When I was a part of the Girl Guides, we engaged in activities like sailing boats and hiking in the mountains of BC. One of the first hiking lessons we learned was to arrange hikers according to their walking pace and speed. The slowest would lead, while the fastest would trail. This arrangement ensures the group stays together and covers the maximum distance with minimal effort.
The original Vox post suggests that there's an issue with the decision-making structure within the family.
The wife might indeed have a deeper understanding of virology than her husband, but he's the one responsible for making decisions.
However, the optimal solution is akin to a hiking destination, where the information collected is the distance covered, and the order of input is based on intellectual pace.
The wife's mistake was not recognizing that different types of decisions require a different hierarchy of information. They made an error by getting the order wrong, which caused their family to scatter, forcing the faster one to stop and wait for the slower. This is frustrating for the faster individual and exhausting for the slower one. who must constantly sprint to catch up.
She's confusing her position in the line with the authority to choose the destination. These are two separate things.
My man’s sawmill operates in the same way, with the slower machines in the lumber finishing department and the faster ones in the woods, felling trees. This way, the entire process moves efficiently, and work in process inventory becomes a natural process control. The wife might be thinking in terms of decision batches rather than a continuous process.
Regardless of whether the group is hiking, stitching leather into hiking boots in a factory, or making decisions, the order of operations matters and can lead to gaps forming in the line if the order is incorrect. In the scenario presented in the original post, the order was incorrect, and they reached their destination, but inefficiently.
I wonder if the divorce rate is tied to the decline of the Girl Guides or Girl Scouts. These order of operations issues are basic life lessons.
Thank you for this post. There were a couple of things that stood out to me.
(TL; DR: In a time where we are told that the average man is a dolt and completely useless as anything other than a punchline or a bad example, I choose a man who acts like a leader over one who is more concerned with not being wrong. I respect a man who makes a decision and is willing to accept the consequences of that decision. That is a character trait worth encouraging.)
1. The husband demonstrated good leadership qualities:
a. He looked at the available information and made a decision. The right or wrong of that decision (around COVID) has been discussed and continues to shape a lot of our current behavior. It's somewhat irrelevant if you are looking at whether or not he is a leader.
b. When confronted with his wife's hesitancy about the vaccine and the recommendations, he listened to her. It sounds like they discussed their disagreement. If he had been a weaker man, he could have raged at her, hit her, or threatened her in some way. I don't get the impression that he simply buckled and gave in. That would be another situation and cause for concern. It sounds like the wife is now the one driving the divisive feelings within the relationship.
c. He maintained a decent relationship with both his wife and his mother, despite their differences. I don't know of many children who are willing to tell their parents to "piss off" when they are interfering with something that is clearly none of their business.
Given this information, this husband shows clear leadership capabilities and a willingness to be blamed when he is wrong and accept responsibility for his actions. This mentality and behavior should be encouraged and rewarded. Rewarding the leadership results in more confidence, better leadership, and, potentially, better decisions and outcomes in the future.
I understand that the conservative mindset is centered around outcomes. This is not wrong. Let's look at the outcome based on what we do:
1. Verbal communication: "Remember when you were wrong about COVID, and I had to tell you the real facts about the propaganda and VAERS data?, Remember when you made me stand up to your mother?, See the number of young people dying from pericarditis?", etc.
2. Non-verbal communication (80 to 90% of human communication): aloof, dismissive, not receptive, suspicious and judgmental looks, discourtesy, open hostility.
These behaviors from his wife lead to suspicion and disrespect for him, which the children see and emulate. She distrusts him which can lead to him "checking out". If he can do nothing right, why should he try? In essence, he will shut down and withdraw. Sadly, I have seen this in both men and women. If we are looking to men as leaders, the withdrawal on his part is more destructive to the family. Since men do not have the ability to fall back on someone else, it makes them look incredibly weak and worthless. Looking at the modern state of the black community within the US is a fair example, I think.
On the other hand, if the approach is to reward the positive, by breaking down the situation into smaller relevant parts, the outcome can be very different.
1. Verbal: "Thank you for providing guidance.", "I appreciate you listening to me and looking at the information from the CDC regarding the VAERS data.", "Your mother loves you and our children almost as much as we love them. Thank you for listening and keeping the peace. I appreciate you believing me." You can still gently explain why there is a difference of opinions.
2. Ask him for input in a discipline that is a strong area for him, in his "wheelhouse", so to speak.
3. The relevant parts are making the decision, listening to different opinions, looking into alternative facts when offered, deciding if they are correct or applicable, keeping the peace between warring factions (wife and MIL), and being willing to change his mind, if necessary and based on his growing knowledge of the situation.
