Today on Blogcritics
Home » Bring Your Husband To Heel: TV goes to the dogs

Bring Your Husband To Heel: TV goes to the dogs

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on Twitter0Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

I have seen some pathetic excuses for television in my life but this this takes the cake. The BBC is airing a show called Bring Your Husband To Heel in which “top canine trainer Annie Clayton merrily explains: ‘Men and dogs are both creatures of habit, are happy when fed and will drink anything.'” Clayton apparently thinks so little of men that he feels that men can be trained just like dogs to curb “laziness and other unwanted behaviors.”

I simply cannot think of any concept more demeaning, degrading and insulting to a man than this. Of course, it goes without saying that if the show was about training women, Gloria Steinem and her team would be all over this show like eyeliner on Avril Lavigne. I’ve had about all I can take of the emasculation of men in today’s society. I’m not fond of the dumb jock type (and God help the guy who goes all macho on me) but who in the hell does this woman think she is? What, precisely, gives her the idea that men (or anyone else, for that matter) should do as she dictates? Is Clayton familiar with the concept of free will? And what kind of false connection between two people is she promoting by suggesting that a woman resort to such a pathetic way of dealing with someone you supposedly love and respect?

Here’s an idea: let her try and “train” men the way she sees fit and then I’ll “train” Annie Clayton the way I see fit. Since she’s so fond of the animal parallel, I’ll dig up a cattle prod and a branding iron and I’ll treat her like the cow that she is.

Powered by

About Lisa

  • with karate ill kik ur ass

    hell yeah!!!

  • Col

    I was one of the ones who complained and I’m over the moon that it wasn’t in vain (As it usually is whenever else I complain about sexism against men in the UK media). I’ve never seen this dog trainer, Annie Clayton, perhaps because I couldn’t bring myself to watch this sexist drivel, but it goes without saying that she’s one of the rising number female chauvinists who are poisoning UK society.

    …Oh Germaine Greer what have you done you hypocritical little fascist!

  • http://victorplenty.blogspot.com Victor Plenty

    You all boycott the Rolling Stones too, right? You know, just to be consistent.

    If you don’t know why that would make you consistent, look up these lyrics:

    “Under My Thumb”
    “Brown Sugar”

  • Col

    [quote] You all boycott the Rolling Stones too, right? You know, just to be consistent.

    If you don’t know why that would make you consistent, look up these lyrics:

    “Under My Thumb”
    “Brown Sugar”[/quote]

    Men tend to complain a hell of alot less about sexism perpetrated against their own sex then women do when it’s perpetrated against women.

    I guarantee you that women rarely complain in defence of men!

  • Janouk

    I have not seen the show, only heard about it. Lke this is something new.. Yes, husbands can be trained as can be wives…. the big secret is called operant conditioning, was ‘invented’ by Skinner and is applied in a dozen different ways. Want to know how you can train your wife, boss or that obnoxiuous colleague? Read Karen Pryor’s “Don’t shoot the dog”…

  • William,

    Yes, the intention of the BBC was to be demeaning to men, as usual.
    In that respect, they fit in with the anti-men ethos of all our media.
    However
    Two points:
    Isn’t it time we had some proper dog training programmes. Like barbara Woodhouse.
    All animals are bound by the rules of conditining. So there is nothing wrong with unearthing the use of conditioning for men.
    But in this case, the intentioin was to demean,
    Like torturers putting psychology to the wrong use.
    The critical question: would they have allowed such a programme as : “Bring your wife to heel” ???
    i.e. the ‘gender reversal’ test.

  • http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Why-I-Moved vinay

    Its just not politically correct to be a man these days.
    This woman in the video below is a fit candidate to be promoted as a role model for radical feminists. Watch this video completely..
    http://www.putfile.com/media.php?n=Why-I-Moved

  • ? Steffa Koslowski

    I can’t believe this show. Western women have been confusing western men for decades….going from “I want a big strong man” to “anything you can do I can do better” to “I am woman hear me roar” to “sisters are doin’ it for themselves” and now “train your husband like you would train a dog”. Where the hell do these women get off? If a man came up with the idea of “managing the relationship with his wife using the same techniques used to manage the relationship with his female dog (a.k.a. bitch) what do you think would happen next? I see so many western men coming to eastern europe to meet us women because we treat them like men and with respect. You western women deserve all the disrepect you’ve earned, and this is just another brick in the wall for you fools. We love your men…..keep it up and you’ll have none.

  • http://victorplenty.blogspot.com Victor Plenty

    The real threats to men don’t come from feminism or from trite comedy shows. The real threats to men come mostly from other men.

    Getting wound up into outrage over things like this show, which are minor and mostly imaginary insults, is a waste of time that won’t do anything to make the world a better place for men, or for women.

  • Ken

    Your apathy is astounding.
    1) This show is an indication of a larger problem for men in the media.
    2) This reaction is miniscule compared to the reaction that would occur if this show was meant to train women.
    3)The insults this show presents are far from imaginary, even just the title of the show is an insult to men.
    4)The more men are bombarded with images of men as dogs (i.e. animals) or not as good as women, the less they will desire, or aspire to be, real men. Then they will as you put it continue to be a threat.

  • dave

    I have half heard that one of the men duped in this show is seeking a divorce ,is that true does anyone know ?
    if it is ,I would not blame him .Who wants to be married to a liar ?

  • Ken Nakamura

    I’m a man. I saw the show. I thought it was hillarious! I’ve been married 45 years and when my wife isn’t trying to train me, her mother and my mother are! Watch ANY girls, aged 4 to 9 as they play… just husband trainers in training.

  • angryman

    I saw the show and it disgusted me .
    Is the evil man hating Clayton aware of the hate that she has caused ? Probably not .

  • Sara Hicks

    It seems that everyone is missing the point. Perhaps the programme title is somewhat controversial to lure audience numbers, but in fact BOTH the husband AND THE WIFE are being trained to work together successfully.

  • Cyndi

    I disagree. Though the name of the show was obviously meant to get a reaction, I would say the techniques could easily be used on either sex. Perhaps a better name would have been “How to Train Your Spouse”?

    The overall message of the show seems to be that nagging does not work, but positive reinforcement does. That’s all! Now how can positivity — in any form — really hurt any marriage? If my hubby would like to use these techniques on me, I would be fine with it – after all, my dog lives like a king.

  • Jonathan

    For years I used to call myself a feminist – now I see that most feminists are utterly sexist. Many modern British women are obnoxiously chauvinist. I now have no interest in or sympathy for women’s rights whatsover. Be a people-ist women, not a feminist/sexist.

  • Anne

    what a great show!

  • J.S.

    I agree that the title “bring your husband to heel” is utterly demeaning, for BOTH men and women. Seriously, are we women so desperate, so unable to communicate with our men that we need manipulative techniques like this one? I would find it utterly demeaning to use this on my man. Why would I need to? I am a rational, reasonable, understanding being and I can communicate well (I can both listen and understand and I can make myself understood).

    What some people don’t get is that by demeaning the other sex you also demean yourself. Because if you are happy with who you are, why would you need to raise your own esteem by lowering someone else’s?

    Instead of methods like this, people should be taught effective communication skills. Respectful communication! The only thing I think is not so bad with this otherwise crazy method is the idea that positive reinforcement can have a huge effect and that praising what is good and making the other person feel good about themselves is going to make for a much happier union that nagging and b****ing.

    For example, I want my man to tell me he loves me more often. Instead of nagging “you never say you love me”, “do you love me at all”, “why don’t you ever…?” etc. I can say “I(‘d) really love to hear you say you love me, it means so much to me”. Is the second one really more manipulative or just more respectful and, well, nice?

  • http://www.myspace.com/truth0r Michael

    I agree with Cyndi.

    First, I should say that I did not see this show, but I think I know the essence of what was conveyed. The show may have been sexist and could’ve used a better title, perhaps, but I believe these techniques work. This is how world-class animal trainers teach. In case some of you have forgotten, we’re mammals, too. If this stuff works on very intelligent species like whales, dolphins, apes, etc., then it’s unsurprising they work on us. It can work on children and adults alike. Nagging or positive reinforcement? I’ll take the latter, please.

    Just one example.

  • JT

    Hey Michael.. “Sit!”

  • Thomas Allen

    You are awesome Lisa!

%d bloggers like this: