What’s old is new again: Brian Reinholz and his wife find complementarianism in marriage works for them.
Does your marriage feel like a constant power struggle? Have you ever thought about the ‘old way’ of doing things and wondered if there’s something to it?
Let me start with a disclaimer: I understand that some of the things I say might seem offensive, or misogynist. I only ask for a fair shake and an open mind, and I promise to reciprocate.
My wife and I are coming up on our 5-year anniversary. As I reflect on these past 5 years of marriage, it’s pretty interesting to see the twists and turns we’ve taken. We’re completely different people than we were, and I’m glad. Here’s our story.
♦◊♦
Shy nerdy boy (that’s me!) meets edgy, rebellious girl. Shy nerdy boy thinks he can “save” edgy girl with his love, compassion, and wisdom. (An almost laughable statement, looking back at 16-year-old me.) He ends up learning a whole lot more from the relationship, like how to come out of his shell, live a little, and oh yeah, actually carry on a normal conversation with someone else.
They get married at 18 and 19 with every confidence that true love will overcome all obstacles. (Does this story sound familiar yet?)
♦◊♦
It started out good but went sour fast. It was everyday combat … anything from who’s going to drive today to who’s going to cook, do the dishes, take care of the dogs, etc. Granted, we both hated our jobs and were always exhausted. But looking back, one major flaw in our relationships was we were always self-focused, not focused on each other. And I think the reason is that both of us were desperately trying to play roles that we weren’t meant to.
My reaction to these power struggles was to just start giving in. I carried the calmer demeanor of the two of us, and I’m also a chronic conflict-avoider. So I’d just bow out, again and again and again. But, as some articles here have mentioned, most women don’t really want a passive man for a husband. My wife didn’t either. So, goodbye emotional intimacy.
It was a pretty dark chapter in our marriage—there was a period where, after only a year or so into marriage, my mantra of “I’ll never get divorced” started to transition into “maybe this was a bad idea.” And once you let your mind down that rabbit hole, it ends up in some pretty dark places.
♦◊♦
It was around this time that we decided to find a church. (I know, I know, here comes the sappy, God-saved-my-marriage story.) We actually didn’t really see just how screwed up our marriage was yet—we just wanted to meet some friends, and church seemed like the place to do that.
This church was probably one of the best things that has ever happened to us. Within months, we both started changing. We both had a sense of purpose that went beyond paying the bills and making our way through our Netflix queue.
At some point in the last few years, we got introduced to the concept of complementarianism—an alternative to egalitarianism that teaches on ‘different but equal’ gender roles for men and women, especially in a marital context. I was pretty hesitant as this sounded a lot like those “crazy evangelicals” who want to bring us back in time to the Cleavers.
But around the same time, we started talking about wanting to start a family, and both of us felt very strongly that if we were going to have kids, we wanted to make them the focus of our life. We wanted to pour our best into them. I had experienced the huge blessing of having a parent around 24/7—my wife had not because her father died when she was young and her mom had to work and raise the kids.
So, we wanted a devoted parent, but at the time I didn’t know what that would look like. I thought maybe I would get a work-from-home job and stay with the kids? But around that same time, my wife became fairly adamant: “I’d like to quit my job and stay home with the kids,” she told me.
There’s been more changes than just that though … I’ve begun to take a lead role in financial management, overall family vision, making major decisions, etc. From my perspective, the new role and responsibility has driven me to step up a lot more, to fight hard for our family and feel good about it. (Like the whole ‘with great power comes great responsibility’ thing.)
From my wife’s perspective (these are her words), she feels like our changing roles have cut down on arguments, helped her to feel more clear about responsibilities and expectations, and she has gained peace from not feeling the need to control everything. I have also seen her relationships with other women improve a lot, and I’ve seen her grow in all types of handy skills (she’s made her own yogurt, mayonnaise, and ranch dressing in the past week). She also reports being a lot happier. 🙂
♦◊♦
So here’s where I’m probably going to heat a few kettles. I believe that men and women are different, and that it’s dangerous to ignore these differences when it comes to marriage.
