(no subject)

[trinityvixen]

I cannot be the only one to find this both sad and repulsive, can I?

I know that we do a lot of manipulation to get other people to do what we want--"Hey, I'm your friend, please come with me to the party so I'm not alone" etc--but this doesn't even pretend that the person being jumped through hoops (literally) is a person. The woman trains her husband like professional trainers train animals and sees nothing wrong with it.

Personally, I find it abhorrent, and I would imagine most of my guy friends would, too. There's sexism being reinforced on both sides here, and it's not remedied by the husband turning it around on the wife at the end. She assumes he's a dumb animal that she can manipulate to performing tricks, he stops listening to her when she's in pain. That's a fantastic relationship. Granted, this is as much satire as serious, but there's a hint of "Life is so much better this way!" that's honestly what the author thinks, and you call tell that.

How about, instead of wife* having to nag husband,* husband took the initiative and picked up laundry without having to be rewarded? Newsflash, boys and girls: you're not going to be rewarded for doing chores. You have to do them. You made those dishes in the sink? Guess what? You get to clean them. You will not be thanked for doing what was your job to begin with, nor is it necessary for your S.O. or roommate or other suffering cohabitator to do so just so you feel accomplished. This whole "tall poppy" syndrome has gotten way out of hand.

And, wifey, how about you explain that simple system of "You made it, you clean it up" to husband instead of nagging? Try not to be so sanctimoniouos, but do mention that most people, yourself included, pick up their own messes on the impetus of their own conscience nattering at them to do so. Then leave it at that? Tolerate shirts on the floor--or better, walk all over them, heedless of what might happen to a favorite item of clothing--so that he catches on that not having any clean clothes or having his clothes being trampled might easily be prevented by picking them up. It's a tad passive aggressive, perhaps, but you're no longer responsible once you've explained once how the "you break it, you fix it" system of life works.

*Note: I don't pretend that these gender stereotypes--frustrated neat-freak wife and ignorant lazy-slob husband are the only ones. It frequently goes the other way, and I can think of a few gal friends who are just as guilty of "I'll get to it later" syndrome as any of my guy friends. Yes, myself included. For the sake of the article's premise, I kept the gender roles fixed, though they by no means are in real life.

Comments

[arcane-the-sage.livejournal.com]

Actually I find the article quite enlightening. Despite what we tell ourselves humans are still nothing more than big dumb animals (we just know more tricks). Many common behaviors in people can easily be observed in animals in the wild, and not just our closest animal cousins. Social interactions, territorialism, even our interactions with our environment are little more than primal behaviors with a thin layer of human reason to justify what we are doing. As the woman said herself: it wasn't about training him, but about training herself not to encourage certain behaviors. Hell, I employ similar techniques (though on different behavioral models) during my commute to and from work. Subtle little things which cause a particular behavior to manifest in the majority of individuals. Makes my life a little easier, and on occasion makes other commuters a tad more civil. Aggression/confrontation only leads to more of the same. To change a behavior you have to be willing to change yourself.

[ecmyers.livejournal.com]

Wow. I generally don't like the idea that a person should try to change their SO. Pretty much everyone has some quirks and habits that are annoying, but they should be minor ones (in the grand scheme of things) if you plan to share a life; otherwise, you should know what you're signing up for. You get the whole package, flaws included. Hopefully you care enough about your SO that those little annoyances won't even matter, but I suppose over enough time they could wear a little thin.

Major complaints should be addressed, but if your partner isn't willing to compromise (because let's face it, voluntary change is often crucial to a good relationship) then there are probably bigger issues. If your SO can't be bothered to pick up after himself, or do something that is really important to you, then tricking him (or training him) really isn't the answer.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

What's that saying? "Lord help me to change the things I can, know which things I can't, and to always understand the difference"? Something like that. Basically, you can work to improve, always, but, yeah, there's not much point to taking a person you like but only with improvements as a spouse. Not a recipe for success methinks.

[(Anonymous)]

As I said in a post farther down the page, I don't feel like this is trying to change a person so much as trying to change a habit. And yes, I think there's a difference. I think that, say, trying to get someone to stop watching sports or to not like going out bar-hopping, or trying to change personality traits like gregariousness or a short temper, is futile and not very nice. But trying to get them not to leave their socks on the floor isn't exactly rewriting their personality. And while the phrase "training" is kind of offensive - the actual practice described isn't that bad. Ok, so you hold your tongue when they do something that annoys you, and you praise them when they do something that pleases you. You're not nagging, you're giving clear signals as to what makes you happy. They don't feel attacked, and they feel like they get full credit when they do something right. If it's something they really can't or don't want to help, this isn't going to change them. But if it's something that's not important to them but is important to you (like socks, say), then they'll probably change. They're happy 'cause they're getting praised. You're happy because the floor's clean. No fighting, no passive-aggressiveness, no sulking or resentment. What's not to like here?

