One of the most troubling effects of applied feminist theology has been the demonization of sex differences. Naturally, this denial of biological reality didn’t make sex differences disappear, it just made them off limits for discussion. That’s ironic, because some of the most pronounced differences between men and women may be seen in the way they engage in discussion. It’s very clear here at HUS that men and women communicate very differently.
Recently I reread one of my favorite books about cross-sex communication, and despite the fact that it was written in the early 90s, I haven’t found anything that tops it. Even after four years of blogging about dating and relationships, I find John Gray’s Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus enlightening.
I’m not sure if there ever was a time when the sexes understood one another better, but most of the questions I get from female readers are an attempt to figure out what’s going on in a guy’s mind.
The best advice about men usually comes from men, but I’m happy to pass it along when it’s really good. John Gray is really good. Some of the insights seem a bit dated for today’s culture – that is, the nature of men and women has not really changed in twenty years, but some of our behaviors have. You may need to adjust here and there, but most of this is gold.
When men feel good about themselves, they are most motivated to please a woman.
The more a man’s life is in order, the more he hungers for a woman to share it with.
When a man does something to make a woman feel special, he becomes more attracted to her.
Men are attracted to women who clearly can be pleased. A man does not want to hear a woman dwell on negative feelings or problems. Women should initially share their most positive, autonomous side.
Not to be needed is a slow death for a man. He needs to feel appreciated, trusted and accepted.
Men are motivated and empowered when they feel needed. Given the opportunity to prove his potential, a man expresses his best self. Only when he feels he cannot succeed does he regress back to his old selfish ways.
But: Too much intimacy, too quickly, can cause women to become needy and men to pull away.
When a man is attracted, he gets excited because he anticipates that he can make her happy and that makes him feel really good; it brings the best of him out. The anticipation of more is very important to keep him interested. If he feels completely satisfied, then there is no distance for him to continue traveling to pursue her. Distance not only makes the heart grow fonder but gives the man the opportunity to pursue. Men always need the opportunity for more.
When women “overgive” it compromises their position, and it prevents the excitement of anticipation and romance from building.
While a man tends to question whether he wants to pursue a relationship, the woman tends to question where the relationship is going.
This may make her insecure and she will begin to pursue him. When a man stops pursuing, a woman’s task is to resist the enormous urge to find out what has happened or to do something about it. In this instance, she should stay open to his future advances, but fill her life up with friends.
The male intimacy cycle is like a rubber band. It involves getting close, pulling away, and then getting close again.
A man pulls away to fulfill his need for independence or autonomy. When he has fully separated, suddenly he will feel his need for love and intimacy again. A man automatically alternates between needing intimacy and autonomy.
When a man springs back, he picks up the relationship at whatever degree of intimacy it was when he stretched away. He doesn’t feel any need for a period of getting reacquainted again.
If a man does not have the opportunity to pull away, he never gets a chance to feel his strong desire to be close. If women insist on continuous intimacy then he will almost always be trying to escape and distance himself. He will never get a chance to feel his own passionate longing for love.
When a woman chases a man or punishes him for withdrawing, he feels incapable of fulfilling her and gives up. His fear of her anger or rejection might cause him to give up entirely.
Women need:
- caring
- understanding
- respect
- devotion
- validation
- reassurance
Men need:
- trust
- acceptance
- appreciation
- admiration
- approval
- encouragement
A man’s interest should be active.
If a man detects that a woman’s mission is to please him, he will also focus on how she can please him. If she wants to pursue him, he will happily sit back and passively receive what she wants to give. This will not make her happy. When he senses that she is unhappy, she becomes less interesting to him and the attraction lessens. A woman who is eager to please a man will find that he is pleased, but not necessarily interested.
Active interest motivates the man to action to achieve a goal, thrives on achievement and comes from a place of desire and confidence. The more risks he takes, the more invested he becomes.
The way a woman makes him feel good, (and more interested) is by creating opportunities for him to succeed in truly fulfilling her needs. Without her to please, he is a man out of work. He needs a job, needs the opportunity to succeed in a relationship with a woman. This is an enormous boost to his fulfillment in life.
A female’s interest should be receptive.
Receptive interest is motivated to create opportunities to receive, thrives in response to support, and comes from a place of preference and worthiness. A woman’s receptive interest in a man generates his active interest in her. When she reacts to his advances, he feels more connected to her. Then he is automatically more interested and motivated to get to know her.
A man gets turned on when a woman’s radiance makes him feel more like a man.
Feminine radiance embodies the three characteristics of femininity:
1. Self-assurance: An air of grace and trust, self-respect.
2. Receptivity: The ability to receive what is given and not resent getting less; ability to benefit or find good in every situation.
3. Responsiveness: A man loves a woman with a smile. He loves to feel that he can make a difference, that he can make her happy.
The wisdom of waiting to be sexually intimate is that a man’s desire has a chance to grow into the higher levels of expression.
His physical desire expands into the emotional desire to please the woman.
Having an exclusive relationship provides the foundation for lasting intimacy. A woman creates intimacy by honestly sharing more of who she is, and a man experiences increased intimacy by successfully supporting and nurturing more of who she is. As she discloses herself more, he can gradually get to know her. If he continues to be supportive as he gets to know her better, then the love he feels in his heart has a chance to grow.
When a woman becomes sexual before she is ready, she has stopped being receptive and becomes accommodating. She compromises her position. When she gives more in the relationship, she begins to expect more from the man, which makes her very unattractive. Female expectations are a turnoff for men.
The thing that surprises me most, though it makes a lot of sense, is the value to a man of pursuing and winning a woman. And the value to a woman of giving him the opportunity to do that.
We can either return to a way of relating that respects sex differences, or we can continue to ignore sex roles, asking women to be aggressors and men to be passive recipients. While I think that it’s important and helpful for women to offer encouragement and show interest to men they find attractive, both sexes will realize the greatest benefit if women do this in response to male initiative.
{ 1542 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3 4 5 … 11 »
If they earn income, as most students and retirees do, they should pay some % in taxes. That’s the only “fair” way to fund the gov’t IMO. Deductions and tax credits ad nauseam are primary reasons why the U.S. has a revenue problem. It isn’t because we don’t have a progressive tax code. Other way around…
@Say whaat: “We’ve also been able to each do our own thing, not speaking to each other, simply sharing the same room for company. It’s a pretty nice arrangement, if I do say so myself!”
That looks like a real passionate and heart warming relationship………….. Well, I guess everyone finds his /her own way with relationships. Whatever works.
This thread……………………………
I’m going to need another package of twizzlers for this.
SayWhaat – ” We’ve also been able to each do our own thing, not speaking to each other, simply sharing the same room for company. It’s a pretty nice arrangement, if I do say so myself!”
This! This is exactly how “personal space” works in my marriage. I have all the space I need when she is with me, because when I’m quiet she can sit next to me and leave me alone while keeping me company.
The flip side is this is why people being around tends to annoy me in general. For some reason most people insist on talking to someone if they are near them regardless of whether or not they have anything of importance to say. I very much enjoy my wife’s company because much of it is spent in silence, or at least with no idle chit chat. We talk if we have something to say, and simply enjoy each others company in silence when we don’t.
@ Ted D
Haha yup. My ideal version of “personal space” would be sitting next to or cuddling with my SO while I daydream or do work on the computer.
From an etymological perspective, it should be noted that hypergamy is not necessarily male or female. Hypergamy can be practiced by either sex. It just so happens that historically, female hypergamy, aka hyperandry, has been more common.
INTJ – ” Haha yup. My ideal version of “personal space” would be sitting next to or cuddling with my SO while I daydream or do work on the computer.”
Yep! And it only took me 2 LTRs and 2 marriages to find it. :-p
Re: personal space
No awkward silences that way, right?
“So here in the above exchange you admit you never thought yourself unattractive at all but had parents who had to “check” you before you got too big in attitude for your britches because of your looks?
What gives?”
My parents had to check me so I didn’t devote a lifetime of work to yelling at other people.
@Just1Z
It was worth a try, I guess.
Of course those relationships span the time from 16 to 39 years old though. LOL
Hari Christmas – ” I’ll tell you how, they don’t intend to survive marriage. These people aren’t even engaged. Marriage isn’t anywhere near the table. Its just another “relationship” out of many to come.”
Well then to my original point: why be with them at all? If they don’t intend to marry their current SO someday, why bother continuing the relationship?
This thread = completely overtaken by Plain Jane.
@hary christmas: “Ah Hah! You finally said it, “attractive”. The “intent coloured with natural infatuation” is not simply enough, now is it?”
With all due respect, I’m slowly beginning to understand why so many people pick on you all the time here. I must be slow witted
You seem to have personal, defensive issues about your looks. My comment was meant to describe a category of young ambitious women in the Czech Republic. Wether I find them personally attractive or not is irrelevent.
And yes, I don’t find myself guilty of being more physically attracted to women that suit my own taste. I very much doubt that when you enter a public place, a fat, swearing “Mike or Bill” with a baseball cap on and the face of Newt Gingrich would be the first that would catch the gaze of your flirty eyes.
@ Ted D
This is a common thing amongst young women (especially the ones that are interested in young guys), and I can’t really figure it out.
@ Susan
As Just1Z pointed out, Hairy Christmas seems to be clogging up the comment threads. Perhaps another PJ ban is in order?
