This continues a series I’ve called “Blogging Dobson” – (1) – (2) – (3) – (4) – on some comments in the Dobson book “Straight Talk to Men and Their Wives”. I pull out some “interesting statements” which illustrate the fallacy that these kinds of ministries perpetrate of being “godly” or “family-affirming”.

Once upon a time he didn’t have white hair…
In the course of the series, which describes some of the “interesting” parts of Dr. Dobson’s book, it was discussed about how husbands are called to step up and lead their families. However, the husbands are disenfranchised of their authority. The wife is then set up as the authority holder (head) of the marriage. The rest of the book involves examples of means used to accomplish this goal. Those who follow the religious feminist sphere regularly will recognize these as global trends in the church today (establishing Marriage 2.0), because Dobson has been a leader in this respect.
Dobson begins (in this chapter called “A Man And His Wife”) with a statement on divorce, which hardly is interesting: (1)
Perhaps you know that the divorce rate in America is now higher than in any other civilized nation in the world, and it is steadily increasing. That is tragic. Even more distressing to me is the knowledge that the divorce rate for Christians is only slightly lower than the population at large. How could that possibly be true? Jesus taught his followers to be loving, giving, moral, responsible, self-disciplined, honest, and respectful. He also explicitly prohibited divorce except for radical circumstances of infidelity. With these instructions, He provided an unshakable foundation for a stable and loving relationship between husband and wife. How can it be, then, that those who claim to have accepted Jesus’ teaching and devoted their lives to Christian principles are hardly more successful in maintaining harmonious families than those who profess nothing? There’s an enormous contradiction tucked within those words.
The part that becomes interesting is that it reminds me of a quote by Focus On The Family representative Glenn Stanton, who performs the same role in the group today that Dr. Dobson is doing with this book. In that quote, instead of lamenting it like Dr. Dobson, he has celebrated it (H/T Dalrock):
The divorce rates of Christian believers are not identical to the general population — not even close. Being a committed, faithful believer makes a measurable difference in marriage.
Dalrock provides good commentary on this, so I’ll refer you to there, since this isn’t the primary interest of this post. Suffice it to say, it’s not good to lament the results of their Marriage 2.0 experiment, especially today. Dobson continues to write, telling us the reason that all these marriages are being blown up in divorce (1):
The truth is, the same circumstances that destroy non-Christian marriages can also be deadly in the homes of believers. I’m not referring to alcoholism or infidelity or compulsive gambling. The most common marriage killer is much more subtle and insidious. Let me explain.
Suppose I have a counseling appointment at four o’clock tomorrow afternoon with a person whom I’ve never met. Who is that person and what will be the complaint that brings them to me? First, the patient will probably be Mrs. Jones, not her husband. A man is seldom the first to seek marriage counseling, and when he does, it is for a different motive than his wife seeks it. She comes because her marriage is driving her crazy. He comes because his wife is driving him crazy.
I’m not aware enough of marriage counseling (even Christian) or how it works specifically beyond what I’ve read on Gregoire’s site and this post (which is the only one that came up describing the results of it after an exhaustive search), but I notice the pattern is as Dobson writes:
It’s always the man’s fault, because he won’t submit to her and be like a woman.
It could be argued that the whole purpose of marriage counseling is to strong-arm the man into submitting to his wife and later give her justification for the inevitable frivolous divorce that is to come. Dobson goes on to give three “letters” as examples to this point in bold and neglects to explain his points any further. He probably meant something by them, but they are nonsense logically, and one of the handful of statements in the book I really can’t do anything with because it’s so nonsensical. To break up the statements:
1. She comes to counseling because her marriage is driving her crazy.
2. He comes to counseling because his wife is driving him crazy.
We logically know that the wife asks for marriage counseling because she has some problem with her husband that is driving her crazy (same as the husband’s reasons). The only conclusion I can make out of this given the rest of the text is that Dobson is making this subtle reframe in order to push the point that the husband isn’t submitting to her desires in the marriage, which makes the marriage drive the wife crazy. Meanwhile the husband’s views on how the marriage is driving him crazy are dismissed as out-of-hand because they are about his wife and do not focus on the marriage, i.e. fulfilling her thoughts, wishes, desires, etc. Dobson gives us his conclusion about “Mrs. Jones” (2):
Mrs. Jones speaks as though she were the only woman in the world who has ever experienced this pattern of needs. But she is not alone. It is my guess that 90 percent of the divorces that occur each year involve at least some of the elements she described–an extremely busy husband who is in love with his work and who tends to be somewhat insensitive, unromantic, and noncommunicative, married to a lonely, vulnerable, romantic woman who has severe doubts about her worth as a human being. They become a matched team: he works like a horse and she nags.
Note the nature of these qualities – Dobson is in effect making a call to men to be more feminized in their marriages, and put aside the work of providing for his family via his job. Dobson is saying if men would just listen to their wives and submit to their wishes, these marriages wouldn’t be blowing up. Hence, we have the common teaching that supplicating to the wife is the answer if the marriage is on the rocks. But when job security becomes an issue if the husband isn’t “dependable” (as Dr. Dobson should well have known as a professor at the USC School of Medicine and a practicing pediatrician), and isn’t working the load his bosses demand of him for being at his wife’s beck and call, the wife won’t be thankful. Especially if the hours he works less for pleasing his wife enables him to provide less of a standard of living than before.
But this would all be possible if the husbands would just hear (submit to) their wives, as Dobson tells us (3):
I can hear masculine readers saying, “If women want a slower lifestyle, less materialism, and more romantic activities with their husbands, why don’t they just tell them so?” They do tell them so, in fact. But men find it very difficult to “hear” this message for some reason.
(Dobson then tells the story of his preacher father stepping on a cat’s tail in an open-air revival while he was preaching and it struggling and crying until he took a step.)
This story typifies many twenty century marriages. The wife is screaming and clawing the air and writhing in pain, but the husband is oblivious to her panic. He is preoccupied with his own thoughts, not realizing that a single step to the right or left could alleviate the crisis. I never cease to be amazed at just how deaf a man can become under these circumstances.
Dobson tells me something I for sure didn’t know. Marriage in the 20th century (and I’m sure the 21st) for a woman is extremely painful and panic ridden, when a man steps up and leads the family and doesn’t submit to his wife. Like a cat whose tail is being stepped on. If he would just only submit to her, that pain of hers would go away and she would have a happy marriage with no complaints from her end and no thoughts of divorce. Such is the dream of Marriage 2.0.
Now, why should I be the constant source of pain for a woman if I marry her?
(1)“Straight Talk to Men and Their Wives” by Dr. James C. Dobson p 92. (2) ibid page 94. (3) ibid page 95-96.
Do men not have any responsibility to watch their actions? It sounds like the man he was describing was not being very alpha (or running the MAP). I do agree the undertone is not great in these quotes, as it puts all the issues on the man, which is definitely not accurate all (much?) the time. Some men do pursue their jobs too much, but that is up to them.
On a side note, I often here the claim that no one ever lamented not spending more time with their family in the end. I always thought this left out the idea that we only listen to those who are successful. Many men who made nothing of their business life are likely to have lamented they didn’t work harder, but we don’t read about them because they weren’t successful.
It is a balance, as “seeking to be rich” is definitely warned against and I find the context of that to be overwork, though underwork is an equally damned problem as well.
A bit rambly and I will seek to let things go here.
is in love with his work
Absurd. I know very few men, mine included, who work long hours because they are “in love” with their work. That’s enough to make me tune Dobson out.
@Brad:
I don’t think Ballista is indicating that husbands have no responsibility. Of course they so Rather, that Christian women want men to be both men (provide, often as the sole provider which means long hours), and be sensitive, romantically driven creatures like women. This is untenable
But the worst part? If she gets this soft sensitive man, she finds him unattractive as well. Men are darned if they do, darned if they don’t. The issue is women and their unrealistic expectations.
The whole system is set up to steer men. If it was flow charted, the mans path through would not even be a path through, it would be like a maze directing him back to try different things but never reaching the exit that leads to the happy wife happy life dream.
What the whole thing misses is that these women ARE happy in their discontentment, because it yields drama and empathy, something women will absolutely thrive in.
I have known a very few women who were not compelled by drama and empathy. They do exist as far as I can tell from the outside. But those stuck in the Dobsonian world strike me as simply being in an unsettled state all the time, as Elspeth says darned if do or don’t for the man. This is why divorce is contagious, why a wife that shares her drama creates envy in others who then buy the books and SEEK drama with which to seek counseling and get attention focused on her.
Ive been to Christian marriage counseling before. Been a long time. But it is exactly as you’d expect, either its full frontal man fixing, or its so vague and set on not choosing a side on any issue that it does little good. I actually told one guy that unless he would mediate a couple of issues, literally hear the sides and render and opinion, I would not participate. Those were unsettled days in life indeed, the mediation occurred, “one of us” was not happy with the results, the counseling ceased. It was not counseling that fixed my marriage…not even close.
@rbradleyandrews
I am an advocate of husbands learning and utilizing Game in marriage, but I think this is a problematic framing of the issue. The wife is in rebellion with the full assistance of the church (as the OP shows). Her rebellion is driving her crazy and making her miserable. If the husband can assist her in ceasing her rebellion through effective game/leadership, then this is an act of love as well as good practical advice. But it always needs to be clear that her rebellion is her sin, and her rebellion is the fundamental source of the problem along with the complicit church. When we assign responsibility to the husband for the wife’s sin we are contributing to the problem and being cruel to men, women, and children. The NT repeatedly instructs wives to submit to their husbands. It does not instruct husbands to make or cajole their wives to submit. Instead, it makes declaratory statements that the husband is the head of the wife/family.
Excellent post Ballista74, and thanks for the kind linkage.
Or as Joel and Kathy would say:
The framing similarity between the quotes you share from Dr. Dobson’s book and lowering the boom is uncanny. The fundamental difference is Dr. Dobson doesn’t come out and say wives are right to divorce under these circumstances, but he does get perilously close.
The similarity is of course more than a coincidence, but it is still striking how all of this follows the script we have outlined with the threatpoint being used in a futile effort to make wives happy. Pick any modern Christian discussion on marriage and it is nearly guaranteed to be a core theme, which is why Dr. Dobson, Joel and Kathy, and Fireproof all manage to stumble into the same frame. The other recurring theme is wives using denial of sex to controll their husbands.
On the “in love with his work” angle, the answer is almost always “it’s happier at the crappy job than at home”. There are occasions when it’s different, but they’re the exception that proves the rule and a complete misunderstanding of the situations.
Oh, and less anyone forget to say it: I’d bet hard money that most husbands actually do “listen”, which is why they’re in marriage counseling in the first place. That they treat their wives requests as logical rather than sinful Fitness Tests is actually the problem. Oh, and she expects to be “happy”, which is another issue unto itself.
Dobson, Joel and Kathy, and Mr. Rheumy eyed ruddy cheeked 1st Baptist preacher, and the guy in the office next to you, and it frustratingly seems like EVERYONE except the cyber people who populate these blogs feels exactly the same way.
I’m feeling extremely demoralized.
There are more of us every day Empath. I think that the most important thing that can be done is to warn the generation of men coming of age about this problem.
Look at it this way: Dobson and his ilk are the mainstream now. They can’t do any more damage than they are already inflicting at the moment. Things can only get better.
As a college guy who has spent enough time in church… unless a fellow is brain-damaged, he will be taught well that he’ll only marry if he wants to be whipped dog serving a woman.
@rbradleyandrews/@BradA
On the “who is responsible” question, the next post (#6) will explain the dynamic a bit more and how the responsibility for both his actions and hers are put on the man. As I’ve used as example a few times, if the husband has an affair it’s all his fault. If the wife has an affair it’s solely her husband’s fault because “he drove the poor dear to it”.
Ultimately husbands bear all the responsibility for both his and her actions (it’s a warping of what the head of the family is supposed to represent), as well as her thoughts, emotions, mental state, etc. This is common expectation in Marriage 2.0 and the thought process behind what Dobson and all the other traditional feminists are doing with respect to marriage and men.
@Elspeth
Often because if you were (next post) to graph out the marital satisfaction of husbands, it’s probably as low or lower than the wives. Work is often a common escape for husbands that don’t love their home lives. Of course, as this post illustrates, the husband’s marital satisfaction has always been irrelevant.
And as I indicate in the next post, I’m saying everything is ALL his responsibility. That’s what I meant “it’s ALL your fault”.
@Dalrock
Thanks for your contributions. As for Dobson, I think he does everything short of jumping up and down screaming “Do it! Do it!” – as should be evident in the next post. As I say with Gregoire and porn wrt women, it’s hard to find a uniform and categorical rejection of divorce in Dobson’s book (at least this one). This is only fuel to the fire of the concept that the church is supporting the divorce culture.
Pingback: BD #6 – Making Sure The Wife Feels Loved. | The Society of Phineas
Pingback: BD #7 – The Basic Concept Behind The Man-Up Rant. | The Society of Phineas
Pingback: Commentary on Christians on Marriage | Thinking 8
Pingback: BD #8 – Ruled By Feelings And Emotions. | The Society of Phineas