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

That was me, by the way.

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

Sorry, I think you're blowing this one out of proportion.

A) It's a fairly jokey article.

B) I think you're seriously underestimating the Catch-22 of the neat partner.

I'm currently lurking a bit on a wedding-y website (for obvious reasons), and from what I'm seeing, this is a big problem. The demographic is very skewed (most guys don't hang out at wedding chatrooms), so I'm sure there's a bunch of people in the same situation with the genders reversed as well.

You're saying that the solution is that the messy just pick up after themselves spontaneously. The problem is that that just doesn't happen. Most of the time, the messy don't really care. They don't think to do the dirty dishes, or to pick up the trash they've left on the floor, or not to drape their stinky socks over the couch. When the neatnik asks them to fix it, the messy one either "forgets" or argues that it's not a big deal, or fixes it once and then needs to be reminded the next time. If the neatnik repeatedly asks for some help with keeping house, they're accused of being a nag. If they don't do the chores, they're accused of being passive aggressive and also have to live in filth. (Generally, the neat person is more bothered than the messy one, so it's the neatnik who's getting punished here.) If they just take care of it, they bottle up the resentment and frustration until they explode. Messy, bewildered, then says that they blow everything out of proportion, when it's not the one dirty dish that neatnik's actually upset about, it's the six previous months of playing maid.

So what exactly is the neat person supposed to do when the messy one just doesn't take the initiative, no matter how much reasoning, lecturing, or begging the neatnik gives?

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

That's a fair reading. I got that it was mostly humorous. It's just sad when people reduce other people to pets to play tricks with. It says something about the give and take of this woman's relationship.

I honestly have no idea how to deal with neatnik versus slob as I'm a bit of both. There are things I don't mind being sloppy about and things that, if they are messy, I flip out. I think the key is to find someone who violates your automatic neatnik fixations as little as possible. Good communication is key, too. For all that the author says the counselor gave them the thumbs up, it doesn't actually sound like she was communicating well at all.

There is a way to remind your partner that you're not nagging when you ask them to do something they neglected to do twice. It's in the delivery. Of course, there are some people who hear every repeat comment as nagging, and then you're in a whole other pot of hot water.

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

I think the issue here is not so much reducing her husband to a pet, but reducing his behavior. It's an odd distinction, but an important one. You can love and respect someone, but not respect certain habits of theirs. If they cannot manage to be considerate and civilized and rational in certain of their behaviors, then it can become impossible to deal with those behaviors in a considerate and civilized and rational way. When you've already gone through the careful explanations of why you are hurt by this behavior, all using "I" phrases, and done diplomatic reminders, and gritted your teeth, and a year later they're still doing it, then you need some way to escalate.

And this method is actually a good one. It doesn't hurt their feelings, it doesn't make them feel like a bad person. It doesn't start fights. It's a way of thinking that lets you reward good behaviors and not be a nag, but not feel like you're being walked on. Nagging doesn't usually work well. But just keeping your mouth closed generally leads to frustration and resentment. But if you're deliberately don't say anything because you're not rewarding bad behavior, then you feel like you're still doing something. And so you're less likely to lose your temper. Everyone wins.

[edgehopper.livejournal.com]

I would add that the only reason that the article seems offensive is that she's comparing SO's to animals. If she just presented the techniques without making that analogy, she'd still be right, but it wouldn't seem as degrading. It also would be a much less interesting read.

But, the most important part of the article (IMHO) is the idea that you use methods other than nagging (or in technical terms, negative reinforcement) to encourage behavior. For example:

At home, I came up with incompatible behaviors for Scott to keep him from crowding me while I cooked. To lure him away from the stove, I piled up parsley for him to chop or cheese for him to grate at the other end of the kitchen island. Or I'd set out a bowl of chips and salsa across the room. Soon I'd done it: no more Scott hovering around me while I cooked.

Clearly a far better approach than either yelling at Scott or stewing in stressful silence. That she came up with the idea from bird training doesn't make it a bad idea.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

The thing that bugged me about that cooking example? Why can't she just ask him to grate cheese?

"Hon, can you please grate the cheese while I do this?"

How is that harder to do than strategically leaving a grater and a block of cheese out for him and hoping it will distract him from trying to do the cooking over her shoulder? It's just weird that she sets up traps for the guy instead of making the comment when he walked in. It's even a little bit creepy that she would so anticipate him that she would do that...

[edgehopper.livejournal.com]

Have you ever seen Jethrien and Chuckro play any form of game that requires you to guess what the other person is thinking/drawing/has on his/her card (such as Pictionary?) Now that's creepy.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

No, but I've heard. I believe it, too, given the way they orbit so perfectly when together. It's very chilling. And it makes us all jealous, I'm sure.

[(Anonymous)]

But here's the thing - we work really well together. Startlingly well together. And the psychic link thing is wacky.

But we still do thing that drive the other nuts. I tend to poke whatever's on the stove. Over. And over. And over. No patience. I have to be shooed away before I'll just let the damn thing cook. And I leave my stuff in piles. I leave it on the table, and the chair and the bed and the counter and next to the coat rack. And I hate stuff that requires confrontations - returning moldy berries to the supermarket or making the FedEx guy change the delivery address or getting the phone fixed. I'll avoid doing them until yelled at or someone else does them for me. Chuckro's got his own bad habits.

Now, I don't do these things because I don't love Chuckro and we don't communicate well. And just because he loves me doesn't mean that he doesn't get driven up the wall when he has to go back to the supermarket to exchange produce, and comes home to find my stuff all over the bed. And I know this, and he knows I know this. I don't do this stuff to bug him. But I also don't really do it conciously. I don't particularly care on my own whether I still do it. If I could magically wave my hands and just stop, I'd do that so I wouldn't frustrate him anymore. And nagging me...makes me feel nagged. I'll do it, but I'll be slightly annoyed, and I won't remember the next time.

Chuckro's much less responsive to and more resentful of nagging than I am. So you can see how this could be problematic.

And we've been together for years, living together for over a year. We have a very healthy relationship with great communication and a lot of love. But that doesn't stop me from periodically wanting to smack the boy upside the head.

My mother, by the way, read the article and is now wondering if some of these things would work on my father. They've been happily married for almost 27 years. They're best friends and clearly adore each other. But a way to reinforce behavior that makes you happy without arguing is a very useful thing to have.

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

Dammit! Silly LJ, why won't you stay logged on?

That was me. Again.

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I can see how that would work. And yes, you're right, it would save a lot of frustration when stuck with someone unrepentant in their ways.

I guess I'm just stubborn in my mindset that I shouldn't have to praise someone for doing chores. It's a thankless task, I won't lie, but it's still something you have to do whether you want to or not. If you were just living by yourself, even then, you would do it. All living with another person means is escalation of number and amount of things to be done in a specific chore.

Maybe I'm just jaded. I'm unconvinced that this subliminal praising will even work beyond this anecdotal encounter. Besides that, no one thanks me when I do the dishes, and I still manage do them. I don't expect to be praised for hauling my laundry to the laundromat and back. I just do it. I can understand it's an unreasonable expectation that everyone else do the same, but I would almost certainly not put up with a person for very long before coming to blows with them if they didn't do the same (and, if you ask feiran we have).

[chuckro.livejournal.com]

Just because chores are a thankless task, don't mean it hurts to thank someone for doing them. I find doing chores much more pleasant when I know that Jethrien appreciates my doing them. I hate feeling taken for granted, y'know? I mean, I do the chores because they need to be done and I'd do them just for my own benefit if I lived alone, but it's different when you're cleaning up someone else's mess.

I think this is rather focused on a couple, when "you made it, you clean it up" tends to get blurred because, for instance, there's no point in doing two seperate loads of laundry. If I'm going to clean my clothes, I might as well do all of our clothes, and the sheets and towels and tablecloth. Y'know?

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

I guess that makes sense, too. When they're shared, it's harder to define what and what degree of things are yours to do. Breaking up chores--I do dishes, you do laundry--is one solution. This could work, I suppose, as another.

[chuckro.livejournal.com]

Feel free to do this to me. I could use some training. And I like praise.

[jethrien.livejournal.com]

Ditto.

(Sorry I keep leaving my stuff on the table, sweetie.)

[cbreakr.livejournal.com]

weird that, as a collective last night, we found useful and tempting cases within just a few minutes

[trinityvixen.livejournal.com]

Saddest of all, we cannot deny the appeal...