POWER IMBALANCE IN MARRIAGES

Every once and a while, whatever the trigger may be, I pause and reflect on some of the marital interactions I have viewed over the years in my clinical practice. The elements of power, authoritative/demanding vs submissive/passively accepting, or passive-aggressive, play out to different degrees in all relationships.

There are constant power struggles in all marriages though they may be major or minor and handled very differently. While our society accepts equality between the sexes in today’s marriage, not all spouses handle relationships and marital tasks of household and offspring in an equal or shared fashion. Some of these imbalances are culturally dictated; some by the lack of assertiveness in one or the other, some in mimicking the only model the players have witnessed in the past marriages they observed, and some because neither partner has thought it out, negotiated, or agreed to the most critical expectations of the other...

When matters are quite off balance, one spouse might be physically or emotionally abused( in the perception of others or themselves). If the abused one has little sense of worth to begin with, the abuser continues to further the sense of worthlessness in his /her partner with enough occasional remorse to keep the other partner always hoping that their will sometime be approval shown for their forbearance, patience, caring and forgiveness.

If that fails to happen, there is little left but anger and disappointment. Add complexity to this interaction by including projection, displacement, fear of being left alone, anxiety about caring for children alone, shame, and the myriad of other possibilities. Marriages are often kept together that stumble along unhappily for both, who in their attempts to find some happiness may use totally inadequate or destructive coping mechanisms. Extra-marital liaisons are often an attempt to experience what a relationship with someone else might be like, in the often mistaken belief that the problems all rest in the partner, not one’s self.. When a decision is made and the marriage viewed as intolerable to one or the other, a no-fault divorce is fortuitously made easily possible in our present day. However, when the idealized version perceived as what the marriage could have been, is either mourned or made often failed attempts to return it to the track it was hoped to have been on in the first place…to the ‘lived-happily-forever-after’ route, the desired destination is rarely reached unless a proper balance is set. Usually, having been tried and failed before, it might be expected that it would fail again because it is not a script either can follow.

It is my impression that living with that false hope is probably one of the most painful routes anyone can take. It is doomed to constant disappointment and anger both at the spouse and at one’s self due to a perceived weakness for accepting such disappointment and abuse). Throughout my many clinical years I have often seen such marriages, though all with totally unique elements between each couple. I see these marriages as imbalanced because one person takes a position of power (or is enabled to take it by being given it). The enabler is frequently caught in this position out of fear. The fears may be totally unfounded to the eye of an objective beholder but are clearly real and terrifying to the person experiencing them. The perceived ‘strong one’ may secretly wish to be stopped because they feel themselves on a runaway of behavior but, sadly, have prevented that action by the strength of their demands and threats to their partner, who remains terrified and knows no other way but to remain distanced, fearful, and emotionally detached. One of the dances in this situation is that of a ‘distancer’ and a ‘pursuer’. Picture that the more one pursues someone that is trying to distance, the more the distancer has to fight to get away. If the pursuer is looking for closeness and comfort, it is easily seen how that won’t work. The roles of distancer and pursuer are interchangeable, given different circumstances, in most relationships.

There are two alternatives in such imbalances: divorce; or work to change the balance.. Because people have tried and failed for so long, they would do well to be in couples therapy for this work. The therapist should be equipped to take them ‘out of the box’ in which they have been stuck and help them see that there are other ways to behave and achieve more desirable and effective results.

THE TOO MANY PRIDE AND PREJUDICE SEQUELS

A few times I have written reviews of Elizabeth Aston's series of books on the extended Darcy family members as a sequel to the book PRIDE AND PREJUDICE by Jane Austen. After reading five that I found by Aston, Amazon kindly pointed me to the many more available. I read a book titled MR. DARCY PRESENTS HIS BRIDE by Helen Halstead. It, too, was a delightful book but it now pushed me into the confusion of feeling I was living in parallel worlds. The names and numbers of the Bennett grandchildren changed. Even the name Bennett was spelled two ways (Bennett& Bennet) Many of the characters came from Austen but many more were invented.

Next I read the Pemberley Chronicles and The Women of Pemberley by Rebecca Ann Collins, a pseudonym from one of the book's characters. Even this author gives different names for the Elizabeth and Darcy offspring. From the cover in the latter book, I learn that there are nine more books as sequels on the subject by that author. Additionally, I counted 25 more on Amazon.

One of the books I read had Lizzie with a miscarriage in her first pregnancy. Another had Lizzie having five girls, followed by two sons. A third had a daughter followed by a son but the boy had a different name in each of that author's books. I had hoped to read all the books and settle my head on the version I liked best. That is now unlikely as there is so much else I would like to read than a rehash of someone's fantasy when I can imagine a great one in my own head.

I see my two choices. I can content myself with knowing as little as what I know about what happens after Prince Charming and Snow White get married and move to another country to live happily ever after; or I can boggle my mind trying to keep a mental score card on the characters, their changing names and profiles, and exactly who is in the next generation of these families.

Quite interesting is the historical description, in the Pemberley Chronicles, of the Industrial Revolution in England. Unlike Tolkien's allegorical version of it in the Lord of the Rings, this accounting is much more readily understandable as the historical account it is meant to be. If there are any readers of this blog who may have read others and liked them, please comment here and let me know which they are! Meanwhile, I am in awe of the two hundred years during which so many have read and re-read Austen's novel. I am more in awe, though, of how many have caught the coat tail and capitalized on a novel that, by now, must be out of copyright.