This will allow him to build confidence and remain a leader within the household. Over time he will make better decisions. I keep thinking back to the post by Vox Day about the Female Superpower. Telling a man he has done a good job boosts his confidence and improves his chances of being a man who can command respect from his wife, family, and peers.
While I cannot begin to comprehend the pressure that a man feels when being faced with making decisions and the expectation of being a good leader, I can tell you what I have observed. Rewarding someone. for doing what you want them to do often results in more of the same behavior. Over time, the outcomes improve, and the decisions become second nature, like they were born this way.
My congratulations to the SDL. This simple posting has been like a hard hit on M-F perspective wasps nest. The comments are fast and furious and fascinating and enlightening. Thank you. Hope the book contents benefits from these exchanges . I know I have.
"My marriage went from rough to rocky, rougher to rockier, eternal trouble, win, lose, each one jockeying to be the winner. I took your seminar and learned about a system, cooperation, win, win. I explained it to my husband. We thereupon worked together on every detail, seeking win, win: both of us win. We both won. Who would wish to compete in a marriage? The winner would be married to a loser. Who would wish to be married to a loser?"
Sometimes you see those relationships where it's them vs the world and all the adversity in the universe only pushes them closer together. Roissy, I think, once said that sigmas make girls feel like this once they poach them from their hierarchy. On the other hand you see the relationships where they struggle to push their opinion over the other's head which has the tautological result that when they win, they are married to a loser. Even when it's the man who makes the woman into the loser it can sorta work but it's not nearly as strong as the win-win mentality described above.
I feel like there's a similarity, with the posted story highlighted, to fathers who insist on never letting their sons win in head to head competition and who get bitter when they lose. There's a skewed perspective that makes you wonder what sort of assumptions they had for the relationship.
This comes up so much in people who get married, have a certain list of demands and assumptions for their partner, and then the partner fails to fall into line. Maybe they didn't ask the important questions before they were married, or maybe one or the other (though usually the woman) thought, "I can fix him."
Every little thing becomes a power struggle; they're like two people in a row boat who each have one oar, but they can't agree on the destination and even when they do, they keep paddling in opposite directions. Every tiny perceived infraction becomes a catalyst for a blowup. It's as though nobody ever taught them what marriage is, what it is for, and what their responsibilities to their spouse ought to be.
It’s rough when family members are not on the same page especially spouses. My brothers got vaxxed and mocked me for not doing it. Oh well I don’t have to live with them. Do I still respect them? Sure, they still have good qualities and I love them. But I don’t have much confidence in their ability to make good decisions. I am pretty sure they vaxxed the kids too- my nieces and nephews
A lot of men get very autistic about submission. What matters is the patterns of behavior.
For example as a manager you discover even your best and most loyal people will refuse orders from time to time. I have found that as long as it is rare then it isn't a problem.
Same thing with my wife. I can count on the one hand the times she has disobeyed me over the 15+ years we have been married. It doesn't indicate there is a problem that needs fixing. In fact it is the exception that proves the rule.
My wife of 47 years was a special Ed teacher BA, MA with MR, LD, and EMH certifications. About 15 years into the marriage and after having kids of our own that during a heated argument about a decision regarding the kids that I realized she was using the same techniques on me, that she used on her special Ed students. Pissed me off big time. After that point they never worked again. Fool me once shame on me, fool me again no way. Funny thing is that it was only in the areas where she seriously disagreed with me that those techniques came into play. In retrospect I find that while she disagreed with me many times, when it came to the important things she always deferred to my decision. Still true today.
The big flag for me on respect in the original comment isn’t the disagreement between the wife and husband itself - it’s the line where the wife says “I fought with his mom for him.”
Is this woman’s struggle with respecting him actually grounded in the vaxx issue itself? He ended up taking her advice and not getting it, so I would guess not. The respect struggle, to this outsider, seems more grounded in her having to do the fighting for him. He should have stood up to his own mother and said “wife and I will be making this decision together - butt out.”
That whole C-19 to [VX] thing was organized around everybody perceiving an interest in everybody else's business and decisions. It was focus-grouped out of and during the prior Events for sure.
The fact of the matter is, that he shouldn’t have required the advice of his wife on whether or not to get the vaxx in the first place. And that’ll be the issue she has. The incident with his mother just compounds this unfortunately.
I completely disagree - it was a fraught time, with new information of varying degrees of reliability coming in fast. Not everyone who was trying to keep their head afloat had time to stay on top of counter narrative blogs constantly. If he was busy keeping their family financially stable and she could data gather during nap time, for example, relying on her advice - which he ultimately did - is a valid delegation effort. Or if she had relevant educational experience that he lacked, for example. The would fall squarely under helpmeet - using her time and expertise in service of the family, and him deferring to her where she has put in time or skill that he hasn’t.