Damien Vulaume December 2, 2012 at 3:44 pm
@hary christmas: “Ah Hah! You finally said it, “attractive”. The “intent coloured with natural infatuation” is not simply enough, now is it?”
With all due respect, I’m slowly beginning to understand why so many people pick on you all the time here. I must be slow witted
You seem to have personal, defensive issues about your looks.
—-
You are new so you missed the endless threads with men saying “women say they want nice, sensitive guys who will treat them right but they don’t…..wah …. I had to take the red pill to find out the truth”
They are surprised to learn that yes we want nice, sensitive guys who treat us right but whom we are also attracted to first. They seem to think that being nice is enough, and I don’t know where they got that idea from since we women never say that.
Just like when men say they want x amount of qualities in a woman, its a given that they are talking about a woman they are attracted to first, same goes for us.
That was kind of what I was getting at in a joking way.
@ PJ:
There definitely a “type” that’s prone to do this.
It’s the high intensity, drama folks who usually dive right in. Heads first. I have a friend like this. She loves the beginning stages – intense chemistry, falling fast, fantastic sex, practically moving in together within weeks – but the momentum never seems to last. She admits it’s a risky strategy and has had her heart crushed many times, but she loves the rush too much to try building a relationship at a slower pace.
To each their own..
Sheesh, Vox Day is trying to repeal the 19th Amendment on my blog and Plain Jane is off her meds again. Here goes the Delete button!
@Olive: “This thread = completely overtaken by Plain Jane.”
It does look like that indeed!
Now, THIS is intersting:
Ted D: “I very much enjoy my wife’s company because much of it is spent in silence, or at least with no idle chit chat.”
INTJ: “Haha yup. My ideal version of “personal space” would be sitting next to or cuddling with my SO while I daydream or do work on the computer.”
What I found, based on my experiences, is that girls (rather than women) tend to feel insecure or neglected in a relationship if they don’t get enough attention at home, attention in a verbal way. I’ve always found women more verbal and talkative than men in their social interactions, certainly between them, but with everybody in general. I think they’re more communicative or at least need to be much more so than men.
Although what I gather from Ted D is different, he’s talking about his grown up mariage, and apparently a tacit agreement between him and his wife.
On another note, I’m always a bit distressed when I see those couples in restaurants who can spend the whole dinner without utering a single word to each other, obviously bored and used to one another. This I witnessed everywhere. I never understood how why those couples were still together.
“INTJ December 2, 2012 at 3:45 pm
@ Ted D
Well then to my original point: why be with them at all? If they don’t intend to marry their current SO someday, why bother continuing the relationship?
This is a common thing amongst young women (especially the ones that are interested in young guys), and I can’t really figure it out.”
Women are the only ones that do this?
Last Valentine’s Day my BF and I went to Olive Garden (I know, I know, so cliche) and there was a couple at a table right near us, both on their smartphones/texting The. Entire. Time. My BF and I spent several moments quietly poking fun at the awkwardness.
@ Damien Vulaume
Hah. Maybe I just need to let out my natural asshole game and say “Shut up bee-itch!”
Damien Vulaume – “I’m always a bit distressed when I see those couples in restaurants who can spend the whole dinner without utering a single word to each other, obviously bored and used to one another. This I witnessed everywhere. I never understood how why those couples were still together.”
Well, we usually at least talk a little, but we are close enough to this that I feel confident answering.
It’s simple: we do not need to talk to enjoy being with each other. Literally, I feel better just being in her presence, and she enjoys the calming influence I have on her. (Deep down she is a slightly extroverted social butterfly ENFJ). We can enjoy a meal alone, but just sharing it with each other makes it better, even if we have nothing at all to say to each other. And at the root of it, this is why I love having her with me as much as possible. She doesn’t waste my time with inane yapping about nothing, and her presence adds to my enjoyment of just about everything I like doing.
Now, I’ve seen “silent couples” that we’re silent because the were miserable with each other, but that is in no way the same as what my wife and I share.
But we get alone time occasionally. She is out with her mom and the girls shopping for a dress for her Xmas party, and the boys and I rearranged the living room furniture to make room for the tree. Oh, and I got the oil in the van changed. Pretty productive use of our time apart.
Vox Day is trying to repeal the 19th Amendment on my blog and Plain Jane is off her meds again.
Hey now… I simply made an observation. I have repeatedly stated there is zero chance of any Western society restricting voting in any manner. I expect children and aliens to be given the franchise first. Just remember that I observed it before the collapse.
It’s remarkable how obvious the financial crash of 2008 was to everyone after the fact. I expect the unsustainable demographics of Western societies will be equally ex post facto obvious.
Olive – “Last Valentine’s Day my BF and I went to Olive Garden (I know, I know, so cliche) and there was a couple at a table right near us, both on their smartphones/texting The. Entire. Time. My BF and I spent several moments quietly poking fun at the awkwardness.”
And again, the wife and I resemble this enough to chime in and I’d like to give you an alternative view on this. Perhaps this couple was indeed so bored with each other that the were seemingly ignoring each other right at the table. But…
My wife and I do this on occasion. It isn’t that we are bored with each other. It is that we are so comfortable with each other that we realize it is OK if we are not always 100% focused on each other as we spend time together. I don’t get offended if my wife picks up her phone at dinner to glance at a Facebook, and she doesn’t take it personally if I send a text or two during dinner. I’m not ignoring her at all. I’m thoroughly enjoying her company WHILE I’m writing that text. And she enjoys that I enjoy her company. She knows that while she is checking Facebook, I am sitting across the table appreciating her companionship even though she isn’t paying much attention to me at the moment. Her just being with me means a great deal to me, and since I enjoy her company often, I have to allow that she needs to focus on others sometimes as well. By allowing each other the opportunity to mentally “check out” while spending time together, we can spend more time together and still maintain relationships with others.
This is how we use modern technology and communications to improve our lives. It allows us to spend more time together without neglecting our commitments to foster other relationships with friends and family.
This is lovely, Ted! Aww
And probably the most romantic thing I’ve ever read on HUS.
I feel the same way about my boyfriend. We don’t need to talk to enjoy being together.
“It’s remarkable how obvious the financial crash of 2008 was to everyone after the fact.”
2008 was my best year recently for investment and speculation. It was absolutely wonderful, in the sense that an amusement park is wonderful. When you see a major financial bubble, you short it.
I can’t deal with Financial Repression. 2011 was my worse year ever. Fortunately, I’ve recovered and am now back to steady positive returns again.
“I expect the unsustainable demographics of Western societies will be equally ex post facto obvious.”
They are obvious now and have been obvious for some time. Although Japan and South Korea seem to be worse.
@Susan:
In fairness to Vox, he was also recommending that non-property owning men also be stripped of the right to vote.
Iggles – I said I had a VERY gooey emotional center. There are few people in this world that will ever see any of it at all, and the only people that have seen it in all it’s horror and glory are my LTR mates. So perhaps you can understand why I find it so damn hard to use “game” on my wife. She is literally the only person in my life that knows or sees the real me in its entirety every single day. No one, even my closets friends, sees it all.
Lol. Closet = closest above. Beer and iPad autocorrect for the lose!
Ted,
To each his own (recall that I refuse to get a smartphone precisely because I don’t want to be THAT person, but if it doesn’t bother you it’s no skin off my back). However, I want to point out something.
There’s a difference between “spending time together” and being in a setting that sort of facilitates face-to-face interaction and communication. For example, at this very moment I’m spending a nice Sunday afternoon with my BF, but I’m sitting here writing this post, while he’s watching football (you Stillers fans!) and loudly expressing his disdain for his videogame. No talking required.
However, if we were out to dinner somewhere and he had to check his facebook every 15 minutes, I’d become increasingly annoyed. Again, it’s a manners thing for me. But as always, YMMV.
@INTJ: “Hah. Maybe I just need to let out my natural asshole game and say “Shut up bee-itch!”
Oh man…… showing your true colours, hé? Why being so prompt at lashing out insults at girls? Good luck in finding your soul mate.
Looks like there are lots of things going on here that I don’t understand
Bah. It isn’t voting that’s the problem. Everyone knows women can’t drive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiz_QxGuWEw
In that case, forget I objected.
Olive – ” There’s a difference between “spending time together” and being in a setting that sort of facilitates face-to-face interaction and communication.”
I actually agree with you on this, which is why we both make an effort not to be on the phone often when out. But, we spend so much time together that it hardly makes a difference if I choose dinner or TV time in bed to strike up a conversation. So, if we don’t have anything to say at dinner, why not use the tike for something more productive than talking about the weather?
@ Damien Vulaume
I was being facetious.
Though admittedly there have been times when I’ve wanted to do this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zTTZ54W2Ug
Often the people with the toughest shells are soft on the inside!
My boyfriend has a pessimistic view of most people. He readily admits he had his guard up with me until he could fully assess my character and what I am about. I figured out it because when he falls, he falls hard. He’s been burned in the past by lovers and friends so to make it into his inner circle takes time and building trust.
Also speaking of tough shells, one of my best friends embodies this too. On first impression she comes off tough and/or intimidating to some, but once you get to know her she’s nothing like that! Lol. She’s a big goofball (she loves pulling pranks) and is a caring, genuine person
Ted,
I don’t feel that facebook is ever “productive,” but again, YMMV.
Olive – LOL on Facebook. I agree. But my wife puts it to great use staying in touch with her large circle while spending most of her time with me and our children. To me, that is productive and a rather great multitasking use of time.