One thing I’ve observed in a lot of men is that they either skew toward passivity or skew toward domination. The passive men (who I think are the majority) need responsibility—I know I did. The domineering men need accountability. (One way to accomplish this is regularly meeting with, and baring your soul with, a few other men that aren’t afraid to tell you if you’re way off base. I strongly recommend this for both men and women.)
As for women, well, my perspective is probably weak at best here … but from what I’ve seen most women want freedom to make their own decisions and live their own life but they also want a husband who has a plan, has a vision, and has the courage and discipline to execute that family vision.
When a wife takes control, either by choice or out of necessity—I see this all the time where the wife brings home the bacon, raises the kids, and takes care of the house—she’ll most likely resent her husband for being lazy. But lo and behold, the husband quickly feels disrespected and not needed, so he checks out.
Maybe these stereotypes seem really sexist and really unfair … you’re probably right. But have you not seen this play out before? Maybe it’s just my circle, but I see this happen. All. The. Time.
Every marriage is different. Every balancing act is going to look different … the roles are going to look different. Same with same-sex relationships. I’m not saying it’s my way or the highway—but I do know that this family relationship has taken a lot of stress and tension off of both of us. I think a knee-jerk reaction that calls a male-led model “oppressive” probably does more to hinder rather than help couples that might benefit from it.
Are power struggles getting in the way of intimacy in your marriage? Or am I totally off my rocker? Happy to hear either opinion but let’s keep it respectful. We’re all just sorting through this maze together.
—Photo Sean MacEntee/Flickr
I don’t see anything about true egalitarianism being the problem here. I see problems with self-centeredness, trying to change one spouse, passivity (which is unflattering in either spouse), marrying too young… but certainly not any sign of a Biblically-based commitment to mutual submission and love, which is the essence of Christian egalitarianism. There are a lot of bold-faced lies about egalitarianism out there. It does NOT mean that women are never stay-at-home wives and mothers (actually, many egalitarians are!). It does not mean the woman is in charge (mutual submission, not dominating wife). It does not mean the woman doesn’t… Read more »
I’m sure many commenters have said this, but here goes: I’m glad this arrangement worked for the author’s marriage. Finding complementary roles– even if they are the “traditional” gender roles that, for many women, feel oppressive– certainly works for some marriages. My problem is that this type of article is often used by patriarchal misogynists from the Christian right wing to bolster their position: “See? Egalitarianism fails marriages!” However, statistically (from what I have read) egalitarian marriages fare better on average than ones that enforce strict gender roles. More importantly: with all the progress women have made, and considering the… Read more »
I agree that two people trying to run all realms of a relationship is unhealthy, and that finding complimentary roles is often preferable. A great, valid and necessary point. However, gender prescriptivism isn’t necessary. I am in a long-term relationship with my partner (I’m female, he’s male and we don’t feel comfortable being married when our non-heterosexual friends cannot. But we’re in this for life, rings or not). I work seventy hours a week and am ambitious and career-focused. I am in a management role in a demanding field. My partner is a bartender who works 30-40 hours a week… Read more »
Good. That’s egalitarianism in practice. 🙂
It’s all about the individuals, and their own attitudes. NOT their gender.
Kudos to you both for creating such functioning and fulfilling – although less than usual – relationship.
I am involved in a relationship which purposely skews the power-relationship towards Her. We both find it incredibly fulfilling. I am neither passive nor irresponsible, and she is not domineering or disrespectful. Anyone who sets out those dysfunctional extremes as the either/or ends of a relationship really doesn’t know much about what they are saying. It is possible to allow one’s partner to have primary (or ultimate) power to decide (for example) which bills get paid this month without being disengaged from the process. Neither position (paying the bills or not) is inherently male or female. It ultimately doesn’t matter… Read more »
Do whatever is best for your relationship. If that means a more “traditional” marriage, then go with that. If that means a more “egalitarian” marriage, then be egalitarian. It all depends on the kind of people in the relationship.
I don’t care if you “see it all the time” when a woman gets frustrated by taking on a “man’s responsibilities.” There are millions of women who couldn’t care less.