No man can be an expert, and a counter-narrative expert in all things.
Your insight is good, but as the wife might be assigned to perform the actual research and present her man with a column A-For, and a column B-Against, the husband must make the decision and the family abide by it. If the husband cannot make the decision, then the problem is serious. If the wife cannot present her man with a rational argument, both for and against, and therefore add value to the decision making process, then there is a problem. It is not the wife’s job to advocate for or against, but to support the capability of the family unit to perform competently. A family is not a democracy.
There is a difference between debate and disagreement, research, and development before the decision is made, and noncompliance after the decision is made. Whoa be it to the wife that is not compliant after the decision comes down.
This cycles back to the boss-delegation discussion in a fashion. Does the boss actually want to hear the detailed pros and cons of every single delegated decision, or does he just want to the job to get done? Do real families actually have the husband making all of the final decisions, in every single area, with the wife never advocating for or against any of them, even if they are within her delegated duties and expertise?
That seems redundant, tiresome, and inefficient. Within areas of the woman’s expertise, and assuming the husband trusts her judgment, delegation is much more efficient if she reports to him the same way Vox reported a boss wanting a subordinate to report. “I’ve considered all the options, and XYZ is the best way forward, because… “ The subordinate should be prepared to go into details if the boss asks, but over explaining every single time is a disrespectful waste of his time.
If the husband has delegated children’s health care decisions to the wife, then he’s trusting her judgment in that area and her presenting a PowerPoint on the pros and cons of every vaccine recommended for every childhood check-up and then expecting him to make the final decision, is a failure to obey his order that she makes decisions within the delegated area.
Agree wholeheartedly. The XO/Navigator has a great head on her shoulders and has pretty solid ideas, and she is not shy about sharing. She defers big decisions to me, but she handles her own bailiwick for the fam, making sure I'm informed on what's been done.
I want her inputs, and she's been instrumental in helping me see other aspects to some problems. Like the Captain and XO on a ship, I want that input and sometimes her pushback before I make a final call on some big items. This is why we are married -- we have the benefits of a team with a designated leader.
Yes - exactly this dynamic is what works for us also.
I think a huge part of what is missing from the people here saying “divorce him for even having considered getting the vaxx” is that Captain will be most effective in making big decisions, if he knows that his XO has his back and isn’t going to mutiny even if he makes the wrong call.
Unless you are dealing with actual malice, people make the wrong call because they genuinely believed it was the right call with the information they had at the time, weighed against their guiding principals. An effective Captain needs an XO who’s going to respond to an error, even an egregious one by (a) helping him course correct effectively in the immediate crises and (b) once the crisis is over, sitting down and being like “So Cap, that was all kinds of wild. From where I’m sitting it looks like we missed XYZ and did EF totally backwards. Since those are in my wheelhouse, I’m thinking of changing ABC to address it. What other failure points do you see? And of those in my delegated area, what outcomes would you like to see changed.”
What the Captain doesn’t need is going into a big decision with an XO who is saying “don’t mess this up or else I’m going to mutiny.” And after making a bad call, during the crisis and clean up phases, he especially doesn’t need the actual mutiny happening. That takes the team from having two adults trying to solve one crisis, to a single adult with two crises (the original error and the mutiny) to resolve.
One time I heard (((Dr. Laura))) talk about how some men get "hit-wives" to stand up to and fight with their mothers and sisters for them.
My wife's best friend growing up in Mexico married an upper class American guy. This guy's father is a true member of the elite and pampers his daughters and sons-in-law to the nth degree but when his son needs some help it's all grit and bootstraps.
Well this guy married my wife's friend because she's kind of "spicy" and perfectly willing to mix it up with her FIL, MIL and SIL's. The husband's side of the family thinks that my wife's friend is a major witch with a capital B.
Sometimes some guys just don't have what it takes to take on their own family and they get a wife to do the job for them. That may very well be the case with the woman from this article.
Does your friend’s “hit-wife” respect him or does she regard him more like a child or a pet?
Presenting a mutual front, and both holding it as the circumstances require, makes sense to me. But I’d find it hard to respect a man who needed me to fight with his mom and sisters FOR him instead of WITH him.
Concur, cultural differences come into play. My family could get loud, in all matters. Wife’s family never raised their voice no matter the subject or situation. Like no emotion. One must be aware of those differences and adjust accordingly
I do wonder if the millions of young men coming in thanks to Biden realize they’ve probably reduced their chances of getting laid by at least 50% relative to if they had stayed in their own countries.
What a great article on empathy, forgiveness, and respect. Everyone makes mistakes, it's a fallen world. Purity spiraling with a lack of sympathy leads only to chaos and ruin. What a series of great and poignant articles this past week. Merci et salut, SDL.
Hmm on that female male jab breakdown. Do you think that has anything to do with voting patterns?
I know it's not the most relevant. But seeing all the "college age women make up the majority of liberal voters" and "universities are mainly female" makes me think.
Maybe non conformity isn't strictly political but conformity likely is. From my side cons were mixed on the jab, but liberals were all in.
Women are programmed to agree with the (perceived) majority. That ensured their survival back in the cave days. That or they agree with a strong male figure in their immediate environment. If there is no strong man, they'll agree with the substitute, which is politicians and the media.
There is a reason the inventor of public relations, Edward Bernays, very specifically targeted women. You'll also find that pretty much all advertisement is geared towards women, because most women unfortunately are very easily manipulated. Just tell them, everybody else does X. And they will follow suit.
I am not sure that even our selected representatives have much to do with voting patterns in the Clown world. But surely, women are much more malleable and reliant on others to tell them what to do.
However, the question also concerns politics, where people often choose to support what their favoured political party's position is. For example, will republican voters go along with ethnic cleansings and sending men to die for someone else's war? Clowns influence all parties, do not listen to them.
From my own examination of various surveys on the matter, it’s due almost entirely to both voting patterns and age — older GOP voters (~85%) got the shots a lot more than younger ones (~60%). (Democrats didn’t have much of a difference across ages… about 90-95% regardless.)
The female population is both more Democrat and older, so it would have a higher vaxxed rate for both reasons.
In marriage absolute obedience is required. Because of the actions of Eve, God has subjected a woman's will to man. Genesis 3:16, "your desire shall be subject to your husband and he shall rule over you".
The topic, the consequences and whatever people may feel about them are immaterial, none of it gives even the slightest excuse to defy the order that God has decreed.
Practically as well, if a women takes her own council then her husband will never have responsibility, so he will not decide properly.
"A wife is no more bound to get her child vaccinated at the husband’s demand than she is to cut off the child’s nose, sexually abuse the child, or otherwise harm the child."
Except sin of course. I thought that went without saying but I guess not. Obedience to husband comes from obedience to God, not a rejection of God, so I think you missed the topic completely.
There's is no scriptural basis for it, something that is generally understood. Even marriage vows are "till death" not "till danger of death". It's pretty easy to identify too, any action or inaction born out of a fear of death isn't going to be supported.
[14] For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy.
For some reason, some people had trouble seeing the Fraud. The husband was extremely fortunate to have a wife/partner that did so. And Owes her for influencing him.
Marriage is a sacrament in the Christian tradition. It seems a lot of woman prefer to raise their standards only after they secure a husband, but this is backwards. Modern dating practices conflate courtship and commitment, but once you accept a proposal or worse propose to a man on your own, that's it, that's your upper limit. You don't get to harangue a man because you disagreed.
If this was a boyfriend, I would be more inclined to agree with the argument that this is somehow irreconcilable. You are free to go. However, this woman has not only a husband but a child. A bitter wife who sets herself against her husband is only going to make this child's life hell. And for what? A misstep? An unfollowed command? Men and women are supposed to have each other's back (Ecclesiastes 4 12).
Hen pecked husbands and bitter divorces is not a solution.
I didn't make the claim she did. There's quite a few responses indicating she shouldn't trust her husband anymore or that she should have questioned more decisions. I'm refuting the notion that it would be okay to use this disagreement as a lifelong wedge.
I see a lot of people putting the masking/distancing on a separate plane from the not-vax. I understand there is a difference, but in the end the masking/distancing may be more harmful in that it destroys society and indicates obedience to the Agenda. Ritually covering the race and installing fear of one's fellow man is satanic and especially harmful for children.
That said, masking/distancing for a month or so could be justified for the sake of the marriage, any longer and you are abetting mental illness.
Betting that the 37% were the men with girlfriends and lacking frame.
When I was a part of the Girl Guides, we engaged in activities like sailing boats and hiking in the mountains of BC. One of the first hiking lessons we learned was to arrange hikers according to their walking pace and speed. The slowest would lead, while the fastest would trail. This arrangement ensures the group stays together and covers the maximum distance with minimal effort.
The original Vox post suggests that there's an issue with the decision-making structure within the family.
The wife might indeed have a deeper understanding of virology than her husband, but he's the one responsible for making decisions.
However, the optimal solution is akin to a hiking destination, where the information collected is the distance covered, and the order of input is based on intellectual pace.
The wife's mistake was not recognizing that different types of decisions require a different hierarchy of information. They made an error by getting the order wrong, which caused their family to scatter, forcing the faster one to stop and wait for the slower. This is frustrating for the faster individual and exhausting for the slower one. who must constantly sprint to catch up.