Iggles – ” My boyfriend has a pessimistic view of most people. He readily admits he had his guard up with me until he could fully assess my character and what I am about. I figured out it because when he falls, he falls hard. He’s been burned in the past by lovers and friends so to make it into his inner circle takes time and building trust.”
From this description I think you have a pretty damn good idea of how I work as well. Your description of your husband and his experiences with “the world” and getting burned very my mirror my own past. And indeed, when I fall, it leaves a huge crater.
My husband does his man cave thing by going to the shooting range (which he’s at now). I did go with him before I was pregnant/nursing, but only rarely.
We often play video games or do stuff on our computers in the same room, just being comfortable, and every now and then talking about game stuff. He’s not into sports (which I totally appreciate).
I do like to ask him silly female questions like “what are you thinking?” and “what are ya up to?” He hates those questions. I’m generally not very talkative though, being more introverted than him.
But I like my personal space, too. When I first moved in with him, he asked me why I had closed the door when I used the bathroom. I was like, uh? Apparently he grew up with open bathroom doors, and when I close the door, he thinks I’m being distant.
On a selfish note, I appreciate baby napping time, when I can be all alone, too.
@Iggles:
“My boyfriend has a pessimistic view of most people. He readily admits he had his guard up with me until he could fully assess my character and what I am about. I figured out it because when he falls, he falls hard. He’s been burned in the past by lovers and friends so to make it into his inner circle takes time and building trust.”
I have a rather pessimistic view of myself. I readily admit that I have burned myself in the past.
I’ve noticed that the common denominator in many of my live problems have been that there was a significant contribution to the problem by me.
“I do like to ask him silly female questions like “what are you thinking?” ”
I’ve found that my wife generally doesn’t like the answer to this question.
Ohhh… troll is gone, now we can talk like grownups. Hi, hope your Sunday is as awesome as mine. We brewed beer, made my Sicilian grandmother’s meat sauce, and played some games with the kids.
Any real relationship cannot be filled with 24/7 activity, unless you’re both dopamine-addled extroverts. Even a dual-extrovert pair needs some down time — they just do it in private.
Wifey and I are all over the map, sometimes when we are out, we chat up strangers, other times we only talk to each other, and once in a whole it might actually look like we’re being totally silent (but we are usually playing footsie).
She actually never asks me what am I thinking — we are kinda opposite in many ways.
@Olive: “I don’t feel that facebook is ever “productive,”
I don’t either. Besides the “big brother” side to it, it is often a time spent on it virtually communicating with close ones you could actually meet by just taking the subway and share a real human meeting. with them.
@Ted D: “But my wife puts it to great use staying in touch with her large circle while spending most of her time with me and our children.”
This I observed with many couple around me. I don’t know about the world statistics of facebook users, but I woud not be surprised if it showed that there are more female users than male users. Just a guess.
To each his own (recall that I refuse to get a smartphone precisely because I don’t want to be THAT person, but if it doesn’t bother you it’s no skin off my back). However, I want to point out something.
I share this idea I only want a smartphone for uses like directions (since I can’t read a map) but I wouldn’t want to use it when I’m around people and talking. I do like Facebook both for the keeping tabs on people and for the chances of learning new stuff really quickly I had found many interesting articles by people sharing with other people things I’m interested but they don’t know I’m into or they are not close enough to share. Is also a good way to publicize my blog posts.
In spending time with hubby is good that we are past the stage of insecurity so sometimes we spent time talking all day,sometimes over coffee, he goes out with friends to play Car Wars I go out with friends to watch Twilight, sometimes we stay at home he is in his computer and I am in mine no need to say anything. And all this is normal.
“it is often a time spent on it virtually communicating with close ones you could actually meet by just taking the subway and share a real human meeting. with them.”
Well sure. But, in order to do that, my wife would have to be gone from home often, as she really has a huge number of friends. And, many of them are still in New Hampshire, and she can hardly just jump in the car for a 12 hour drive to shoot the breeze.
If she didn’t satisfy her social needs by using Facebook, she would either need to spend most of her free time visiting people, or she would go stir crazy for lack of socializing, because obviously I’m not going to be able to meet that demand. She is the reason I discovered any use for Facebook at all. But unlike her, I’m perfectly happy with a small handful of friends I only talk to on occasion.
Re: facebook, I guess I should clarify because my post made it sound like I despise it lol. I do find facebook quite useful for keeping in touch with old friends and even making plans in some cases. I just think that it can become quite addicting, and can be used as a substitute for actual real life interaction. Now, if you’re Ted (who, for an introvert, is quite social here at HUS
), that’s not necessarily a bad thing, I guess. But to me, it’s the same thing as if I whipped out my phone and started texting in the middle of a college class or a business meeting. There’s a time and place, and Olive Garden with your SO on Valentine’s Day isn’t it, IMO.
@ Damien:
I usually try to avoid the need to defend my relationship to anonymous Internet strangers.
All I was trying to convey was how each of us could find our own “down time” while still enjoying the other’s company. I am very extroverted, and my boyfriend is very introverted, so it works for both of us.
Sometimes it doesn’t, though…like yesterday, when we nixed half of the errands we needed to run, just because we enjoyed cuddling under the covers for longer than we should have! XD
That sounds like a fabulous Sunday! We didn’t get to see much of our kids this weekend – I missed them! Next Sunday is tree trimming and I am planning to make “Sunday gravy” for guests – I can’t claim a family recipe, though.
@Olive
I got to watch a relationship train wreck itself in slow motion via pictures from half way across the planet.
All bow to the glory of The Facebook which made the hours of 11:30-2:30 incredibly entertaining, yet also sad (for the man in question)…
Lokland,
Lol, facebook is a gossip’s playground. “Omigod, did you hear…?” “Yeah, I saw it on facebook!”
I deactivated my facebook for a long time because everyone seemed fake. Then I reactivated it because everyone just uploads their pictures to it, and I like keeping up with my friends that way.
I think I might start going traditional and getting albums, though. There is just something more upscale about that.
I’m glad the rest of you had great Sundays. Mine involved helping to host a Baby Shower. Ugh. Women-folk doing women things. I was appointed baby-sitter, which is cool, I like kids, but goddam.
Olive – “Now, if you’re Ted (who, for an introvert, is quite social here at HUS )”
Dear, I’m not introverted because I don’t like to talk. I’m introverted because I don’t particularly like talking with people face to face. The Internet is my favorite means of communicating, followed by text and then email. I can keep up with my friends and actually only see them once every few months for an evening and be good. I get all the interaction I need for the most part virtually, and rely on my wife and family for the face to face stuff. And I love that I can do all this without actually having to go visit anyone.
@Olive
““Omigod, did you hear…?” “Yeah, I saw it on facebook!”
I have to share.
First, though it sucks, the result is good for the guy in question.
(Who ended the relationship this afternoon.)
LDR, one on the other side of ocean.
Girl has lingerie/sluber party with friends. Kool.
Girl uploads picks to Facebook, one at a time as night progresses. WTF!! (Even more WTF!!! as I could see these and I know her in a professional capacity, as well as her now ex.)
Girl gets comments and subsequently flirts with all her new admirer’s. Ohh hell no.
Boyfriend becomes just another guy.
Anyway, long story short, girl was bad news from the get go. Everyone told him so (not me, not my place, but you can be damn sure I was praying he’d listen. I like the kid.).
Result unsurprising.
@ADBG
Pics are the only reason I still keep Facebook. Me and my wife use it as a virtual album.
I win the Worst Sunday Award. I’m briefing and will be for the forseeable future.
Stupid 18 month lag time.
In that case, forget I objected.
To understand my perspective on voting, it may help to understand that I have lived most of my adult life in countries where I was not allowed to vote. I simply don’t have the emotional the connection between voting and freedom that most people, particularly Americans, do.
No doubt the fact that I am a libertarian and no one I have ever voted for has ever won an election at any level may also be a factor.
@VD
I’m relieved to hear you bear no personal responsibility for Italian election results over the past few years.
@ Hope
Hah. I’m actually curious now. Is it common amongst whites to leave the bathroom door open?
My kids are all under 12. A day home with them inside is basically ensuring they don’t destroy anything… or each other.
@ Susan
Akk. My stomach hurts. Please try not to make me laugh so hard!
Ted,
Though I have a hunch you’re less introverted than my BF, for example, who tends to get in the zone and doesn’t want to be bothered, even via technology. 5 minutes ago I asked him why he was smiling and he just said “because my bitch was leaving me alone.” Douchebag… 
I’m mostly just pulling your leg.
Olive – “5 minutes ago I asked him why he was smiling and he just said “because my bitch was leaving me alone.” Douchebag… ”
ROFL! I don’t ever want to hear you say your man doesn’t have game. That answer was brilliant!
@ Olive
Hahaha. What a man.
Nice Sunday here too:
I placed the baby on the opposite side of the crib and his little mind was blown with the new angles (that was mommy’s advice to exercise his eyesight) I made a Tuna Casserole that I always wanted to try and the hubby approved and some Coconut Anise bread (this one is the bread my mother used to sell when we were growing up and has been passed from mother to daughter for at least 4 generations, is a family recipe no one in the country knows how to make it mwa ha ha ha) and I managed to come up with a very interesting theological tale that I think is quite good. Need to put in the folder of “to write” nice Sunday all allong.
