Are men responsible for women's happiness or unhappiness?

[Ulfreida]

@nearwildheaven

Sometimes, I want to ask women, “Was someone holding a gun to your head?” (and in fact, I have).

Guns are not necessary.

I had less than zero intention to buy my husband’s clothes for him, do all the housework, bills, appointments, trip planning, shopping, childcare. But I could not make my husband do any of these things. He made no argument as to why he wouldn’t, he just didn’t do them unless I fought with him, screamed at him, cried. He would willingly agree to tasks if they were specific, clear, finite, and I asked him to. He never saw something that needed doing and just did it; it was always my job to notice everything. Then he had a vast repertoire of behaviors to make it more work to get him to do it than doing it myself. For example, laundry. Even if I asked him, he would only put a load of clothes in the washer and then he felt he had ‘done the laundry’. I would have to find him to tell him to dry that load, again to fold, again to put away. Each time he had something better to do or was too tired or would get to it soon, but never did – but he got furious if I “nagged” him. See how I ended up doing the laundry myself? Same with everything.

I know that many men have this m.o. Lots of wives have described it to me.

[SpacemanSpiff_II]

Regarding surveys of post-divorce happiness, I wonder if some survey divides that between divorces involving kids at home and childless divorces. Because I would think there might be a big difference in post-divorce happiness between those whose relatonships with their kids has been suddenly reduced to every-other-weekend visits (while their financial obligations continue) and those who don’t have their lives upended in this regard.

Also, it might be useful to compare differences in happiness between post-divorce men and women to differences in happiness between pre-marriage men and women. That might sort out the impact of the marriage itself from the impact of the post-divorce situation.

[Kimstu]

@Ulfreida

He would willingly agree to tasks if they were specific, clear, finite, and I asked him to . He never saw something that needed doing and just did it; it was always my job to notice everything. Then he had a vast repertoire of behaviors to make it more work to get him to do it than doing it myself. […] Each time he had something better to do or was too tired or would get to it soon, but never did – but he got furious if I “nagged” him.

This is sometimes called “strategic incompetence”. But I’m not sure it’s always a deliberate strategy, it’s often just the consequence of a deeply socialized conviction that I shouldn’t have to do this sort of task if I don’t feel like it.

And just to re-emphasize that these are observations about socialized gender behavior patterns in general, rather than mere gratuitous man-bashing, consider this classic example of a traditional female version of strategic incompetence used to slough off household responsibilities, taken from Clarence Day’s memoirs of his Victorian childhood:

Father was always trying to make Mother keep track of the household expenses. He was systematic by nature and he had had a sound business training. He had a full set of account books at home in addition to those in his office–a personal cash-book, journal, and ledger–in which he carefully made double entries. […]

Before he got married, these books had apparently given him great satisfaction, but he said they were never the same after that. […] He still knew what his personal expenses were, but they were microscopic compared to his household expenses, and of those he knew nothing, no details, only the horrible total. His money was flowing away in all directions and he had no record of it. […]

Every once in so often he tried to explain his system to Mother. […] She didn’t feel that women should have anything to do with accounts, any more than men should have to see that the parlour was dusted. […]

He said confidently that she would soon learn to keep books. It was simple. Meanwhile, if she would just make a memorandum for him of whatever she spent, he would enter it himself in the accounts until he could trust her to do it.

That day never arrived. […]

He tried to go over the bills regularly with Mother, as well as he could […]

I liked figures myself, just as Father did, and I thought it was queer Mother didn’t. She was as quick at them as anybody, yet she didn’t get any fun out of writing them down and adding them up. […]

When she cried, or showed that she was hurt, it appeared that Father, too, felt hurt and worried. He said again and again at the top of his voice that he wished to be reasonable but that he couldn’t afford to spend money that way, and that they would have to do better.

