiness is something he can rectify, he should sincerely try to help out of love for her. If she comes to him and says she is simply down and indicates she wants to just talk, he should take the time to listen and encourage her.

But let’s say a wife comes to her husband with a very generalized, almost global dissatisfaction. She tells him she is unhappy and says maybe she isn’t really meant for marriage. She does not offer any constructive criticism of anything he is doing wrong, but simply says she is unhappy. She does not ask for a divorce but intimates that maybe their marriage will not last. She says she wants to see a therapist. Let’s also assume that the man in this case has never been unfaithful, has worked hard to support his family and is not physically or mentally abusive, though like all spouses he may be guilty of occasional insensivity. 

Now truthfully, what has occurred here is an act of passive aggression on the part of the woman if she has subtly threatened divorce. She has told the man to whom she has vowed permanent fidelity that she may end the marriage for no good reason. 

Unfortunately, sometimes men react to this situation by working hard to figure out what they themselves have done wrong and by offering to go to marriage counseling, which often seems to place them in the position of the guilty party. This invariably does no good.

Game would tell a man that what he needs to do in this situation is act like a man. When someone is aggressive to a man, he acts. Therefore, having been threatened with divorce, the husband should immediately distance himself from his wife. It would be a good idea for him to leave the house for a few days. He should tell his wife firmly that she is responsibe for her own happiness. He then should indicate to her that he is going to begin preparing himself for a divorce. Now, I don’t think he should take any drastic measures. He should not take any drastic measures because if he acts with resolve he may be able to prevent his wife from doing something that will ruin her life. I am not suggesting he respond with aggression but with resolve. I am especially not suggesting that he launch into tactical warfare with his wife. But he should let her know that he can handle a divorce just fine and he hasn’t the slightest guilt about moving on with his life. This may be a lie. In fact, he may be feeling at that moment that a divorce would devastate him. Still, he should not say that. He should remind her without anger, again and again, that it is she, and only she, who is threatening their marriage.

Now would you say this is a degrading and manipulative ploy on his part to act in this confident way? I say, no. I say it is reasonable for a man to respond to passive aggression in a firm and confident manner.

Now, some people might blame him for having ever gotten mixed up with a woman who would do such a thing. But, again, we live in an Eat, Pray, Love culture and sometimes good women come under the terrible influence of emotional hedonism. Also, it is deeply embedded in female nature to test men in the entirely unconscious hope of eliciting manliness and protection.

Please follow and like us: