This entry was posted on Friday, February 15th, 2008 at 8:59 pm and is filed under Communication. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Some people are just so good it hurts-really hurts. The technique which we call pseudo-benevolence is one that can drive a spouse crazy in no time, and it is common in our society.
The pseudo-benevolent dictator may be the husband or the wife, or both; his identifying characteristic is that he imagines that he is an abundant giver and can anticipate or know the needs of his spouse. The problem is that the victimizer fails to recognize and show approval of the expressed needs or real desires of his partner. This behavior has something in common with the mind reading act described earlier, in that both rest on unclear communication and the assumption that one person ‘mows” what the other is really feeling, wishing, or thinking.
In one young couple we knew (whose marriage lasted less than five years); the husband brought frequent little gifts to his wife. One day he would burst in with a chocolate malt (his wife was on a diet) and say boyishly, “I thought you needed a treat!” A few weeks later, he ‘would bring home two tickets to a night baseball game because his wife had been wanting a night out (his wife hated sports and for months had been nagging to be taken dancing; her husband hated dancing). This went on and on. H the wife needed new clothes; the husband might surprise her by picking out a dress on sale which he “knew” was just right for her, even though she preferred to do her own clothes shopping. After every such gift, the husband would look expectant, proud, and pleased because he was being such a considerate person.
The wife played right into the game. Not about to be labeled the “bad guy” in this twosome, she would praise the husband for his thoughtfulness, and accept the gift. She seldom had the courage to object.
The pseudo-benevolent dictator sometimes senses that the happiness of his spouse is only feigned, so he may end up feeling just as depressed as the recipient. Since neither realizes what is happening, the giver may regard the receiver as ungrateful, while the receiver thinks the giver is super-selfish.
The person who believes he is benevolent usually does not recognize the discrepancy in his behavior. He overlooks the fact that “benevolence” based on one’s own fantasy of what the other person wants, or one’s own need to give, turns out to be dictatorship. It cuts the other person out, and any hints or clues the other delivers that he feels left out are ignored, or simply not heard, or seen as lack of appreciation. If the victim tries to press his point, the conversation may go something like this:
‘What do you mean I never do anything for you? I took you to the movies two nights ago.”
“But, darling, you forget I didn’t want to see that movie. I was tired that night and told you I’d rather go to bed early.”
“You did not. You just said you were tired, and I thought the movie would relax you.”
“But you were the one who wanted to see that movie I hate John Wayne movies!”
“Boy, see if I ever do anything for you again. Other wives never get taken out, and when I try to do better, you nag me for it. That’s the last time.”
The imputation of desire as illustrated here is not the same as responding to the spouse’s real needs, expressed or unexpressed. In some cases, a spouse may certainly give spontaneously without being asked, because as a result of past experience he knows that his partner desires a particular gift, or loves to cuddle at bedtime, or likes a certain meal especially well. If a person is genuinely sensitive to another’s needs, and gives to fulfill these rather than his own, he should rightfully be called-not a pseudo-benevolent dictator-but in romantic terms, a lover!
