Misogyny at the root of anger towards wives

Josh Smith wrote:Here you invent an extreme of what I am communicating in order to invalidate what I'm trying to say.

Josh, what difference does it matter to me what the extreme is INSIDE YOUR head?

Assume for a second on a scale of 1 - 10, the "hurt" you feel by my comments is because you have created in your head of me is a jerk rating of 1 or maybe the perception you have is I am a jerk of only a 6, a 7, a 10? Correspondingly you suffer the pain of my comments in accordance with the image you have created.

At the same time, I discuss issues the same with you as I do with others and they rate me on a scale of 1 - 10 as a great guy. Some think I am mildly nice, others think my advice is just what they needed. Correspondingly, they have emotions in accordance with believing they received some helpful advice.

This provides a range of 20 or 21 if you include 0, from jerk -10 to nice guy +10.

I am apparently both at the same time. I have come to accept this reality. It is my reality, not yours. Whatever level "jerk" you have in your mind of me, I'm good with it. I realized long ago the degree to which I'm labeled jerk or nice has more to do with the person doing the labeling.

Now you want to take your negative view of me and try your hardest to convince me that you are right, that I am the "jerk" to whatever degree you perceive me. Well, good luck with that. I'm more than happy to let you continue to beat that drum and go down that road. More power to you. Enjoy.

At the same time you beat that drum, I'm going to continue to help people by giving them solid advice and the tools they can use to solve whatever issues they face. The majority say thanks, others say it is not for them and then some, such as you, go on the offensive. It is not that I have "seen it all", it is simply on the scale of interactions of those that don't like how I provide advice you happen to be nothing new. Yawn, I have heard your whining before. Grow up. Don't worry about me. Go conquer the world.

As I said before, you CHOOSE to be a victim, you choose to engage and play the part of the hurt individual. I have not twisted your arm. I never made a commitment or some vow to make sure there are no peas under your comfortable mattress. Get over it.

Can we look at that please? Has anything in this thread or outside of it given you evidence to support you statement?

I'm good with passive-aggressive. Speak softly and carry a big stick. Good leadership is passive-aggressive. Certainly it is measured, it does little good to use aggression past what is required to achieve an objective.

Take you for instance. Currently on a scale of 1-10, I wonder how aggressive you feel I am? Truth is, I'm an extremely laid back person. In a public forum, maybe at worst aggression gets to a 4? You can't handle a 4? So far in this forum I see the level of aggression as a 2, maybe a 3 at most. You disagree? In my life, 10 means you are taking the lives of multiple people. That is how I define aggression. I certainly would hope never to find myself in such circumstances. I mean, I have contributed to people losing their lives, but I'm good with my role in those matters.

Maybe you have not been aggressive enough in life so you take your frustrations out out on your wife. You were never aggressive enough to take on the realities of life, to confront your boss, to defend the helpless, to put your life on the line in the defense of others, so that lack of aggression has always bothered you.

The root cause of your misogyny may be your underlying low self-esteem, your lack of aggression. Is that something you have considered?

Do you always find aggression to be a negative trait?

I have felt that this Thread was Wondering into the Realm of Nebulousness. But Still I was Curious.

Honestly, I KNOW Rirchard. We have even disagreed at times.... that is, UNTIL he told me of the Problem he had with me...and then, because he ALWAYS seems so Reasonable and his Explanations so... well, utterly Correct... My Disagreements with Richard swiftly go away.

Your disagreement with Richard would probably go away too, IF you had any Experience with Anger Management.

MY Important Skill was that I READ what Richard had to say, and then I THOUGHT about. I rejected my first Emotional and Defensive Thinking as More than Likely Flawed and Clouded by Pride and Defensive Emotional Thinking. Using Anger Management Techniques to try to Discern the Value of Whatever his View Point was... well, duh... it always seemed to occur to me that he Did In Fact have a Good Point and was Wise to Point out his Concerns. He Was Only Being Helpful. God Bless Him.

anyway, Josh, ... did you Write in to Us for help... or did you just want to Practice your Anger out on the Experts?

