IN THE previous discussion about fathers setting limits for their daughters, James F. writes:

Most of the females I’ve met have a tendency to blame anyone except themselves, and especially men. Feminists in particular are somewhat comical in their constant complaining and blaming of men, never quite clever enough to realize that in doing this they are passing all the responsibility to the man. Then they ignorantly complain about men having all the authority. These Jezebels are caught in their own paradox. This is why they are almost always miserable: they insist on having (or usurping) complete control over everything, but when something goes wrong they won’t take the blame – so they never improve and the situation never improves. The unfortunate men in relationships with these women often endure such a battery of constant psychological abuse that they lose their identities and become passive and useless, often turning to drug abuse or defiling themselves in various ways. I have seen this happen to a number of close friends.

— Comments —

Terry Morris writes:

Prescient observation! I too have seen this happen to a number of close friends. One friend’s wife in particular – a “dedicated Christian” and “staunch conservative” woman, according to her – seemed to derive great pleasure from severely browbeating her husband whenever my wife and I were at their house to visit. I assume she did the same when other friends would visit. At length we decided it best for all concerned to simply stop visiting them. I haven’t seen or spoken to my friend in awhile, but I have been told that he “hits the bottle” on a regular basis now. It’s very sad because in their case he is (or was) a very ambitious person with a good business head, and had worked very hard to establish what once was a lucrative business in the oil industry. He wasn’t the ideal father in many respects that we would consider ideal, but he was a good father in many others, always cognizant of his responsibilities to his offspring.

Yet, never content with the blessing such a man can be to a woman and her children (and the society at large), this woman has, according to mutual friends, also all but destroyed his business relationships by virtue of the selfsame blankety-blank attitude, thus rending the family basically bankrupt and near destitute, and their children without an inheritance. But of course it’s all his fault; if he were more of a “manly man” (she actually said this about her husband!, according to the same source), which it seems she feels compelled to point out to everyone who dares express concern about their situation, why they wouldn’t be in this predicament. Therefore, she has taken it upon herself to rebuild what he has destroyed. Did you get that?: she presumes to be his manhood! When that fails (which no doubt it will), she will again lay the blame squarely on his shoulders. In fact, I’ll bet she’s already laying the groundwork for that as we speak.

Jonathan Silber writes:

James F. writes: “Feminists in particular are somewhat comical in their constant complaining and blaming of men…”

There’s a name for women like that: Shrews.

A reader writes:

“Every wise woman builds her house, but a foolish one tears it down with her own hands.”

Or mouth.

James P. writes:

In a sense, the hectoring wife Terry Morris describes was correct to attribute her husband’s failure to him not being a manly man. If he had been any kind of a man he would have insisted that she respect him, especially in public but also in private, and thus she would not have repelled all his friends and business associates.

Laura writes:

Yes, he is to blame too.

Mary writes:

I know a couple of these types of marriages and they are painful to be around. In simple terms they are bad matches of temperament: she – passionate and bossy with tremendous authority of personality (choleric) – is unhappy with him – the peaceful, mellow soul who loathes confrontation (phlegmatic) – and his level of energy and manliness so she verbally emasculates him, causing him to withdraw even more and prove her correct (in her own mind).

The men in the marriages of this sort that I’m familiar with are not effeminate at all but they are introverted and reserved – which one can be and still be masculine – while their wives are extroverted and forceful – which one can be and still be feminine. Neither spouse understands how the other one ticks: the men have an inner strength that they can’t express and isn’t appreciated; the women desperately need someone to rein them in but their spouse isn’t capable. Certain temperaments are very slow to react, some are lightening-quick; a quick-reacting woman married to a slow-reacting man can be a problem indeed because the woman feels dominant and that is a recipe for disaster. God admonished women to obey their husbands for a reason : ) These marriages can work with deep love and most importantly mutual respect.

John P. writes:

I have to object to your statement that “he is to blame too.” You simply have no idea what it’s like dealing with a crazed woman. Husbands have no legal authority today. One hundred and fifty years ago a man could slap his wife and send her to bed without supper. Do that now and there’s a chance you’ll wind up in prison. Short of a violent response, which I and most men reject, there is simply no way to reason with shrews. I’ve seen it many times: Decent with crazy wives. What exactly was this man supposed to do? You’re also opposed to divorce which might be another response to the problem.

Laura writes:

I think I do have an idea. I assume that early on he indulged her criticism of him. From the very beginning of their relationship, he may not have made it clear that he was in charge. I don’t think it is necessary for a man to beat a wife to assert his authority.

Please follow and like us: