This post is not a comment on marriage vows, or what 'should be'.

The attachment theory approach seems to turn a lot of what we have been preaching on its head. It certainly flies in the face of some of what Schnarch proposes. Is that such a bad thing?

I dont know. Is it bad? I thought you liked Schnarch. I know I do.

It seemed to me that the H was needing a mother figure to give him the support he needed. His wife played into that role, but when she came to realize what was going on, she stopped, basically demanding he grow up and take on his adult leadership role. This was too much for him and he seemed overwhelmed. He could not ascend to that role on his own, especially with the growing resentment in his wife. It was just too scary. I believe that is why they eventually divorced.


Many men have defensive attributes that make them appear masculine. Thru the intimacy of a LTR a woman will eventually see the difference between a insecure defense, and true mature masculinity. In their case (pretty common) once this happened, he was unwilling to step up and grow, had no ability to implement boundaries to protect himself (due to his need for a mother/comforter)from her haranguing and she had no ability to have trust and desire for him (her biological need to have a man- a strong protector)
There is no right, or benefit in expecting something from her that he couldnt accomplish.

For example NOP was able to turn his sitch around, exactly because he is a alpha male prime. All strengths are also weaknesses. In men like that its usually selfishness that over time becomes a LB. Lots of situations (usually not important in the mans opinion) putting themselves first over the woman, creating resentment. In most cases, when she becomes LD out of resentment, they just move on.

I dont see that being the case in most of the situations here. In most here there is a lack of selfishness (people pleasers), placating, supplicating, man servant activity.

Chrome is a interesting exception. He has very little insecure defensiveness. His masculinity is mostly mature. He goes and gets what he needs. But somewhere/how he learned or was forced to use supplicating and found that hiding his desires was necessary and an effective survival strategy. He does well eliminating it, right up untill he thinks he will be 'punished' somehow.

Schnarch seemed to just accept this outcome as a consequence of the man’s failure to confront his issues, to step into the crucible, do the growing he needed, learn to hold onto himself and find the security he needed within himself and then be able to give that back to his wife. I recall his almost lack of concern

Yep. seems reasonable to me.

If he needs a mother he should go home and live with her. Or more realistically- live on his own and learn to take care of himself. If he cant take care of himself, how can he take care of his wife/SO? Of course a equal amount of that is her perception abilities and focus.

but I am seeing this as a bigger and bigger flaw in the differentiation theory.
I dont see it as a flaw. I see it as dealing with 'what Ii'. Schnarch is a well respected pro. Even if my synopsis is incorrect, he obviuosly saw something we dont.

What if he were able to focus on the need to basically grow up, but with the support and comfort of his wife.
This is a great idea. Looks good on paper. Heck even our marriage vows suggest such a thing. Sounds like a great woman. She is probably with a great man.
Its sounds differentiated. Any Idea why Schnarch didnt focus on the wife working on being differentiated? He needed support and comfort. no arguments with that part.

What if her needs preclude her from being able to give it?

Then he needs to get a therapist, or some male friends to work on it with.

I wonder if this approach would have saved the marriage of that couple, instead of throwing the H out on his own to come to terms with his weakness and grow on his own.

He wasnt willing to do it with her. He hadnt changed in all the time they were together previously, when she was supportive. He didnt change when she was mad. So why would she think he is going to change?
So he gets to do it on his own. or not. Most men dont change.
You can either change or wait till life forces you too. Most people like to wait and continue to get what they always got.

If you want to work on 'should be's' do me a favor and get Bush to stop his obsequious behaviour, whilst dismantling the Constitution. Its incongruent. Im starting to get cranky about it, and ready to go gather my 'indian' bretheren and have a tea party. If he is going to keep it up, at least have the balls to wear a blue helmet while he is doing it.