The Surrendered Woman

The Surrendered Wife http://www.surrenderedwife.com/ first came to public notice back in 2001 when Laura Doyle published her book of the same title. It was a controversial subject that angered many feminists and caused lots of men to send her silent messages of thanks. Although one of the greatest critics of SW is a man, John Gottham, who is considered to be an expert on marriage. Gottham believes that balanced, caring, sharing, open and honest communication is vital for a healthy relationship. But I haven’t found these to be missing in the mantra of a Surrendered Wife.

The aim of Surrendered Wife was to transform thousands of relationships by making changes that would ultimately bring women romance and intimacy. Because no matter how content we are, no matter how independent, no matter how enlightened women are it seems we need, if not romance, then intimacy. Not physical intimacy, although that is very nice, but a spiritual intimacy.

Doyle was banking on there being ‘millions of women’ wanting to make their marriage better. One would assume there was also millions of men who wanted this too but the book wasn’t aimed at them, the assumption being that men weren’t the ones that could make the changes. It certainly implies that the power for change lies with the female. Does that mean the male is already ‘cooked’ as Judge Judy would say or does it imply that the male is powerless – without the skills to affect change. Maybe men look outwards for something that makes their relationship with their partner bearable, work, hobbies, alcohol, affairs with other women.

The English Oxford Dictionary defines ‘surrender’ as ‘to abandon oneself entirely to a powerful emotion or influence’. So are there millions of men who evoke powerful emotion in and influence over their women? Yes, of course there are. There are millions of domineering, controlling men who force their women to do their will. But these women are not in the embrace of romance or intimacy. They are victims. Doyle is very clear that her surrendered women are not submissive, and they are certainly not victims. Surrenders Wives are empowered in an alternative way, one that will bring them more fulfilment.

Doyle claims ‘Feminism may have done a lot for the workplace, but what has it done to help women find fulfilment at home? It seems to me that these people have simply empowered women to get divorced, become single mothers, get married again, and leave the next man, too, because he's no good. We're empowered to sue for lots of child maintenance, and then live struggling and lonely for the rest of our lives. Just great!'

Many of my female friends are in long term relationships and marriages. They hold down jobs, some of them have high powered jobs earning more than their husbands, others have jobs that pay the minimum wage but that wage is vital to the family. All have children. Many are dissatisfied with the relationship that they have with their man, In fact I can only think of a handful of friends who have a fulfilling relationship with their partners. All the others seem to be just ‘jogging’ along, maybe managing nicely and their discontent only comes to light after a few glasses of wine and some thinking. Maybe ‘thinking’ should be banned! None of them are having a great sex live, or if they are, it isn’t with their husbands. Some moan about their men, some mock them, some shake their heads in despair of ever understanding them and they wonder if this is how it’s going to be for the rest of their lives. Some want their men to see them as a sexual, desirable woman and far too many fall asleep with their back to their man.

But none want their marriage to end. So they just….wait.

It was reported recently that Rom Coms, the genre of film also known as ‘chick flicks’ and usually starring Jennifer Anderson, are responsible for a lot of women feeling dissatisfied with their own relationship. Where, they are prompted to ask themselves, is my heart skipping a beat moment? Why does my man not look at me with that look of intense desire in his eyes? Why doesn’t my man hang on to my every word? Because love, you nag him, piss him off and generally give him brainache! And, interestingly, gay men’s relationships are also supposedly being adversely affected by the Hollywood image of love and romance. I remember listening to a radio phone in on this subject where a gay man rang in to say how he dumped his boyfriend after seeing ‘Brockback Mountain’ as he said it left him feeling there was something missing from his relationship. Would a straight man dump his girlfriend after watching ‘Nine and a Half Weeks’? No, of course he wouldn’t, he would just suggest to her that she buys an aerosol of whipped cream and put some plastic sheets on the bed. Or he’d have an affair!

