Try, Try Again

The other day, Kevin McCullough (author, columnist, radio show host) was filling in on a local radio talk show, and he was talking about how there should be fault determined in divorce and it should possibly have an impact on child custody. A cheating spouse, for example, should not be able to walk with half of the marital assets, alimony, and custody of children.

McCullough is a conservative Christian who believes husbands should be strong and in charge, protecting, providing for, loving, and respecting their wives.

At least one man called to express his concern about faulting people for an affair, saying that out a fifteen year marriage, he and his wife have not had sexual contact in the last ten years due to her ongoing rejection, and her refusal to get counseling. The implication was that he should not be punished if he were to stray as if he was some jerk whose cheats on a wife who regularly and enthusiastically jumps his bones.

McCullough gave a few different examples of what the man should say to his wife and how he should say it. Things akin to "Honey, I love you, and God designed me to want to be with you in a certain way, and it is not acceptable for us not to have that together. It would be for you like if I refused to engage in conversations with you." He told the guy to approach his wife in this way (with variations in the actual words) every day, being sensitive yet firm. His advice was to persist in approaching her until she either leaves or relents. (Of course, if she relents, she may still do her best impersonation of a rag doll, and for most men that is disheartening.)

My immediate thought was - "The guy doesn’t want to drive her from the home. In addition to the family disruption, he'll lose half of everything he's worked for over the last 15 years and pay her alimony until he dies."

Ah, but not in McCullough's scenario. In his scenario, she would be penalized for leaving.

So that tactic could work for all of the rejected spouses – if our laws and courts were in line with what McCullough wants.

However, as long as a guy will likely face losing his children, the home, savings, investments, and still be obligated to pay a woman for the rest of his life even though she wasn't much of a wife in the first place – he's going to be less likely to try the tactic of "persist until she relents or leaves". In addition to having to endure active rejection on a daily basis, which can be very painful, he'll be putting himself at the mercy of a system that isn't kind to husbands and fathers, especially if they've been earning all of the income.

What do you think? Is the persistency tactic a good idea under any circumstances, existing or hypothetical?