She's confusing her position in the line with the authority to choose the destination. These are two separate things.
My man’s sawmill operates in the same way, with the slower machines in the lumber finishing department and the faster ones in the woods, felling trees. This way, the entire process moves efficiently, and work in process inventory becomes a natural process control. The wife might be thinking in terms of decision batches rather than a continuous process.
Regardless of whether the group is hiking, stitching leather into hiking boots in a factory, or making decisions, the order of operations matters and can lead to gaps forming in the line if the order is incorrect. In the scenario presented in the original post, the order was incorrect, and they reached their destination, but inefficiently.
I wonder if the divorce rate is tied to the decline of the Girl Guides or Girl Scouts. These order of operations issues are basic life lessons.
Thank you for this post. There were a couple of things that stood out to me.
(TL; DR: In a time where we are told that the average man is a dolt and completely useless as anything other than a punchline or a bad example, I choose a man who acts like a leader over one who is more concerned with not being wrong. I respect a man who makes a decision and is willing to accept the consequences of that decision. That is a character trait worth encouraging.)
1. The husband demonstrated good leadership qualities:
a. He looked at the available information and made a decision. The right or wrong of that decision (around COVID) has been discussed and continues to shape a lot of our current behavior. It's somewhat irrelevant if you are looking at whether or not he is a leader.
b. When confronted with his wife's hesitancy about the vaccine and the recommendations, he listened to her. It sounds like they discussed their disagreement. If he had been a weaker man, he could have raged at her, hit her, or threatened her in some way. I don't get the impression that he simply buckled and gave in. That would be another situation and cause for concern. It sounds like the wife is now the one driving the divisive feelings within the relationship.
c. He maintained a decent relationship with both his wife and his mother, despite their differences. I don't know of many children who are willing to tell their parents to "piss off" when they are interfering with something that is clearly none of their business.
Given this information, this husband shows clear leadership capabilities and a willingness to be blamed when he is wrong and accept responsibility for his actions. This mentality and behavior should be encouraged and rewarded. Rewarding the leadership results in more confidence, better leadership, and, potentially, better decisions and outcomes in the future.
I understand that the conservative mindset is centered around outcomes. This is not wrong. Let's look at the outcome based on what we do:
1. Verbal communication: "Remember when you were wrong about COVID, and I had to tell you the real facts about the propaganda and VAERS data?, Remember when you made me stand up to your mother?, See the number of young people dying from pericarditis?", etc.
2. Non-verbal communication (80 to 90% of human communication): aloof, dismissive, not receptive, suspicious and judgmental looks, discourtesy, open hostility.
These behaviors from his wife lead to suspicion and disrespect for him, which the children see and emulate. She distrusts him which can lead to him "checking out". If he can do nothing right, why should he try? In essence, he will shut down and withdraw. Sadly, I have seen this in both men and women. If we are looking to men as leaders, the withdrawal on his part is more destructive to the family. Since men do not have the ability to fall back on someone else, it makes them look incredibly weak and worthless. Looking at the modern state of the black community within the US is a fair example, I think.
On the other hand, if the approach is to reward the positive, by breaking down the situation into smaller relevant parts, the outcome can be very different.
1. Verbal: "Thank you for providing guidance.", "I appreciate you listening to me and looking at the information from the CDC regarding the VAERS data.", "Your mother loves you and our children almost as much as we love them. Thank you for listening and keeping the peace. I appreciate you believing me." You can still gently explain why there is a difference of opinions.
2. Ask him for input in a discipline that is a strong area for him, in his "wheelhouse", so to speak.
3. The relevant parts are making the decision, listening to different opinions, looking into alternative facts when offered, deciding if they are correct or applicable, keeping the peace between warring factions (wife and MIL), and being willing to change his mind, if necessary and based on his growing knowledge of the situation.
This will allow him to build confidence and remain a leader within the household. Over time he will make better decisions. I keep thinking back to the post by Vox Day about the Female Superpower. Telling a man he has done a good job boosts his confidence and improves his chances of being a man who can command respect from his wife, family, and peers.
While I cannot begin to comprehend the pressure that a man feels when being faced with making decisions and the expectation of being a good leader, I can tell you what I have observed. Rewarding someone. for doing what you want them to do often results in more of the same behavior. Over time, the outcomes improve, and the decisions become second nature, like they were born this way.
My congratulations to the SDL. This simple posting has been like a hard hit on M-F perspective wasps nest. The comments are fast and furious and fascinating and enlightening. Thank you. Hope the book contents benefits from these exchanges . I know I have.