Doyle says ‘Like millions of women, I wanted my marriage to be better. But when I tried to get my husband to be more romantic, helpful and ambitious, he withdrew-- and I was lonely and exhausted from controlling everything. Desperate to be in love with my man again, I decided to stop telling him what to do and how to do it. When I surrendered control, something magical happened. The union I had always dreamed of appeared. The man who had wooed me was back.’

Now why would this happen? Do men want to have control? What’s wrong with sharing? As Carrie Bradshaw from Sex and The City might ask ‘Does the act of ‘sharing’ add something to your relationship or does it in fact take something away?’
Sharing is vital. All the financial responsibility, all the chores, all the child care should be shared. Not down the middle. But in a way that is fair and acceptable for them both and that works for the family. Balance has to be a balance that works and if a woman decides to pass all financial control to her man and it works for them that is taking responsibility. Each partner should feel their opinion, needs and desires should be acknowledged. But where there is conflict someone has to make the final decision. The SW would allow her man to do just that. And support him in that decision and work with him to ensure that the decision was the right one for them. The non SW would, if forced to go with her mans decision may sulk, complain, maybe even throw a spanner in the works so she could at some point say ‘I told you so, you should have listened to me.’ The non SW grows resentful and her opinion of her man, who, lets face it, she has helped to emasculate, diminishes and she then doesn’t want to fuck him anymore.

There was a big debate this week about whether a woman should pick up her mans socks. Some argued that by doing so she was ‘letting the side down’, that if she picked those socks up she was effectively putting the woman’s movement back a hundred years. This in a week where a woman, Lubna Hussain, is soon to go on trial in the Sudan for wearing trousers in public. If found guilty she will receive 40 lashes. So how far has the women’s movement come in the last hundred years? Not fucking far. Ok, so here in the West we don’t get physical lashes for wearing trousers but there is still a gap in pay, woman are demonised for allowing their children to be killed while the man who did the killing is not subjected to the same level of hate, mothers of feral children are attacked in the press and very few people question the fathers role. Or if they do it is the woman who is derided for not being able to keep a man. Why is it that no one seems to have asked what the father of Baby P was doing while his son (and daughters) were living in a filthy hovel with a couple of paedophiles and a woman who shouldn’t have been left in care of a goldfish? But I digress.

The bottom line is simple – The surrendered woman must leave at the front door the power she wields at work and with children in order to achieve a greater intimacy. Doyle claims it isn't 'about dumbing down or being rigid. It's certainly not about subservience. It's about following some 'basic principles' that will restore intimacy to your marriage, and with it, peace and joy and inner growth. The main principle is to relinquish 'inappropriate control' of your husband.

The following rules need to be followed in order to become a SW:
• Give up unnecessary control and responsibility
• Express their needs while also respecting their husband's choices
• Resist the temptation to criticize, belittle or dismiss their husbands
• Trust their husbands in every aspect of marriage - from sexual to financial...and more.

Dare I ask….What’s the problem with these? Isn’t it just a long winded way of saying ‘to honour and obey’. The first rule – Give up unnecessary control and responsibility includes the word ‘unnecessary’. It certainly isn’t advising women to blindly follow their man unquestionably. If, for instance your man wanted to join the Moonies, well I think it would be advisable in that instance to say ‘Er…. no. I don’t think that’s for me thank you very much’ and make an appointment with the bank to remove your share of money from any joint bank account before he signs it over to the cult leader.

Express your needs while also respecting their husband’s choices.
Think about it. The bedroom needs to be painted. He says blue, you say yellow. Yellow because blue makes you hallucinate and have violent migraines. Now, if after you have expressed this he still insists on blue the time has come for you to ask yourself ‘Do I want intimacy with this man who has so little regard for my welfare?’ A man who would act in such a way isn’t worthy of a SW. But if you have no real need for insisting on yellow then why is a woman who agrees to blue such a threat to women who hate the idea of women pleasing their man.