Recall that small businesses get taxed at the normal rate, while investments are taxed at the capital gains rate, which are also deferred until taken out, so the “potential” wealth could go quite low as in cases of bubbles bursting. The complicated mathy derivatives and stock packages are just glorified gambling.
Hope,
This isn’t an apples to apples comparison. Most large corporations are C-corps, while small business are either S-corps, LLCs, partnerships, or sole proprietorships.
The latter do NOT pay any taxes at the “business” level. The businesses are 100% pass through entities, and the “owners” pay personal income tax on the business earnings.
In contrast, C-corps are double taxed. The business itself pays corporate income tax BEFORE any of the money is distributed to the owners….the stockholders. The U.S. has one of the highest nominal corporate income tax rates in the world at I believe 35% off the top of my head although the effective rate is often much, much lower because the system can be gamed with various deductions. The actual shareholders who own stock then pay tax on any dividends the corporation pays out…..which is presently 15% off the top of my head because of the Bush tax cuts, and also pay capital gains tax on stock appreciation.
The debate/argument about what is fair tax policy involving corporations, the double tax issue, and whether large corporations even pay real tax (pass through to customers) is beyond the scope of this discussion and I don’t have the time or inclination to get into that. But the way you framed the comparison in terms of the raw facts is misleading.
The economy at the top is like a giant expensive casino, while the economy at the bottom is the poor and lower middle class making minimum wage and squeaking by, waiting tables, doing cashier work, etc. There are very few who don’t work at all and collect benefits. Not sure how it is in the UK, but that is how it is in the US.
I agree that the U.S. economy has become too “financialized” with essentially anyone involved in finances, owning paper assets essentially getting too much of the total pie.
On a different note, Mr. Wavevector….you are just absolutely killing it. Your comments since you have arrived here are exceptional. You absolutely are right on so many things, and I find myself nodding my head reading your comments. You are absolutely right in pointing out that many women still don’t get the value proposition of a man being in a committed, monogamous relationship. There has to be more than regular sex and having a “hot” wife due to the man’s status. There is a massive amount of cognitive dissonance amongst many women even those who ostensibly appear more empathetic to the male POV. At the end of the day, many women value their “strength and independence” and empowerment ABOVE EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING ELSE.
@Ashley
No, (and yes). It’s not “threatened”. It’s “not seeing where do I fit in her life”. When I started to live with my future wife, I was still studying. I felt not comfortable with her, until I finally get the job. I was really, really happy when I brought home my first REAL salary from REAL job and I knew it that I was bringing something to the relationship. I think that if I wouldn’t be able to get the job that time, I would break up with her, no matter how much I loved her.
@susan
I hate to play “girl’s plays” so when I was playing with my daughter, I always played as I would play with a boy. Once we created harpies from the paper and started to play in Jason journey. One moment, when Jason started to shot at the harpies my daughter suddenly declared “and now harpies realise they were wrong and they became good and they will have children“.
@JP
But it’s not because native French woman are having children. One could estimate that 1/3 of children born in France are children of immigrants. It’s estimate, since I think there is no official statistics. However, sickle cell anemia is extremely rare among old European population (half of percent for southern european populations), and quite recenlty a data was relased which shown 1/3 of children born in France are now at risk.
Meaning that fertility in France is driven mainly by immigrant woman, which may still not be integrated within western culture. Meaning France is a poor counter-example to “western culture drives fertility down”.
@A Definite Beta Guy
Yes, but it was alse done by females.
This was REAL work, and that work HAD TO BE DONE by someone.
+ 1
It rubs me the wrong way to hear women’s contributions to society brushed aside. (i.e., “All they did was birth babies; men did everything else!) While I don’t doubt that men did most of heavy physically tasks, I don’t thing what women brought to the table was insignificant. (And as szopen points out, they also did physical tasks as well)
I think where the disconnect lies is that throughout history women’s influence was greater felt in throughout personal sphere (impacting individuals, such as her husband, children, relatives, and neighbors) while men dominated the public sphere (work, politics, etc). In the 20th century as more women begin working outside the home, they now have a larger impact on the public sphere. However, many believe that only influencing the public sphere counts as important.
Civilizations have risen and fallen many times on this rock. One of the common threads I’ve noticed is family is the glue that holds society together. Without those ties there’s little to tether citizens to looking out for one another and the common good. You can build a civilization, but it’s not likely to sustain itself as the personal sphere weakens..
SZopen…”real work”
Owen Young, who grew up on a farm, ran GE from 1922-1939. Ida Tarbell’s biography contains a word-portrait of what Monday–”wash day”–was like for a farm woman in that era: “he drew from his memory a vivid picture of its miseries: the milk coming into the house from the barn; the skimming to be done; the pans and buckets to be washed; the churn waiting attention; the wash boiler on the stove while the wash tub and its back-breaking device, the washboard, stood by; the kitchen full of steam; hungry men at the door anxious to get at the day’s work and one pale, tired, and discouraged woman in the midst of this confusion.”
@Anacaona
That sounds like a lovely day! Those small pleasures are the best. Coconut Anise bread sounds delicious – will google.
@Mike C
Uh oh, do I need to start quoting David Buss again at great length?
There has to be? We’re talking about biology. That is the trade – men may increase their SMV via status. It is as simple as that, and actually has nothing to do with commitment.
What is the value proposition? Since most men are not in a position to “take care” of a woman in the traditional sense that Mr. Wavevector describes, how do women benefit from male investment?
@szopen and the other guys too
I heard from a young friend this weekend who has been seeing someone for about six months. They met via a random encounter and get along really well. The thing is, she is in a high status job. He used to have a similar job but was laid off almost two years ago, and has been unable to get anything even remotely similar. He has been mostly working odd menial jobs to cover his bills. Needless to say, he has become extremely discouraged.
He recently ended the relationship. He told her that although she is the best thing to have happened to him in months, he “feels like a loser all the time.” He also said that he cannot possibly be responsible for another person’s happiness right now – all of his energy must be directed toward finding employment. He promised that if he gets a job, she will be the first person he calls. She is in love with him, and devastated.
Does this surprise you? Is this a case of “he’s just not that into you?” or would you feel the same way? What should she do? I think she’s going to have a hard time letting go, because she perceives that the circumstances are entirely to blame, rather than a lack of feeling on his part. She feels that if he cared enough, he would stay in the relationship, and she also points out that he acknowledges his life is better with her in it. I think it’s more about his self-respect. What do you think?
HAHAHA! I love that.
“Does this surprise you? Is this a case of “he’s just not that into you?” or would you feel the same way? What should she do? I think she’s going to have a hard time letting go, because she perceives that the circumstances are entirely to blame, rather than a lack of feeling on his part. She feels that if he cared enough, he would stay in the relationship, and she also points out that he acknowledges his life is better with her in it. I think it’s more about his self-respect. What do you think?”
I sounds like self respect.
He sounds humiliated because of his employment status and the fact that she is successful while he has been thrown onto the industrial scrapheap, where he suspects, and not without reason, that he will stay forever.
If I were in his position, I would simply scrap looking for a job and get a Ph.D. in biostatistics or a medical degree.
Problem solved.
@Susan
“Does this surprise you?”
No. Women don’t want to be in relationships with losers. Men don’t want to be in relationships with winners.
“Is this a case of “he’s just not that into you?”
No. He probably does like her. Fact is the situation won’t end well. Regardless of how they feel now.
“or would you feel the same way?”
Exactly the same.
“What should she do?”
Quit and work at Starbucks, pray he gets a job or find a new boyfriend.
@susan
No. I am not saying that all men, or even a majority of men would feel the same as him (or as me). But it seems that there is at least sizeable minority who feel really not comfortable if they do not feel they contribute enough. It may be culturally prescribed, as feminists tend to think, or it may be in genes, I don’t know. At one moment in my life my wife have been earning (I hate English tenses) more than me. It was eating me alive. She said she does not care and that it’s not problem for her, yet I felt like a loser. I started to get additional work hours and side jobs. It was like i was not really grown up, not really a male.
And there could not be done much about that, at least I cannot imagine how could she do anything about it. It was about me, not about her. It was not about lack of love. In fact, the fact that I really care about her only make the case worse. If I wouldn’t care about her and about the relationship, I wouldn’t care about difference in our earnings too.
But again, I don’t know whether I am simply an outlier – i am outlier in so many other areas, so this could be like that also here – and if this guy feels the same as I was feeling. Sure, this could be just pretext for him, it is possibly that he really “was not that much into relationship”. I am waiting for the other guys’ opinion.
Well, if there is some tasks in which he feels really comfortable (fixing things etc, or just moving heavy furniture) she could ask him to do them for her. Or she could just claim she needs to go to some area at dark does not feel safe and maybe he could escort her for a moment. Whatever to make him feel she needs him. I don’t know. This could misfire if she would formulate this n a wrong way (e.g. if she would make it look as it would be something he is expected to do). Again, would love to hear from the other guys first.
@Susan
“I think it’s more about his self-respect. What do you think?”
Yes, you are wise.
He may not be (wise), if they can make it work between them he should kick his BS old style values to the kerb.
I fully believe in people making their own deals. Everywhere from true equality through to patriarchy – whatever you want as long as you are both legal adults of sane mind.
When the pack/herd is crazy, stop listening to it – Go Your Own Way.
After a thought, don’t go with my advices. That would be just temporary solutions. After all, how many many times she can ask him to help with heavy furnitures. She could also say “do you want me to quit my job? I care about you more than about the job” but frankly, if he would answer “yes”, I would advise her to dump the guy. At least he would be assured that she does not consider him a looser.
But what do I know, after all.
“ut it seems that there is at least sizeable minority who feel really not comfortable if they do not feel they contribute enough. It may be culturally prescribed, as feminists tend to think, or it may be in genes, I don’t know. At one moment in my life my wife have been earning (I hate English tenses) more than me. It was eating me alive.”
I have the same problem, but it’s completely driven by my competitiveness rather than my need to contribute.
I don’t really have an inborn need to contribute. As my wife would admit, I basically have no skills with respect to interacting with the physical world, including lifting, carrying, repairing. That just wasn’t my thing, growing up. I did books and computers and academics.
I put her in charge of the household repair stuff. She also notes that she knows of no other men quite like me.
I do apparently have an inborn need to win.
Susan – “What is the value proposition? Since most men are not in a position to “take care” of a woman in the traditional sense that Mr. Wavevector describes, how do women benefit from male investment?”
Do you have any suggestions? Because honestly I don’t. Unless we can get to a point where we CAN completely redefine society AND biology, what exactly SHOULD men be doing to “add value” to a relationship with a woman that isn’t already expected?
By this I mean, women already expect love, devotion, care, attention, and a whole host of other “lovey dovey” stuff from the men in their lives. (I don’t know what else to call it, but the “emotional” stuff in a relationship.) Problem is, men in general DO NOT see any of that as “adding value” because traditionally men are taught that their “purpose in life” is to make money to support his family. If he isn’t able to be the bread winner, what exactly IS he supposed to excel at? Oh, I can hear the multitude of answers from homemaker to soccar dad, but here is the rub. IF men do this, will women lose attraction for them? Because you see, it is NOT just men who are socialized to expect to be a work horse for their family, but women are also told that men are the workhorse of the family. And, even if that wasn’t the case, if women need a man they can ‘look up to’ and they have high powered careers, what exactly is a man supposed to do to “impress” such a strong and independant woman? Connect with her on an emotional level? Be her domestic god?
It isn’t just that men don’t feel like they have a place, women seem to believe the same in many cases. And in general, men figure if women don’t have a clue what they want from their men, how the hell are the supposed to provide it? And of course, as we’ve outlined already, men
NEED to be needed.
@Susan
“What is the value proposition? Since most men are not in a position to “take care” of a woman in the traditional sense that Mr. Wavevector describes, how do women benefit from male investment?”
Extending this argument implies that men with enough money should be able to support multiple families.
*I’ll be taking applications. No one over 5′ 4″, 110 pounds and under.
Pics required. No kids. No smokers. No drinkers, No partiers. No sluts.
Jokes.
———–
An analogous situation to the one you presented above is a 21-22 year old male shacking up with a 30 year old female.
At the time they may have equal SMVs and it can all be dandy.
A quick look at reality however reveals that the chance of that actually working long term is 0. (In this case because the male SMV increases.)
In the case you presented, it might be fun for the first few months-years after which its gonna become a daily reminder of how inferior he is to her. Resentment ensues.
The same occurs in the situation I mentioned above. One person becomes inferior, resentment ensues.
@Just1Z
I agree with this – I’ve been thinking about this re the question of egalitarian marriages vs. those dominated by males (or even by females). In 2012, we can go on about what the majority is doing, and how well, but it doesn’t matter. The only thing that matters is if it works for the individuals in question. If you’re a woman who wants to be Taken in Hand, there are plenty of guys who will dig that. If you’re a woman who wants egalitarian, there are many men happy to sign up for that. There are even manginas who will be in LTRs with people like Amanda Marcotte.
I think it’s largely a waste of time to argue about what people should do, or more importantly, should want.
@ Ted D
This explains the “chicks dig jerks” thing. The only way to impress such a strong and independent woman is to be an alpha douchebag.
“I think it’s largely a waste of time to argue about what people should do, or more importantly, should want.”
Unless that’s how you make life decisions.
“What should I be doing here? What is the ideal to which I should be aspiring?”
@Ted D
I don’t have the answers either. My question was in good faith – obviously the dynamic between the sexes has changed dramatically – the old value proposition no longer applies. To say that men take care of women, so women should let them lead just doesn’t resonate, because that kind of provisioning is unusual today.
For me personally, I would say that my husband and I take care of each other. We’ve figured this out as we’ve gone along, but we’re both happy with what we’re putting in and what we’re getting out. I mentioned that I tend to defer to my husband as a direct result of his being the sole provider for our family. When that is not the case, what is the justification for deference or submission?
@INTJ
INTJ, this makes no sense. Once again, let me suggest that data is your friend. The most stable marriages in society today are those between educated individuals who have married assortatively. High status women are clearly happy to mate with men whose status is the same as theirs rather than higher. That is the profile of the marriages in this country with an 83% success rate.
I understand Megaman’s frustration with you, you really do shoot from the hip.
Ah, but the problem is that so many are asking “What should everyone else be doing? Why are they not doing it my way? I don’t like being in the minority, I don’t feel dominant or successful. I think society is broken and will destroy itself soon because there aren’t enough people who think like me.”
@Susan
“Ah, but the problem is that so many are asking “What should everyone else be doing? Why are they not doing it my way? I don’t like being in the minority, I don’t feel dominant or successful. I think society is broken and will destroy itself soon because there aren’t enough people who think like me.””
This isn’t necessarily true.
If two people recieve the same end result via different means, one got a better deal than the other.
The end result is far less important than the journey it took to get there.
Example,
2 men marry virgins.
One has N of 1. One has N of 10.
Who has better deal?
One with N of 10.
If you allow the unrestricted (and those restricted who take a dalliance or two) continue with their behaviour the value or everyones marriage with a lower N count is decreased.
Not necessarily bad because guys with low N at marriage probably couldn’t do better anyway. Still, its a smack in the face to enjoy life less then have someone else get the same result.
Hey you have an MD. Go work at Starbucks. Hey you have a Bs. in Basket Weaving. Go work at Starbucks.
If society doesn’t segregate the rewards given to different paths then theres no point competing.
@ Susan
At what age do they get married? What happens until then? I’d venture that a sizable portion of these women forego relationships altogether, while many of the rest end up with high dominance assholes.
@Susan
“If you’re a woman who wants to be Taken in Hand, there are plenty of guys who will dig that. If you’re a woman who wants egalitarian, there are many men happy to sign up for that..”
I could do either, or anywhere between. as long as decisions are taken according to reason and competence I don’t much care who makes those decisions (equality), but if ‘you’ want to defer, okay no biggy, I see myself as horse sense equipped (mostly). I’d be happy to let a relationship wander round that map over time, but then I’m a nurturer, I would expect my wimminz to grow.
Amanda and I? nahhh!
well, I just can’t see a future with a pushy feckwit on the grounds of lack of both reason and competence (specifically recognising the real world as opposed to the bizarre, twisted feminist holodeck hell that she infests).
“If you allow the unrestricted (and those restricted who take a dalliance or two) continue with their behaviour the value or everyones marriage with a lower N count is decreased.
Not necessarily bad because guys with low N at marriage probably couldn’t do better anyway. Still, its a smack in the face to enjoy life less then have someone else get the same result.”
I wasn’t trying to get high N.
In fact, I thought that winning involved keeping N at 1 and avoiding any pre-marital sex.
I was going for winning, not pleasure. In fact, my goal in life wasn’t to “enjoy life”.
I’ll admit that I may have a problem with perfectionism.
Susan – “I don’t have the answers either. My question was in good faith – obviously the dynamic between the sexes has changed dramatically – the old value proposition no longer applies. To say that men take care of women, so women should let them lead just doesn’t resonate, because that kind of provisioning is unusual today. ”
I wasn’t being snarky and assumed the question was in good faith. (if I came off as cranky, chalk it up to no coffee and Monday morning at client location. I had to wear business casual and drive an hour…)
I think you are correct that each couple needs to suss this out for themselves. The problem is, as individualistic as our society is, we DO NOT in any way I can see teach people to approach relationships in this manner. By and large, there is still a push towards the more traditional roles, and they simply DO NOT apply in the modern West. And, how exactly should a man and woman even attempt this? I mean, should I walk up to an attractive womand say something like “hey, I really like those hot shoes you are wearing. Would you be open to a “taken in hand” relationship?” I exaggerate, but honestly Susan, in this PC world we live in, how is a guy that perhaps wants such a traditional relationship even supposed to figure out which women might be up for it? Other than religious institutions and maybe a few private organizations, I think most men assume ALL women are feminists to some extent, and fear pissing a woman off by asking for another/better deal.
JP – “I was going for winning, not pleasure. In fact, my goal in life wasn’t to “enjoy life”.”
Exactly. To me, happiness is a side benefit of living a good life, NOT the goal of life. The goal is to do what needs to be done, and to do it to the best of your ability. I guess I’ve always seen life as a test from God: to prove you can make it through in one piece. I suppose that means even God makes men jump through hoops.
I only have one fault JP, my modesty
@SW
It’s only his friend if it reinforces his predetermined and quite negative opinions of college women. Arguing that “the methodology is wrong” is just a silly pretense. This is an example of a conclusion in search of a factual basis. Ironically, following his own example, you’d be justified in flushing anything he presents down the toilet, for no good reason!
@JP
“I was going for winning, not pleasure. In fact, my goal in life wasn’t to “enjoy life”.”
Thats my point.
If two people are able to win but one receives a disproportionately large amount of pleasure (or lack thereof) then theres something wrong with the society that is allowing one of those two to win.
You can label as either high or low N people are the winners but to say they both deserve equal things is ridiculous. You could even switch it up by sex.
@Lokland
I don’t disagree with you about promiscuity – all of society pays the price for that. I was speaking about the idea that men should rule in relationships. I don’t have a problem with Athol’s Captain/First Officer model – it’s a very useful concept for men whose wives have been Captain for a while…
Mostly I see the relationship dynamic as a personal choice, and I don’t see how one man whose marriage is egalitarian is either better off or worse off than one whose isn’t. Financially speaking, the egalitarian couple is probably better off.
@Susan
We were considering totally different things.
Didn’t realize the context.
Your correct.
@I??J
Without evidence, you’re just venturing into BS land, yet again. Why don’t you do some research of your own for a change?
For an admitted atheist and Thomas Paine admirer, you have a real knee-jerk, quasi-religious attitude towards facts you don’t like. I don’t see much reason at work here…
“At what age do they get married? What happens until then? I’d venture that a sizable portion of these women forego relationships altogether, while many of the rest end up with high dominance assholes.”
FWIW this is almost exactly what I figured INTJ was getting at with his comment. Sure, college educated women do tend to stay married once they tie the knot, but what are they doing with themselves in the years prior? We know that for many its going to be at least 5 years, and for many a decade or more? So, until they find “Mr. Beta Right” who are they sexing up? Jerks? Cads? Players? Asshats? Seems these guys do manage to get at least a few hits a year… Or, are they spending 4-6 years with a guy they have NO INTENTION to marry someday? Because I’m starting to get the picture that:
1. A small percentage of women are truly sexxing up cads, either by choice or lack of experience with men.
2. A decent sized portion do seem to get into relationships, but those relationships are not based on an intent to marry, and instead seem to be either “comfort” relationships or simply something to tide them over until they are “ready” to get married.
3. some number (small to medium?) of women that just sit out because they either can’t generate any interest from men at all, or can’t generate interest from men THEY deem worthy.
Seems that the bigger issue may be with the “average” young woman working the serial monogomy tract, since I’d wager they are a larger group than either the fully “unrestricted” bunch or the totally left on the sidelines group. I’ll admit that IF indeed it is only 20% of women sexxing up cads, then they can’t be the primary issue. So, who is left? The women sitting out? Yeah, in some cases if they are simply being too choosy, or more to the point overestimating their actual market value. But I still wager the largest “group” of women fall into catagory 2 above. And, that means that perhaps some of the ‘sphere is right, serial monogomy is just as bad if not MORE disruptive than straight out promiscuity.
I’m not pointing fingers, I’m interested on everyone’s take.
@INTJ
The women we’re discussing are college graduates. They marry at 30, on average. I do not think it’s at all true that a sizable number forego relationships – what do you base that claim on? As for high dominance assholes, I don’t think any women wind up with them. They tend not to marry, and when they do, they tend to cheat and then divorce. So in the educated group, that’s got to be some portion of the 17%, at most.
@Ted D
Yes, this is a problem if the number of men able and willing to provide in the traditional sense who want leadership in return is larger than the number of women willing to make that deal. Religious communities do seem like the best bet, but perhaps that works because it does seem like a high percentage of men complaining about this are religious, at least online.
Whatever the case, it is what it is. There is no way in which you can boss women back into bare feet. Some of us may choose it, that’s the best men are going to get.
Susan – “Whatever the case, it is what it is. There is no way in which you can boss women back into bare feet. Some of us may choose it, that’s the best men are going to get.”
LOL. You crack me up with the “barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen” schtik. Tell me honestly, how many men do you know that feel this way? How many here at HUS do you think feel this way? I probably know a small handfull at best, and they are older “red neck” boys from the boonies of Western PA and Ohio. Guys don’t want their wives barefoot and pregnant by and large. They simply want a woman that looks up to him, respects him, loves him, lusts for him, and takes care of him. Most men I know have NO PROBLEM with women working, until it comes to him or them, and at that point I think men AND women tend to defend their needs over the needs of others.
So, although I appriciate the immagery you paint, do you really think it is an honest attempt at dialogue to continue perpetuating the myth that most men want wives to lose the vote, lose the right to work, and lose all personal freedoms. I get that the ‘sphere is full of such guys, but I’d wager that if you could round up every man alive that has found the Red Pill, the men that want to take away sufferage would STILL be the minority. We don’t want to push women down, we’d simply like to know exactly how we can once again stand next to them, and in the interests of fostering good marriages, perhaps stand just a smidge above a few, so we have a shot at getting some admiration from them.
INTJ: Is it common amongst whites to leave the bathroom door open?
No.
If that’s true, then I don’t think we have a problem, because I believe most women want to give that. Not at 21, it’s true, but eventually. I’m not questioning that, I’m questioning whether most women are willing to sign up for the Male Leads, Female Follows shtick.
“I don’t disagree with you about promiscuity – all of society pays the price for that.”
I think that one of the issues here is that for some people serial monogamy = promiscuity.
So, there’s probably a promiscuity semantics issue here.
I don’t think its gonna be some kinda catastrophic fall, just the loss of economic superiority resulting in relatively poor living conditions and life quality (which in comparison to cave men, will still be golden).
It depends on how far the fall is. I’ve spent some time in both Israel and Italy. There was less material wealth, but in some ways the quality of life was higher. Oddly, even Israelis seemed less stressed tha Americans. There’s less anomie in those countries. People seem more connected.
@Megaman
“@I??J”
hmmm, that’s a particularly nerdy joke that you are making there. so, what ‘sign’ are you? *lmao*
can’t you two just grab a couple of beers and chill?
Hell, I was getting on ‘okay’ with PJ the other day…anything is possible
One possibility of a return to more traditional roles for women, and more traditional (and larger) family structures generally, is that if/when the welfare state collapses under its own weight (which seems likely), first we will have a period of significant pain in which it will be observable by everyone that the single & childless with little to no extended family are suffering the most. People will in effect return to their innate clannish instinct. With no state to protect/provide for them, it’s back to relatives banding together to protect their mutual interests. Those without a lot of relatives will be at a real disadvantage.
What will then happen, probably, is that more and more people will get married earlier, stay together more steadfastly, and have more kids.
In many ways this will be “progress” but in others “regress.”
This observation is not original to me.
J, Italy definitely, but Israel??? That’s a crazy high-stress country if you ask me. People there are very tightly wound. Gee, I wonder why …
The end of the U.S. as Great Power hegemon (which is the decision that will hit in 15-20 years) is not the same thing as the end of the welfare state.
The welfare state is with us as long as there is cheap energy and the current culture remains in place (which is an engineering question).
@Susan
Just started looking back over things here- gotta say, that this whole concept of “men need to be NEEDED” that everyone keeps bringing up, is lost on me. Maybe it’s just the way I am, but to me, saying that men need a woman to do things for is a bit infantilizing, and I know that was not your intent. It seems to imply that men have no compass, and less drive or aspiration without the company of a woman. Personally, I don’t believe that at all, I believe the opposite. When not coupled up, not comfortably provided for (i.e. in the hunt), is often when men are at their best as far as their desire to achieve and overcome. Being on your own keeps you hungry and focused. In any case, if you are not complete in the most fundamental ways (think purpose, not food, sex or sleep), how is a woman supposed to fill that void? No person can. One thing I have found to be true, is that those who achieve will do so regardless of who or what is or is not in their life. This is especially true of men- because men draw less of their personal identity and drive from outside influences than women do (and too many men don’t realize this, using external prods and society’s rewards to push them forward, rather than letting their instincts guide them).
The way I would characterize the relationship between a man and a woman with regards to need is something like this: I don’t NEED to be needed, the only thing I really need in this life is to fulfill my purpose in as many ways as possible- this may or may not involve a wife, or a child, or even a girlfriend for that matter. A woman is welcome to share my journey with me, but she will not become the focal point or the destination of that journey, and she needs to understand that. I will share what I have with her, and support her in setting her compass and fulfilling her own purpose, not because I need to do so, but because I believe that is the way life should be lived.
I do appreciate what you are saying with your blog post, but I think it needs to be more realistic with regards to how men who are attuned to what they really want out of life live and relate to women. Presumably, the women who read your blog want a man who truly self-defines, for obvious reasons, and I’m telling you that such a man does not need a woman to do things for, in order for his life and pursuits to be satisfying. A woman can help him on his journey (and he can help her on hers), but like I said, the type of man your readers want will decide who and what he is, and will win regardless of who’s on his team.
We already can’t pay for the welfare state and it’s far, far from a foregone conclusion that A) we will extract all the new energy we’ve found, since there are large and powerful forces that don’t want to and who, not incidentally, for now have the upper hand and B) even if we did, there’s no guarantee the resulting wealth/revenue could pay for anything like the current welfare state.
Susan – “I’m not questioning that, I’m questioning whether most women are willing to sign up for the Male Leads, Female Follows shtick.”
Well here is the rub. IMO what I outlined IS a relationship with a male lead and a female follow. Here is my quote:
“They simply want a woman that looks up to him, respects him, loves him, lusts for him, and takes care of him.”
