Tag Archives: wife

1956. Nagging

Her Highness Emma at post 1955 said this. “We need love and constant reminder that I “wife” is the most important person in His life. Somewhere this was lost and the wife becomes the nagging wife trying to get her hubby to show appreciation.” She is right on both counts. My response is to try anything and everything to avoid nagging.

Nagging flows out of the natural motivational differences between the sexes. A woman’s prime motivation in life is to earn a sense of self-importance and she expects input from others to confirm it. Married, she expects primary confirmation from husband. When she figures that he takes her for granted, she cannot live with the uncertainty and so she obligates herself to do something.

Husband seeks self-admiration just as wife seeks self-importance. But husband depends on his accomplishments and internal confirmation whereas wife looks for external confirmation. His accomplishment with marriage is that he earned her. He figures that case is closed. He is obligated to achieve elsewhere in order to produce, provide, protect, and problems solve for his family. That is, fulfill those and other missions in life, among which are his R&R habits of relaxation.

She chooses nagging as the way to fulfill obligations to herself. She feels good doing it, for vengefully expressing her hurt. He hears messages of disapproval that are disconnected from his missions in life. If he is not appreciated, then he is not respected and she is not grateful for him. His sense of duty makes him want to please her; her nagging eats away as that sense of duty. Eventually, he braces up inside, turns to his inner strength, and does not care what she thinks. In parallel, her worth to him diminishes.

He may not leave her but nagging easily leads to living separate lives under the same roof. Wife may adjust to it, but in the long run it is worse than being taken for granted and harder to recover from.

When her irresistible force of wanting him to change meets his immovable object of men do not change to please a conquered woman, something has to give and relationship harmony usually falls first.

His taking her for granted has roots in his acceptance of her excellence. Her nagging has roots in retaliation and revenge sponsored by hurt. Which works best to promote harmony?


Filed under How she loses

1938. Compatibility Axioms #241-250

241. People don’t mistreat those they respect. A long courtship enables a woman to both earn a man’s respect and qualify him as having had a good upbringing and as having developed the potential for treating his woman well. [108]
242. Women are driven to nest, nurture, and nestle with loved ones. It empowers them to become relationship experts, which enables them to successfully swap interests with a man for marriage. Men have neither such expertise nor interest. [110]
243. Men are driven to compete with Nature, against other men, and to control and shape human events. Their sex drive is but a subset because women can more easily tame it before marriage than reduce their drive to compete with him after marriage. [110]
244. Men won’t and don’t compete with their wives in the major processes of life such as key decisions. Two reasons: They abhor being told how to live and fear losing to their woman as it diminishes their sense of significance. [110]
245. A woman instinctively needs a brighter future for her and her children. She seeks security of life, dependable relationships, and family cohesiveness. She seeks family, economic, and social stability. She seeks safety of health, life, and family. To help her fulfill these needs, a man expects rewards for husbanding and fathering. As the relationship expert, she has to develop the swap to mutual satisfaction.  [110]
246. A man absolutely needs only one thing. A place to flop, eat, throw his things, and prepare for tomorrow’s ‘battles’. If his wife isn’t inclined to maintain at least a hut for him, someone else will. [110]
247. Women do not absolutely need a man, but they want company. A woman’s primal want is for a solid relationship with someone stronger and more influential in shaping events that impact her and her children. She wants help to brighten her future in a society dominated by powerful people. Two men won’t knowingly share her, so one man best fulfills her primal want. [110]
248. A man wants the freedom to do as he chooses, especially to make himself stand out as a competitor, his own man, a man of significance. He views his home—hut or palace—as a place of recovery and not a place to be called to account. [110]
249. A woman’s time-focus emerges from her primal need to brighten her future. Most of her present-day concerns were handled as part of yesterday’s future. She dreams a lot about enhancing and making her relationship more solid and it works best when she supports her man’s focus on present-day matters. [110]
250. A man’s time-focus emerges from his primal readiness to compete, which makes it imperative that he focus on today and its problems. He knows full well he can handle tomorrow’s problems when they arrive. Where women dream about the future, his primary concern for the future revolves around what he can do today to prepare for tomorrow. [110]

1 Comment

Filed under Dear daughter

1929. Compatibility Axioms #201-210

201. Promiscuously experienced boys make poorer adult-mates. From many round-heel and easy-pushover girls, boys learn two things. 1) Females aren’t as respectable as males. 2) Token commitment is sufficient and devotion unnecessary to capture a female.
202. The end result of masculine-style sexual freedom for women is that men become more adroit at sexual hit and run, and women gain more experience as ex-girlfriend, ex-lover, ex-live in, and ex-wife. [103]
203. As male dominance is challenged in the home, it strengthens and fertilizes the man’s natural reluctance to stay long with one woman. [103]
204. Females pursuing equal right to be unfaithful actually redouble the males’ effort to maintain and even exploit their natural dominance and sexual freedom. [103]
205. Women are endowed with a cooperative spirit, men with a competitive one. Men easily recognize the difference, guard their turf aggressively, and overpower wifely assertiveness that challenges husband’s role. [103]
206. Women need to exemplify religious morality. It can civilize, tame, and domesticate the male beast. (New school moral relativism breeds abuse and violence of men against women and children and both sexes against others.) [103]
207. Women bitch that men don’t act gentlemanly. It’s the highly valued self-respect of ladies that inspires men to act gentlemanly. (To loosen up moral values, feminists several decades ago shamed out of existence the social construct of the lady. Gentlemanly respect and courtesy faded rapidly thereafter.) [103]
208. Women insist on equal sharing of housekeeping and childcare responsibilities. The best intentions to equalize workload weaken mutual devotion, because sustaining equality is too friction-causing and impossible in the end. [103]
209. Men usually keep their love under wraps. When he expresses love, he does so through actions designed to please his love object, and it shows in spurts. [104]
210. Women express love through closeness, nurturing, and intimacy. She reveals her love frequently using words when necessary to keep the spirit moving. Also, she expects her ears to be filled frequently with his words of affection and appreciation. [104]

1 Comment

Filed under Dear daughter

951. Submission or Submissive? — Section A: The Difference

First, let’s deal with and clarify term usage: Men expect female submission. Women expect to follow their natural submissive spirit.

  • Major differences exist between the terms. Submission is energized by competitive intent. Submissiveness is energized by cooperative spirit.
  • Women live by and foster submissiveness, when they like themselves as female, their man as mate, and their relationship for permanency. It helps capture a man, hold him, and prove that women don’t play the male game of submission.
  • Submission is what men think they expect. This doesn’t mean they know what they want just because they expect it. It’s a manly argument that men use to win their point, to act and appear dominant, to defend their seemingly invaluable role as provider-protector. Submission sounds like and is used as a male weapon.
  • Men expect female submission, because it stops challenges to his superior role as provider-protector. Women offer a submissive spirit, because it reduces competitive conflict and fosters cooperation. The terms are nowhere near the same, except when women forgo their superior position and advantage.
  • Men anticipate filling the marital role and expect spouse’s submission to husband’s authority and dominance. After marriage, they aren’t nearly as demanding unless challenged by wife. If they don’t have to prove their worth, they’re much less inclined to seek or require submission.
  • However, submission is more a game founded on intentions rather than real life. Women are foolish, if they accept submission as men claim it as privilege or natural right. The females’ best strategy: Ignore the subject, refuse to talk about it with men as it has the same effect as getting in their face. In the final analysis, submission isn’t relevant to her future life anyway, because her submissive spirit nullifies it.

Don’t for an instant presume that I’m contradicting the bible. I believe it whole-heartedly. I can’t help it that biblical injunctions call for women to be submissive to husband, and men convert it to their version, submission.

NOTE: Earlier articles on this subject appear as posts 56, 72, and 73.


Filed under Home CEO

783. Double Standard? Bah! Humbug!

At post 780 Her Highness Mary very perceptively questioned me about double standards (DS).

·        She said: “It seems that the female is under a pretty heavy burden here, constantly living up to her man’s expectations while he is free to go about his business.”

·        She claims that DS “can breed great resentment over time when seen from the women’s view.” She’s very right about resentment, because it springs from a one-sided and polarized view.

The DS battle in the home reflects off the legal, political, and economic DS generated outside the home. Feminists developed the DS argument as a virus to fight patriarchy. DS became contagious across society, spread into the home, and the inflammation of resentment arose in relationships.