I’ll admit, the bit right after ‘So here’s where I’m probably going to heat a few kettles’ really heated my kettle. Right up until then I was thinking ‘good for them, they found what they both wanted, and despite it not being exactly what they both signed up for, it worked for both of them’. But then you had to extrapolate from there to the rest of humanity, which is what bothered me. Reading the rest of the article did calm me down a little. But I have to say, you should try phrasing this more like ‘this is something… Read more »
*thumbs up* this is so good.
Howabout instead of asserting positions, we look at the research:
http://godswordtowomen.org/Preato3.htm
Egalitarian marriages are 4 times more likely to be happy than traditional in-egalitarian ones.
Assman, I’d the divorce rate says anything about marriage styles, it is probably that in a world where women are free from economic dependency on men, they will not stay in marriages in which they more than pull their weight while being made to feel like an inferior.
Just as you can assert some unearned privilege of leadership, your partner can reject the role of follower.
I love the concept of “different but equal”. It is the differences between the sexes that make us complete. It is the relative strength in the opposite sex that makes a couple unbeatable. It is the weakness of one that is balanced out by the other that makes a strong team.
The opportunity lies in the recognition and appreciation in the differences between the sexes not the desire to make relationships sexless.
How do same-sex relationships fit into this?
He has the right idea,. Any couple should compliment each other’s strengths and weaknesses well, or be flexible enough to work through them.
But it has nothing to do with the strengths and weaknesses of a gender. What does that even mean? Is there some universal trait in all men that’s weaker than it is in all women, and vice versa? I find that hard to believe.
Where the OP and I part company is on the idea of a marriage that includes a leader and a follower roleam. That is neither egalitarian, nor complementary it is classically patriarchal and aligned with the evangelical spiritual patriarchy taught by most faiths. Where there is a leader and a follower there is a power differential. Add to this his control of family finances and “responsibility” for major family decisions and you have a reltaionship that is not something I can endorse. A marriage of equals standing on their own two feet together is a much better model to my… Read more »
“A marriage of equals standing on their own two feet together is a much better model to my way of thinking.”
The egalitarian model has failed. The divorce rate is solid evidence that egalitarian marriages don’t work. Leader and follower on the other hand is a universal model for marriage found in every society and it is highly successful.
Which is why evangelicals (and southerners more generally) have the highest divorce rate among all of the religious groups in our country – because they’ve so thoroughly embraced the egalitarian model of matrimony.
Dude. the divorce rate has been headed slowly but steadily downward since 1980
http://www.bsos.umd.edu/socy/vanneman/socy441/trends/divorce.html
The reason the divorce rate was so low before the advent of no-fault divorce, was stigma and economic dependence, not pure blissful marital arrangements. When you cannot apply for a line of credit by yourself, you will stay in that shitty relationship so that you can eat.
I think there is benefit to developing clearly agreed-upon roles that fit the two individuals and fit the couple, instead of both people trying to do everything fully equally all the time. There’s something to the idea of having some clear division of labor for lack of a better phrase. In THIS case, it just happens to be split along what’s considered traditional gender lines, but there’s no reason that two people couldn’t divide up roles a thousand different ways. It just sounds like good general advice that does not necessarily recommend traditional gender roles. Within same-sex parent couples, probably… Read more »
I think to a degree it comes down to the personalities of the people involved and expectations and that it’s not as simple as gender roles. I trained for a profession and enjoy my job. I dot want to stay home but I also don’t want kids. For me the idea of supporting a stay at home man (because in my reality there are no fathering duties) is what would quickly make me resentful. I’ve done it before and don’t like to be a sole breadwinner as I’m sure some men don’t like. I prefer my partners male or female… Read more »
This is a very respectfully written article and it seems as though the author has really tried to be openminded. But what would have happened if the two of you weren’t a) so young and had had more time to develop discipline and sense of responsibility independently of each other? Would that have made a difference? And imagine if you lived in a society where a woman didn’t have to resent a husband if she had to work herself. I mean I, as a woman, would love a man, that is my man, to help me with what I cannot.… Read more »
“We have tried it for race and not yet succeded. But I don’t think we’ve even started trying when it comes to gender.” The is little difference between the races but a massive difference between the genders. Anthropology, genetics, biology all confirm the same thing. Women and men are different. Blacks and whites no so much. “But is it because I was raised with passive women and strong men around me and as a social creature find the norm beautiful.” And what’s wrong with that? If all moralities and norms are arbitrary then why can’t we choose the patriarchal norm?… Read more »
Sorry, assman (what a great screen name). I have absolutely NO interest in going with a patriarchal norm. You and your husband/boyfriend can pursue that together.
How are women and men different? What is one thing that all women want that all men do not, or vice versa? I ask because I have lots of both male and female friends, and I have observed LOTS of overlap in their needs, desires, and behavior.
One thing that I think this article misses is the way in which it views different roles. Although something like bill paying is a traditionally “masculine” role, there’s really nothing inherently (or biblically) about it that makes a person with a penis better at bill paying or happier when paying bills. That’s just what works for the authors family. And if that works, great. Egalitarian doesn’t mean that a woman can’t do feminine tasks nor does it mean that a man can’t do masculine tasks. It just means that they don’t have to and can work out how these tasks… Read more »
There are greater consequences centered on the lack of Male productivity then there are when women slack off in a marriage. This is made painfully obvious by the higher divorce rates filed by women.
Men need to submit to a duty that is clear prosperous and noble. We need to know where we belong in a relationship. I can’t see how an undefined notion of egalitarianism could compete with a partnership based on axiomatic Masculine pride and yes Feminen virtue.
In other words we want to de heroes.
I think you’re totally right re: both partners needing certain clearly defined roles in a relationship. I know that I appreciate when things are clearly spelled out with the people that I live with in terms of who is responsible for which bills, chores, etc. as well as what the general ethic of the house should be. There are, however, two problems with holing up complimentarianism as absolutely right for every couple. First of all, different partners may legitimately have different strengths, and relationship roles should serve to play to each partner’s strengths. For example, if I am better at… Read more »
Let’s talk “pre-kids” shall we? Why is it that when a couple get’s married that 1) the wife chooses to stay home and take care of her hiusband and home, she’s looked at as making a choice and that’s a good thing. 2) the man decides to stay home and take care of the home and wife and doesnt work, he’s a lazy bum? And don’t tell me that attitude is unique.
I see that double-standard attitude everywhere, and it’s one of my major pet-peeves. 🙁
I see it in lots of women (e.g. equality when it’s good for them, chivalry when they like it) but, honestly, in many men as well.
Truth is, as much as people talks about equality, many are still entrenched in gender roles, and they believe “it’s the way to be” without questioning them.
We must also consider some roles have an innate, biological origin – not cultural (e.g. the man cannot give birth while the woman goes hunting).
Well, hopefully she could just swing by the grocer’s 😉 I am very guilty of liking and even expecting chivalry. Have you even lugged something heavy around and been just at your breaking point when someone offers to help? The relief! Yes, it is always men who offer, in my case at least. But then it has never stopped me from offering. Ever since I was a child I could not see an old person struggling without atleast considering whether it would be appropriate to help. Probably because I had close contact with elderly people early… So I’m thinking it’s… Read more »
It is something of a pervasive attitude…but I’d argue it’s changing. I’ll pull an example from one of my television guilty pleasures – Brothers & Sisters. One of the guys in the show is a stay-at-home Dad and it’s considered totally fine. (The couple ends up divorcing anyway, for other reasons). When they discuss why he’s at-home Dad and she’s the working Mom, it turns out it was all about the cash. Her job made more, so that’s how it worked out. After the divorce they have this big fight for custody of the kids…which he initially wins because he… Read more »
I lurk and read here a lot. As a female and typical breadwinner in relationships I can honestly say I completely get resentful when I come home to someone I perceive as not working as hard as I am (be it at home or professionally). And heaven forbid if I can walk all over the guy to boot. I emotionally check out of the relationship and move on to one that is more satisfying and stimulating for me. That doesn’t mean I move towards “domineering” but that I find someone with more motivation and passion in life. I think the… Read more »
Interesting point about that continuum – and I agree with you, it’s not black or white. We can say that, when one partner is domineering, the other has to be passive (or viceversa), otherwise the relationship will not work – and that’s a functional dualism. Women has been taught to be passive for millennia; but that has changed in recent years (in the West, at least). Personally, I have a strong ego so I know I tend to be dominant. At the same time, I strive for an equality-based relationship, so I prefer strong partners with whom we can find… Read more »
Plus also, I’d argue that the dynamic is more about a whole bunch of continuums. Like, I can be much more dominant about some aspects of a relationship, and then a lot more passive about others. I too strive for a more equality-based relationship…but regardless I know that sometimes I’ll prefer to be more ‘in charge’ whereas sometimes I actually prefer not to.
