"The Surrendered Wife" philosophy

I suppose it works if you are already passive anyway. I'm a go with the flow kind of girl. 

I'm not sure it works the way you put it, I would think rather it's more like having equal footing by not nagging people to do what you want them to do, but compromising and being more relaxed about things.
Then again, I haven't read the book. 

My attitude and relationship sort follows along these lines in a way, but I am slightly less "go with the flow", but I aspire to being more so.  Sort of Buddhist, really!  My hubby works more than I do (and physically harder) so I do more of the cleaning.  Mostly all of it.  But the dirt bothers me more anyway.  I cook sometimes, he cooks sometimes.  I almost always do the dishes.  He takes care of the bills, but I used to be too controlling in that respect (last relationship) so it's good for me to let go a bit.

I haven't checked out the website yet, but I am fascinated / repulsed at the same time.  I have always believed that a happy person who is pursuing her dreams, projects, whatever is going to be an attractive person and attract others who are happy and well adjusted to her.

I'm not sure it works the way you put it, I would think rather it's more like having equal footing by not nagging people to do what you want them to do, but compromising and being more relaxed about things.
Then again, I haven't read the book. 

Yes but you have a better grasp of the philosophy than others who also have obviously not read the book.

Reading some of the misunderstandings about the author's philosophy is a bit like reading a pontification about nuclear physics, and the person not only called it "nuke-u-lar" but said a bunch of stuff that an expert in the field would recognise as misinformed about the topic.

The original question had to do with finding like-minded people who actually understood the topic, not people who had a knee-jerk, misinformed, uneducated opinion about it based on a few descriptive words (e.g., "surrendered" - which in this context means giving up being a control freak because no one actually likes feeling controlled and it only serves to alienate people rather than promoting trust and intimacy).

I have always believed that a happy person who is pursuing her dreams, projects, whatever is going to be an attractive person and attract others who are happy and well adjusted to her.

Then can you please explain to me why I am still single      

Thanks, Britwife - I did a quick search but couldn't find one (though I did find someone make reference within another thread to it). 

Add me to the list of people who is no good with the UK-Y forum search (though I think I'm pretty good using google to search the wider web!)

I couldn't find it either I'm afraid. I think it must have been archived. Shame, because I seem to remember there was someone who was very keen on it. I forget who, maybe they will post again in this thread if they are still around.

It was in my library, I read it.

I agree with not nagging.  I didn't get married to be a Mommy to my husband.  But I did get married to be a partner.  

She recommends letting your husband pick out your clothes make-up and even what hobbies you have, not telling him that he is ever doing anything incorrectly.  

For example from the book, you should never drive that is your husband's job if he is driving the wrong way and you know it you shouldn't try to stop him even if his driving is taking you into the WRONG STATE.

Yeah, telling my husband he is driving the wrong way isn't nagging, it just letting him know he is driving in the wrong direction.

The original question had to do with finding like-minded people who actually understood the topic, not people who had a knee-jerk, misinformed, uneducated opinion about it based on a few descriptive words (e.g., "surrendered" - which in this context means giving up being a control freak because no one actually likes feeling controlled and it only serves to alienate people rather than promoting trust and intimacy).

Umm..I actually read the book. And I hardly think there's anything knee-jerk about my response.

Then can you please explain to me why I am still single      

You will, he's out there somewhere wondering the same thing! 

My attitude and relationship sort follows along these lines in a way, but I am slightly less "go with the flow", but I aspire to being more so.  Sort of Buddhist, really!  My hubby works more than I do (and physically harder) so I do more of the cleaning.  Mostly all of it.  But the dirt bothers me more anyway.  I cook sometimes, he cooks sometimes.  I almost always do the dishes.  He takes care of the bills, but I used to be too controlling in that respect (last relationship) so it's good for me to let go a bit.

I haven't checked out the website yet, but I am fascinated / repulsed at the same time.  I have always believed that a happy person who is pursuing her dreams, projects, whatever is going to be an attractive person and attract others who are happy and well adjusted to her.

There would be no reason to be repulsed in this instance.

Really, I'm not trying to convert anyone, just wanted to know who was actually informed about the topic and finding it useful in their lives!

I don't think it's healthy to change oneself in order to "get" a man.

Any man for whom you feel you have to alter yourself in order to better attract their love, is not the "right" person for you in the first place. And any person who does not accept you exactly as you are is not worth being with.

I agree with sweetpeach on this one, I'd rather be alone than be with the wrong person or with someone for whom I have to contort my natural self.

And if that means I don't "attract" ANYONE -- then so the hell be it.

The purpose of ANY of our lives is not centrally to get a partner. Screw that. That's just an incidental, a cherry on the top if it happens.

