Just a point I think all but one person on this thread has missed, and that's about timing.
Why do this interview now? And for whose benefit?
Someone upthread pointed out that Stephanie has done this interview once the youngest child has left home.
This means in effect she is less tied to the relationship in the same way she was.
At this point, this is where DH starts to make 'concessions' and 'admissions' of guilt. Why?
Not because they had previously been unaware of the issues and the impact on Stephanie. I simply don't believe that. Stephanie position has always and continues to be irrelevant.
At the very point, Stephanie has ties that bind her to DH, DH suddenly confesses to bad behaviour.
Isn't that almost to say 'I'm not bad as they say I am you know. See i can make amazing road to Damascus confessions which prove im different /better' etc etc. It strikes me as yet another pattern of control by almost 'giving permission' to have these feelings but in a way that the power and focus remains on DH and undermines any thoughts of leaving that Stephanie might now be at risk of entertaining. It says well you don't have to leave me because I am recognising my poor behaviour.
In a more traditional domestic abuse situation you would recognise the pattern of a man admitting he is doing something wrong but not necessarily being sincere in his willingness to do anything to actually change. Its an admission of bad behaviour but expecting reward cookies for admitting it without actually having to address the behaviour.
In terms of 'infantilising' Stephanie, I think its important to point out that many woman don't recognise they are being abused. And by the time they do recognise that pattern they are conditioned to accept it and don't have much of a concept of how if they changed their lives it would be better. Its beyond comprehension. They just don't know any different is realistically possible. And this can happen to 'strong' willed women as well as 'weak' willed women. This concept of strong v weak willed is mired in problematic definitions and understanding of how domestic abuse works. Emotionally trying to separate yourself from someone you've been with for 20 years isn't easy and something that women who appear 'strong' can do. Women are trained to conceal how this is affecting them, especially in more middle class social circles, because they are taught to behave in certain ways to maintain appearance.
The other thing that strikes me is the influence of the transwidows here. It I s becoming increasingly difficult for DH to avoid certain scrutiny because awareness of the pattern of behaviour is growing - especially in the circles DH seeks the approval and attention from. For DH to continue to have the same level of profile they have to keep finding a new narratives to their story to keep attention on them. A bit like Katie Price always having another self made drama on so she can make more money by doing a new interview about how hard her life is. DH has a certain target audience - and has to pitch to that audience and stay relevant to that audience as the wider narrative on trans issues shifts. DH knows the market is shifting. Stephanie is likely to become increasingly more of a prop as things move on. Because again, since her children have now left home, including her in the story ties her closer to DH going forward...
I think the thing to watch is 'on whom terms' is all this on? Is it 'strong Stephanie's'?
Will Stephanie ever be allowed to define herself as a separate identity to DH? She has surrendered so much of that in reference to DH already. Doing interviews like this doesn't separate her. It does the opposite as it ties her story and identity to DH. She's not a woman with a husband who is a wanker who didn't consider her mental health or her emotional or social needs. She's not a woman who has put her kids first in a shitty situation. She always defined as DH's wife and in secondary deferential terms to DH.
I think this story has some way to run.