Are the "rules" different if DH is a "genius"?

[EquityDarling]

name change for this one...

I have been together for 8 years (married for 6) to a DH who is generally acknowledged (although not by himself) to be a "genius". With a few details changed to avoid outing but convey the essence, he is a renowned artist (in a very specialist field), a widely published faculty member at a top university and a leading campaigner on a particular political/social issue who is often interviewed in the press/asked to give evidence to select committees etc. His intelligence and talent was obvious from an early age, making him something of a freak child, which his lower middle class aspirational parents did not deal with well - they were embarrassed by his "weirdness" and constantly put him down so that he is utterly lacking in self-confidence and can have trust issues and react in a very hostile manner to anything he perceives as criticism. He has an incredibly strong sense of justice and fairness, hence the campaigning work in an area which is often difficult, unpopular and makes him lots of enemies.

I am definitively NOT any kind of genius, just an averagely bright professional from a happy, stable family.

DH and I in many ways have a really fantastic relationship - he is so fascinating, massively enthusiastic, really interested in my views on everything and flatteringly attracted to me sexually. But when he goes through a period of extended stress, which is happening at the moment, due to various issues of principle related to university politics and the wider issue on which he campaigns, he can be very difficult to live with. I have no problem with the things which are upsetting him - he is quite justified to think they are shockingly hypocritical and corrupt and I share his concern about them - but his anger and upset has simply taken over our lives to a degree which is really driving me down. He has immense energy, hardly sleeps and wants/needs to talk about what is bad and wrong and how down it is making him, around the clock. I feel as though the only place I can get any peace is at work.

We have had some counselling (both joint and separate) and I have found that my best coping mechanism is an approach called "radical acceptance", whereby I have to let him talk it out without trying to 'solve' the problem, accept that if we go out with friends he will often spend the evening staring angrily at his phone, posting furiously on various specialist discussion boards, or ranting about how awful something is until it fills up the whole of the space. The same happens if we go to see my family or if he and I go away for the weekend. Basically I accept what I can't change and draw a few agreed boundaries where I can, for example he no longer calls me at work for long rants and has mostly stopped waking me up in the middle of the night to tell me things. I (sort of) knew this was what I was getting into when I married him and I know he genuinely cannot help it, but I am beginning to doubt my ability to see this through in the long term, particularly since the issues currently enraging him aren't going to go away.

I do not believe this is emotional abuse as it is not calculating or manipulative, he is simply overtaken by the strength of his emotions and finds it very hard to self-sooth, but I am wondering whether I am letting my own needs slide to a degree which is damaging. Please be gentle lovely Mumsnetters but advice would be appreciated...

*behave as
*than with the behavior bit

I went back to my post- I admit it was a bit confusing- I started with asking why there not many women geniuses in verbal fields-and ended with-I quote- :
So our social skills + the neurological differences might explain why girls can more easily than men keep in check their verbal abilities.
So there is some restraint in women in relation to their verbal abilities for the best (we have less annoying female bores) and for the worst (less women among famous geniuses in verbal fields).
And unfortunately Simone and Germaine are annoying as individuals and Virginia is completely unbearable. But they are exceptions in this behavior.

Gosh, you must be extraordinarily elderly to know what De Beauvoir and Woolf are like, in person. Dr Greer is fairly normal for a bety high achieving intellectual and writer (I had occasion to be in the same seminar room as her). She was less annoying, I found, than dealing with people who make spurious claims without evidence.

"And unfortunately Simone and Germaine are annoying as individuals and Virginia is completely unbearable. But they are exceptions in this behavior." Gosh. Really? Tell us more- your insight into the personalities of dead people will be fascinating! And Greer? Yes, women are often thought annoying when they don't stay in their box....

I get that it hasn't come across well in Mama's posts but I find Simone and Germaine a bit annoying too. Talented, very, but I can really imagine both of them being that mate of a mate you're like 'oh god shush' at, in your head. I don't mind separating character from talent, we do it with men all the time, look at all the rock gods and their weird characters.

"Which socialise girls to see themselves in the future as "Muses" or helpmeets of genius men."

To stick with the rock n roll theme, I was in a music shop the other day looking at books. Many many biogs/autobiogs of male rock lives. A couple of female ones, but the most prominent ones I know - Marianne Faithfull's book, which is about her yes, but also very much about her relationship with Jagger, Cynthia's book about John Lennon, and best of all Pamela de Barre's groupie bible. All about playing that supporting role, in one way or another.

There's nothing wrong with it, I suppose. With supporting someone and being valued for that. In a way it's a good thing, to step outside the 'you have to be the god of the world' thing and recognise that being something else is valuable too. Or for just wanting to make a life having sex with famous people. But it bugs me that it always seems to work a certain way with the genders.

Oh, Twinkle I want to know what you think about being able to 'hear' Beta Blockers in performance?

One additional explanation for the higher incidence (and accompanying acceptance in society) of "bad" behavior in the male genius type could arise from several factors working together: the statistically higher percentage of males on the hypomanic/manic scale in bi-polar disorder, slightly higher percentage of males with IQs at the very highest (and, of course, lowest) end of the spectrum, and testosterone.