Once in a while when Father got low in his mind and said that he was discouraged, Mother felt so sorry that she tried hard to keep count of the cash for him. She put down all sorts of little expenses, on backs of envelopes or on half-sheets of letter paper of different sizes, and she gave these to Father with many interlineations and much scratching out of other memoranda, and with mystifying omissions. He would pore over them, calling out to her to tell him what this was, or that, in a vain attempt to bring order out of this feminine chaos.

Mother could sometimes, though not very often, be managed by praise, but criticism made her rebellious, and after a dose of it she wouldn’t put down any figures at all for a while. She had to do the mending and marketing and take care of the children, and she told Father she had no time to learn to be a book-keeper too. What was the use of keeping track of anything that was over and done with? She said that wasn’t her way of doing things.

“Well,” Father said patiently, “let’s get at the bottom of this, now, and work out some solution. What is your way of doing things? Tell me.”

Mother said firmly that her way was to do the very best she could to keep down expenses, and that all her friends thought she did wonderfully, and the Wards spent twice as much. […]

There’s an instance of what used to be a very widespread form of female “strategic incompetence”, where an important and necessary household task is wilfully neglected by one of the spouses because she doesn’t like to do it, doesn’t think she should have to do it, and is unwilling to learn how to do it in a useful and efficient way.

Day’s mother is being just as much of an irresponsible “womanbaby” about household finances as the irresponsible “manbabies” criticized in this thread for their uncooperative strategic incompetence regarding household management.

[Kimstu]

@SpacemanSpiff_II

Regarding surveys of post-divorce happiness, I wonder if some survey divides that between divorces involving kids at home and childless divorces. Because I would think there might be a big difference in post-divorce happiness between those whose relatonships with their kids has been suddenly reduced to every-other-weekend visits (while their financial obligations continue) and those who don’t have their lives upended in this regard.

It’s a good question, but AFAICT the available evidence doesn’t suggest that the greater happiness of women than men post-divorce can be significantly explained just by men’s sadness at seeing less of their children.

For one thing, in so-called “gray divorce” among older couples without young children, women are still more likely than men to seek divorce. And older fathers post-gray-divorce significantly diminish contact with their adult children, even though there’s no custody agreement restricting them to a schedule.

Mothers increase their involvement with their adult children; they are twice as likely to have more frequent contact with their adult children after a late divorce than they did before. For men, it’s the opposite; they are only half as likely to engage regularly with their grown children after a split.

Men are significantly more likely than women to remarry after divorce, but overall women are still happier than men post-divorce. ISTM that that indicates an important difference, on average, in the advantages vs. disadvantages of the socialized behavior norms within modern marriages for men and for women.

(And once again, I’m not at all denying that there are individual counterexamples to all of these general trends all over the place. As thorny_locust has pointed out, no general socialized behavioral norm can be extrapolated to a reliable predictor of the behavior of any [b]individual[b] human being.)

[SpacemanSpiff_II]

@Kimstu

This is sometimes called “strategic incompetence”. But I’m not sure it’s always a deliberate strategy, it’s often just the consequence of a deeply socialized conviction that I shouldn’t have to do this sort of task if I don’t feel like it.

There may be some of this. But to some extent, it may also be that the guy doesn’t feel that these tasks are necessary altogether, and for this reason they’re largely the wife’s issue.

The key question in this regard is what the guy did before he got married, and had no wife to take care of it. If he did these things at that time but on marriage decided it was his wife’s role, then it sounds like what you’re describing. But if he went without these things altogether and then on marriage the wife decided they were necessary and he dragged his feet about doing them, then that’s something else.

I would guess there’s probably a bit of both.

[Kimstu]

@SpacemanSpiff_II

But to some extent, it may also be that the guy doesn’t feel that these tasks are necessary altogether, and for this reason they’re largely the wife’s issue.

Yes, like Mrs. Day not thinking household accounts are important or interesting, so she doesn’t bother with keeping records for them. She expects her husband to deal with all that.

And the fact that keeping accurate household accounts is difficult or impossible for him without her cooperation (since she’s the one in charge of a lot of the expenditure) doesn’t really matter to her. She doesn’t like to do these tasks, she doesn’t consider them really necessary, so she’s not going to bother to try to understand his point of view, or to think how a household might be benefited from having accurate records of revenues and expenditures.