Need I remind you that you are Angry AT RICHARD! --- DICK! --- for short... or should I say for long.... He is a BOY! it only works against Your Argument. You are not angry at Women.... you are Angry at Everybody... Yes, even the Nicest Guy in the World -- Richard...

It makes me wonder why you Forgive Me... and I was actually Kind of Rough On You, but you are focusing all your Hate toward Richard, an Obviously Nice Guy. Now That is Weird! You Want to Start Fights with Nice People!?

I am honestly perplexed now. Most of the Time, in Anger Management, Angry People are 'triggered' most surely by other Angry People -- Birds of a Feather Flock Together... and all of that.

OH! Again, Richard WAS RIGHT... you have a Self Esteem Problem.... YOUR ARE ANGRY AT THE PERSON WHO YOU WISH YOU WERE. You must be Frustrated and you are Lashing Out At Your Mirror Image... that is, the Mirror Image you wish you were...

Or something like that... I will have to think about a while.... which is what Thinking People do... by the way...

Hi Leo,

You wrote:

Using Anger Management Techniques to try to Discern the Value of Whatever his View Point was

Given the vitriolic rants you had at Lundy Bancroft, I had no idea that you practised any techniques whatsoever. I honestly came to believe it was the alcohol talking. How would you have written about him if you weren't moderating your anger?

Josh Smith wrote:Hi Leo,

You wrote:

Using Anger Management Techniques to try to Discern the Value of Whatever his View Point was

Given the vitriolic rants you had at Lundy Bancroft, I had no idea that you practised any techniques whatsoever. I honestly came to believe it was the alcohol talking. How would you have written about him if you weren't moderating your anger?

Dear Josh,

Well, that's Wonderful! You are Clearly Paying Attention. That is a very good thing.

BUT, have you noticed that you Tilt Things in the Direction of Insult? Yes, I have a few Chardonnays for music practice. I wake up early in the morning and I study Mathematics All Day Long. Do you HONESTLTY begrudge me a few drinks afterward. I is not like I am a Total Drunk and drink all do until the Liquor is all Gone... which is what a Real Drunk would do.

But, Yes, you can say it Impairs My Judgment... If I were driving a Car... or you Could Say, if you had Any Kind Feelings At All and did not Want to Stir Up Arguments, that the Alcohol only released me from stodgy inhibitions, and only served to make me more glib and gregarious. No, not you! You see me as a disgraceful drunk. Shame on Me... or is it shame on you? Winston Churchill and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and probably Joe Stalin ALL conducted World War II... Every Minute a Day, TWICE as Drunk as I have ever been in the last 5 years (There was a New Years Eve Party and a bottle "Stoly" back in 2009 which left me with a hangover... I have not had a Hangover since...), Oh, and Adolf Hitler was a very sober Teetotaler... would you prefer that I was exactly like Adolf Hitler.... NO! Don't tell me... I am afraid of what your answer might be. .

But I admit to a Drink and so you Call me out as a Drunk. What, are you a Lawyer. No, you don't have to be. EVERYBODY behaves like Lawyers Now... instead of Saying the Truth as they REALLY KNOW IT, they take all of the Known Facts and then Construct a STORY That FITS... That Suits Their Own Ends better than what they KNOW the Truth would do for them.

Isn't that Kind of Like Selling your Soul to the Devil? Or maybe at a Certain Point Lawyers and Chronic Liars can no longer tell the difference between what is TRUE, and What Their Best Argument Would Be.

Anyway, Josh, I have great respect for you for paying attention. You are Not Stupid.

But, You Being Malignant... well, That Is a Problem.

Don't you suppose there must be SOME difference between GOOD and EVIL? And, yeah, tell us you are the Good Guy... when YOU are the guy that wrote in with an Anger Problem...

Wow Leo, I must have touched a sore point for such a rant at me. Yes, people do create stories to try to explain what they observe - and you do that too. You created plenty of them about Lundy Bancroft and me too. And I admitted to you that given the sense of fury coming from your posts about Lundy Bancroft, i did think it was unmoderated anger fueled by drink. And I totally accept that that image could well be wrong.

You wrote:

yeah, tell us you are the Good Guy... when YOU are the guy that wrote in with an Anger Problem...

You're implying I see myself as the "good guy". Maybe you could find a quote from me in the thread in which I say positive things about myself. If you want me to do the work, I could find many quotes from me about how I am ashamed of my anger problem.

You value the act of paying attention but I don't observe you doing it.

Hi Richard

Having admitted in post #51 that you are passive-aggressive:

I guess in the end I embrace the idea that underlying my conduct is what can be seen as passive aggressive behavior.

You are now claiming that being passive-aggressive is a good thing:

I'm good with passive-aggressive. Speak softly and carry a big stick. Good leadership is passive-aggressive.

I strongly disagree with you there, Richard. This thread is about marital relationships and I believe that passive-aggression is particularly destructive there - involving a dishonest nastiness. It's like a dachshund hiding in the bushes, running out to bite someone's heel and then running back behind the bushes. You don't want to be that dachshund do you, Richard? It's like being a hidden terrorist compared to an upstanding soldier. You don't want the terrorist option, do you?

Given that you admit your passive-aggression and claim to be good with it, that disqualifies you as an adviser on an anger management forum.

Josh Smith wrote: I strongly disagree with you there, Richard.

Disagree all you like.

Given that you admit your passive-aggression and claim to be good with it, that disqualifies you as an adviser on an anger management forum.

Thanks for your personal opinion about what qualifies someone.

You make it sound like women are helpless. It is probably your misogynistic beliefs that result in this feeling of superiority you have.

Women can be aggressors, women are more than capable of taking care of themselves. I'm equal opportunity.

As stated, I'm a laid back guy. I'm passive. I have never once used any sort of physical aggression towards a friend, family member, loved one, etc. Have I ever become angry? Yes. As they have with me. I have been aggressive as they have been aggressive with me. It is a two way street Josh and it is not gender specific. It is called being human.

You don't even seem to understand what aggression really means. That disqualifies you from being in a position to qualify who should or should not be qualified. Funny how that works, huh?

Josh Smith wrote:Wow Leo, I must have touched a sore point for such a rant at me. Yes, people do create stories to try to explain what they observe - and you do that too. You created plenty of them about Lundy Bancroft and me too. And I admitted to you that given the sense of fury coming from your posts about Lundy Bancroft, i did think it was unmoderated anger fueled by drink. And I totally accept that that image could well be wrong.

You wrote:

yeah, tell us you are the Good Guy... when YOU are the guy that wrote in with an Anger Problem...

You're implying I see myself as the "good guy". Maybe you could find a quote from me in the thread in which I say positive things about myself. If you want me to do the work, I could find many quotes from me about how I am ashamed of my anger problem.

You value the act of paying attention but I don't observe you doing it.

Hi, Josh,

I appreciate your astuteness in following these Threads, and especially your attention to my own contributions. You seem to know more about my Contributions than I do, as I simply can't 'place' a 'Lundy Bancroft' in my mind.

I take it that I was horribly unfair to this poor Lundy Bancroft person. Well, if so, I deeply apologize and can assert with all honesty that whatever I said, I did not say it with any lasting conviction. I forgot all about it... or about Lundy Bancroft.... and so apparently it was not all that important to me. and What insult is easier to forget than a Forgotten One?

And, yes, I suppose I have been mean and unfair to you. Yes, you seem to want to Be provoking, aggressive and hostile... but, since this is an Anger Management Page, well, I should expect that to Come with the Territory. Besides, you might be a Lawyer and think that your ... well, let's euphemize it and call it 'assertive' behavior is The Best Of All Possible Behaviors.

So, I should try my best to be nice to you. I am sure Richard feels the same way. I wish I had to time to read your complete arguments. But, I have tried to comment at times, and was ignored. If you are dismissive of my advice, well, it is not the best incentive for following the Thread that Closely.

