Misogyny at the root of anger towards wives

**Posts:** 2970 · by **quietvoice** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 10:30 pm

the thousands of viewers reading this thread

There are not thousands of viewers reading this thread. 2800+ page views does not translate into thousands of viewers. Ask if you'd like clarification on this.

**Posts:** 12131 · by **Richard@DecisionSkills** » Mon Nov 30, 2015 10:45 pm

Josh,

As stated previously, I'm not in here to pick up clients. I understand you struggle with this. Oh well. Label me all you like, express your opinions regarding my arrogance and my cold-heart, etc. You are nowhere near the first person to do so, nor will you be the last to judge me. Judge away my friend, I am good with it. I actually wish people would be more willing to judge instead of hide their opinions.

In my career I have been called every adjective imaginable hundreds of times and my life threatened multiple times. But, I have also been told thank you thousands of times and that makes it all worthwhile.

And in my career I have seen hundreds of abused wives and arrested tens of abusive husbands for domestic violence. I have responded to the homes, the hospitals and the shelters. You have the opinion of one man you continue to hold sacred. As I stated in my last post, if that gets you through this issue you have with your wife great. There is nothing wrong with using faith in the word of another to overcome an obstacle you might face. It matters not the truth of this mans research if it makes you treat your wife better.

**Posts:** 1299 · by **bert_ernie** » Tue Dec 01, 2015 12:34 pm

Hey Josh,

Perhaps your assessment of Richard has some truth in it. Or perhaps you're taking an inch & running a mile. Or perhaps you're way off base. This is only text on the internet so it's kind of hard to divine someone's emotions from that. It can be hard enough to even determine meaning even aside from emotions. I would say however that you should try turning that lens of criticism back on yourself. Quite early in this thread you seemingly abandoned the topic of the post & just started picking on the posting styles or personalities of people involved. Is this the sort of thing you do with your wife? How is that going to get you anywhere?

& i fail to understand why if someone states their opinion in a book then it's cast iron fact. Whereas if someone states it in words it's pure imagination.

**Posts:** 69 · by **Josh Smith** » Tue Dec 01, 2015 9:50 pm

Hi Richard,

Thanks for your post. When you write:

[quote][Oh well. Label me all you like, express your opinions regarding my arrogance and my cold-heart, etc. You are nowhere near the first person to do so, nor will you be the last to judge me. Judge away my friend, I am good with it. /quote]

The indirect relationship message is - "do what you like, I'm not really interested in your opinions of me, you're unimportant to me".. My reading is that you're angry with me and want to put me down with this message but want to mask the aggression under a fake stance of detachment and "I've seen it all".

I'm very guilty of such ploys myself - much of my anger comes out in indirect passive-aggression - creating a fake mask of innocence while doing annoying things.

**Posts:** 69 · by **Josh Smith** » Tue Dec 01, 2015 10:21 pm

Hi Bert_Ermie,

Thanks for joining in.
I would love it if you could write on the topic of the thread from the experience of your own anger issues or write about ideas coming from what you have read and discovered. The frustrating thing for me is that noone here seems interested in that.

Anyway, the interesting thing that did emerge is that Richard tries to belittle me under the guise of being a nice guy. Now that is what I typically do with my wife - pretend that I'm all innocent while doing something annoying. So now pointing out Richard's passive aggression is sharpening my awareness and, I hope, might be of benefit to him at some point and other people reading this thread.

**Posts:** 2970 · by **quietvoice** » Tue Dec 01, 2015 10:26 pm

Josh Smith wrote: My reading is that you're angry with me.

Why would he be angry? He's unaffected. You're a stranger to him. Where would his anger come from? That's my take. Once you get past taking things personally on internet forums, it becomes very easy to not be affected by someone else's words on a screen.

**Posts:** 12131 · by **Richard@DecisionSkills** » Tue Dec 01, 2015 11:04 pm

Josh Smith wrote: My reading is that you're angry with me and want to put me down with this message but want to mask the aggression under a fake stance of detachment and "I've seen it all".

I'm very guilty of such ploys myself

I have noted previously you seem to think that how you think must be how others also think. You don't give people enough credit for being able to come at a situation from a totally different perspective. If you are guilty of a ploy, it doesn't mean everyone else uses that same ploy.

Why do you think I would be angry with you? For disagreeing with me, for providing me your opinion that I am arrogant? If I were to anger with every person that disagreed with my opinions or expressed a negative opinion about me that would indeed be a very angry life for me, lol.

My friend, I am in the business of disagreement. Maybe you have not yet figured that out. Being insulted is not the exception it is the rule. I can't afford to get angry at someone just for the simple act of disagreeing or insulting me. Maybe that is something you can afford, I cannot.

Anyway, I still do not understand why you continue to seek validation, but alas that will be one of life's little mysteries that will have to be left unsatisfied. I will live.

I think at this point quite a few people have offered up some great opinions on the degree to which misogyny is or is not the root of anger towards wives. I don't see anything really new of value developing in this thread, so I hope in whatever way that you are able to find whatever help you are searching for to help you with the anger issues you have with your wife.

Best of luck

**Posts:** 1299 · by **bert_ernie** » Wed Dec 02, 2015 12:13 pm

Josh Smith wrote:Hi Bert_Ermie,

Thanks for joining in.
I would love it if you could write on the topic of the thread from the experience of your own anger issues or write about ideas coming from what you have read and discovered. The frustrating thing for me is that noone here seems interested in that.

Anyway, the interesting thing that did emerge is that Richard tries to belittle me under the guise of being a nice guy. Now that is what I typically do with my wife - pretend that I'm all innocent while doing something annoying. So now pointing out Richard's passive aggression is sharpening my awareness and, I hope, might be of benefit to him at some point and other people reading this thread.

plenty of people have already done that in this thread & yet here you claim that "noone here seems interested in that."

it is dishonesty on your part.

you say "the interesting thing that did emerge". no that's not interesting at all. that's just more dishonesty where you attack another poster & avoid honestly looking at any point that was made.

**Posts:** 1152 · by **Leo Volont** » Wed Dec 02, 2015 1:07 pm

bert_ernie wrote:
Josh Smith wrote:Hi Bert_Ermie,

Thanks for joining in.
I would love it if you could write on the topic of the thread from the experience of your own anger issues or write about ideas coming from what you have read and discovered. The frustrating thing for me is that noone here seems interested in that.

Anyway, the interesting thing that did emerge is that Richard tries to belittle me under the guise of being a nice guy. Now that is what I typically do with my wife - pretend that I'm all innocent while doing something annoying. So now pointing out Richard's passive aggression is sharpening my awareness and, I hope, might be of benefit to him at some point and other people reading this thread.

plenty of people have already done that in this thread & yet here you claim that "noone here seems interested in that."

it is dishonesty on your part.

you say "the interesting thing that did emerge". no that's not interesting at all. that's just more dishonesty where you attack another poster & avoid honestly looking at any point that was made.

Wow!

Everyone Heard Me, a while back, when I said that Bert'n'Ernie was our most Promising New Helper. The Man simply has good Instincts and Insight.

yes, B'n'E is right! That Josh guy is just playing Cat and Mouse with all of us. Indeed NOBODY with an IQ over 90, or an emotional Axe to grind, would INSIST that the ONLY REASON a man would get angry with a Female Roommate is because he HATES Women. it is to presuppose that a Male Roommate committing the same Infractions would get an affectionate Laugh and a Smile.

Yes, if B'nE's instincts and keen perceptions tell us that Josh is full of ... whatever... then, well, why are we still encouraging that... well... sociopath... that guy that is just hear to pull the tiger's tail...through the cage bars and congratulate himself that there will never be any harmful repercussions for any of the hateful things he does.

**Posts:** 160 · by **timeout** » Fri Dec 04, 2015 11:47 am

Josh Smith wrote:Hi Richard, Quietvoice, and Leo,

Thank you for your latest posts. As I mentioned to Leo in my last post to him, I created the thread with the hope of talking to like-minded people who want to deal with the anger issues they have with their wives. That proved to be unfruitful because noone is saying they too have anger issues with their wives. The debate went to the level of ideas and it became clear that noone has actually read anything apart from me. I think I have made point - that wife abuse emanates from misogynist beliefs - and you all reject that viewpoint for one reason or another. I believe it would be futile to continue arguing back and forth - much as I am tempted.
I think the interesting thing now is to look at how the communication went from an anger point of view. So let's start with you Richard. I believe your style is passive-aggression - anger expressed behind the mask of innocence and fake helpfulness. Why do I believe this? Because I have done this all myself and I can clearly see it in you.
I think the subtle aggression started with:
Given you created the thread I would guess you fall further to the politically correct side than most. I'm not saying that is a bad thing. It really just depends on how close you are to the rabbit hole. Don't fall in.

and later
I don't know if you have actually fallen down the rabbit hole. Have you?

Rather than dealing directly with the content of what I was writing, you belittle me in order to elevate yourself to a higher position. So behind a mask of reasonableness you are having a personal agenda to put me down and elevate yourself at my expense. (you are, oh so enlightened about political correctness, while I am a pure deluded idiot)
Here are a few more examples of your passive aggressive style of communication:
[What I found hilarious about the assumption is that in 3 years and over 5,000 posts you are the very first person to make such an assumption.

So I did/do find your assumption hilarious, because I have context which with 25 posts is not available to you. It doesn't make it any less amusing for me.

Here you fake being amused while you are really seething with anger. Obviously, I hit a sore point by saying that you are simply here to pick up clients. (I still believe that as you have not given any real reason why you are actually here. Your argument that you are interested in theory does not wash because theory can be found in books and not on forums. You also showed zero interest in the theory that I wanted to discuss.) So, if I am right, you are not only passive aggressive but also deceitful and have a hidden agenda. Do you really believe people will not notice this, Richard?

You don't understand math, that is okay.

More arrogance, passive-aggression and belittling . (I actually studied math at university.)
Most people in western cultures agree that things like stoning a woman to death for disobeying her husband is just a tad bit misogynistic.

Here you show a lack of empathy that is truly shocking and reveals your cold heart that is hiding behind your ‘”helpful” persona.

Yes. I believe that I am not a misogynist. If in your world, opening doors, buying flowers, giving over my coat on a cold day, giving up my seat on the train, buying dinner, etc. make me a misogynist then label me a misogynist. I'm good with that.

Well, this quote I have simply thrown in to show that you do not listen (read) what the other person is saying. You live in your own world where you invent stories that nobody talked about in order to then fight your (not existing) opponent. You may also have said these irrelevant things in order to change the topic and confuse the thread – a typical strategy of passive aggressives. I have done that many times…
All in all I would like to say that if you are here to pick up clients then you shooting yourself in the foot, Richard. Do you think prospective clients will not notice the arrogance, passive aggression and cold-heartedness that seems to come through more and more as this thread develops?
If you carry on to talk to me in this style I will continue to point out to the thousands of viewers reading this thread your passive aggressive manipulation techniques. It ‘s not what came to do on this forum but analysing someone else’s passive aggression does also help to overcome my own.

Youre male , is that right Josh? So anyone's anger towards you or belittlement of you cannot be due to misogyny, but instead OTHER REASONS.. Which shoots your own argument in the foot. Had you been female, from what you are arguing you would be now blaming the cause of Richard's (supposed) anger and belittlement on misogyny (WHEN ACTUALLY IT IS NOT A CAUSE).

**Posts:** 653 · by **Introspectah** » Fri Dec 04, 2015 12:23 pm

You were on the right track, Josh Smith, but you succumbed to the grave mistake of lumping your estimations of the subtly underlying invalidatory force which so often guides Richard's conduct, under one common denominator called passive aggression.

In the numerous quotations of his text you summarized, i noticed little traces of passive aggression, but oh so many signs of an underlying invalidation of your character and motives, which you clearly felt, as so many people feel when being perhaps (un)wittingly condescended by Richard's approach which is nevertheless clearly coming forth out of a source of benevolence.

The mistake you made was to rely on personal experiences as a basis for comparison and speculation as to the veritable drive behind Richard's propulsion engine.

Had you delineated this quotation:

Anyway, I still do not understand why you continue to seek validation, but alas that will be one of life's little mysteries that will have to be left unsatisfied. I will live.

You woud've gotten closer to the angle of Richard's propensity to malign that which he is so vehemently disapproving of.

In the quotation above it is clear to see he assesses that endeavouring to identify and reform the underlying motivation for an individual to seek validation in the external world, entirely based on the fundamental element of dissatisfaction inherent to the relationship played out in between parents & child, [= a problem of inherent invalidation] responsible for innumerable cases of self-abusive unfoldings of life-scenarios, is unworthy of being called living, and is thus diametrically opposed to being a purposeful endeavour ... ... a futile, economically prestigious distraction of life's most essential tasks so often seen encouraged by a man who's good at what he does, but is partially bedazzled by a blind spot which clouds the inner eye that's supposed to connect him to the indispensable value of the psycho-emotional life.

Much more could be said.
In fact, i think i could write a book about it, but ... [< following an example of what i could say]
''i have more important things to do.''
= this being exemplary of a highly subtle, indirect invalidation of the self-assigned task of depicting Richard's motives [aware this hasn't been called for], thus infusing my statement of truth with a minimal dose of condescendence, [a type of invalidation] one is bound to be much more sensitive to than the other.

In the final analysis it has to be added that personal experiences with similar issues of sensitivity have taught me that Richard might be doing all of this unintentionally, though i'm unwaveringly confident in the knowledge that he sometimes deliberately uses a subtle force of sneaky invalidation to rouse the recipient out of a cycle of passivity- - - -again with the best of intentions, so it seems.

**Posts:** 12131 · by **Richard@DecisionSkills** » Fri Dec 04, 2015 2:47 pm

Introspectah wrote: ...which so often guides Richard's conduct, under one common denominator called passive aggression.

Outside of simply being explanatory, a way of observing and labeling a personality trait, is the term "passive aggressive" a negative or positive trait? From my experience, the vast majority of people associate passive aggressive as being unhealthy. It is also common in my experience for the majority to not understand the term, that being passive resistance turned to aggressive resistance. I agree this could apply to passive turned aggressive in the arena of public discourse.

And most certainly it is very normal over the course of years and participating in hundreds of threads, there will be disagreements and those turn into further discourse or debate. Some may shrink and choose to disengage when faced with disagreement, others may engage and escalate, giving rise to the label "aggressive". The conversation starts so nice and polite. So basically all politicians are "passive aggressive".

And what becomes memory? The hundreds of threads without much discourse, the ones where the OP posts a question and thanks everyone for their answer or the threads where disagreement abounds and a healthy back and forth ensues? It is the latter that people remember and it is the latter that then forms perception, giving rise to memories of aggression.

I guess in the end I embrace the idea that underlying my conduct is what can be seen as passive aggressive behavior. I am not here to deny the label, rather to throw up my arms and say, "I don't know" as it relates to what extent is it some unhealthy psychological resistance and to what extent is it merely the nature of pubic discourse?

What I do know is aggression is not always a bad thing and that aggression is not the same thing as anger.

**Posts:** 653 · by **Introspectah** » Fri Dec 04, 2015 7:42 pm

Outside of simply being explanatory, a way of observing and labeling a personality trait, is the term "passive aggressive" a negative or positive trait?

To me any natural emotional impulse [deliberately] subdued and/or reframed in a misleading manner, whether this be a choice following upon consideration for the sensitivity of the recipient, a conformity to socially acceptable conduct or anything else, is in itself a choice/act detrimental to the purpose of clear communication in the aim of mutual transparancy and comprehension.