Sucks when something enjoyable does not work out, sure, but we can't compromise our natural selves in whatever is going on with us, in order to please another individual who sure ain't compromising HIMSELF for US.

Ask yourself this:
How many men walk around worrying about how best to fit in with US and our nature/personality, to not rock the domestic boat?

Riiight.

I AM myself and the best thing ANYONE can do for themselves is TO BE TRUE TO YOURSELF.

I'm not going to change myself just because ooh, I'm single, ooh, I'd better be a happier, more attractive well adjusted person in order to attract the love of the same!! Golly geee.

People have to take me as is. Sorry. If that means I'm not liked or loved, do I give a flying one. No.

The original question had to do with finding like-minded people who actually understood the topic, not people who had a knee-jerk, misinformed, uneducated opinion about it based on a few descriptive words (e.g., "surrendered" - which in this context means giving up being a control freak because no one actually likes feeling controlled and it only serves to alienate people rather than promoting trust and intimacy).

I spent quite a bit of time on the site last time this topic arose here and was also involved in a big discussion of it on in a LJ community I belong to. So, hopefully you dodn't mean me when you refrerred to knee jerk opinions etc simply because I didn't have the inclination to include a bibliography in my post.

I suppose it works if you are already passive anyway. I'm a go with the flow kind of girl. 

I'm not sure it works the way you put it, I would think rather it's more like having equal footing by not nagging people to do what you want them to do, but compromising and being more relaxed about things.
Then again, I haven't read the book. 

Not having read the book either, I can only go with what's on the website as well.  As you said, if someone already leans that way, then it's not such a big deal.  But, from what I saw, it sounded a lot like she was aiming her point at women who do nag and harp at their husbands.

The original question had to do with finding like-minded people who actually understood the topic, not people who had a knee-jerk, misinformed, uneducated opinion about it based on a few descriptive words (e.g., "surrendered" - which in this context means giving up being a control freak because no one actually likes feeling controlled and it only serves to alienate people rather than promoting trust and intimacy).

You posted links to a somewhat controversial website and philosophy.  People are going to have reactions.  Not all of them will be positive.  Sorry.

It was in my library, I read it.

I agree with not nagging.  I didn't get married to be a Mommy to my husband.  But I did get married to be a partner.  

She recommends letting your husband pick out your clothes make-up and even what hobbies you have, not telling him that he is ever doing anything incorrectly.  

For example from the book, you should never drive that is your husband's job if he is driving the wrong way and you know it you shouldn't try to stop him even if his driving is taking you into the WRONG STATE.

Yeah, telling my husband he is driving the wrong way isn't nagging, it just letting him know he is driving in the wrong direction.

I doubt anyone would follow her advice (or anyone's) 100%.  I happen not to remember the examples about not telling your husband if he's driving hundreds of miles in the wrong direction and we tend to remember things that resonate with us emotionally.  And we sometimes remember things slightly differently from what actually occurred.  I would never advocate doing anything that would put anyone in danger or inconvenience.  I think the author also made the point that if you don't trust someone's judgment and feel the need to control them, then either they are not the right person for you or you are being too controlling.  A third option (if neither person recognises what is happening) is simply that people sometimes make mistakes and life is not perfect.

LipBalmAddict, you clearly feel very strongly about this.  I'd be interested to hear how you apply the philosophy to your life and how it has affected your relationship.  Not taking the p*ss, I'd really like to know. 

Not having read the book either, I can only go with what's on the website as well.  As you said, if someone already leans that way, then it's not such a big deal.  But, from what I saw, it sounded a lot like she was aiming her point at women who do nag and harp at their husbands.

You posted links to a somewhat controversial website and philosophy.  People are going to have reactions.  Not all of them will be positive.  Sorry.

Agreed on the first part about the philosophy being aimed at controlling people.  Her approach is based on the twelve step programme underpinning addiction recovery programmes such as AA, OA, NA.  

On the second part, fair point.  I'm not seeking agreement from all who look at this thread, I was just looking for someone who had actually explored (and/or understood) the topic before commenting.  I should have known better, my bad.

There would be no reason to be repulsed in this instance.

Really, I'm not trying to convert anyone, just wanted to know who was actually informed about the topic and finding it useful in their lives!

Well, I would like to learn more about it just to see what it's all about.  I guess I said repulsed because I was afraid the philosophy would reccomend something like:

She recommends letting your husband pick out your clothes make-up and even what hobbies you have, not telling him that he is ever doing anything incorrectly.  

That's sort of ridiculous if not repulsive to me.  I mean I already have my own hobbies which are really important to me!  But I do think it's a good idea to join him on his hobbies just to strengthen our relationship by doing stuff like hiking, camping together.

You're right though, until I've read it, I'm not really informed.