A story from a fan of Edward Deming:
"My marriage went from rough to rocky, rougher to rockier, eternal trouble, win, lose, each one jockeying to be the winner. I took your seminar and learned about a system, cooperation, win, win. I explained it to my husband. We thereupon worked together on every detail, seeking win, win: both of us win. We both won. Who would wish to compete in a marriage? The winner would be married to a loser. Who would wish to be married to a loser?"
Sometimes you see those relationships where it's them vs the world and all the adversity in the universe only pushes them closer together. Roissy, I think, once said that sigmas make girls feel like this once they poach them from their hierarchy. On the other hand you see the relationships where they struggle to push their opinion over the other's head which has the tautological result that when they win, they are married to a loser. Even when it's the man who makes the woman into the loser it can sorta work but it's not nearly as strong as the win-win mentality described above.
I feel like there's a similarity, with the posted story highlighted, to fathers who insist on never letting their sons win in head to head competition and who get bitter when they lose. There's a skewed perspective that makes you wonder what sort of assumptions they had for the relationship.
This comes up so much in people who get married, have a certain list of demands and assumptions for their partner, and then the partner fails to fall into line. Maybe they didn't ask the important questions before they were married, or maybe one or the other (though usually the woman) thought, "I can fix him."
Every little thing becomes a power struggle; they're like two people in a row boat who each have one oar, but they can't agree on the destination and even when they do, they keep paddling in opposite directions. Every tiny perceived infraction becomes a catalyst for a blowup. It's as though nobody ever taught them what marriage is, what it is for, and what their responsibilities to their spouse ought to be.
It’s rough when family members are not on the same page especially spouses. My brothers got vaxxed and mocked me for not doing it. Oh well I don’t have to live with them. Do I still respect them? Sure, they still have good qualities and I love them. But I don’t have much confidence in their ability to make good decisions. I am pretty sure they vaxxed the kids too- my nieces and nephews
A lot of men get very autistic about submission. What matters is the patterns of behavior.
For example as a manager you discover even your best and most loyal people will refuse orders from time to time. I have found that as long as it is rare then it isn't a problem.
Same thing with my wife. I can count on the one hand the times she has disobeyed me over the 15+ years we have been married. It doesn't indicate there is a problem that needs fixing. In fact it is the exception that proves the rule.
My wife of 47 years was a special Ed teacher BA, MA with MR, LD, and EMH certifications. About 15 years into the marriage and after having kids of our own that during a heated argument about a decision regarding the kids that I realized she was using the same techniques on me, that she used on her special Ed students. Pissed me off big time. After that point they never worked again. Fool me once shame on me, fool me again no way. Funny thing is that it was only in the areas where she seriously disagreed with me that those techniques came into play. In retrospect I find that while she disagreed with me many times, when it came to the important things she always deferred to my decision. Still true today.
Nurses do this too. There is no more intense a totalitarian than a floor unit charge nurse.
True
Experience has taught that if done well, its a very good thing, a unit that’s a joy to work on.
If it’s done poorly than that’s the sign of a woman adrift desperately searching for male domination
YMMV
The big flag for me on respect in the original comment isn’t the disagreement between the wife and husband itself - it’s the line where the wife says “I fought with his mom for him.”
Is this woman’s struggle with respecting him actually grounded in the vaxx issue itself? He ended up taking her advice and not getting it, so I would guess not. The respect struggle, to this outsider, seems more grounded in her having to do the fighting for him. He should have stood up to his own mother and said “wife and I will be making this decision together - butt out.”
That whole C-19 to [VX] thing was organized around everybody perceiving an interest in everybody else's business and decisions. It was focus-grouped out of and during the prior Events for sure.
The fact of the matter is, that he shouldn’t have required the advice of his wife on whether or not to get the vaxx in the first place. And that’ll be the issue she has. The incident with his mother just compounds this unfortunately.
I completely disagree - it was a fraught time, with new information of varying degrees of reliability coming in fast. Not everyone who was trying to keep their head afloat had time to stay on top of counter narrative blogs constantly. If he was busy keeping their family financially stable and she could data gather during nap time, for example, relying on her advice - which he ultimately did - is a valid delegation effort. Or if she had relevant educational experience that he lacked, for example. The would fall squarely under helpmeet - using her time and expertise in service of the family, and him deferring to her where she has put in time or skill that he hasn’t.
No man can be an expert, and a counter-narrative expert in all things.
Your insight is good, but as the wife might be assigned to perform the actual research and present her man with a column A-For, and a column B-Against, the husband must make the decision and the family abide by it. If the husband cannot make the decision, then the problem is serious. If the wife cannot present her man with a rational argument, both for and against, and therefore add value to the decision making process, then there is a problem. It is not the wife’s job to advocate for or against, but to support the capability of the family unit to perform competently. A family is not a democracy.