So if one were to feel aggression, i'd say be upfront about it! no need to temper it.
This being a brief, incomplete take on the literal interpretation of passive aggressiveness, as this particular termonology holds many sub-branches of various types of emotionally charged behaviour.

And as a more general answer to your question, i believe that nothing is inherently negative or positive until it has been subjected to our interpretation.

And what becomes memory? The hundreds of threads without much discourse, the ones where the OP posts a question and thanks everyone for their answer or the threads where disagreement abounds and a healthy back and forth ensues? It is the latter that people remember and it is the latter that then forms perception, giving rise to memories of aggression.

A disheartening realization which might topple the lofty ambitions of the average counselor who's [even mildly] doubtful of his integrity and quality, as a human being, and as a human at work, so i know you'll remain unaffected by this particular setback as you're a veteran seasoned in sour times, and have consequently grown a protective layer around your shell which comes with benefits and side-effects.

"I don't know" as it relates to what extent is it some unhealthy psychological resistance and to what extent is it merely the nature of pubic discourse?

It may be so that an unhealthy psychological resistance is an indispensable element of culturally propagated public discourse.

On the other hand, perpetuated patterns of self-pity seem to trigger a mercilessness on your behalf, which seems to stem from having experienced first-hand such a mercilessness which has retrospectively proven to toughen you up into a better version of your self, so perhaps you assume all might benefit of taking such a shortcut you have presumably been forced to take.

What I do know is aggression is not always a bad thing and that aggression is not the same thing as anger.

Aggression oftentimes proves to be a constructive force in my life experiences, reflected in the overt encouragement commonly heard in European football which gives sound to the idea that a healthy dose of aggression is always needed.

In a way, common interpretations of aggression might be seen as a take on the forceful emancipation from the strongly wilful individual through the regulating barriers of socially acceptable emotional conduct, into a realm fortified by all kinds of alarms and vigilantees running to supervise the degree of agreeability to the behaviour of the masses ... us all having been installed with certain programs that dictate the norms of acceptability which upon violation we are meant to rally against as a group---1984-style.

Though a lot of it must also come down to the fallibillity of our perception and the limitations of our mind in its current potential.

Aware that the second-latest passage may have gone a tad too deep for most navigators of the ocean.

So...

In a way, common interpretations of aggression might be seen as a take on the forceful emancipation from the strongly wilful individual.
As we live in a culture who's ethics generally discourage emancipation from the flock, aggression is largely written off as an undesirable trait---unless it serves the function of maintaining status quo, of course!

In defense of the Bank!

**Posts:** 12131 · by **Richard@DecisionSkills** » Fri Dec 04, 2015 8:41 pm

Introspectah wrote:A disheartening realization which might topple the lofty ambitions of the average counselor... i know you'll remain unaffected by this particular setback...

I'm not sure why the reality of how the human mind works is disheartening. It simply is. People recall more easily salient information. They remember the time they hit a jackpot. They remember the machine, the casino, the amount. They don't remember the other 1,000 pulls at various other machines, they only have gist memories, an amalgamation of the other events, lacking in detail or significance. Not sure why that is disheartening.

What setback? That the OP does not agree with me that the world is round? That I was unable to be of assistance? In this case multiple members offered up opinions and it appears the OP is quite okay with believing all anger towards a wife is rooted in misogyny. I guess quite a few setbacks occurred if by setback you mean not being able to convince someone of an alternate point of view. That happens. You are correct, I will remain unaffected. Do you think it should affect me? Why?

On the other hand, perpetuated patterns of self-pity seem to trigger a mercilessness on your behalf, which seems to stem from having experienced first-hand such a mercilessness which has retrospectively proven to toughen you up into a better version of your self, so perhaps you assume all might benefit of taking such a shortcut you have presumably been forced to take.

