"I hate your book"
I received this email yesterday - it came out of the blue. By coincidence, i was close to the writer's home town in the USA only last week and I left a copy of the book's manuscript with a friend, who doesn't know my correspondent.
Read on...
10/13/06 9:03a
I have read the draft of your book "Man Overboard" with dismay. It is a document that I will. to the degree that I can, advise anyone I can to avoid your book at all costs.
My objections are several but have a "philosophical" foundation so I would like to start with a few points of essential belief:
Women (as a generalization) are emotionally needy and addicted to the periodic fix of "hormone baths". They are slaves to the emotional roller coaster ride thus produced.
All sentient creatures operate from a position of self interest, that is actions are based upon what serves their need the most. There are other forces at play, (socialization, instinct, etc), but self interest is very powerful. More successful sentient beings operate (or usually attempt to operate) from a position of enlightened self-interest, that is if you in the pursuit of your self interest consider the interest of others, other will consider your interest.
Some things are not worth the price of having them. Yet sometimes people pay the price regardless.
My first objection is one of pragmatism, that is, doing what makes sense, or has proven to work. Thus I believe that if a man follows your advise what he is doing over the long haul is will not give him the desired result (or will give him the desired result at a cost vastly outweighing the benefits). It is pretty simple, one gets what one rewards.
You should have learned this from raising children. Your child throws a tantrum, makes a general pest of himself and spouts outlandish demands and you give him what he asked for you have just taught him what works. Now that he has learned this lesson, his tantrums and unacceptable behavior will escalate when he doesn't get his way, he has learned that if his proven method isn't working he simply is doing enough of it.
By the same token if you teach a woman that demands, threats, pouting, sexual blackmail, and other sorts of emotional hate gets her what she wants she will continue. The difference between your child and a woman is the child wants the thing he is demanding, and once he receives that thing the tantrum stops. Woman, on the other hand, wants your obedience (which she interprets as "love"). Once she becomes accustomed to a certain level of obedience that level will no longer cause her to experience that hormonal rush of oxcytocin that she equates with love, and, since her primary expectation is your unconditional devotion to her happiness,she will be constantly testing the "unconditionalness" of your devotion. "Will he put up with this?", "will he put up with that?" There is no end to the escalating love test.
I've been married for 24 years, at the very beginning I was clear by my actions that I didn't live to serve and that manipulation wouldn't work. It was obvious when I left her in a restaurant on our third date that I didn't reward bad behavior. I was clear that I was in the relationship for MY happiness and my needs to be met, and I didn't have a particular need to serve her. She knew right from the start that my motivation for making her happy was my happiness in the relationship. That makes me value the relationship and not want to lose it. I told her from the start she could deliver one ultimatum so she should be certain not to use it frivolously. She knew from the start the if ever uttered the word 'divorce' she would have one.
she learned that it was to her enlightened self interest to consider my enlightened self interest.
My second objection is less goal oriented. Simply, it's your choice if you want to sell your manhood, your pride, your autonomy, for some spoiled, narcissistic princess wannabe. But this is NOT a marriage for a man it be in, its a marriage for a eunuch to be in. You have sold everything you had of value so that she would stay awhile longer, Until she decides to raise the price. My firm belief (a belief that is confirmed daily by everywoman I meet, every human interaction I witness, and everything I read) is that a woman will USE a man who will let her, but never respect a man who allows himself to be used, but won't respect him and can't love him.
I hate that you are writing a book advocating that men enslave themselves on the altar of what you have defined as marriage. In the world of today,( as in all of history) there is enough trying to beat us down without our own advocating we beat ourselves down
(Name Withheld)
...........
My response is here:
Dear Mr (Name),
Thank you for your comments. You obviously feel strongly about your relationships. And you have thought deeply about the issues. I applaud your strong stand. I believe men must take responsibility for their relationships.
On a point of philosophy, I believe our concept of human nature determines our expectations of how other people will treat us. Your beliefs about what drives human behaviour forms the foundation stone of your experience. That’s because life always seems to deliver what you think you deserve. Research among teachers found that children performed to the level the teacher was given to expect, not to their natural ability. Bright kids performed badly and dumb kids performed like bright kids whilever the teacher’s definition of them was ‘bright’ or ‘dumb’.
I guess you can see where this is heading. If women act in a certain way, is it because they are naturally like that, or are we simply manifesting our expectations?
Ray, I am not good at being a husband, father, etc. And my wife and I still have dark periods when she acts badly and vice versa. But we tend to give each other the room to ‘have a Jimmy’ (a little inner tantrum), secure in the knowledge that it will blow over. We didn’t have that trust before I changed my approach.
I tried for 30 years to be the Patriarch, the firm hand, the dominant partner. I failed. I felt insecure for all those years. But I didn’t feel secure until I stopped trying to control my wife. All I feel now is loved.
What works for me is for me. What works for you is for you.
Your marriage is in the red zone – 25 years is a peak in the divorce graph, often the woman leaving the man rather than endure another 25 years with an emotionally-unavailable partner. Usually the male is blindsided by the woman, who left emotionally many years before.
I have 500 readers’ responses, mostly males. Only 2 responded to the manuscript as you have.
Thank you for the opportunity to cross swords. I should warn you that advising people to avoid a book is the best way to get them to read it – forbidden fruit, etc. Why not just say nothing about it?
By the way, how did you obtain the manuscript?
Cheers!
Michael
...........
His response came back almost immediately:
10/13/06 1:24p
Thank you for your response. To clarify some of my points, I have never tried to be to be "Patriarch, the firm hand, the dominant partner", nor do I permit Diane to be. As an American woman, she was accustomed to have men "hop to" when she spoke. Her wish was their command, (its just the natural order of things here--and getting worse).
She quickly learned that I didn't respond, I refused to hear demands (and don't make them) I refused to hear belittling comments( and don't make them) It truly is a matter of mutual respect.
I am expected to know HOW she shows me her love, frankly it doesn't make me "feel loved" but I believe its fair that I understand it is her way, likewise I don't feel obligated to accede to her demands. If she expresses herself well (and we are both inclined to give the benefit of the doubt) and I understand her, I'm inclined to do what I can to make her feel good. I do this because it is in my self interest, her treating me with respect AND being concerned with my happiness makes me treat her with respect and be concerned with mine.
I do think you are correct, that people get (not what they deserve) but what they expect. I expect to be treated civilly and I expect my adult wife to act like an adult, I expect it, I ONLY respond positively to it, and I get it.
With regard to the 24 year mark, if she needs to go... she needs to do what makes her happy.
(Name)
.........
I responded:
(Name),
Thanx for your note. I enjoy being challenged because I want to learn all I can about this issue. I am intrigued by your perspective. I agree that women try to control men and they are prone to making belittling remarks. It’s not an American problem. It is universal. I believe they are hardwired to do it. There is a fascinating book called The Surrendered Wife by Laura Doyle that admits that this behaviour is common among women. She contends that women lose respect for their male partners because of their behaviour. I believe their motivation provides a clue to putting an end to the phenomenon. In the manuscript I wrote:
“They sound like they are trying to control you because they feel insecure. When they try to arrange everything and give you a list of things to do, then check up on you like your mother used to, it’s because they are anxious. They feel responsible for everything. They believe nothing will get done without their interference. It could be you let her do too much and don’t pull your weight. You’ll put an end to controlling behaviour when she trusts you to take an active part in planning and carrying out activities. Pull your weight. Don’t leave running the household to her. Call the electrician. Pick up things at the supermarket that you notice you are running out of at home. Show her you are thinking about things she would normally have to worry about. Don’t leave it all to her or she’ll feel overwhelmed and start passing on her anxieties to you in the form of instructions and worse, negative comments about your decisions in other matters. Once she can trust you to be part of the team, she’ll relax and the pressure will come off both of you.”
I don’t believe men have to carry an equal share of domestic duties. I don’t believe women want them to. Women want to feel loved. They want to know that they are thought about. When a man cooks a meal, tidies a room, makes a bed, takes the kids off her hands, runs errands without being asked... He’s not saying “I am your slave.” He is saying, “I am aware of you. I care about you. I love you.” It’s the communication of emotion that eliminates controlling and belittling behaviour, not the physical act.
When a woman feels loved, a man can get away with anything. Far from being castrated, I am now far more likely to get what I want since I learned how to communicate my feelings by actions. Far from becoming a eunuch, I have a more active sex life now than at any time in our relationship, excepting the first 12 months.
Your refusal to be intimidated by demands and expectations is a very healthy response. Standing up for yourself is called “differentiation”.
Ray, my book is primarily written for men whose women are walking out on them. It is a strategy for winning back something that has been lost. When she’s walking out – and you want her to stay – it’s not the time for differentiating or standing firm. You do whatever it takes. My strategy is simply this: Stage 1: Surrender, fall on your sword, unilateral surrender. This should throw her off balance and make her curious enough to stick around for a while. Stage 2. Overachieve as an attentive lover – a massive love offensive on every front. For as long as it takes to convince her your love is real. Stage 3. Balance is restored gradually as her sense of natural justice kicks in.
Your definition of human nature – the Utilitarian Theory (acts of love are merely enlightened self interest; people will take whatever they can get) - probably precludes Stage 3. My definition – the Unconditional Theory (true love is motivated by nothing more than true love; people will sacrifice everything for love) - makes Stage 3 possible.
Nonetheless, this explains why I recommend the approach you find objectionable. Mine is a recovery strategy. I wouldn’t recommend it as a way to start a new relationship. (Though during the Infatuation stage of a love affair, we feel inclined to do anything for the loved one.)
I AM FASCINATED TO KNOW how the manuscript came into your possession. I say this because I was within a few hundred miles of you for the first time in my life when I was in Vermont only a week ago. And I left the only copy of the manuscript I had with me in Vermont with a dairy farmer called Abe Collins from Stanton. Then I get an email from you in Mass. Did someone pass it on to you?
I am interested because I am a student of the way ideas move throughout societies. I am somewhat of an authority in Australia on ‘word of mouth” dispersal of ideas.
(www.michaelkielymarketing.com.au)
Michael Kiely
Read on...
10/13/06 9:03a
I have read the draft of your book "Man Overboard" with dismay. It is a document that I will. to the degree that I can, advise anyone I can to avoid your book at all costs.
My objections are several but have a "philosophical" foundation so I would like to start with a few points of essential belief:
Women (as a generalization) are emotionally needy and addicted to the periodic fix of "hormone baths". They are slaves to the emotional roller coaster ride thus produced.
All sentient creatures operate from a position of self interest, that is actions are based upon what serves their need the most. There are other forces at play, (socialization, instinct, etc), but self interest is very powerful. More successful sentient beings operate (or usually attempt to operate) from a position of enlightened self-interest, that is if you in the pursuit of your self interest consider the interest of others, other will consider your interest.
Some things are not worth the price of having them. Yet sometimes people pay the price regardless.
My first objection is one of pragmatism, that is, doing what makes sense, or has proven to work. Thus I believe that if a man follows your advise what he is doing over the long haul is will not give him the desired result (or will give him the desired result at a cost vastly outweighing the benefits). It is pretty simple, one gets what one rewards.
You should have learned this from raising children. Your child throws a tantrum, makes a general pest of himself and spouts outlandish demands and you give him what he asked for you have just taught him what works. Now that he has learned this lesson, his tantrums and unacceptable behavior will escalate when he doesn't get his way, he has learned that if his proven method isn't working he simply is doing enough of it.
By the same token if you teach a woman that demands, threats, pouting, sexual blackmail, and other sorts of emotional hate gets her what she wants she will continue. The difference between your child and a woman is the child wants the thing he is demanding, and once he receives that thing the tantrum stops. Woman, on the other hand, wants your obedience (which she interprets as "love"). Once she becomes accustomed to a certain level of obedience that level will no longer cause her to experience that hormonal rush of oxcytocin that she equates with love, and, since her primary expectation is your unconditional devotion to her happiness,she will be constantly testing the "unconditionalness" of your devotion. "Will he put up with this?", "will he put up with that?" There is no end to the escalating love test.
I've been married for 24 years, at the very beginning I was clear by my actions that I didn't live to serve and that manipulation wouldn't work. It was obvious when I left her in a restaurant on our third date that I didn't reward bad behavior. I was clear that I was in the relationship for MY happiness and my needs to be met, and I didn't have a particular need to serve her. She knew right from the start that my motivation for making her happy was my happiness in the relationship. That makes me value the relationship and not want to lose it. I told her from the start she could deliver one ultimatum so she should be certain not to use it frivolously. She knew from the start the if ever uttered the word 'divorce' she would have one.
she learned that it was to her enlightened self interest to consider my enlightened self interest.
My second objection is less goal oriented. Simply, it's your choice if you want to sell your manhood, your pride, your autonomy, for some spoiled, narcissistic princess wannabe. But this is NOT a marriage for a man it be in, its a marriage for a eunuch to be in. You have sold everything you had of value so that she would stay awhile longer, Until she decides to raise the price. My firm belief (a belief that is confirmed daily by everywoman I meet, every human interaction I witness, and everything I read) is that a woman will USE a man who will let her, but never respect a man who allows himself to be used, but won't respect him and can't love him.
I hate that you are writing a book advocating that men enslave themselves on the altar of what you have defined as marriage. In the world of today,( as in all of history) there is enough trying to beat us down without our own advocating we beat ourselves down
(Name Withheld)
...........
My response is here:
Dear Mr (Name),
Thank you for your comments. You obviously feel strongly about your relationships. And you have thought deeply about the issues. I applaud your strong stand. I believe men must take responsibility for their relationships.
On a point of philosophy, I believe our concept of human nature determines our expectations of how other people will treat us. Your beliefs about what drives human behaviour forms the foundation stone of your experience. That’s because life always seems to deliver what you think you deserve. Research among teachers found that children performed to the level the teacher was given to expect, not to their natural ability. Bright kids performed badly and dumb kids performed like bright kids whilever the teacher’s definition of them was ‘bright’ or ‘dumb’.
I guess you can see where this is heading. If women act in a certain way, is it because they are naturally like that, or are we simply manifesting our expectations?
Ray, I am not good at being a husband, father, etc. And my wife and I still have dark periods when she acts badly and vice versa. But we tend to give each other the room to ‘have a Jimmy’ (a little inner tantrum), secure in the knowledge that it will blow over. We didn’t have that trust before I changed my approach.
I tried for 30 years to be the Patriarch, the firm hand, the dominant partner. I failed. I felt insecure for all those years. But I didn’t feel secure until I stopped trying to control my wife. All I feel now is loved.
What works for me is for me. What works for you is for you.
Your marriage is in the red zone – 25 years is a peak in the divorce graph, often the woman leaving the man rather than endure another 25 years with an emotionally-unavailable partner. Usually the male is blindsided by the woman, who left emotionally many years before.
I have 500 readers’ responses, mostly males. Only 2 responded to the manuscript as you have.
Thank you for the opportunity to cross swords. I should warn you that advising people to avoid a book is the best way to get them to read it – forbidden fruit, etc. Why not just say nothing about it?
By the way, how did you obtain the manuscript?
Cheers!
Michael
...........
His response came back almost immediately:
10/13/06 1:24p
Thank you for your response. To clarify some of my points, I have never tried to be to be "Patriarch, the firm hand, the dominant partner", nor do I permit Diane to be. As an American woman, she was accustomed to have men "hop to" when she spoke. Her wish was their command, (its just the natural order of things here--and getting worse).
She quickly learned that I didn't respond, I refused to hear demands (and don't make them) I refused to hear belittling comments( and don't make them) It truly is a matter of mutual respect.
I am expected to know HOW she shows me her love, frankly it doesn't make me "feel loved" but I believe its fair that I understand it is her way, likewise I don't feel obligated to accede to her demands. If she expresses herself well (and we are both inclined to give the benefit of the doubt) and I understand her, I'm inclined to do what I can to make her feel good. I do this because it is in my self interest, her treating me with respect AND being concerned with my happiness makes me treat her with respect and be concerned with mine.
I do think you are correct, that people get (not what they deserve) but what they expect. I expect to be treated civilly and I expect my adult wife to act like an adult, I expect it, I ONLY respond positively to it, and I get it.
With regard to the 24 year mark, if she needs to go... she needs to do what makes her happy.
(Name)
.........
I responded:
(Name),
Thanx for your note. I enjoy being challenged because I want to learn all I can about this issue. I am intrigued by your perspective. I agree that women try to control men and they are prone to making belittling remarks. It’s not an American problem. It is universal. I believe they are hardwired to do it. There is a fascinating book called The Surrendered Wife by Laura Doyle that admits that this behaviour is common among women. She contends that women lose respect for their male partners because of their behaviour. I believe their motivation provides a clue to putting an end to the phenomenon. In the manuscript I wrote:
“They sound like they are trying to control you because they feel insecure. When they try to arrange everything and give you a list of things to do, then check up on you like your mother used to, it’s because they are anxious. They feel responsible for everything. They believe nothing will get done without their interference. It could be you let her do too much and don’t pull your weight. You’ll put an end to controlling behaviour when she trusts you to take an active part in planning and carrying out activities. Pull your weight. Don’t leave running the household to her. Call the electrician. Pick up things at the supermarket that you notice you are running out of at home. Show her you are thinking about things she would normally have to worry about. Don’t leave it all to her or she’ll feel overwhelmed and start passing on her anxieties to you in the form of instructions and worse, negative comments about your decisions in other matters. Once she can trust you to be part of the team, she’ll relax and the pressure will come off both of you.”
I don’t believe men have to carry an equal share of domestic duties. I don’t believe women want them to. Women want to feel loved. They want to know that they are thought about. When a man cooks a meal, tidies a room, makes a bed, takes the kids off her hands, runs errands without being asked... He’s not saying “I am your slave.” He is saying, “I am aware of you. I care about you. I love you.” It’s the communication of emotion that eliminates controlling and belittling behaviour, not the physical act.
When a woman feels loved, a man can get away with anything. Far from being castrated, I am now far more likely to get what I want since I learned how to communicate my feelings by actions. Far from becoming a eunuch, I have a more active sex life now than at any time in our relationship, excepting the first 12 months.
Your refusal to be intimidated by demands and expectations is a very healthy response. Standing up for yourself is called “differentiation”.
Ray, my book is primarily written for men whose women are walking out on them. It is a strategy for winning back something that has been lost. When she’s walking out – and you want her to stay – it’s not the time for differentiating or standing firm. You do whatever it takes. My strategy is simply this: Stage 1: Surrender, fall on your sword, unilateral surrender. This should throw her off balance and make her curious enough to stick around for a while. Stage 2. Overachieve as an attentive lover – a massive love offensive on every front. For as long as it takes to convince her your love is real. Stage 3. Balance is restored gradually as her sense of natural justice kicks in.
Your definition of human nature – the Utilitarian Theory (acts of love are merely enlightened self interest; people will take whatever they can get) - probably precludes Stage 3. My definition – the Unconditional Theory (true love is motivated by nothing more than true love; people will sacrifice everything for love) - makes Stage 3 possible.
Nonetheless, this explains why I recommend the approach you find objectionable. Mine is a recovery strategy. I wouldn’t recommend it as a way to start a new relationship. (Though during the Infatuation stage of a love affair, we feel inclined to do anything for the loved one.)
I AM FASCINATED TO KNOW how the manuscript came into your possession. I say this because I was within a few hundred miles of you for the first time in my life when I was in Vermont only a week ago. And I left the only copy of the manuscript I had with me in Vermont with a dairy farmer called Abe Collins from Stanton. Then I get an email from you in Mass. Did someone pass it on to you?
I am interested because I am a student of the way ideas move throughout societies. I am somewhat of an authority in Australia on ‘word of mouth” dispersal of ideas.
(www.michaelkielymarketing.com.au)
Michael Kiely
posted by Michael Kiely at 2:28 pm
0 comments
Buy your Self Defence Guide to Marriage now!