[Ulfreida]

@SpacemanSpiff_II

There may be some of this. But to some extent, it may also be that the guy doesn’t feel that these tasks are necessary altogether, and for this reason they’re largely the wife’s issue.

The key question in this regard is what the guy did before he got married, and had no wife to take care of it. If he did these things at that time but on marriage decided it was his wife’s role, then it sounds like what you’re describing. But if he went without these things altogether and then on marriage the wife decided they were necessary and he dragged his feet about doing them, then that’s something else.

I would guess there’s probably a bit of both.

Yes, it’s both. My husband’s siblings were divided between those which were rigidly organized, to a somewhat frightening degree, and those, like my husband, who, left to themselves. would literally live in a garbage pile, and I am using literally in the literal sense of the word. There’s ADHD and hoarding in the mix there, more marked in two of his brothers.

My husband recognizes the worth of having clean, mended clothes, an organized work space, and a stocked pantry. He just could/would not do it for himself.

[SpacemanSpiff_II]

@Kimstu

For one thing, in so-called “gray divorce” among older couples without young children, women are still more likely than men to seek divorce.

This seems to address the question. Thanks.

@Kimstu

And older fathers post-gray-divorce significantly diminish contact with their adult children, even though there’s no custody agreement restricting them to a schedule.

This, OTOH, doesn’t have as much bearing. Adult children are not part of the same household, and differing amounts of contact with adult children is not a life-changing issue, if it’s even noticed at all.

@Kimstu

Yes, like Mrs. Day not thinking household accounts are important or interesting, so she doesn’t bother with keeping records for them. She expects her husband to deal with all that.

Or, as far as she’s concerned, nobody needs to deal with it.

Though it might be a bit different in that case, since she’s expecting that ultimately there will be money available to pay the bills, and is remaining ignorant of the details of how that’s managed. I’m thinking more of a situation where the standards are different.

As a minor example, I personally don’t feel it’s necessary to “make” a bed. When I was single I never made my bed, and when I got married I continued to think it was unnecessary. My wife kind of likes it. This never became an issue between us, but I’ve rarely or never made a bed and my wife does it when she’s in the mood and doesn’t do it otherwise. I’m not relying on her to make the bed; I simply don’t care about it altogether.

In the example of the wife making doctor’s appointments, the same might be true. If the wife thinks the husband needs to take an annual physical and the husband doesn’t think it’s necessary, that’s a value judgment and neither position is objectively right or wrong. But if the husband is willing to go along with the wife nagging him to get one and making his appointment, he’s not relying on her to do it for him; he’s simply going along with something that she thinks is necessary and he’s ambivalent about.

And so on for other matters.

That doesn’t mean that all such issues are along these lines, and - as above - I think there’s probably something of what you call “strategic incompetance” involved in many cases as well. But what I’m describing is probably also a factor.

[Kimstu]

@SpacemanSpiff_II

As a minor example, I personally don’t feel it’s necessary to “make” a bed. When I was single I never made my bed, and when I got married I continued to think it was unnecessary. My wife kind of likes it. This never became an issue between us, but I’ve rarely or never made a bed and my wife does it when she’s in the mood and doesn’t do it otherwise. I’m not relying on her to make the bed; I simply don’t care about it altogether.

Which is totally fine if both of you are happy with it. The problem, ISTM, is when “standards are different” but one or both partners are unwilling to work out an explicit mutual compromise on their standards that keeps them both happy.

In general, husbands don’t seem to be more easygoing or adaptable than wives on matters where they have the “higher standards”. For example, if a husband has a collection of vintage guitars that he always handles carefully, and his wife just tosses one of them onto a couch to get it out of the way of the vacuum cleaner because she “personally doesn’t feel it’s necessary” to treat the guitars gingerly and she “simply doesn’t care about it altogether”, the husband is unlikely to just shrug and say “eh, different standards”.