NO ONE IS MINDING THE STORE

We used to think that our government wanted to discourage monopolies so that competition would keep prices down. In the last few years we have seen conglomerates become monopolies, individuals gain control of massive media outlets and all sorts of frightening indicators for the poorer of those among us. While Microsoft did not acquire YAHOO, Carl Icahn may have a better chance.

One of the newer ones is eBay trying to control Craigslist, on of the few who gives the buyer the break that one gets at a flea market. Craigslist functions locally with a great proportion of volunteers (almost a dirty word in corporate circles)!

HP is after EDS. Monopolies are not illegal in the United States. What is illegal is actions taken by monopolies to limit competition. It will be the subject of my rant to the Attorney General as soon as I get time to write about Verizon. (see Verizon Fraudulent Sales blog of 4/15 archived).

DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER

Amy Goodman has written an excellent article on the Bush administration's violation of journalist's rights and ability to do their job. "The Bush administration has engaged in assault, intimidation, and imprisonment to limit the ability of journalists to do their jobs." Two years ago Glenn Greenwald wrote a book on the subject.

He writes, "For the past 10 years, I was a litigator in NYC specializing in First Amendment challenges, civil rights cases, and corporate and securities fraud matters. I am the author of the New York Times Best-Selling book, How Would A Patriot Act?, a critique of the Bush administration's use of executive power, released May, 2006." View his complete profile.

Two years ago there were very clear posts about the problem. I quote: "The release of three Reuters journalists from custody this week raises new questions concerning Bush administration and U.S. military policy that has allegedly led to the deliberate murder of at least thirteen journalists in Iraq by U.S. soldiers."

This might explain why there are no longer TV journalists worth listening to other than the comics. They all sit on TV, figuratively crossing their legs, too frightened about their contracts being renewed than to stand up for journalistic integrity. They pretend to be giving news, when in fact, all that comes out of their mouths is their biased opinion. Gone are the days of newsrooms where truth and daring reigned and editors dared risk all to bring the truth to the citizens that trusted them. Not so today. Not only is the President not trusted, nor many religious figures, nor the law, nor politicians but, sadly, American TV journalists have joined that pitiful list of fallen once-respected-professionals.

NEW GOOGLE SERVICE IS MAKING ITS WEB PAGES SOCIAL

Google has been wonderful at jumping where it is relevant. The exponential speed with which the Internet is making the world smaller is extraordinary. Making the world smaller is a goal well worth any effort. The USA, in the Bush era, has joined the rest of the world as being a country of massive numbers of 'haves' and a greater majority of 'have-nots'.

As people are brought into closer contact to share opinions and information, and as those opinions are now in all corners of the world, it will be harder for the Bush/Cheney/Rove tactics of secrecy to continue.

This speculation goes beyond what it seems the thoughts of socialization and connecting friends with friends of those friends. But, then again, thinking outside the box reveals all sorts of interesting possibilities. Even though decisions are being made for business reasons, that does not mean some are not beneficial to our way of life

MOTHER'S DAY

Though a few weeks past in the UK, Sunday was is a day dedicated to Mother's here in the USA. It has always been a joy to all the mother's who are remembered by their offspring and a day of utter disappointment and depression for mothers who are forgotten.

For a more complete understanding of Mothering Day to Mother's Day.

So I wish all Mothers a very, happy Mother's Day with all the love that can be sent to them from their children, tiny and adult.

MICROSOFT'S EDSEL

Euthanizing Vista is only one of the solutions by those of us who hate it. Many are going even further and trashing Microsoft totally in favor of Linux machines.

THERESE POLETTI'S TECH TALES

Clamoring for Microsoft to keep XP alive

Commentary: Why not kill Vista instead of Windows XP?

By Therese Poletti, MarketWatch

Last update: 12:01 a.m. EDT May 8, 2008

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- "After being spurned by Yahoo Inc., Microsoft Corp. Chief Executive Steve Ballmer surely has too many other problems right now to ever listen to the following suggestion.

Moreover, there is not a chance it will ever happen, not after all the billions of dollars the software giant's probably poured into marketing and developing what may be its most unpopular operating system, Windows Vista.

But in the wishful thinking/fantasy department, I think Microsoft (MSFT:

29.27, +0.06, +0.2%) should euthanize Vista and write it off as a big mistake. Many consumers looking for a new computer also may prefer my idea. Because after June 30, Microsoft will stop most sales of its seemingly more successful operating system, Windows XP.

I am not alone in my lunacy, A group has formed to try to save Windows XP on the technology news site InfoWorld. (OK, the petition only has almost 194,000 signatures, but it legitimizes the notion that not everyone wants Vista.) The petitioners want Microsoft to keep selling Windows XP indefinitely -- which is asking a lot, but compared with the alternative is understandable."

Not even Bill Gates seems to want to comment favorably. Another oft repeated suggestion is to get a MAC...not a bad idea. But for those of us wedded to our Microsoft, proprietary software, for which we have paid thousands of dollars so that we can pay more each time there is a slight addition, so that it can be called an upgrade, it is not cost-effective....at least so we have been thinking.

Now ask yourself, what do you do with your computer that you cannot do with many of the programs from Source Forge? The list is shortening exponentially.