The surrendered wife

[pestov]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-37861459

So I've just read this article about being a surrendered wife and I'm horrified. We do not need more people encouraging women to be subservient in their relationships, and as for relinquishing financial control?! Tell me IABU and have missed something that legitimises this madness!

why are some pp so angry over this ?? she sounded a complete nightmare to live with ! had it been a man saying that stuff...what is wrong with respecting your partner, listening to them and treating them properly, asking their opinion, thanking them for gifts ? it's common sense and common decency ffs.
had i been her dh i would have told her to jog on years ago, she sounds hard work, it is hardly being a door mat treating someone as you would like to be treated yourself.
as for the equality bit going out the window ? bloody hell, i'm all for equal rights but some people are getting a bit ott with it on here, if this is how some people, this woman included, behave, no wonder relationships go down the pan, nagging, screaming, whining, blaming and 'i'm a victim' in my ear 24 /7 would have me running for the hills if i was a man [or a woman] on the receiving end of this [ the kids were bad enough when they were young ! phew....and breathe..pipsqueak....rant over

What people are angry about is that it sends a message that there is only one possible way of managing male/female relations: somebody has to be the boss, it is impossible to manage things on the basis of equal adults.

It is not about this individual couple: it is the fact that she is choosing her experience as a platform to propagate a message that is still taken quite seriously by large sectors of society. And that message is that a relationship cannot be founded on equality, that the only alternative to a surrendered wife is a controlling and unpleasant wife.

I have plenty of Christian friends who believe this and the narrative is always the same: if/when I do not surrender to my husband and let him make all major decisions, I turn into an unpleasant, nagging, abusive harridan and make the whole family miserable. There is no alternative.

This woman is towing the party line. There is no means of knowing what her marriage was actually like before the change or if her husband had his faults too: this is what she knows she is expected to say. She is not the only one.

I fail to understand how her giving up trying to control her husband suddenly equates to her surrendering herself to him.

She shouldn't be controlling him, and he shouldn't be controlling her.

Why are some relationships so F'd up?

Interestingly, you never find Evangelical Christian husbands agonising over the fact that not leaving major decisions to their wives is turning them into controlling twats.

Hell no if I'd have trusted eeither of my ex husbands with money I'd be on the streets homeless now.
If you relinquish all control it just means you can be manipulated and you have no power. You need to keep on top of finances, work, everything else. A friends of mine was a surrendered wife, married for 40 years then dumped by dh for a younger woman. He had moved all his money abraod and they left the country.
My friend is now too old to get a job and suffers from ill health, lives in a council hostel and her state pension as she only worked for a few years is £50 a week.
Husband lives in luxury abroad.
I can't believe anyone wouldn't think of this before deciding on this course of action.

a lot of religions have strange ideas about women any way and treat them as second class citizens, whilst i respect peoples ideas and religious teachings some are totally fucked up, there is a hell of a difference in 'surrendering' and 'being equal'. mutual respect and courtsey towards each other goes a long way, treat your spouse as you would expect to be treated and that should go both ways.

show you see a lot of those on mn sadly.although hearing how some people talk it's not surprising, they angst the small stuff and stick their heads up their arses at the bigger problems then whine when it goes wrong.

Yeah, the title was super misleading. "Surrendered" is not a good way to describe what the content of the article actually explained as not moaning all the time, giving your partner respect, and not belittling them and trying to control them.

If that's really a suitable term for it, then I'm surrendered to my partner too!

Whether "surrendered" is a misnomer for what this woman does or not, the message of her blog- and of the book it takes its inspiration from - is perfectly clear: any woman who does not consciously recognise her husband as the head of the family is at risk of developing into a controlling harpy.

I know several women- adult, otherwise sensible women in happy marriages with lovely husbands- who feel they have to pay lip-service to this ideal, regardless of what actually goes on in family discussions. What they cannot see is how damaging this narrative is for women and relationships in general.

How does she think this is a revelation?! I appreciate the subtext, but if you take it at face value, she has realized if she starts treating her husband like an equal rather than a pet monkey her relationship will thrive. No shit.