Men tend to be strongly socialized to think that their opinions and preferences, especially in their own households, are important and objectively right and deserving of deference, while other people’s opinions and preferences are just arbitrary “different standards” or “value judgments”.

@SpacemanSpiff_II

If the wife thinks the husband needs to take an annual physical and the husband doesn’t think it’s necessary, that’s a value judgment and neither position is objectively right or wrong. But if the husband is willing to go along with the wife nagging him to get one and making his appointment, he’s not relying on her to do it for him; he’s simply going along with something that she thinks is necessary and he’s ambivalent about.

He kind of is relying on her to do almost all the work necessary for him to comply with that standard, though.

In a similar vein, suppose that the abovementioned guitar-indifferent wife promised her husband that she’d always comply with his rules about vintage guitar handling as long as he always kept all his guitars shut in their storage space out of her way when not in use. But if he left one sitting out on a stand she’d feel free to toss it on the couch if she needed to move it. I don’t think you’d argue that she’s “not relying on him” to do the work to make her compliance possible.

When partners make compromises on standards, ISTM that both of them need to be willing to take initiative and responsibility for implementing the compromise standard. Not just agree to obey the other partner’s direct orders with the absolute minimum of contributed effort, like a sullen slacker employee.

(And btw, in what world is not getting a regular physical a mere matter of personal preference? I can see making a case that a healthy adult doesn’t need a physical every single year, as long as he does make sure to get one periodically at less frequent intervals. But a husband who won’t bother ever getting a physical exam at all unless his wife does all the work of making the appointment and nagging him to keep it is just being an irresponsible slacker about his health, as much as if he never got his car maintained or inspected.)

[Jay_Z]

Here is a factor for me on the household stuff.

My ex hated how I did the household tasks. Hated it. It was more who I was than what I did.

I can use a screwdriver. I can install a garbage disposal, a microwave, change elements in a washer or dryer. I don’t have an interest in building a house, that sort of thing. I am now loath to be involved with any woman with this sort of vision, because I’ll be judged wanting in the long term. I am going to be very specific about what I can and cannot do in a relationship up front, and hopefully weed out any potential partners that are attempting to use mirroring to advance the relationship.

When my divorce happened, the ex and I never sat down and split up stuff. A few big things were talked about. The ex took some other minor stuff without asking about it. Conspicuously left behind were some tools that were never mine. I have no doubt this was a veiled reference to my lack of handiness as compared to her current partner. This was never articulated, it was more in the category of something I should “just know.”

Keep in mind that some of these disputes are never articulated by the women involved, more in the “he should just know” category. My ex was a terrible communicator during the marriage. It was my main complaint. I could have been unhappy about other things, but those were parts of herself that I tolerated because that was my vision of how marriage should be. Her communication was crap though. I would find out stuff from third parties or kids, plans she had made with her mother or whatever. Mentioned repeatedly by me. There was never any improvement.

Everything in my marriage was tainted by the spectre of this other man whom I only knew in passing. But it was tainted nevertheless.

My GF and I did not have the issue with household stuff. We worked a lot better together than I ever did with my ex, though we were long distance and never lived together. The relationship was problematic due to the mutual betrayals we suffered, which meant that we tended to focus on fun/sex until other stuff built up. I didn’t think she could love me long term in the end and I’d seen enough of it.

So I’m going to try to be really specific and maybe I can have a good choice and love. The grey divorce stuff makes me fairly pessimistic on this count.

[raspberry_hunter]

Yeah, what @Kimstu said.

The thing is, my husband does not care at all if birthday cards for his parents happen. However, my mother-in-law really liked getting cards from our family, and I really liked her.

Was someone holding a gun to my head? Well, yeah, kind of, in the sense of “I really love my mother-in-law and I want her to be happy, and it is not all that hard to buy her a birthday card even though it’s really her son’s responsibility.” If I didn’t love her a lot, I wouldn’t have bothered.

Doctor’s appointments: fortunately, my husband has a horror of someone else making his appointments and so will do so himself, but yeah, I would do so if he didn’t – I’d rather have a healthy husband than not. I mean, if I didn’t, why would I be married to him in the first place?

