Peter Steinglass, the Editor of Family Process, acknowledged this dilemma in his letter to me and (additionally) suggested that I edit out some of what was probably unnecessary and send it back. I think his comments and suggestions were excellent and excising a good deal of the paper would have been a good idea. However, by then I had lost interest in the thing and was off to other projects (See Neal, Zimmerman, and Dickerson, 1999).

Over time, many people have asked for copies of the paper and have expressed appreciation for my willingness to make it available. As a consequence, I came up with this idea of publishing the thing on the Web. So here it is. It is repetitive in places and needs editing. But hopefully you will find things in that are helpful and/or interesting to you.

Finally, I would also like to add a note about what I would do differently if I were to edit and clean the paper up at this point in time (10/98). First, the emphasis on gender in the paper is based on the context in which my practice, teaching, and supervision occur: Couples therapy with (mostly) heterosexual couples who are also (mostly) middle and upper-middle class white. In the paper I emphasize gender and power as discourses that are more relevant than others for the purpose of making the operation of discourse and power visible. I think - now as I did when I wrote the paper- that discourses beside gender and power are sometimes more important in the experience of the particular individuals in couples therapy. In these instances, it is important to subordinate your own ideas about which discourses are most releveant, and to assume the "not-knowing" position about which Harlene Anderson has spoken . I probably do not emphasize this enough in the paper and, as a consequence, some readers have interpreted the emphasis on gender and power as reflecting some kind of assumption that I think these are always the thing that should be addressed. This reflects a misunderstanding to which I have probably contributed by not emphasizing that the influence of gender and power are examples of a way of thinking and working rather then the way to always work with couples.

As I said in the more recent paper on couples (Neal, Zimmerman, & Dickerson, 1999) , I think it is more consistent with narrative ideas and practices to subordinate the therapist's ideas about what the relevant discourses are to those are experience-close for the clients. This paper is an attempt to discuss how discourses (that specify how we men) perform masculinity operate as forms of power and sometimes exert destructive effects upon ourselves, women, and couples relationships. Hope you find it interesting and helpful.