As a divorce attorney I have the privilege of seeing (1) why most marriages fall apart; and (2) how different family and parenting structures function in the context of the new relationships of my clients and opposing parties. As to the first point, that's why I'm at TRP/MRP - it's just plain truth, and I can't imagine a single male divorce attorney who would deny it (female attorneys have stronger hamsters, so I rarely trust them).

As for family structures that work, I've developed the theory I call "biological step-mother." It is based on this one infallible law of divorce and custody cases:

Men don't get custody after marriage because they don't live like they have sole, exclusive custody during the marriage. (Shared parenting is a conversation for another day). Men must develop subliminal custody of their children in their wives' minds.

LEGAL CONTEXT

Although laws are changing, custody matters always involve judicial discretion. This will never change. Period. That judicial discretion will always tilt slightly toward mothers, regardless of what the statute says. Why?

  • Judges inherently respect history, even when it has been overruled. History dictates that mothers are default custodial parents. Many judges have been in the profession since before the law change and can't get the old ways out of their heads.

  • The law still (and always will) assume default custody to a mother simply because the baby came out of her belly, whereas men can't know for sure who the father is (no matter how faithful she says she's been) until that DNA test comes back. Divorce law is slightly different from custody law in that it presumes shared parenting, but the legal bias from juvenile law is still subconsciously present because most DR (divorce) judges are also the JV (juvenile/never-marrieds) judges.

  • Abortion law implies that children are the property of the mother. It's her body, so she can decide whether the child lives or dies. When the child is born, there is a slight change, but the legal context of "she decides what happens to her baby" subliminally carries over to DR/JV law.

  • Most DR/JV judges are women. As to the few male ones, they are virtually always closet betas who put women on a pedestal. They act alpha because it's their courtroom and they have positional authority, but they have no internally radiating authority. They still crack jokes from the bench: "You're here because you didn't do the dishes like she told you, right?"

Can dads win custody? Absolutely, I do it all the time. But women don't believe this until it actually happens. This is key. Women make decisions based on their perceptions, not actuality.

Here are the two parenting structures that often result in stressed marriages.

TRADITIONAL BIOLOGICAL MOTHER

The biological mother has a unique and unashamed relationship with her children. She carries them in her womb, nurses them when they're young, and often takes primary responsibility for their basic growth and development. For all practical purposes, they are her kids. This is especially true for SAHMs.

You, as the father, are involved to the degree that she finds your involvement advantageous to the development of the children. If you start doing things she doesn't like, she throws a hissy fit or just leaves. More significantly, she will undermine your relationship with the children in any number of ways.

TRADITIONAL STEP-MOTHER

Step-mothers respect the fact that her husband is the ultimate authority figure over the child. If the relationship went sour, she accepts the fact that she will have no custodial rights in the child. As a result, she does not take personal responsibility for the growth and development of the child, giving it to her husband. By placing him in charge, she sees herself as a helper who comes alongside him to assist in raising the child.

Unfortunately, step-mothers often maintain a subconscious emotional detachment. This is because of the custody issue. They don't want to form a close bond with someone when there is a possibility that they may never see that person again. I've heard it said many times: a woman's greatest fear is abandonment. In this case, instead of a romantic abandonment, it's a parent-child relationship that's lost. For women, this is too close a bond to risk, so step-mothers remain subliminally detached and allow their husbands (the birth fathers) to be the final authority and emotional rock for the children.

BIOLOGICAL STEP-MOTHER

This is a relatively rare phenomenon, but I find it often occurring when divorced or nearly divorced couples decide to reunite - particularly when the father has demonstrated that he is likely to get custody of the children, or at least shared parenting and that she would not be the default custodian. To be clear, if the father convinces the mother of this through emotional abuse ("You'd better never leave me or I'll take the kids" and she believes him), a different maternal structure develops that is distinct from the biological step-mother. I won't go into that here, but suffice it to say that it is harmful and usually results in unruly kids. The biological step-mother is when the woman respects the father's authority, rather than fears it.

When the traditional biological mother finally acknowledges that she does not have exclusive ownership of her children they become "our children." Many traditional biological mothers will use this lingo, but do not actually feel or experience this until it's concretely rooted in their heads: The law won't back you up. I have a distinct advantage here, being a divorce attorney. My wife knows that I will not position myself in a way where she would get custody and I know how to break through false accusations. For non-divorce-attorneys, the key in developing this frame of mind is to convince her this: YOU, the father, are the PRIMARY CAREGIVER of the children, NOT HER.