There is a difference between debate and disagreement, research, and development before the decision is made, and noncompliance after the decision is made. Whoa be it to the wife that is not compliant after the decision comes down.
This cycles back to the boss-delegation discussion in a fashion. Does the boss actually want to hear the detailed pros and cons of every single delegated decision, or does he just want to the job to get done? Do real families actually have the husband making all of the final decisions, in every single area, with the wife never advocating for or against any of them, even if they are within her delegated duties and expertise?
That seems redundant, tiresome, and inefficient. Within areas of the woman’s expertise, and assuming the husband trusts her judgment, delegation is much more efficient if she reports to him the same way Vox reported a boss wanting a subordinate to report. “I’ve considered all the options, and XYZ is the best way forward, because… “ The subordinate should be prepared to go into details if the boss asks, but over explaining every single time is a disrespectful waste of his time.
If the husband has delegated children’s health care decisions to the wife, then he’s trusting her judgment in that area and her presenting a PowerPoint on the pros and cons of every vaccine recommended for every childhood check-up and then expecting him to make the final decision, is a failure to obey his order that she makes decisions within the delegated area.
Agree wholeheartedly. The XO/Navigator has a great head on her shoulders and has pretty solid ideas, and she is not shy about sharing. She defers big decisions to me, but she handles her own bailiwick for the fam, making sure I'm informed on what's been done.
I want her inputs, and she's been instrumental in helping me see other aspects to some problems. Like the Captain and XO on a ship, I want that input and sometimes her pushback before I make a final call on some big items. This is why we are married -- we have the benefits of a team with a designated leader.
Yes - exactly this dynamic is what works for us also.
I think a huge part of what is missing from the people here saying “divorce him for even having considered getting the vaxx” is that Captain will be most effective in making big decisions, if he knows that his XO has his back and isn’t going to mutiny even if he makes the wrong call.
Unless you are dealing with actual malice, people make the wrong call because they genuinely believed it was the right call with the information they had at the time, weighed against their guiding principals. An effective Captain needs an XO who’s going to respond to an error, even an egregious one by (a) helping him course correct effectively in the immediate crises and (b) once the crisis is over, sitting down and being like “So Cap, that was all kinds of wild. From where I’m sitting it looks like we missed XYZ and did EF totally backwards. Since those are in my wheelhouse, I’m thinking of changing ABC to address it. What other failure points do you see? And of those in my delegated area, what outcomes would you like to see changed.”
What the Captain doesn’t need is going into a big decision with an XO who is saying “don’t mess this up or else I’m going to mutiny.” And after making a bad call, during the crisis and clean up phases, he especially doesn’t need the actual mutiny happening. That takes the team from having two adults trying to solve one crisis, to a single adult with two crises (the original error and the mutiny) to resolve.
That is too rational. My experience is that very, very few women are capable of presenting a rational argument.
One time I heard (((Dr. Laura))) talk about how some men get "hit-wives" to stand up to and fight with their mothers and sisters for them.
My wife's best friend growing up in Mexico married an upper class American guy. This guy's father is a true member of the elite and pampers his daughters and sons-in-law to the nth degree but when his son needs some help it's all grit and bootstraps.
Well this guy married my wife's friend because she's kind of "spicy" and perfectly willing to mix it up with her FIL, MIL and SIL's. The husband's side of the family thinks that my wife's friend is a major witch with a capital B.
Sometimes some guys just don't have what it takes to take on their own family and they get a wife to do the job for them. That may very well be the case with the woman from this article.
Does your friend’s “hit-wife” respect him or does she regard him more like a child or a pet?
Presenting a mutual front, and both holding it as the circumstances require, makes sense to me. But I’d find it hard to respect a man who needed me to fight with his mom and sisters FOR him instead of WITH him.
She loves him and yes she respects him. He's a good guy. He's just beaten down by his upper class WASP family and their BS.
Concur, cultural differences come into play. My family could get loud, in all matters. Wife’s family never raised their voice no matter the subject or situation. Like no emotion. One must be aware of those differences and adjust accordingly
Sounds like his family would only listen to his POV with a team, hence "hit wife." That's on his family rather than him.
Also, points to the wife for standing up for her man. A quality quite lacking, apparently.
With such a gender imbalance, I almost wonder if America is going to have an abduction of the Sabine women type event.
I do wonder if the millions of young men coming in thanks to Biden realize they’ve probably reduced their chances of getting laid by at least 50% relative to if they had stayed in their own countries.
We might have to go to their countries and take away their women.
Much of Clown World is a civilizational shit-test by women looking for the strong man
They will allow themselves to be taken and justify their forced submission by blaming the weakness of their men.