I am happy for Brian, but reluctant to take much away from this experience of one young marriage. Marriage is, as David Schnarch (sp?) has written, a cruciable for personal growth. At the very least, such well-defined roles may help a couple to avoid becoming too undifferentiated as individuals. In a good marriage, the whole is greater than the sum of the partners. That said, my own experience of following cultural scripts in relationships is that it can blind you to the real ebb and flow of things. People grow and xhange. What works for a couple in their 20s… Read more »
There is this attitude that male dominance can be good for marriage, but female dominance is always disaster. That attitude is very male chauvinistic and I would like to see an article where a man openly says that female leadership saved his marrage. Equal or peer-leaning marriage does not mean that everything must be split exactly 50/50. Peer-leaning marriages are complementary but not in a male dominant/female submissive sort of way. The woman may lead in one area and the man may lead in another area. Each area is equally respected. While I think that a marriage can be peer-leaning… Read more »
“While I think that a marriage can be peer-leaning is the husband stays home and takes care of the kids and house, I do not think it can be that way if the woman stays home.” I was with you until you said the above quote, Marie. It is perhaps more difficult, due to the fact that whenever people fall into the norm in a relationship, the effort made in that relationship is sometimes taken for granted. (i.e. if the man is the breadwinner, his satisfaction in that role might also be taken for granted). So, I would again say… Read more »
Very interesting, Heather. So what do you think about so many credible studies that show that husbands respect their spouses more if they earn good wages?
Our culture proves few opportunities for both spouses to work part-time while the children are small. So again, when push comes to shove, the culture expects the woman to make the career sacrifices. That sort of expectation promotes male dominance in society.
where are these “credible studies” exactly?
@ Maria. “So what do you think about so many credible studies that show that husbands respect their spouses more if they earn good wages” What this means is that women who have reaql “careers” are respected because women are using their education to be successful. Hell yeah I would respect my wife if she was a doctor, Sr. Management in a firm but if she was out working just for the sake of making a couple extra bucks and tgo get away from the kids, I can appreciate it but have more respect, nope. But that’s not the typical… Read more »
Well I’d also like to have a look at the studies you’re referring to…because I’ve never seen any to that effect.
YOu’d have to get it from Maria .,… she was the one that I was responding to.
Tom, I was replying to Maria too…
First, let me say that I’m very happy for you. Finding a path forward in your marriage that leads to a sense of peace and joy is something to be celebrated. My wife and I have a path forward as well. We make our decisions based on a simple philosophy. That what we do, we do for the relationship, not just for ourselves. This concept of relational thinking is pretty well known. And when a couple commits to the long term, relationship = family. The idea here is that you each ask yourself, what are we creating together with our… Read more »
“I feel like we have a false dichotomy here…either it’s “men are this and women are this,” or “throw out any assumptions whatsoever about men and women” I think it’s probably somewhere more in the middle.” Alright would you like to elaborate on that? The way our society is at the moment, you can’t make a generalized statement about men and women without it being used as a prescription for how women and men should behave. Once you make a generalization, we suddenly make it a normalization, and then anyone outside of it is somehow doing it wrong. Not to… Read more »
Do you think there are any implications of this for gay marriage? As a supporer of gay marriage, I wonder if arguments like this can be used to oppose gay marriage because “men and women are different” and two men are going to have more than their fair share of conflicts as a result.