“looks up to him” – pretty much means she thinks HE is higher up the food chain.
“Respects him” – IMO respect from a woman is deeply entwined with subordination, to some extent. That is, if my wife “respects” me, then I assume she will defer to me when push comes to shove. The level of defferment probably varies a great deal from man to man, but I think most have some element of this.
And the rest? Well Love/Lust should hopefully be tied together, although we can all find personal examples in our lives of couples where one or the other is there, but not both.
“takes care of” – that one is a wildcard I’ll admit. Every guy I know has some individual idea of what “care” constitutes in a relationship, and this is where negotiation between the couple is necessary.
So the thing you are missing is, for many men, “respect” and “admiration” come partly from a woman’s submissive approach to his leadership. It is her defferance to his leadership that SHOWS she respects and admires him.
How many women are up for that? Basically I’m more than willing to treat my wife pretty closely to being an “equal partner”, provided the underlying aggreement is we are equal in everything until I see an issue, and then I am the tie breaker by default. I’ll help with house chores, I’ll take care of the house and car maintenance, I’ll help cook. I’ll share every dime I make and allow her to choose how that money is spent WITH me. But, when it comes down to brass tacks, we both agree that if it ever comes down to it, its my way or the highway. If we both do our part, it should never, EVER come down to that, because we SHOULD be working together so that these situations don’t occur. But the underlying message is “our relationship appears to be egalitarian because I allow it to be so. I like making you happy, and it makes you happy to feel like you have an equal stake in our relationship. But you should always understand that this situation is my choosing, because I love you and want you to be happy. Take that incentive away from me, and expect to face a completely different situation.”
And, I realize that at 21, a woman may not be ready to marry tomorrow. However, I’d say that IF she ever wants to marry, she should be steering her life in that direction far before she turns 21.
Bro, well, personally, if not coupled up, it’s very doubtful I would be where I am today. Not saying I would be unhappy but I probably would not have achieved what I have achieved.
BroHamlet – “Maybe it’s just the way I am, but to me, saying that men need a woman to do things for is a bit infantilizing, and I know that was not your intent. It seems to imply that men have no compass, and less drive or aspiration without the company of a woman. Personally, I don’t believe that at all, I believe the opposite. When not coupled up, not comfortably provided for (i.e. in the hunt), is often when men are at their best as far as their desire to achieve and overcome. Being on your own keeps you hungry and focused. ”
I’d say that is how you are. Me? If I didn’t have a wife and kids to support, I would likely live WAY below the level I do now. I wouldn’t need a 5 bedroom house and two cars. I wouldn’t need multiple TVs, computers, and high speed internet. My electric costs would be nil as would my heating, because I could be content living in an efficiency apartment. In short, the reason I strive to “do better” is for them, not myself. Without a family to support, I may very well have spent my entire life as a starving musician. Perhaps I would have been happier, and rest assured I’ve spent many nights contemplating that. But, it would have been worse for society, because without a family to support, I would NOT have become a productive member of society. Because frankly, I don’t give a shit about “society” because they don’t give a shit about me.
No, the general understanding of hypergamy is that the woman marries a man of superior social status – superior to her own status, specifically.
I can get behind the idea that many women will try to get the highest status man they can get and that “marrying the prince” is a common fantasy. Nonetheless, the reality is that most people marry within their own social class. Cinderella stories are rare and tend not to work out. A rich man is far morre likely to pump and dump a poor girl than he is to marry her. Even where there is upward mobility, it tends to be two lower SES people making that climb together.
@Szopen: “I would break up with her, no matter how much I loved her.”
Please explain.
@Susan: “He also said that he cannot possibly be responsible for another person’s happiness right now (…) He promised that if he gets a job, she will be the first person he calls.”
Based on what we have here, it’s clear that she loves him for who he is as a person, and not for WHAT he is, since she met him when he was already down on his luck.
In an era where money is put above everything else by many many people,
I would consider it a precious gift, the most precious, to have a woman like that standing by my side if I were in this man’s situation. Also, I find it strange that he says he “cannot possibly be responsible for another person’s happiness right now”. Well, that’s already happening, isn’t it? Since he brings her happiness by just being the way he is with her. I don’t see how his current employment status is related to it. All this is more about his wounded pride.
What should she do? I don’t think anyone could give her any useful advice right now. I also doubt she is going to let go of him easily.
Having said all this, it would have been interseting to hear his side of the story. He might have told a different tale… Besides, 6 months is still a fairly short time in a relationship, so there might be lots of other untold factors involved.
@J:
“It depends on how far the fall is. I’ve spent some time in both Israel and Italy. There was less material wealth, but in some ways the quality of life was higher. Oddly, even Israelis seemed less stressed tha Americans. There’s less anomie in those countries. People seem more connected.”
The U.S. is excellent at producing anomie.
I think I’ve been in a permanent state of anomie since high school.
@ Just1Z
Believe me, I’ve tried. Unfortunately, there’s something in me that compels me to respond in kind to repeated ad homs.
J – “I can get behind the idea that many women will try to get the highest status man they can get and that “marrying the prince” is a common fantasy. Nonetheless, the reality is that most people marry within their own social class”
Well the thing is, hypergamy probably doen’st cause too many problems for Cinderella. After all, her man is pretty high up the ladder compared to her. Now, how about Jane Doe and her husband John? They are both from the same SES, and both work. WHen they marry they are pretty close in SMV, but over time they begin to separate for any number of reasons. Lets just say John gets laid off and can’t find work. Two years later, Jane files for divorce and ends up with Tim Brown, who years ago when she married was possibly below her threshold, but now that he has a VP position at a small company, he looks stellar next to her loser husband without a job.
IMO that situation is driven by hypergamy. She bailed on her husband because she saw him as beneath her, and found herself a man with a higher rank than her, based on what her rank is today. (not what it was when John and Jane married.) So tell me, how is a man supposed to ensure that he can keep up in this financial climate?
Yes, this example is extreme and devoid a lot of useful details. but as an example, I think it works to present the concept.
@ Susan
I don’t think I’m communicating very clearly. See Ted D’s post to see what I was talking about.
SW: The way a man knows that a woman considers him “up” is that she is receptive to his interest and potential commitment.
Wave: Here we see the status of the man being defined exclusively by the emotional state of the woman, rather than any characteristic of his or any thing she might do for him. It is this self centered worldview that I correctly describe as solipsistic.
Of course it’s “solipsistic.” By describing what any individual considers, one is by definition describing that person’s individual, internal world. What sdoes that have to say about Susan?
I could say that John considers Mary’s tats hot. That has noting to do with her “objective hotness,” which may or may not even exist. The only real information in that statement is the John likes Mary’s tats.
@ Ted D
Yup. I’m getting tired of this whole “barefoot and pregnant” thing, because frankly, it’s a knee-jerk straw-man not unlike feminist rhetoric.
I want some traditional things such as having relationships with the intent to settle down and marry, putting family ahead of career, and having kids before the risk of infertility and birth disorders goes up. But the thing is that I don’t expect anything from my wife that I’m not willing to do myself, aside from being a baby incubator which unfortunately I’m physically not equipped to do.
@ Ted D
Had to pull this out specifically. What guys want is someone who pedestalizes them. No double standard there, given that the whole problem with guys is that they tend to pedestalize women.
“Whoops. Bold fail. I just meant to bold “a woman considers” and “what any individual considers.” Susan, can you fix that?”
This is why I use little * thingies.
@Intj
“Believe me, I’ve tried. Unfortunately, there’s something in me that compels me to respond in kind to repeated ad homs.”
well, I have had my hiccups too…so no moralising from me. I just thought that beer might help. in fact, since it’s pitch black here, I’m opening a Hobgoblin* as I write
*Hobgoblin is a beer, not an ugly woman, nor is ‘opening a Hobgoblin’ a perverted sexual practice of any kind. promise
God, what drivel:
http://www.mydailymoment.com/Mind-Body/the-pros-and-cons-of-one-night-stands/Print.html
Note what’s not on the list of “cons”: as your N rises, men’s interest in anything more than a quick bang declines.
I also like “don’t feel guity.” Yeah, because we all know that feelings are easily controlled!
INTJ – I think you hit the nail on the head. I am not asking for much from a wife I am not willing to do myself, however the concessions I am willing to make are somewhat different than the concessions I need from a mate. I see it as an equitable trade. But as women become more self sufficient, they are less likely to like my concessions, or even make any at all. So the relationship is either off balance, or no one gives an inch and it fails regardless. To me the problem is if men and women are equal on too many levels, there is little room to compromise and less incentive to do so to foster a successful relationship.
@Damian “Based on what we have here, it’s clear that she loves him for who he is as a person, and not for WHAT he is, since she met him when he was already down on his luck. In an era where money is put above everything else by many many people, I would consider it a precious gift, the most precious, to have a woman like that standing by my side if I were in this man’s situation.”
+1
@Susan “I think she’s going to have a hard time letting go, because she perceives that the circumstances are entirely to blame, rather than a lack of feeling on his part.”
A successful marriage requires the desire and ability to stay together through “bad circumstances” such as unemployment, illness, or death of a parent or child. IMO, a man who ends a relationship under the circumstances described is not a good bet if he comes around later asking for round two. What happens if the next job doesn’t work out?
@BroHamlet
I think you describe men with a strong sense of purpose accurately, the achievers. However, I don’t think most men have a strong sense of internal ambition (most probably have some and a good deal have little) and do need to feel needed by women or, to a lesser extent by their larger family or society, in order to have the desire to strive more towards achieving goals.
