What's Up with Hope Hicks?

The current Trump-related drama in Washington has John Kelly’s former high-level aide Rob Porter convincingly accused of physical and emotional spouse abuse by not one, but two ex-wives. Trump, of course, has come to his defense, as has Porter’s boss. None of this is surprising-more like business as usual in this administration. What actually is most interesting in this mess is the perspective of Hope Hicks. Ms. Hicks is the administration’s communication’s director and is apparently one of Trump’s most trusted and loyal aides. The 29 year old former model is alleged to have had a substantial role in writing the initial awkward defense of Mr. Porter, whom she is said to have been dating for some time: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/09/us/politics/trump-hicks-porter.html?ribbon-ad-idx=4&src=trending&module=Ribbon&version=origin&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Trending&pgtype=article. If true, this would represent extremely poor judgment by Ms. Hicks. Again, though, the interesting part to me is that she is dating Mr. Porter. Wouldn’t she know that Porter’s FBI clearance had been “held up” because both of his ex-wives spoke candidly to the FBI during his security clearance investigation? She now says it would be “extremely out of character” for him to be abusive. Really? How are we to understand this comment?

This question becomes more compelling when we remember that Ms. Hicks also dated former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, who seemed to have major anger management issues at the time: http://people.com/politics/hope-hicks-dating-rob-porter-corey-lewandowski/. I do not intend this post to be a criticism of Ms. Hicks or her dating habits. She is an intelligent grown woman who can make her own choices in men without advice from me. However, I have spent over 40 years doing full time psychotherapy with primarily women. Many of the problems I have attempted to ameliorate have been related to the poor treatment inflicted by the husbands, boyfriends, and dates of my clients. Years ago, I began to reflect on the importance of careful mate selection. It can very hard if not impossible to ‘fix’ a poor choice after the fact. Consequently, I have tried to understand the choices women make in men. Here are a few thoughts.

Both of Hope Hicks former boyfriends are almost certainly alpha males. They seem like very powerful, assertive, take charge men. In fact, I strongly suspect both men would be called control freaks. Such men are typically extremely compelling to women. Ms. Hicks probably hasn’t yet seen the dark side of Mr. Porter. To paraphrase one of his ex-wives, if she hasn’t yet seen it, she certainly will: http://www.cnn.com/2018/02/09/opinions/hope-hicks-should-run-from-porter-and-trump-costello-opinion/index.html. Assuming she hasn’t yet experienced directly his reported rage reactions, there is a simple reason why. Here is the reason: she has never said ‘No’ to Mr. Porter about something of importance to him. If she did say No, and did not provoke a rage, it was probably because Mr. Porter didn’t care about her opinion on the subject. Therefore, he did not take the No personally. I hope these ideas are useful to her and all women in understanding otherwise perplexing behavior by men.

 I do not know these people and have no information about their lives except what I read in newspapers and magazines. However, I have seen the behavior pattern described in national news sources on many occasions. It is the source of enormous pain and confusion for women (and some men). It is also extremely common, and there appears to be little awareness of it in the general population. I assume John Kelly’s comments about Mr. Porter are an accurate description of his work behavior. That is, at work he is an outstanding contributor, who is well respected. Of course, this means he keeps his anger in check at work. Only someone who is perceptive, intuitive and deeply aware of this pattern might notice the intense anger and frustration lurking underneath professional failures, rejections, or criticisms. These comments apply to all men, but especially to those who are most dominant and powerful. Mr. Porter is simply one example of millions. I am using him and Ms. Hicks to illustrate a huge problem. Bringing conscious awareness to previously unconscious patterns is what I do as a psychologist.

So how does knowledge of this pattern affect dating relationships? Because of centuries of cultural programming and conditioning, women of all ages enter the dating arena attempting to please men who seem to be worthy of their interest. Most women try very hard to please the men they select for dating. They are not consciously aware that they virtually never reject or disagree with any advance, need, or opinion of their dating partners. Women find powerful alpha males to be nearly irresistible, for a variety of reasons that are beyond the scope of this post. Women understand intuitively that these are men with whom you do not oppose or disagree if you want to continue seeing them. I have seen women unceremoniously dropped by such men for the smallest of ‘transgressions’, such as asking to be reminded about the time of a dinner date. Again, it is possible to politely and mildly disagree with such a man as long as the issue isn’t important to him. Needless to say, rejecting sexual advances would be difficult, as virtually all men require reassurance of their romantic/sexual appeal in the dating process.

Do we also have alpha females? Yes-of course, and in relationships, these women will need to be dominant. If they are not allowed to be dominant in matters of importance to them, they will either become abusive, emotionally withdraw or leave. It’s that simple. The only meaningful difference between highly dominant men and women is that the women do not send their partners to emergency rooms on a regular basis. Not a very romantic picture, is it?
Once I became aware of this pattern, I started actively looking for it in my client’s romantic relationships. It was there in nearly all cases. It seems the most effective way for a relationship to survive long term is for one of the partners to be submissive. This is true even when neither partner has a rage disorder. I believe it is present in most long term, successful relationships. Think about the successful, long term marriages in couples you know well. Does one member appear to almost always get their way? If you look closely, the answer is going to be Yes. This may be a difficult truth to face. If you carefully examine a long-term relationship and do not see evidence of this pattern, look again. Remember, disagreement or opposition can usually be tolerated by the dominant partner as long as the matter is of little or no importance to them. Do not be deceived by superficial appearances. The more submissive partner will often demonstrate mild opposition in a public setting. The purpose of this performance is to suggest a kind of equality that doesn’t exist in private. If the opposition is well tolerated by the dominant member, it represents a well-practiced and very safe example of fake equality. Always remember to ask: does the dominant member routinely get their way on matters of importance to them? From my observations, these dynamics appear in virtually all ‘successful’ relationships-straight or gay. The pattern is most apparent when one of the partners is a ‘strong’, forceful, domineering person. However, I believe it is still present even when both partners are not naturally domineering or controlling. For the relationship to work one will need to be in charge.

From this perspective, we can offer a new definition of what a successful relationship is. Our new understanding will also be a guide to how to have a meaningful relationship that succeeds for both partners. This is an important point, because virtually all currently available dating advice is wrong, useless or misleading in this regard. An effective, mutually fulfilling, lasting relationship is one in which the more submissive partner skillfully, enthusiastically and routinely submits to the emotional, sexual, and other important needs/demands of the more dominant partner. Obviously, the more submissive person will need to find satisfaction in this experience. Whether this is truly possible or not is another question. Conversely, the dominant partner must learn to not be violent or abusive on the rare occasions when they do not automatically get their way. They must also learn to at least consider the possibility of compromise and negotiation. Such words are anathema to true alpha males and females, as they make them feel weak and ineffectual. I know this assessment sounds like a parody of traditional psychological advice about relationships. I am simply reporting in a clear, simple and direct manner what I have repeatedly observed.
It is possible to teach willing individuals to stop having rage reactions. I have done so many times. Teaching powerful, dominant men and women to value another’s opposing view is more tedious and time consuming but may be possible in some cases. Most humans, and nearly all alpha males and females, have a very difficult time accepting rejection or criticism and maintaining an emotional connection. What we have been taught about how romance should work is a fairy tale. The quicker we unmask and deconstruct nonsensical beliefs, the better for everyone.

Obviously, this new definition of a successful relationship is far from politically correct. Keep in mind, I am not trying to define what I think a successful relationship should be, like so many other writers. I would be perfectly happy if successful relationships were equal, fair and balanced, mutually respectful, etc. My conclusions are based on observations of how such relationships actually work in the real world, as it is. In this case, I am not interested in what is perceived to be fair, just, moral, or appropriate. Platitudes about how life should be but isn’t do not interest me. I am only interested in what actually works. Advocating what should work but doesn’t seems stupid to me. In my PhD program, I was trained to trust empirical, verifiable observations. In other words, I am interested in observing and reporting what actually works in relationships. I aspire to see the world as it is-not as I was taught it is, wish it was, or believe it should be. 

What’s the take home advice for the myriad of Hope Hicks in the world? Here are a few unsolicited ideas, freely offered:

1)    Learn to find some of the 90% of men who aren’t alpha males attractive and worthy of romantic consideration. Many will be far more enjoyable and workable partners.

2)    If you absolutely must only consider alpha males, try to pick ones that do not have violent rages. There are some. The way to know is to say No to them early and often in the dating process. Have firm boundaries about issues of importance to you and stick to them. If they cannot hear No without becoming verbally, emotionally or physically abusive, move on. Quickly. It is critical to find this out early, before sex, and before emotional attachments have been established.

Update: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/analysis-sarah-huckabee-sanders-pleads-ignorance-as-the-rob-porter-mess-worsens/ar-BBJ60c6?li=BBnbcA1.

Update 3/29/2018 http://www.bornebackceaselessly.com/journal/2017/4/24/why-i-stayed

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/rob-porters-ex-wife-speaks-out-against-trump/ar-AAvgefo?li=BBnbcA1