Do wives berate their husbands twice as much as husbands berate their wives?
Posted by Mr. Thoughtful on October 23, 2008
So says the psychologist Richard Driscoll in his recent book, “You Still Don’t Understand”. I haven’t read the book, but the Amazon blurb contains several assertions that will be provocative to some people.
For example, Dr. Driscoll says women berate their husbands almost twice as often as men berate their wives. From my own observations this doesn’t surprise me a bit. When you see married couples in which one spouse is berating the other, isn’t it generally the wife berating the husband?
A funny sitcom illustration of this is found in “Two and a Half Men”. Charlie Sheen’s brother was married to a woman who is, let’s say, a world-class berator. In nearly every episode in which she appears she gave him hell, and they weren’t even still married. Now she’s about to be married to another guy, played by the hilarious Ryan Stiles, who played the tall guy Lewis on “The Drew Carey Show”. She makes his life a living hell too, all to hilarious effect on the show. She’s a caricature, but one that isn’t too far removed from how many wives act.
Another revealing conclusion of Dr. Driscoll is that a husband’s willingness to comply with what the wife wants, and not the reverse, is the key to marital success.
This too isn’t surprising. It seems to be a feature of most marriages I have seen. And it doesn’t make marriage sound too inviting to guys. Who wants to be in a relationship in which a pleasant life depends on your doing what your wife wants. That’s like a job, but one where you don’t get paid (in many cases you are the one who is doing the paying). Lucky thing most never-married guys don’t know this, at least until it’s too late.
Far too many women act in these ways yet are surprised when guys no longer want to be married to them.
dgm said
What’s that old adage about women marry thinking their men will change, and men marry thinking their wives will not?
I’m a happily married woman who does not engage in berating my husband (because honestly, he offers nothing to criticize) or my kids. Like you, I see many a couple with in this relationship pattern. What I don’t understand is, at least in my experience observing certain couples, why men opt to enable it in the first place–it’s not like these women suddenly became critical once they got married.
Mr. Thoughtful said
Dgm, that’s one of the most accurate adages about marriage: women marry hoping their husbands will change, and they don’t, while men marry hoping their wives will stay the same, and they don’t.
I think I know one answer to your question why men stay in marriages and allow themselves to be berated. I recently had a conversation with a married guy in his forties. He makes a lot of money and has a stay-at-home wife and several children. He mentioned that his wife regularly berates him. He hates it, but he knows that if he fights back she will probably divorce him. Of course, he could divorce her. But in the state in which we live, a divorce would mean he would have to pay his attorney fees, her attorney fees, and give her half the assets he has earned, in addition to paying 100% of the kids’ medical, dental, orthodontic payments, all daycare expenses, and ruinous alimony (all this over and above the substantial child support, which is based on a percentage of his income).
Both of them know this. He believes this emboldens her to be harder on him. Divorce law in this state improves her alternative to staying in the marriage, while it substantially hurts his alternative to staying in the marriage.
And as for these women suddenly becoming hyper-critical after the marriage, I think that is very often true. I’ve noticed that many women who are so critical after the marriage were much less so before the marriage. I suspect this is partly because there are just fewer things to complain about when you’re dating than after you’re married (and have kids). And perhaps it’s partly because the women know that many guys would be reluctant to get married if they saw this behavior in their girlfriends.
Lots of things change after the wedding. The reminds me of a joke that many husbands smile ruefully at: why does the bride have such a huge smile on her face as she’s walking down the aisle? It’s because she knows that’s the last **** she’ll ever have to ****.
docpark said
Marriage is a cultural on-lay to a species trait of monogamy. It wasn’t so bad when our life expectancies were about 15-20 years. With life expectancy ranging upwards of 80, we have to figure out ways to cohabit peacefully. For men, this mostly involves clamming up and pretending he’s one of the guys on Mt. Rushmore.
Mr. Thoughtful said
You’re right Docpark about the need for husbands to stay silent, at least for most marriages I’ve seen. Husbands should heed the Miranda warning cops give to people they arrest, “You have the right to remain silent. Everything you say can and will be used against you …”.
Wives often complain that guys won’t open up and talk. We’ve learned that we can’t be lambasted for things we don’t say, but if we do say something we might easily arouse wifely fury, nagging, etc.
Richard Driscoll said
Mr. Thoughtful
I wondered if you might like to see the original article (following).
drD
Why men concede, placate, or withdraw.
Unequal in Arguments
by
Richard Driscoll, Ph.D. with Nancy Ann Davis, Ph.D.
Insistence: While we might expect men to be more forceful than women in marital arguments, the research shows just the opposite, surprising our expectations.
Women tend to be more insistent, according to various researchers including John Gottman [i] at the University of Washington. Women argue more forcefully in almost half again as many marriages as men.
In the most lopsided arguments where only one argues and the other remains silent, by a ratio of 6 to 1, it is the woman who continues to argue and the man who remains silent. So in these most severe arguments, we see an almost complete separation between men and women.
Overwhelmed and confused. Men are typically more stressed and confused in arguments with women and remain bitter for longer afterward, while women are more comfortable amid verbal jousts, recover from them more quickly, and are ready for another round. Generally, it is fair to say that men are more intimidated in confrontations with women than the other way around.
Men are not blindfolded and gagged in arguments with women
— it just seems that way.
Origins: Insistence has been a viable tactic for women, to test the strength of a commitment, while a reluctance to offend has been a more viable for men, who must rely on women to transport their genes into the next generation.
Suggestions: Marriages are better when men and women participate about equally. Amid our typical arguments, we offer a few obvious suggestions for men and for women:
Men: To better resolve conflict, you must learn to be more comfortable with it. Recognize that it is normal for women to be more easily upset and irritated than men, but that women also get over it faster.
Do not interpret it as a great catastrophe when your mate is bothered about something. Stay involved, and try to talk it out.
Women: You might realize that men are more vulnerable in conflict than they appear and slower to recover from it.
Be careful to accurately gauge how much stress your accusations inflict, and make allowances.
Implications: If men were ordinarily more forceful in marital squabbles, then an increase in female power would promote equality. But since women are ordinarily more forceful, as observations indicate, the same solution pushes us farther apart. Men withdraw in the face of female accusation, leaving marriages emotionally barren and inhospitable. The challenge is to strike a proper balance, so that men and women can participate together and gain the best from each other.
Adapted from Opposites as Equals by Richard Driscoll, Ph.D., with Nancy Ann Davis, Ph.D.
[i] J. Gottman and R. Levenson, “The Social Psychophysiology of Marriage.” In P. Noller and M. Fitzpatric (eds.), Perspectives on Marital Interaction (Clevedon, Avon, England: Multilingual Matters, 1988), 182–202.
drD said
Mr. Thoughtful, @unfilteredminds
The Ultimate Jokester.
Nature selects for men who slide their genes into women and into the next generation, and selects for women who require a commitment and expect some serious compensation for carrying those genes.
Along these lines, I include here the brief article on misandry, adapted from by drD (me) with Nancy Ann Davis.
Misandry = Twice Misogyny
News brief:
Recent survey reveals that women resent men about twice as often as the other way around.
Article:
Misandry = Twice Misogyny
Ideological feminists have long accused men of being misogynists, filled with loathing and contempt towards women and unwilling to allow women a fair chance. More recently, “masculinists” or men’s rights activists accuse women of being “misandrous,” which is an odd and seldom used word for loathing and contempt towards men.
So, which is it? Are we more often misogynists or more often contemptuous toward men? Admittedly, one or the other or both shows its ass often enough to pollute a fair share of modern conversation. But which is more commonplace? And how can we provide a reasonable comparison?
A recent 2008 Gallup poll in Great Britain finds that 33% of women “often or very often” feel resentful of men, compared to 14% of men who often feel resentful of women. [i] So fully a third of women carry with them an ongoing resentment toward their opposites, as compared to about a sixth of men.
In an effort to specify our terms, “often or very often resentful” of the other sex is probably about as close as we can get to the basic meaning of misogyny and misandry. While we commonly argue that women have more reason to be resentful, the comparison here is not about our reasons but about our ongoing attitudes. Twice as many women as men acknowledge often resenting their opposites, suggesting that ill will blows from “W” to “M” more strongly than from “M” to “W”.
So why is “misogyny” such a familiar word while “misandry” is so odd and unfamiliar except on out-of-the-way websites such as this one? Some of the explanation is in the paradox of accusation. Women are more inclined to accuse men of malfeasance, while most men are uncomfortable arguing against women and keep their counsel. As in politics anywhere, the harshest and most repetitious accusations usually paint the strongest portrait, leaving the misandrous impression that men frequently resent women while women are innocent commentators to that sad state of affairs.
Another explanation lay in the unusualness of the condition, as we comment on what we find noteworthy and take the rest granted. In an earlier era, the psychiatric term “nymphomania” was applied to the woman who had an inordinate interest in sex, as she was the odd woman out. The complementary term “satyriasis” was seldom used for men, as it was so widely assumed that most men had an inordinate interest in sex that no such psychiatric nomenclature was required.
Back to “misandry.” In that fully a third of women are highly resentful of men, and perhaps another third are somewhat resentful, do we really need a special word for it? Or is it so familiar that we take it for granted?
In an earlier era, men referred to women who bash men with the familiar slang words such as “scold,” “shrew,” “bitch,” and so on. Today, now that such strong words are so severely censored, we are left with “misandry,” which seems an unfamiliar, highly sanitized, and somewhat technical sounding excuse for a hearty epithet. Is the “misandrous” woman not merely a cleaned-up version of the rock-solid, salt-of-the-Earth shrew of old, that inspired Shakespeare to bring a fiery woman to the stage and pleased a younger Elizabeth Taylor to portray her?
Of course, men can be misandrous too. But we save that for a later time.
Richard Driscoll
author of “Opposites as Equals” with Nancy Ann Davis
[i] The battle of the sexes continues according to new Gallup poll.” 2008. See http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=57662
drD said
Mr. Thoughtful, @unfilteredminds
The Ultimate Jokester.
Nature selects for men who slide their genes into women and into the next generation, and selects for women who require a commitment and expect some serious compensation for carrying those genes.
Along these lines, I include here the brief article on misandry, adapted from by drD (me) with Nancy Ann Davis.
Misandry = Twice Misogyny
News brief:
Recent survey reveals that women resent men about twice as often as the other way around.
Article:
Misandry = Twice Misogyny
Ideological feminists have long accused men of being misogynists, filled with loathing and contempt towards women and unwilling to allow women a fair chance. More recently, “masculinists” or men’s rights activists accuse women of being “misandrous,” which is an odd and seldom used word for loathing and contempt towards men.
So, which is it? Are we more often misogynists or more often contemptuous toward men? Admittedly, one or the other or both shows its ass often enough to pollute a fair share of modern conversation. But which is more commonplace? And how can we provide a reasonable comparison?
A recent 2008 Gallup poll in Great Britain finds that 33% of women “often or very often” feel resentful of men, compared to 14% of men who often feel resentful of women. [i] So fully a third of women carry with them an ongoing resentment toward their opposites, as compared to about a sixth of men.
In an effort to specify our terms, “often or very often resentful” of the other sex is probably about as close as we can get to the basic meaning of misogyny and misandry. While we commonly argue that women have more reason to be resentful, the comparison here is not about our reasons but about our ongoing attitudes. Twice as many women as men acknowledge often resenting their opposites, suggesting that ill will blows from “W” to “M” more strongly than from “M” to “W”.
So why is “misogyny” such a familiar word while “misandry” is so odd and unfamiliar except on out-of-the-way websites such as this one? Some of the explanation is in the paradox of accusation. Women are more inclined to accuse men of malfeasance, while most men are uncomfortable arguing against women and keep their counsel. As in politics anywhere, the harshest and most repetitious accusations usually paint the strongest portrait, leaving the misandrous impression that men frequently resent women while women are innocent commentators to that sad state of affairs.
Another explanation lay in the unusualness of the condition, as we comment on what we find noteworthy and take the rest granted. In an earlier era, the psychiatric term “nymphomania” was applied to the woman who had an inordinate interest in sex, as she was the odd woman out. The complementary term “satyriasis” was seldom used for men, as it was so widely assumed that most men had an inordinate interest in sex that no such psychiatric nomenclature was required.
Back to “misandry.” In that fully a third of women are highly resentful of men, and perhaps another third are somewhat resentful, do we really need a special word for it? Or is it so familiar that we take it for granted?
In an earlier era, men referred to women who bash men with the familiar slang words such as “scold,” “shrew,” “bitch,” and so on. Today, now that such strong words are so severely censored, we are left with “misandry,” which seems an unfamiliar, highly sanitized, and somewhat technical sounding excuse for a hearty epithet. Is the “misandrous” woman not merely a cleaned-up version of the rock-solid, salt-of-the-Earth shrew of old, that inspired Shakespeare to bring a fiery woman to the stage and pleased a younger Elizabeth Taylor to portray her?
Of course, men can be misandrous too. But we save that for a later time.
Richard Driscoll
author of “Opposites as Equals” with Nancy Ann Davis
[i] The battle of the sexes continues according to new Gallup poll.” 2008. See http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=57662