Resist the temptation to criticise, belittle or dismiss their husbands.
Why do some woman do this? They married him for fucks sake! Bad parents criticise, belittle and dismiss their children and bad wives/husbands do this to their spouses. My sister does this to her husband all the time. In front of their children. She pulls no punches; no topic is taboo and no swear word unused. Not everyone is this extreme however. Some women (and men) say little comments to their partners in a jokey manner that can cut the recipient of these remarks to the core. Why live like this?

Trust their husbands in every aspect of their marriage from sexual to financial
Ah…here it is. The nitty gritty. This is the rule that non surrendered women find difficult to accept. Sex and Money. Whoever has control of these is all powerful. And power corrupts. Doesn’t it?

Maureen Freely wrote an article for the Observer in 2001 ‘So a fish does need a bicycle’(I just don’t get it? Am I thick?) in which she writes ‘You must hand the family finances over to him, even if he is bad with money. And you've got to let him have his way with you, even if you don't want it , at least once a week.’ Let him have his way with you? A man you love, a man you crave a closer intimacy with? You have to ‘let him have his way with you?’ How fucking sad.

The Catholic Church is now suggesting couples say a prayer before lovemaking; ‘place within us love that truly gives, tenderness that truly unites, self-offering that tells the truth… loving physical union that welcomes’. Now this is controversial. Not the fact that the Catholic Church is suggesting couples say grace before they copulate, but the fact they are suggesting love making should be ‘welcomed’. It is recognition surely that making love with someone you love, admire, respect and have a deep friendship with is something that should be given gravitas, something that should be a delightful experience that is to be welcomed with open arms. Surrendering your mind, body and spirit to your man will take you both to a plane of ‘togetherness’ that makes you stronger as a couple.

In fact the whole tone of Freelys article about the concept of a SW is disdainful and critical. Her opening paragraph about a woman's discontentment with her man (mainly due to his annoying little habits) is aghast that a woman should take responsibility for how she feels. Freely implies that it’s the mans fault his woman is annoyed with him. It is his fault for making her unhappy. Freely asks -
Do you ever feel superior to your husband? Do you think everything would be fine if only he did what you said? Do you criticise him when he misloads the dishwasher? Do you imitate the way he clears his throat to make your friends laugh? Do you have a hard time remembering why you married him? Do you ever look at him when he's fast asleep and snoring, and wish he were someone else? If you answered yes to any of these questions, Laura Doyle, America's new self-help queen, has some very bad news for you. It's not your husband's fault that he falls so short of your expectations. The person you should be blaming is yourself.

Who else Ms Freely? If a woman feels like this about her man she should just get the fuck out. If she has to let her man have ‘his way with her at least once a week’ she should just get on her broom and fuck off. Because he is going to be happier without a woman laughing behind his back, giving him brainache and staring at the fucking ceiling while he empties his balls.

The fact that a SW is required to be ‘available for sex’ whenever her husband requires it is something that sticks in the throat of NSW. However Freely says,
The most intriguing thing is how raunchy the surrendered wives are. Oh how my mother and her friends would blush to hear the advice they give poor Kim, who has surrendered but still isn't getting as much sex as she craves. The 'keys to a happy marriage' are as follows, says Karen. 'Don't criticise him, let him make the wrong turn, give him lots of oral sex and be sure to swallow.'

You know, here's a crazy thought – perhaps the women who want to be surrendered actually desire their men?

Doyle advises ‘Never surrender to a man who is physically abusive to you, or your children, or has an 'active' addiction, or who is chronically unfaithful. It's not worth it. You can never achieve intimacy with types like that.’ Nor would you want too. And here I think is were it is…SW aren’t waving white flags. They are staking a claim. They are saying I love this man. I trust him. I want to hold his hand and let him take me on a journey through life. Doyle says she didn’t become surrendered over night. It wasn’t easy. But it was worth it.

As someone who tried it, for I’m reliably told, 7 whole minutes, I can confirm it isn’t easy. But I wish I’d tried harder!