But, I was thinking of a New Tact... the Philosophical Principle of Occam's Razor.... That the Simplest Explanations for Phenomena are ordinarily the Correct Ones.... that when One Sees hoof prints, once should Think 'Horses' and not Zebras. But, your Misogynist Argument seems to fly way past anything necessary to Explain Anger, or to Address Anger and Solve it as a Problem. As I mentioned before, it seems to me that the Misogynist Argument is just a Commercial Sell... the Focal Point for attracting some Targeted Demographic.

And it puzzles me why YOU, of all people, have been attracted to something like that. Yes, I think you are, well, too 'assertive' for you own good... but I simply cannot understand Why you would go in for something that seems so, well, 'cookie cut' for an Uneducated Audience. It makes me think that you don't really believe what you are saying, but it gives you a good opportunity to Argue for it.

and if you LIKE to argue, then what is better to Argue About than something that Everybody would Disagree with?

Anyway, I do apologize for being impolite to you. Yes, I really Should have Known Better. But that is why I come to this Site in the first place... I gives me Practice at Anger Management for my own sake.

Hi Richard,

I wrote:

Given that you admit your passive-aggression and claim to be good with it, that disqualifies you as an adviser on an anger management forum.

In response, you thanked me for my opinion and then wrote:

You make it sound like women are helpless. It is probably your misogynistic beliefs that result in this feeling of superiority you have.
Women can be aggressors, women are more than capable of taking care of themselves. I'm equal opportunity.

Now that is a very strong distraction you're trying there - inventing an irrelevant argument of mine and arguing against it, Richard. Wow.

Later you write:

As stated, I'm a laid back guy. I'm passive. I have never once used any sort of physical aggression towards a friend, family member, loved one, etc. Have I ever become angry? Yes. As they have with me. I have been aggressive as they have been aggressive with me.

Now this implies to me that you don't understand what passive-aggression is. It suggests you think it means someone who is laid back but can become aggressive.
Can you clarify your understanding of the term and why you admitted in post #51 to being passive-aggressive?

Hi Leo,

I have to admit, I find it troubling that you don't recall Lundy Bancroft when you spent so much emotional energy trying to rubbish him.

You wrote:

And it puzzles me why YOU, of all people, have been attracted to something like that. Yes, I think you are, well, too 'assertive' for you own good... but I simply cannot understand Why you would go in for something that seems so, well, 'cookie cut' for an Uneducated Audience. It makes me think that you don't really believe what you are saying, but it gives you a good opportunity to Argue for it.

I'll tell you why. It's because I have been puzzled by my own behaviour towards my wife - anger tantrums, conniving, blatant lying and endless passive-aggression. I've read books and analysed myself a great deal to understand why I do this and why I'm getting nastier as the years go by. So far, Lundy Bancroft's book "Why does he do that?" is the one that gives me the best answers and I can relate his ideas to my own experience.
What puzzles me is why people on an anger management forum should vehemently dismiss and ridicule his core idea aggressively (in your case) and passive-aggressively (in Richard's case) without speaking from their own experience or bringing in other evidence-based, topic-based arguments. It has honestly surprised me.

Your apology is accepted, I wish you well.

well josh,

to me you don't actually seem interested at all in discussing this topic. you protest that actually you're very keen to discuss the topic and it's everyone else that has no interest in the topic. but what i see is time and again you choosing to keep the conversation on problems you have with richard, problems you have with leo rather than choosing to stick to your initial topic of conversation.

your dishonesty is really your biggest problem.

Josh Smith wrote:Hi Leo,

....It's because I have been puzzled by my own behaviour towards my wife - anger tantrums, conniving, blatant lying and endless passive-aggression. I've read books and analysed myself a great deal to understand why I do this and why I'm getting nastier as the years go by. So far, Lundy Bancroft's book "Why does he do that?" is the one that gives me the best answers and I can relate his ideas to my own experience.
What puzzles me is why people on an anger management forum should vehemently dismiss and ridicule his core idea aggressively (in your case) and passive-aggressively (in Richard's case) without speaking from their own experience or bringing in other evidence-based, topic-based arguments. It has honestly surprised me.

