I spend a fair amount of time researching interventions about workplace violence. I know the epidemiology.[1]

And I despise the Duluth Model. It is not science. It is not therapy. It is ideology. And unlike the Bass and Davis polemic of child sexual abuse, it has not been abandoned.

Both cause damage. I can recall, in the peak of the moral panic on sexual abuse, women discovering their repressed abuse memories (which can be induced: Bass and Davis wrote the book on how to do this, which is why I linked to wikipedia) and having psychotic breaks. That settled generally within 48 hours with good nursing care.

The Duluth model, however, kills. I have lost count of the men I see, acutely suicidal, after being removed from their families because of abuse. And I don’t see the ones who die: I see the ones who fail to die.

But the Churchian Morons are bringing this to the church in the name of avoiding abuse. They care calling structure and protection and guarding abuse. And they are thus leaving women and children vulnerable to the stranger, and real trauma.

This isn’t about abuse, this is about changing the power dynamic between men and women. This is about obliterating headship. This is Hegstrom’s field, so he wouldn’t accidentally adopt the language of a paradigm he didn’t agree with, and his framing of the issue is the same as the Duluth framing. He is concerned that the church uses submission to give husbands “power and control” in marriage. This is important. Hegstrom isn’t objecting to how husbands are exercising headship, he is objecting to headship itself. True to the Duluth model, he is working to change societal conditions that support men having power and control. And here is Focus on the Family citing Hegstrom as the expert in Christian “emotional abuse”.

The trouble is that this is a metaphor of the elite, and one they don’t keep. The elite do not live for themselves, but for their clan, the family status: they know that their power comes not from their talents but their name. They leave the unique and creative ways to destroy themselves to others. They now avoid the standard United States College, for those memes destroy the clan. They know that when they marry they make alliances, and that raising of the next generation is their duty.

And if that requires correction and structure, they embrace it.

The same dynamic is seen in marriage. Couples who view marriage as a capstone of life, where the wife is a free agent, the husband respects her autonomy, and everyone does what they think is best for the family in their own wisdom looks vastly different from one where the couple views their marriage as their cornerstone; a single unit with one head rather than a two-headed monstrosity. Like the rented property, the self-owned wife has little to no curb appeal. What’s worse, because she doesn’t really belong to him, her husband isn’t free to make necessary improvements.

What does a rental property marriage like? She’s lazy, and excuses it as her right to relax because she works so hard, despite all evidence to the contrary. He accepts it because she’s not his property. She gets fat, and he pretends it doesn’t matter. Just normal wear and tear, and it’s not his house. No sex? Another “normal” part of married life. Kids taking priority over the marriage? She gave birth to them so it’s just (again) “normal” that she would give them top priority. He should be thankful that his children are blessed with such a devoted mother. He dare not offer any objection to anything she does because she is after all, a free agent and she just might take advantage of said agency. She probably will anyway because everyone knows that the owned property feels more loved than the rented one. Rented wives have no curb appeal yet blame the tenant despite the fact that they chose to be rented rather than owned.

Contrast with a marriage where a wife accepts that she is now the property and responsibility of her husband. He takes very seriously the responsibilities as well as the privileges that come with such ownership. He is free to make improvements, and she knows that rather than attempting to destroy her uniqueness, he is working to increase her value; to himself, his children, and others including her. When he questions the way she spends her time, she gives account and makes the necessary adjustments. When she doesn’t take proper care of her health and appearance, he calls her on it. Rather than take offense, she is motivated. She puts in the time and effort to be a more fit, healthy, and attractive wife. She willingly engages her husband physically, understanding that her body is not her own and that regular intimacy helps to keep the foundation of their relationship a solid one. She sees her children as the blessed result of love made with her husband rather then the fruit ripened solely as a result of her decision to loan herself as an incubator for 40 weeks. They are well loved but kept in their proper place. She doesn’t even own herself, so she knows she doesn’t own her children either.

There is a structure that works. And that leaves husbands accountable, with a command to love. To put their bodies on the line for their wives and children: at work, and at times at war.

And if we are called to build hearth, home and church, then protect it, we need to have structure. To be able to give commands. And we have a duty to ignore the fifth column who would destroy that very structure that keeps those we love safe.

______________________
1. Google scholar is your friend.