And they will be right
So basically they want handmaid's tale
Considering they go so far as to cosplay as handmaids, it's not unreasonable to suggest that they long for that role. Desperately.
Sad.
What a great article on empathy, forgiveness, and respect. Everyone makes mistakes, it's a fallen world. Purity spiraling with a lack of sympathy leads only to chaos and ruin. What a series of great and poignant articles this past week. Merci et salut, SDL.
Hmm on that female male jab breakdown. Do you think that has anything to do with voting patterns?
I know it's not the most relevant. But seeing all the "college age women make up the majority of liberal voters" and "universities are mainly female" makes me think.
Maybe non conformity isn't strictly political but conformity likely is. From my side cons were mixed on the jab, but liberals were all in.
Women are programmed to agree with the (perceived) majority. That ensured their survival back in the cave days. That or they agree with a strong male figure in their immediate environment. If there is no strong man, they'll agree with the substitute, which is politicians and the media.
There is a reason the inventor of public relations, Edward Bernays, very specifically targeted women. You'll also find that pretty much all advertisement is geared towards women, because most women unfortunately are very easily manipulated. Just tell them, everybody else does X. And they will follow suit.
I am not sure that even our selected representatives have much to do with voting patterns in the Clown world. But surely, women are much more malleable and reliant on others to tell them what to do.
However, the question also concerns politics, where people often choose to support what their favoured political party's position is. For example, will republican voters go along with ethnic cleansings and sending men to die for someone else's war? Clowns influence all parties, do not listen to them.
From my own examination of various surveys on the matter, it’s due almost entirely to both voting patterns and age — older GOP voters (~85%) got the shots a lot more than younger ones (~60%). (Democrats didn’t have much of a difference across ages… about 90-95% regardless.)
The female population is both more Democrat and older, so it would have a higher vaxxed rate for both reasons.
In marriage absolute obedience is required. Because of the actions of Eve, God has subjected a woman's will to man. Genesis 3:16, "your desire shall be subject to your husband and he shall rule over you".
The topic, the consequences and whatever people may feel about them are immaterial, none of it gives even the slightest excuse to defy the order that God has decreed.
Practically as well, if a women takes her own council then her husband will never have responsibility, so he will not decide properly.
"A wife is no more bound to get her child vaccinated at the husband’s demand than she is to cut off the child’s nose, sexually abuse the child, or otherwise harm the child."
Absolute obedience eh?
Except sin of course. I thought that went without saying but I guess not. Obedience to husband comes from obedience to God, not a rejection of God, so I think you missed the topic completely.
I think telling your wife to potentially harm herself or her child via killshots should be included, but agree to disagree.
There's is no scriptural basis for it, something that is generally understood. Even marriage vows are "till death" not "till danger of death". It's pretty easy to identify too, any action or inaction born out of a fear of death isn't going to be supported.
I guess you never heard of Abigail, who saved her entire household by doing other than her husband wished.
"doing other than her husband wished" No, based on his reaction that's not true at all.
This verse seems appropriate.
1 Corinthians 7:14
[14] For the unbelieving husband is sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified through her believing husband; for otherwise your children are unclean, but now they are holy.
Wow.
Awesome Blog post as usual.
For some reason, some people had trouble seeing the Fraud. The husband was extremely fortunate to have a wife/partner that did so. And Owes her for influencing him.
Marriage is a sacrament in the Christian tradition. It seems a lot of woman prefer to raise their standards only after they secure a husband, but this is backwards. Modern dating practices conflate courtship and commitment, but once you accept a proposal or worse propose to a man on your own, that's it, that's your upper limit. You don't get to harangue a man because you disagreed.
If this was a boyfriend, I would be more inclined to agree with the argument that this is somehow irreconcilable. You are free to go. However, this woman has not only a husband but a child. A bitter wife who sets herself against her husband is only going to make this child's life hell. And for what? A misstep? An unfollowed command? Men and women are supposed to have each other's back (Ecclesiastes 4 12).
Hen pecked husbands and bitter divorces is not a solution.
Where did you get the idea she harangued?
I didn't make the claim she did. There's quite a few responses indicating she shouldn't trust her husband anymore or that she should have questioned more decisions. I'm refuting the notion that it would be okay to use this disagreement as a lifelong wedge.
I see a lot of people putting the masking/distancing on a separate plane from the not-vax. I understand there is a difference, but in the end the masking/distancing may be more harmful in that it destroys society and indicates obedience to the Agenda. Ritually covering the race and installing fear of one's fellow man is satanic and especially harmful for children.
That said, masking/distancing for a month or so could be justified for the sake of the marriage, any longer and you are abetting mental illness.