IMNSHO, conflicts usually stem more out of differences than from similarity.
(unless you are a schizophrenic and you don’t get along even with yourself 😉 )
I mean, hey, men and women have always had fight precisely because they see things differently! 😆
Hence, a gay couple should be – theoretically – more easily in tune that a hetero one.
As a matter of fact, though, is not about the gender, it’s about the persons.
So, in the end it all boils down to the individual personalities (that’s why there’s no “one size fits all” kind of relationship).
. I think a knee-jerk reaction that calls a male-led model “oppressive” probably does more to hinder rather than help couples that might benefit from it.
Agreed. I do think there are those that think if the man is in control then it must inherently mean that the woman is getting a raw deal
Brian, although your experience is quite far from my own lifestyle (I definitely am for a more equalist partnership), I agree that your life choices can work for some people (maybe many people, who knows). And I appreciate you’re exposing your POV as ONE possibility, not the ONLY ONE. 🙂 I think that “to each his own” is the golder rule: you both found your place and your family is happy and functional because of this. The error is “ideologism”: thinking one ideology is always rigidly right (be it traditionalism or egalitarianism or…) and it is the ONLY WAY, instead… Read more »
Well, to each his own is a pretty sexist statement.. Let’s say, “To each their own.”
Now if Brian would just tell us his spouse’s name . . .
“Now if Brian would just tell us his spouse’s name . . .” *sigh* let me guess, you want to know her name so you can check (asi if it were any of your business whatsoever) whether she took his name or he took hers? LET. IT. GO. First of all, It’s none of your FRICKING BUSINESS what two people decide to do within their own marriage. But beyond that what you (constantly) advocate is not, in fact, any more egalitarian than the so-called “traditional” marriage. It is literally the exact same thing with a gender flip. But hey, once… Read more »
multiple likes, 8ball
His wifes name is Mrs. Brian Reinholtz. Just kidding. But the truth is, my wife was so excited about being married she ordered our new checks with Mr and Mrs. Tom Brechlin. Seriously … but we changed it
@ Maria “to each HIS own” is an old quote ….now we have to be PC when it comes to quotes or old sayings?
Thanks everyone for your thoughts and keeping the conversation very civil. @typhon – I’m not sure why you’re hearing that I’m suggesting husbands cater to wives? That’s not my intent. I’m afraid your bias might be making it hard to read what I’m saying objectively. I think a marriage should be based on mutual giving. @Quantum & @Artemis – I feel like we have a false dichotomy here…either it’s “men are this and women are this,” or “throw out any assumptions whatsoever about men and women” I think it’s probably somewhere more in the middle… @Scott – valuable distinction re:… Read more »
Brian, I know many fundamentalist husbands who used to talk like you and they made the wrong decisions. They will grudgingly admit that their marriages and stress levels improved when they stopped thinking that they had to make the final decision.
In your marriage, does your wife have any money of her own? If she wants to buy a dress does she have to ask you for permission to spend the money? Do you keep a spousal pension fund in her name? This all seems well and good for now, but stay open to the possibility that she may change and want to take on a larger role when the kids are older. If the script starts to bind either of you in ways that prevent personal growth and fulfillment be prepared to change it up. I also find that housework… Read more »
@Randomizer … My wife was/is a stay at homer and no SHE didn’t have her OWN money, we had household money. We had a budget and accordingly it took into account our own spending for things we individually wanted or when things were tight, what we needed for the family. It amazes me when I hear of husband and wives having their own personal bank accounts. It appears to me that when they do that they aren’t committed as one family. Who does the emotional work? Yeah WE do. Example … My daughter met her now husband when she was… Read more »
Who handles the emotional work? When my son was in Cub Scouts, he was being recruited into a Boy Scout Troop and was invited for a weekend camp out. The night before he did something where there would be consequences. Rather then completely denying him the outing with the troop, I set it up that he could spend the day with the troop but wouldn’t be allowed to spend the night at the camp. WhenI dropped him off I spoke with the leader and explained the situation which he completely understood my position. When I drove away from the camp… Read more »