Not all posts had loaded for some reason before my post above -- seem to have stated similar as others before.

The mention of male rock stars and female muses did make me think of a couple of current female musicians who are, arguably, geniuses, and who have managed to be the dominant partner with male collaborators, partners and mentors taking a supporting role - Kate Bush, and Bjork.

Both have collaborated extensively with male musicians and artists but both are undeniably their own person, and in control of their own work, their image and identity.

true, there are rock gods but there are also rock goddesses, men don't always get all the glory!

The rules arent different. He can learn to be more considerate, even if his genius includes a large dose of never diagnosed Autism Spectrum Disorder, or he is Bipolar, or both.

Not acknowledging that his lack of impulse control has negative effects on you (and others) and so not actively working to treat you with concern & respect, means he IS intentionally treating you injuriously. By choosing not to behave differently, he is choosing to harm you. Makes him no better than any other emotional abusing and manipulative partner.

He needs to apply his research abilities to himself and his behaviour, and then to improving his abilities to interact.

Didn't Bjork say something recently that it's been a constant struggle to be taken as seriously as her male peers?

He cannot be that much of a genius if he's picked a career as a university academic. It's really badly paid and full of awful internal politics. Could he not use his genius to move to a job where he is paid much higher and not subject to awful university politics?

Springydaffs I did read that interview, you're right - it was her saying that if she works with a male producer, it is considered to be 'his' work, not hers - but she has always had such control over her work, her visual style, etc, I can't think that anyone could imagine it's anything other than her own work. But if even she feels belittled by journalists then that really is sad.

She also said she has to say things 5 times before she's heard - a man only needs to say it once.

Adore the woman - Bjork. As we're talking about our personal opinions of women.

surely Kate Bush would only ever need to say it once?

Kate Bush isn't my bag musically (

Bjorks interview mentioned above is amazing - and yes says all those things. Kate Bush actually has been pretty well put in the 'music for ladies' bucket, at least in my experience. Much like Stevie Nicks, she's respected, but respected 'as a woman.' Not like Hendrix, say.

Anyway- I could 'do' rock for a long time. Yes there are women. But it's nothing like equal, and oftentimes genuinely powerful women are sort of subtly marginalised - Kate Bush being a prime example imo.

KB isnt on my playlist either
are there no women with deity status equal to the gods of rock :(

Eg Madonna did it with sex (and sex was her dramatic downfall) - but, with the best will in the world, KB isn't sexy. Bcs that's how female rock stars usually do it - so how did she do it?

I realise Bjork doesnt use sex, either, but she isn't as fabulously successful, or as adored, as KB.

KB seems to be right up there, surely. Or perhaps she's the right flavour for male journalists and therefore seems more than she is.

Hi OP,
I have bipolar II and an anxiety disorder. The fact that he's swinging from different extreme mood to another sounds like typical bipolar to me. The way you describe him is like reading about myself, except without the hyper-intelligence!

I always think of myself as being like the girl in the song- "when she was good, she was very, very good; when she was bad she was horrid". I have been very hard to live with in the past when my meds haven't been right, and I'm sure my DDDDH could have written something similar to your OP. When I feel good I am happy, friendly, chatty, sociable, full of ideas, creative and intelligent. When I am not good I am anxious, obsessive, inward-looking, stressy, hyper-aroused, can't sit still, nervy and fidgety.

Antidepressants taken alone will definitely exacerbate the problem as you have said. They can make you rapid-cycle. When paired with a mood stabiliser like lamotrigine they can make you normal (ish!!).

I know this is selfish on my part but please don't give up on him if you think you can love him and get live in return. I don't know what I'd do if DH had left me in the dark times. If he has got BP2 then it's an illness just as valid in its symptoms as cancer or anything else. Mental illness has symptoms. They may seem like they ARE the person but they are no more the person than a runny nose is a part of someone's personality.

All the very best in your married life; I think you seem like you have been a very wonderful and loving wife.

You don't get the insane nerdery into process and psyche, the copycatting, the study that even Dave Grohl gets. The fact that she chooses not to display her powers maybe plays to that- you don't see her barrelling around being 'look at my status' - which I really respect. But it does put her in an unusual place and I don't see her treated the way, say, Prince is. She is a niche interest- no matter how big she is. I think.

For you, EquityDarling

I totally agree Chimney, there's strong patriarchal social conditioning that's hard to shift, but I do think some women collude in this by persisting in seeing men as a shortcut to status - that applies as much to wags and groupies, wife-of-banker, as it does to sidekick-to-genius roles

Yes, Twinklestein, I see this far too often here on MN. I'm afraid I tend to despise women who talk about their husband's achievements as if that's their status as well.

I remember when I was doing my PhD being rather taken aback when the wife of a colleague told me she did all his footnotes for his PhD. And when I reflected on it, angry, as it was akin to cheating. Certainly a completely unfair advantage. And an example of a handmaiden attitude to being a wife and supporting the husband's "genius" -- no wonder it's so much harder for women in any field of endeavour, when we still have women behaving like this.