[raspberry_hunter]

I think you’re missing @MandaJo 's point. You married someone who cared about things like countertops and antiques, and your value system doesn’t align with that.

But not all women are like that. I don’t care about countertops or antiques or anything like that. Also, while I try to keep a minimum standard of cleanliness, our house is often quite untidy, and we tend to accumulate stuff in a way that many of my friends would be horrified to have happen in their house.

I wouldn’t do at all well in a relationship where the man cared about having a spotless, gracious-living house (which a lot of men do, e.g., my sister-in-law’s husband). Fortunately that’s not what I have.

[MandaJo]

@SpacemanSpiff_II

The key question in this regard is what the guy did before he got married, and had no wife to take care of it. If he did these things at that time but on marriage decided it was his wife’s role, then it sounds like what you’re describing. But if he went without these things altogether and then on marriage the wife decided they were necessary and he dragged his feet about doing them, then that’s something else.

I think a lot of men live like that as bachelors, but on a very deep level, they expect things to be different when they marry. Its part of what they like about the idea. But they don’t think “women will do this”. They rhink “married life is like this”. It’s magic.

[MandaJo]

@Kimstu

This is sometimes called “strategic incompetence”. But I’m not sure it’s always a deliberate strategy, it’s often just the consequence of a deeply socialized conviction that I shouldn’t have to do this sort of task if I don’t feel like it.

I also think that sometimes the incompetent person doesn’t even recognize they things they aren’t doing as work. We always undervalue things we haven’t done. It seems like magic.

ETA: “effortlessly” is often used as a positive description for women. Women are supossed to get all the emotional labor and nurturing done through magic female energy.

[Jay_Z]

@raspberry_hunter

I think you’re missing @MandaJo 's point. You married someone who cared about things like countertops and antiques, and your value system doesn’t align with that.

This isn’t true.

My ex wanted the countertops. That was me doing happy wife, happy life. The ex wanted new countertops, she got new countertops, she got unhappy, bored with the house and with me, went for the man she had waiting in the wings all along.

I’m a divorced dad with three kids, paying money into another household. In retrospect I don’t like the countertops because the marriage ended anyway, the house was sold at a loss because of the market. My current half a duplex sucks when you look at how long I’ve worked, that I have to live here and raise my kids here. There would be a dozen major things I’d do before new countertops. I can’t afford them. There is no “value alignment” there other than my ex’s.

I liked doing the antique stuff with my ex. I would drive her on trips to various stores, spot garage sales, try to help where I could. I liked it when we did that. She fired me for someone else. Earlier in the marriage, I ran some marathons and she drove along the way to greet me at various spots. That was enough for me. Evidently that sort of relationship isn’t enough? That I have to be tight as two peas in a pod with someone? I’ll just quit now then.

[Kimstu]

@MandaJo

We always undervalue things we haven’t done. It seems like magic. […]

Women are supossed to get all the emotional labor and nurturing done through magic female energy.

Sometimes almost literally, as in the viral tale of the husband who was so impressed by the inexhaustible kitchen soap dispenser.

My friend & her husband lived in an apartment that had a soap dispenser installed on the edge of the kitchen sink. When they moved out after two years, he marveled to her: “it’s amazing how that dispenser never ran out of soap in all this time.” Women’s work is truly invisible. […]

She never told him the truth. He still thinks wistfully of that amazing, magical soap dispenser they had once.

[Kimstu]

@Jay_Z

Evidently that sort of relationship isn’t enough? That I have to be tight as two peas in a pod with someone? I’ll just quit now then.

Maybe that would be wise.

Not because I think you don’t deserve to be loved or couldn’t have a happy marriage, but because ISTM that at the present, at least, you are really heavily focused on identifying and strategizing around possible relationship situations in the abstract, none of which are ever going to manifest in any predictable way in any future real-life relationship you have with a fellow individual human being.