Why do women bring it home? Once again, male and female natures differ, so I’ll cut to the chase: Women see a DS, when they favor one particular value over other principles of inter-gender behavior.

·        For four decades women have listened to other women about how to handle and what to expect from men. What and how things should be more equal. Male opinions and masculine values were ignored or demeaned during that time.

·        Consequently, modern females adopt equality to guide their sense of right and wrong within relationships.

Choices have consequences. Men don’t buy into it.

·        DS disturbs rather than smoothes or soothes relationships.

·        Reaching for more equal conditions and treatment, women inflame their relationships and demoralize their homes.

·        Equality is theory and impossible to achieve beyond subjective opinion. Reaching for it, something else always gets disturbed out of equilibrium. Striving for the impossible produces unresolved differences that stimulate resentment in both striver and ‘strivee’.

·        Resentment directly weakens her as the relationship expert. She figuratively eats crackers in her relationship bed, and it eats away at her likeability and his heartfelt bonding with her. Except for sex, men instinctively steer clear of beds littered with resentment crumbs.

Why don’t men buy into equality? On this particular issue, males have the better guide for couples to ease discomfort, judge opinions, and settle disputes.

·        Fairness breeds harmony by smothering resentment before it breaks out.

·        Fairness works much better than equality in the competitive world outside of relationships, so why not inside?  Fairness in the man’s competitive world brings out more easily accepted definitions of right and wrong, more practicality, and better justice.

·        Fairness is more than theory. Reasonable common sense can both achieve fairness and promote more of it by minimizing follow-on resentment. 

·        Equality and fairness are contradictions in principle. The theoretical conflict stimulates wives to compete with husband, which has been shown elsewhere in this blog to turn men off.

·        Virtually anything inter-gender can be labeled DS, if one cites differences, seeks excuses, or promotes self-centeredness. On the other hand, every adverse impact can be marginalized, if one seeks to judge right and wrong by fairness and push toward harmony.

What can wives do? They can do better with a game I’ll call Learn and Seek. Appeal more often to husband’s sense of fairness and test it often for softening his natural hard-heartedness.

·        Wives can seek more tradeoffs, blending, and balancing of relationship effort and responsibility. They can do better, if they learn to push for greater fairness-in-fact and forget pursuit of equality-in-principle.

·        Moms can set good examples daily. They can remind kids to play fair; they can forget the modern day emphasis on outcomes. Forget ‘Winning is everything!’ Return to ‘…it’s how one plays the game’.

·        Husband’s primary goal in marriage is harmony in the home. Wife’s is a brighter future for their relationship. The former helps deliver the latter, so who has the greater interest in building harmony?

Summary: Striving for equality erodes harmony, frustrates wife, and can lead to resentment in one or both spouses. Fairness as primary measuring stick of relationship right and wrong can deliver both harmony for him and brighter future for her.

People like to claim that life’s not fair, but it gets fairer when wives flush away DS as ‘not in my home’.


Filed under sex differences

778. The Blessings of Patriarchy — Chapter 7


The previous six chapters show patriarchy natural for females to exploit, and matriarchy has no chance of replacing it. Consequently, women are ‘forced’ to try harder than men up until they ‘convert’ one man to devote himself to marriage, husbanding, and fathering. After that, husbands have to devote harder to provide and protect, while wives devote to holding the relationship together. (It sounds severe, because we’re viewing married life beneath the positive surface and bonding attributes of love.)

God designed and Nature rewards the female. She’s compensated for male dominance and the relative imbalances just cited with an endowment of relationship expertise. Females know who, what, when, where, why, and how to successfully deal with males or a man. It’s their longest and strongest suit, if they play their hand not perfectly but just well.

To pay for the gift of their dominant spirit, God designed and Nature makes males susceptible to capture by sexual relations, by the females’ unique ability to reward males. Capture is one thing, and men don’t mind. Holding one is another, because men do mind suppressing their hunter-conqueror spirit.

·        Men expect continual rewards for swapping their independence for family responsibility. Convenient sex is but a frequent reminder. Other female attributes such as femininity, likeability, and attractiveness seal the deal for holding a man through a lasting marriage. Compared to other women and leaving sex out of the equation, husband perceives wife as extraordinary. It makes yielding his independence worthwhile.

·        Women hopeful of keeping their man reward with male-friendly incentives and avoid most of what incentivizes females. For example, wife makes herself attractive at all times and avoids sloppy appearances and careless grooming before her man. (She saw the need for it in courtship, so why drop it in marriage, why show that she tricked him?) When she puts her laziness before pleasing his eyes, she desensitizes husband to her importance for him.

·        Over and above what they may earn themselves, women want some measure of wealth provided and protected by a help-mate in order to fulfill their hopes and dreams. Only a man can provide it reliably, and husbands do it best.

·        Their relationship expertise tells women to focus on what they have, and what a man can do for them. And focus not on what they lack and particular men can’t or won’t do for them.  

Brightening the females’ future relies on creating and accumulating new economic wealth. Men are naturally endowed to create it, and women are naturally endowed to take advantage of it. Not by gold-diggers in the traditional sense, but thar’s much gold to be mined in them patriarchal hills by women that appreciate the male gender for all it can do and respect it for just being different.

And thus this series ends.


Filed under How she wins

757. Response to Viewer — Item 21a

Her Highness Abigail prompted this article, when at post #751 she wondered that “…marriage seems like a raw deal for women.”

Of course it can be, but women are the relationship experts, so some blame attaches to them. They intuitively know how to manage and maintain a successful relationship. But that doesn’t mean they rely on their nature. She often ignores her man’s faults in courtship and then blames him as husband.

Also, for example, the wife can generate her own raw deal if she:

  • Forgets that marriage predominantly serves mother and her children, but it has to be ‘bought and paid for’ by her as wife.
  • Promotes equality over fairness in the home, e.g., dividing or expecting chore workload to be equal instead of settling for fairness to generate harmony. (Her relationship expertise endows her for success in knowing and settling differences, if she but drops any semblance of equality.)
  • Determines the values to guide living in her home and negotiates requirements and expectations during courtship, e.g., church-going, raising kids, integrity, temporary separations, faithfulness, etc.
  • Expects husband to be more like her or some other guy.
  • Becomes something different than the gal the husband courted and married, or she expects him to become something different.

Raw deals are made and not born. Both he and she have coarse sandpaper to rub against sensitive emotions. But she’s better equipped than he to soothe the biggest irritations by feathering and nursing the edges into harmony.

P.S. Gold-diggers may have a better idea, as Abigail suggested, but they start with different objectives and values and end up with results different from what most women desire.


Filed under Fickle female

756. The Complex Broken Down — II

Perhaps you wonder why so much misery exists in homes today? Generally, women are not doing their best. You’ve seen some of what follows, but togetherness adds context.

Domestic harmony comes from this:

  • Wives/mothers dominate the home by recognizing husband as head of family, wife as second in command, mother as third, and father as fourth.
  • Females are naturally hard-headed and soft-hearted. Wife’s hard-headedness, however, dominates mother’s soft-heartedness. The wife role takes priority over the mother role. Otherwise, she pushes husband toward somebody else.
  • Submissiveness is not about obedience but about rank structure when agreement can’t be negotiated, but decisions must be made on important matters.
  • Husbands with frequent and convenient access to sex made delightful by wife spend less time looking for it and more time following their missions in life—job, family, or hobby. Perhaps to a fault, but it’s usually better than his chasing skirts.

Disharmony arises out of the following whether kids are present or not:

  • Mother admits her inability to be second in command by repeatedly or exasperatedly turning to father to solve routine, child discipline, or non-critical problems. 
  • When husband/father overrules or reverses decisions of wife/mother, her effectiveness declines. Both she and the kids learn that she’s not respected by head of family. Her authority for discipline goes down, and kids learn to play parents against one another.
  • When wife/mother overrules or shows disdain for decisions of husband/father, he’s driven to look for another home. Both he and the kids see that he’s not respected, and he swallows that as an escape pill.

Over the past few decades, harmony in the home has shifted toward disharmony. As a result, home life miseries intrude into everyday life. Perhaps not yours, but someone you know.


Filed under Dear daughter