Rochelle Oh yes! You can be as reactionary and surly as you like, whenever you like

*Trifle "These principles have to be looked at a bit more critically than the surface meaning when they come under the heading of 'The Surrendered Wife' and only apply to women, don't they?" I must have missed saying clearly... that the 5 of 6 'rules' are just normal compromise and should be non gender specific My variation/explanation would be:

1. Relinquish inappropriate control of your partner. Inadvertent control is inevitable... until you learn to compromise properly
2. Respect each other's thinking, even if you don't agree with it
3. Receive gifts graciously and express gratitude it is the thought that counts (Though I personally would disagree, put some effort into gift choices whydoncha!!!!)
4. Express what you want without trying to control your partner. You'll need to learn to discuss and compromise when you disagree.
5. Relies on him to handle household finances Just delete this one

6 .Focus on your own self-care and fulfilment just as your partner will focus on their own. No matter how much in love you are you ain't mind readers!

the message of her blog- and of the book it takes its inspiration from - is perfectly clear: any woman who does not consciously recognise her husband as the head of the family is at risk of developing into a controlling harpy.

Quite.

You can love and respect your DP etc (which are the very minimum for a relationship I'd have said!) without being 'surrendered'wife. But the message is about the 'head of the household' which is a fundamentally different thing.

ChewedUp I think that was the conclusion of the last thread I was on about this.

If you throw away the bits that are obviously mad... like financial control... and interpret it as having a reciprocal clause, it does just mean "Be equal, respect each other and learn to compromise"

As such, I too am surrendered, as is DH. We surrendered some parts of our individuality when we chose to become life partners. Those parts were all involved in acting as 'me' irrespective of what 'me' needed. Otherwise known as 'we grew up!!'

OurBlanche Sun 04-Dec-16 14:33:38

"If you throw away the bits that are obviously mad... like financial control... and interpret it as having a reciprocal clause, it does just mean "Be equal, respect each other and learn to compromise"

If that is what it means, why don't you get droves of men writing books about being a surrendered husband?

(and if someone did, wouldn't you assume that was about kinky sex, rather than about trying to be reciprocal?)

Why is "surrendered wife" a big thing in the US and surrendered husband is not? Why is the message always that it is the wife who needs to change her ways and be responsible for everybody's happiness?

Ime it is precisely this idea that non-submissive woman= controlling and abusive that is so pernicious. Because it appeals to nice women, over-conscientious women, women who see it as their job to keep everybody happy single-handed.

If that is what it means, why don't you get droves of men writing books about being a surrendered husband? Who knows? Maybe there is a forum out there for it. Maybe that forum just doesn't get so many Meeja hits. Maybe, sensibly, the Patriarchal society we live in doesn't allow men to think about surrender any more than the same zeitgeist has it that women can't be in charge of anything without being a bossy bitch!

(and if someone did, wouldn't you assume that was about kinky sex, rather than about trying to be reciprocal?) Yes, Then again isn't the spoiler of 50 Shades that he is the one who falls in love, surrenders to emotion?

Why is "surrendered wife" a big thing in the US and surrendered husband is not? Why is the message always that it is the wife who needs to change her ways and be responsible for everybody's happiness? Don't know. It's a fucking stupid idea from start to finish. Maybe it is another sign/symptom of the big differences between the UK and US. Like religion, creationism, etc. 'The Little Woman' has been a big Hollywood meme for over a century. Books, by women as well as men; education etc etc etc. Louisa May Alcott, Doris Day and many other famous women should be denounced as traitors to their sex!

Ime it is precisely this idea that non-submissive woman= controlling and abusive that is so pernicious. Because it appeals to nice women, over-conscientious women, women who see it as their job to keep everybody happy single-handed. I don't see that as wholly gendered. I know quite a few men who feel that way too!

As I said, it all just seems silly to me. Some common sense with some ridiculously pathetic ideals of being all pink and fluffy!!

I think it is far more specific and less fluffy than this, Blanche. The language used emanates from right-wing Evangelical Christian groups. It forms part of an overarching narrative that anything other than the man as the head of the family will bring anarchy and separation from God. And these aren't just tiny groups of weirdos; they are quite mainstream and hugely influential.

OurBlanche: These principles are issued under the title of 'The Surrendered Wife' - they are clearly aimed at women, not both men and women

Trifle erm... OK! So is there no room for a discussion to move on, refer to other similar discussions or for an individual to say "Yeah, but it makes more sense / is less scary and weird if you read it like this!" ? indeed!

cory I am aware that it is fucking scary, right wing God touting crap! But I choose to ignore that style of bullshit and point out that all it is really doing is re-packaging some 1950s fluff and, as such, can and should be totally ignored by all right thinking people

It's a bit like choosing to call certain types of spiders "Fairy Spiders" (I have real arachnophobia) Renaming them allows me to look at them without a kneejerk reaction. I can choose to smile and move on... or deal effectively with them.

I choose to do the same with "Surrendered Wives".. and there husbands! Holding them up as "Emperor's New Clothes" is a lot less bangwagoneering or hysterical or angry or fearmongering, than some other approaches, I think!