Your apology is accepted, I wish you well.

Dear Josh,

Oh, Good! Now we are talking about something substantive,,, real Anger Management... but, first,,, I wish you had given me a clue as to who 'Lundy Bancroft' is, or was, and how you think I was so cruel and callous to him...l thought it was a 'she'... but that is how much I have forgotten about it.... honestly, I can't Search up a Single Thing to give me the least clue.... it is like you are keeping your own private Data Base... well, if so, couldn't you at least share?

BUT... Moving On to Current Business... You are apparently a True Believer in Misogyny as the Primary Cause of Your Anger, and that is because, well, I am guessing because you are a Boy and your Wife is a Girl. You are telling us that She Did Nothing to Annoy you outside of being a Female. You are telling us that she was a Perfect Immobile and Inaudible Statue of Venue, radiant in all her Beauty and Glory, BUT, because you are under the Subjection of a Misogynic Complex, you simply HATE her and lash out at her with no other apparent cause at all, outside of you having the Unfortunate Condition of Simply Hating Girls for no other reason then that they are Girls. You know, that is what your Misogynist Argument amounts to. You do know that, right?

What if you were living with Male Roommate... or a Male Lover? Are you telling us that there would not be a Problem in the World... that it all would be complete Bliss? Well, beyond the hygiene problems associated with such relationships....

Oh! Well, thinking about my own progressions of Thought, it seems we have hit upon the solution to your problem... if you only HATE girls but have no problem with Boys... well, this IS the twenty-first Century, and since, nowadays, nobody at all is in the least bit prejudiced against any conceivable kind of Social Arrangement... well, if you REALLY DON'T LIKE GIRLS, well, trade your Wife in for a boy!

I am sure your wife would go along with the arrangement. She must hate being abused by you for simply being a girl... all the time when she is being Completely Perfect. Go to the Courts and find an equitable way to end the relationship. You will be happier. Your Ex-wife will be happier.... she probably... being so Perfect... won't have a problem finding a New Man who will appreciate her for her utter Perfection.

Well, we do run into a problem now. If you Apparently don't Like Women who Like Men, then, well, Men who like Men will probably wonder whether you wouldn't have the same problems with them. They might suspect that your Vowed Hatred For Women might not 'extend'.... kind of 'morph' into a Hatred toward anybody whom you cohabitate with on an intimate basis.

and THAT is what I we have all been trying to tell you. Your Anger Problem is Person to Person. Boy or Girl.... ANYBODY in the same Position as you Wife would be catching the same Flack from you, no?

Tell me I am not right?

Josh Smith wrote:I've read books and analysed myself a great deal to understand why I do this and why I'm getting nastier as the years go by.

What role does thinking play in your experience and your behavior?

Josh Smith wrote: Now this implies to me...

You have a lot of "this implies to me," in your life. You never seem to grasp that others do not see the world the same as you. Not a single member has stated that they agree with how you see a world where misogyny is the root cause of anger towards wives, yet instead of conceding that they are not wrong, you say, "this implies..." and then dismiss or attack their view.

I clearly stated if you want to think misogyny as the root cause helps you with your problem, great. More power to you. Just because we disagree doesn't mean much to me. It doesn't imply anything.

My world view seems to work pretty darn well for me. I have seen and dealt with my fair share of abuse and anger. I don't have anger issues, I'm a happy, relaxed guy that has fun pretty much everyday and I enjoy what I do. And I don't believe misogyny is the root cause of anger towards wives. Yep, my world view seems to achieve some pretty good results.

How is your world view working out for you?

Hi Richard,

In response to my last question:

Can you clarify your understanding of the term and why you admitted in post #51 to being passive-aggressive?

you completely dodged the question with more distractions.

Again, can you clarify your understanding of the term passive-aggression and why you admitted in post #51 to being passive-aggressive?