Stop trying to make rules for what a relationship “ought” to be like, what “women” as a group will consider to be “enough” in a relationship, or what types of behavior or expectation will insure you against future hurt or disappointment in a relationship. There aren’t any such rules. The only insurance is to find and love a unique individual good person who really loves you (and even that’s not a 100% guarantee against hurt and disappointment).

I am not trying to tell you that your ex wasn’t mean to you or that you’re not allowed to be mad at your ex. It is totally reasonable for you to want a better marriage in the future than the one you had with your ex.

I’m just saying that it’s not going to work to draw up an idealized blueprint for your desired marriage and then try to figure out how to screen for inherent defects in your projected “building material” (i.e., “women”) that might cause problems with implementing your blueprint.

Psychiatric help on internet messageboards is worth exactly what you’re paying for it, but since you have voluntarily introduced your personal situation into the discussion, ISTM that a new relationship or a more bulletproof relationship strategy is not what you need most right now. Figuring out your feelings and becoming genuinely happy where you are and as you are is a better place to start.

Butting out now, thx.

[nearwildheaven]

Kimstu’s attitude reminds me of my college classmate, who was married with a preschooler, who told me that she (allegedly) had legal papers stating that if she died, not only would her child(ren) not live with her husband (her sister would have custody), he would only be allowed a phone call once a week, and a single supervised visit at Christmastime. I assumed that this was what would happen to the kids if they BOTH died, but no, this was also if SHE died, and I should add that the rest of his family would effectively cease to exist. I asked her if her husband knew about this, and she just stared at me. I’m guessing that a lawyer could get in some big trouble for drawing up papers without a spouse’s permission, amirite?

She also did not believe in fathers having custody for any reason (“That’s what foster care and orphanages are for”) and also did not believe in post-divorce visitation rights; if the kids wanted to see him, they could look him up when they were 18. I also asked her how she would feel if this happened to her son and she was cut off from her grandchildren, and she didn’t have an answer for that.

That said, I’ll never forget the man I met at a meetup who had just come out of a divorce where his ex-wife had totally taken him to the cleaners; among other things, he had owned a business that had been in his family for 3 generations, and he had to sell it and give her all the money. I replied, “I am very unsympathetic towards divorced men, and I would have to hear your ex-wife’s side of the story.” Believe me, THAT shut him up! However, I found out later that within a few months of said conversation, their 4 children had all moved in with him and had nothing to do with their mother. Go figure.

[nelliebly]

I’m glad I didn’t post post the reply I started much earlier in the thread because it missed the bigger picture. What I see now is that you were apparently so badly damaged by your ex’s rejection of you in favor of this other man, along with the continued bitterness, confusion (lots of that), and distrust that came with it, that you’ve had to take protective steps, such as that tendency to apply certain characteristics to all woman. Those protective steps aren’t serving you well.

If you had as much physical damage as you do emotional damage, you’d have gone to a doc, maybe have had surgery and/or been put in casts. The emotional damage is no less serious. You need a good therapist, one who can help you better understand the how’s and why’s and guide you to the perspectives that will help you move forward in ways you can’t just now. You may think you understand all that already, but if you did, you wouldn’t still be dealing with all the pain, mistrust, confusion, and bitterness, that led you to post the OP.

This isn’t about working on your own shortcomings; it’s about being able to live the life you deserve to have, and from what you’ve said, the one you’ve got isn’t it. Until you get some effective therapy, nothing any of us say here will do much.

[Kimstu]

@nearwildheaven

Kimstu’s attitude reminds me of my college classmate, who was married with a preschooler, who told me that she (allegedly) had legal papers stating that if she died, not only would her child(ren) not live with her husband (her sister would have custody), he would only be allowed a phone call once a week, and a single supervised visit at Christmastime.

That sounds like a really draconian alleged approach to legal guardianship, assuming the husband’s not an actual convicted child molester or something. But I don’t understand why you associate it with my “attitude”? What did I say that made you think I was okay with widowed spouses not having custody of their own children (assuming they aren’t actual convicted child molesters or something)?