The perception of the "primary caregiver" is the overwhelming majority of custody law, even in states (like mine) where that phrase has been uprooted out of the statutes. Traditional biological mothers subconsciously rely on the default assumption that women are primary caregivers when they develop their approach to parenting. When custody is at risk, if they want to preserve the marital relationship their approach to parenting issues changes drastically.

This is when the biological mother takes on specific traits of a step-mother without losing the important value of the traditional biological mother connection either:

  • She shifts parenting responsibility back to the father, accepting that he is an authority figure over the children [because he has subliminal custody].

  • She lives as if she is a helper whose job is to implement the leadership decisions her husband [the subliminal custodial parent] makes, as they pertain to the children.

  • Her lifestyle around the house changes. She enjoys the comfort of living in his home rather than her home or their home [because he has subliminal custody and her parenting time is in his home on his terms].

  • She still has the same loving bond with her children that traditional biological mothers have, but she does not use that as a motivation to draw authority away from the father. [She won't disrespect the subliminal custody arrangement, but will still love and long for her kids all the same.]

  • The children are lovingly bonded with mom, but now are able to develop both a love and respect for their father, which the mother fosters rather than undermines [because the children also subliminally understand that dad has custody - and side bonus, if you do get divorced, guess who they want to live with now?].

YOU DON'T HAVE TO BATTLE CUSTODY TO GET THERE

This is where OYS is extremely vital. If the father doesn't follow OYS principles, the mother will never respect him as an authority figure over the children. He is essentially saying, I want you to do all the responsibility stuff of a custodial parent, but I still want to have the positional authority. Per John Maxwell, leadership is influence, not position.

The father/husband must take the following attitude, regardless of whether or not it makes legal sense to do so (remember: women do things that don't make a lot of sense too):

  • It's my house. I have provided a place for my children to live and thrive. I've invited her to live here with me because that's what I want. I'm going to take care of the house as if it's my responsibility, just as I would if we were dating and she just came over a lot.

    • NOT: It's our house and we both have equal responsibilities to care for it. She'd better hold up her end.

  • My time is my time, which I invest in raising our children. I invite her to enjoy my time alongside me because I like having her around. I'm going to use my time in a way that balances efficiency, productivity, and enjoyment for our family. As my wife, I am inviting her to participate in that efficiency, productivity, and enjoyment (with a few boundaries), but she does not rule my time.

    • NOT: We're married. We both have obligations to each other. We must allocate our time in a way that meets these mutual obligations.

  • It's my money, which I invest in our children's upbringing. I set the household budget. Even if she's working, it's because I am leading her in her fulfillment of that role instead of her maintaining a SAHM role. I allow her to spend money within the confines of the budget that I have set for the family because it is helpful to me and builds trust for her.

    • NOT: We can each do whatever we want with our own income. Or, we each contribute to the marriage in different ways, so we both have a say in how the finances are spent.

CHANGING BRAIN PATTERNS

As a matter of fact, these assertions would not stand up in court if you were to get divorced. But remember, women don't want to feel like wives; they want to feel like the hot girl who's dating the bachelor who has it all together. That's why they felt all tingly before they were your wife and stopped when you started treating them like a wife (in the modern cultural context of how wives are understood, of course).

The stable husband mentality is, essentially, to live as if you are a single dad with sole custody of his kids dating a hottie who you like having around. It says: "I have an established life, but I'm inviting you into my life. You are an outsider, but I want you here anyway. As you respect the fact that I am inviting you into my life, you will learn to enjoy the safety and comfort that my life has to offer you. I respect that you have independent wants and desires, but they will be exercised within the boundaries I establish for your participation in my life."

The above mindset establishes step-mother thinking in her. Step-mothers often accept the fact that they are joining in on a pre-established system. They do so because they like that system. If the guy is beta, he'll let her change the system, but often she doesn't like what she makes it become, hence repeated divorces and remarriages. As has been often said before: Women don't know what they want. When they think they do and try to get it, they are often disappointed. If their husband tells them what they should want and then fulfills it for them, one of two things can happen:

  • She finds that he's right and respects him for knowing her so well and making her happy; or

  • He's wrong, but she chalks it up to her husband trying something and it didn't work; it's his fault she's not happy, not hers. Incidentally, she's happy that she can blame someone else for her unhappiness.

    • This is unconscious salvation from the alternative: she fails to make herself happy, causing a mini-crisis because happiness becomes an elusive concept that is always beyond her reach. Take away her control over her own happiness and, ironically, she will be much happier.

PERSISTENTLY UNHAPPY WIVES AND FOOTBALL-LOVING GUYS

Some people complain that nothing they do makes their wives happy. They're just always sour. To them, I say: Keep up the stable husband mentality. Even if his method fails to make her happy repeatedly, she eventually learns to love his system anyway - not only because it gives her an excuse for her own internalized emotional ignorance, but also because she will feel fulfilled contributing to something beyond herself.

It's like when a man is happy that his favorite sports team wins a game. He experiences happiness vicariously through the players. His life has not actually improved in any way, but his emotional state does because their emotional state does. By developing an emotional commitment to that team, he has entered their system and allowed his emotional state to be tied to their successes and failures. Your wife does the same thing with you.

The problem is that if you've been failing for too long, she stops believing the victories matter. I grew up in Cleveland. Nobody really gets excited when the Browns win a game. There's a half-hearted cheer, but at the end of the day, they all know they're not going to the super bowl. But when the Cavs won the NBA championship and the Indians made it to the world series, now those are teams we can get excited about, even when they lose a few. Why? Because the potential victory is there. If your wife sees that you could be a super bowl champion kind of dad and husband, her emotional satisfaction will latch on to your victories, even if they're small ones, like the first couple games in a season.

It's also worth noting, if you see a team of fat and/or scrawny video game/porn addicts romping out on that football field, even if they win the super bowl by some miracle, you're not all that excited for the win, and you have no confidence in them for next season. You chalk up the victory to a fluke. That's why fitness is key: she has to believe you're a consistent winner, not a fluke-winner.

REGAINING THE STABLE HUSBAND MENTALITY

I'm not going to say much here other than to follow most of the rest of the advice on this sub and do the required readings. I'm done with the "course prerequisites" and will be starting the 101 series after developing my ability to apply the material from the prerequisites first.

But from what I see, the most important factor in regaining the stable husband mentality is simply to take over. Act like you're a single dad dating a hottie and you invited her to live with you. Even if you don't think she's hot, treat her like she is anyway. When she feels sexy, she'll try harder to be sexier. I started this process a few months ago (officially discovering TRP/MRP about two weeks ago) and am already seeing tremendous results.

  • I consolidated calendars so I'm the one scheduling the kids' doctors appointments, birthday parties, swim lessons, etc. She sees that I am the lead parent and she helps implement my plan.

  • I started organizing the crap shelf that's had mail and who-knows-what items sitting on it for the past month. She sees that where she brushed responsibility aside, I get stuff done.

  • I straightened out the garage so it's an actual part of the home again, not the aftermath of a tornado. I fixed the floor of the deck that caved in a week and a half ago. She sees that her rule threatened our shelter [read: biological necessity] and mine restores and bolsters it.

  • I keep my car clean, whereas hers is a mess (even though I do most of the driving with the kids). She sees that her life is chaotic, but I bring order in those exact same issues under harsher environments. Next up: clean out her car too.

SUMMARY: Every woman looks at the rest of the world and thinks, "They have it all together. Why can't I have it all together too? I wish my life was like theirs." This is how cheating starts - desiring things outside the home. You want her to think: "My husband has it all together. I wish my life was like his." Now she is desiring you inside the home. She sees your system (which I now see is just another word for "frame") and genuinely can't resist wanting to attach herself to your life. She will still feel like an outsider for some time, but that's okay - you want to foster that a little. If she sees you as an outsider [Edit: assuming no other psychological barriers]:

  • She will respect your decisions.

  • She will let you parent your children and not undermine you with her emotional connection to them. Bonus points: when she sees you as the primary caregiver of the children, she internally realizes that her legal basis for custody is whimpering away, making her less likely to do anything that would instigate divorce.

  • She will be happier because she is no longer responsible when things go wrong (it's not our mess; it's his mess).

  • She will desire you. A simple note on this: ever wonder why people think marriage commitment sucks the life out of sex? Because she's no longer the outsider operating within your system; she sees herself as your co-equal peer. You don't even need dread for this to work (though it certainly helps). [Edit: Desire doesn't always mean sex or action conformity. Women desire things but don't do anything about it all the time. All you're doing is fostering a psychological condition in her that opens doors for active conformity and puts shiny things on the other side; she still has to choose to walk through, and women don't always make the logical choice.]

Best wishes guys.