I interpret this as a poetic way of saying that given I have been on the receiving end of aggressive discourse, I therefore feel that aggressive discourse is appropriate. You call it merciless, I call it the natural progression of discourse. It is rare for a thread to begin with aggressive discourse.

In this case, Josh is a grown man, the age of 60 I believe. In my opinion neither of us need soften the edges around our opinions, the same as I see no need for you to make your opinions palatable for my tastes. Should I accuse you of self-pity and being merciless simply for putting forth your opinions?

**Posts:** 653 · by **Introspectah** » Fri Dec 04, 2015 9:34 pm

I'm not sure why the reality of how the human mind works is disheartening. It simply is. People recall more easily salient information. They remember the time they hit a jackpot. They remember the machine, the casino, the amount. They don't remember the other 1,000 pulls at various other machines, they only have gist memories, an amalgamation of the other events, lacking in detail or significance. Not sure why that is disheartening.

[Neat analogy.]

True. And it certainly isn't objectively so.
Just that it may dishearten certain unripened souls and that, by consequence of dissatisfaction following upon an unfulfilled preordained amibition set out to redeem self-esteem or fulfill a certain longing, it may prematurely dissuade them off a path they perhaps weren't destined to permanently strike anyways.

As the particular profession central to the dynamic at hand requires much like parenthood a reasonable amount of unwavering resoluteness as a means to implement what's deemed as the just moral cause---a mission destined to evoke ambiguity and conflict; far from being reprehensible as to my experience conflict is a critical prerequisite for growth.

What setback? That the OP does not agree with me that the world is round? That I was unable to be of assistance? In this case multiple members offered up opinions and it appears the OP is quite okay with believing all anger towards a wife is rooted in misogyny. I guess quite a few setbacks occurred if by setback you mean not being able to convince someone of an alternate point of view. That happens. You are correct, I will remain unaffected.

Reference had been oriented towards that particular form of disappointment which may result out of the unjust reflection of the true value of your overall contribution on this forum, as generated by the public opinion.
And although i'm well aware that you are much like my self enjoying a healthy reservoir of self-confidence and thus require no external validation, nor do you get unpleasantly affected by an abrasive injustice towards your contribution, i depart from my own experiences [and thus extrapolate my personal estimations in relation to the similarities perceived in your character] in admitting that i do perceive an underappreciation of the contribution which i hold dear to my heart as mildly disappointing and undesirable, without suffering damage upon being confronted by ineluctably contrasting views.

To the healthily self-confident and self-aware individual there's no need for external validation, but it nonetheless constitutes a pleasant reaffirmation, which is not as much the object of contractive self-interest as i deem it to be in the interest of all those involved to resonate on a familiar wavelength about the principles which i attach great importance unto.

Do you think it should affect me? Why?

Based on the above passages i think my stance's been firmly elucidated.

Should I accuse you of self-pity and being merciless simply for putting forth your opinions?

Not for the act in and of itself, but you could if my manner of conduct happened to reveal signs of a condemnatory inclination.
You may reap benefits with the particular method you've been building upon, but most people's defense-mechanisms well up when sensing the interruption of an invalidatory force; all the more so in a place like this where most sensitive souls that seek refuge and aid suffer from self-worth issues.

Experience has proven to me that physical age means little when it comes to sensitivity and the capability to endure hardship and adversity.

For instance, my father wanders through the mental-emotional life with great resemblance to a 10-year old, so upon deeper consideration i decided to treat him as if he were a [nonetheless innately intelligent] 10-year old, while endeavouring to refrain from that sort of condescension so foully promoted to hold towards humans with an allegedly underdeveloped intellect and moral compass.

The compassion and the deliberate cultivation of unflinching patience aroused by virtue of honouring the child, soul, heart or sensitive nature own to any human individual, does wonders.

Misogyny at the root of anger towards wives

#45

#46

#47

#48

#49

#50

#51

#52

#53

#54

#55

#56

#57

#58

#59

Main Menu

Anger Management Resources

Recent posts

Active topics

Contact Us