I’ll even give myself as an example. I think I’ve been a fairly high achiever. However, there came a time where I decided to take a couple years off to travel the world and learn Portuguese and read. This is achievement in a personal sense but not in a career sense really. If I were married I would definitely be much more ambitious career-wise.
@Susan
“Does this surprise you? Is this a case of “he’s just not that into you?” or would you feel the same way?”
I have been in this situation and I know a handful of ‘transitioning’ men in this spot as well. The process can be long and frustrating and there are some significant impacts to confidence, identity, status and of course the lifestyle changes due to the new economic outlook – which has far reaching implications in terms of provisioning and both the present and future partnership dynamic.
I have felt the same way. For me it came down to: self-respect/confidence, trust, and the ability to be generative.
Trust & Self-respect – confidence. It can be extremely difficult to open up to someone fully when we don’t have our own foundation and our place in the world is ambiguous and/or we are not progressing. This is particularly troubling for men w/o naturally high (or recently shattered) confidence or a very clear sense of purpose and then drive toward that end, which is to say, a great many men these days. There are enough women who want, and always have, a fully baked man with status, earning potential, etc. to remind us of where we stand in the bigger sense.
IOW, we don’t just consider our partner’s view of us, we need to feel like our value is not singularly in the eye of the beholder – particularly when we are struggling to find, hold onto our own sense of value. We need a broader sense of respect – from other men, from societal expectations, and most importantly from ourselves. We can eventually break from those external excitations and the more ego-centric things, but not until we have somehow solidified that sense of higher purpose or deep expertise or recognition from new sources – often inclusive of an economic model that we can accept.
Trust. If a man does not feel powerful in his world in terms of control over his own life and progression in his field, and subsequently his identity, he will have a harder time trusting both his feelings toward her and the relationship in a long-term sense as well as trusting her feelings for him.
We might feel like her feelings are conditional or have a time limit. This can create a lot of pressure – pressure that we are already piling on ourselves to be “something”. We might feel like there is potential for resentment from her due to our lacking status or progress or competitive success or the level of our drive, desire, aggression, etc. that we are able to generate. There is a real fear that she will “tire” of our process of our “moping” our depression and we will become less attractive in light of the continuing chasm between the men of higher (temporary or not) status at work and the society that she is anchored to but we are not.
There is also the stewing concern that our progress may lead us in a direction that she will not be “ok” with – a more permanent shift in identity. To navigate all of that requires a higher-than-normal level of trust. Many marriages, where arguably trust has been defined and time-tested, do not survive the displaced-man situation.
And finally, being generative. I think men must be productive in some way to be happy. The breadth of productivity is great, so there are many ways to achieve this – but still, we must feel that we are producing something. There is the practical sense in terms of our careers but there is also the (ideal) feeling that we have so much to give that we need to be with someone else in order to fully realize our ability to share these things. However if we feel that we are not producing excess energy to share, not filling up our own cup until it is spilling over, then we are net takers, we are not elevating ourselves to the leadership role, the giving, providing, supporting father-figure we all carry around. Until we re-enter this state, we are essentially on emotional welfare, lowering our head as we cash those checks.
“What should she do? I think she’s going to have a hard time letting go, because she perceives that the circumstances are entirely to blame, rather than a lack of feeling on his part.”
She should treat it as the split that it is. No contact going forward. She may very well hold on due to the circumstances but she should treat the relationship as if it were over for any other reason and maintain the distance. It will be a big problem – probably for both of them, if they try to maintain any kind of friendship or contact going forward. Move on. He made his decision, the reasons may never be known, but the action is definitive. Those circumstances may never change or may change but not actually influence his feelings on the relationship. And if he changes and them comes back around it is likely she will then feel resentment about him leaving and have her own reasons for distrust. You never know. But he broke off to progress in his way, she needs to continue to progress in hers.
“She feels that if he cared enough, he would stay in the relationship, and she also points out that he acknowledges his life is better with her in it. I think it’s more about his self-respect. What do you think?”
Yep. He probably does feel he is better with her. He probably extracts a great deal of happiness from the relationship. That is great but also part of the problem: too much of his happiness and identity are from the relationship. This makes it very difficult to maintain self-worth. It seems counter-intuitive, but the relationship can feed into a downward spiral of feeling poorly about himself. It really, really hurts to be in that spot and sometimes cut-and-run is the only way to find relief from the sense that he is continually letting her down and that he is taking without giving. It is sad and perhaps ironic that a man in this spot often exercises the only real power he feels he has in the world – to scuttle the relationship.
@Escoffier
Yes, this scenario seems plausible. What timeline to you see for this?
@ Just1Z
It doesn’t make any sense though. I’m clearly an iNtuitive, because Sensors are much more data-oriented and they value statistics a lot more than I do. So he could call me an INFJ, but that would make no sense either, since INFJs don’t make abstract generalizations like I do (which Megaman hates) – they make personal generalizations.
@ Just1Z
I don’t drink… And if I did, I’d probably become like PJ without her meds.
Sure it is.
You could also settle down in some remote village in Corsica or Sicily, and date a young woman there…You’d love her upbringing.
LOL. Have you visited a Sicilian mountain village in the last 35 years? I have. Appolonia Corleone types haven’t existed there in decades, though a cautious man would still fear her brother or father.
@Hope #272
Brilliant analysis of the economic situation. IMO, Romney’s 47% comment is what lost him the election.
@JP
You are unhappy that the West (Faustian civilization) is ending. Which is fine, but you can’t fix it because it’s not really fixable in the way that you want to fix it. You are going to need to find what’s in the future. You’re looking to the past.
That’s typical of the ‘sphere. There’s this sense that if women all go back to vacuuming in pearls like June Cleaver all the social, technological and economic forces that have spawned the social changes (including feminism, ironically) of the last 150 years will just go away. There’s no sense that new forms of relating will have to evolve, just the idea that if we could somehow go back to 1950–when the biggest and most anomalous economic boom in history was in full force– things would be fine.
@BroHamlet
Just to be clear, I have no intent, I was sharing the insights of John Gray. However, this claim is not new to me. For example, I have read in many different places that when men do generous things for women, they like the women more. The mere act of giving makes men more emotionally invested. Several men here agree, but perhaps this varies by individual.
I know there is much individual variation here. I know, for example, that my husband identified wife and family as a key part of his life’s purpose long before he met me. We discussed this on our third date. I do not believe that is unusual, and from a female POV, it’s a very positive green flag. It doesn’t mean that the woman is the objective of the journey, but many men are certain that they want female companionship on the journey.
@Ted D
But I know for a fact that my husbands respects and admires me. Yet that is not deference to leadership, it is appreciation for my efforts and the qualities that make me a good partner. I don’t see how either quality requires submissiveness.
“Yes, this scenario seems plausible. What timeline to you see for this?”
This really is tied into cheap energy.
The status quo will try to maintain itself until it literally can’t anymore.
I’ve been trying to generally timeline this thing for years, but I don’t really have the projections I need to do it.
There may be some erosion in this direction starting now, but I can’t really tell.
http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=40366
As Just1Z pointed out, Hairy Christmas seems to be clogging up the comment threads. Perhaps another PJ ban is in order?
I’m not pro-banning.
I used to feel that every post addressed to me or related to something that I’d said deserved a response from me. There are now 3 or 4 people whom I no longer read and to whom I no longer respond. If someone strikes you as crackerbox, ignore them. In fact, if we all did that, the trolls would eventaully tire and go away.
@Susan
Some men do have a strong sense of their identity tied into their job and ability to provide financially and so, like the man you cited breaking up with the woman he loved, some are left miserable by the simple fact of not achieving as much career success as they think they need to. It’s such a part of their personal measure of worth and success that they will feel like failures. Both he and the woman can try to make him feel worth in other areas and shift his self-worth metrics to other areas and it can be successful if he is capable of that and willing to try.
Other men don’t feel such a strong sense of worth based on their provider ability. Other areas are being a protector, lover, source of wisdom, soulmate, friend, and having some other valuable ability like making her laugh or having talent in some area that usually doesn’t provide financial reward.
I am an example of someone that could be happy with a higher earning woman as long as she isn’t being an arrogant bitch about that fact. I draw more of my personal sense of worth in a relationship in providing deep love, romance, great sex, wisdom, friendship, humor, and connection. Also, I will be a great father when the time comes for children. I will be a good provider but that’s not what my relationship identity is based on. Also, since I achieved success as a scientist, and, to a lesser extent, as a business consultant and in other areas in the past I have those things to look back on as well.
@Damien
Yes, I wondered about this too. Perhaps he feels that he is not worthy without employment, or that he has no hope of holding on to her long-term unless his career gets back on track. The truth is, this woman is not going to marry a guy who is down on his luck. The worst case is a sort of Blue Valentine future – very risky for her
True! It’s always hard to know the truth when one only has one side of the story. It would be great to get two people in a relationship to each tell me their side and I could run that as a post.
It is true that men want to be pedestalized and women don’t. I think there’s a huge spectrum between pedestalization and total submission.
LMAO
What’s this pedestalization thingy, in psychological words that I can understand?
What’s involved here?
I keep seeing this ‘age of the man, increased risk of genetic problems’ line being shot out, but what risk rate are we talking about?
I mean you could multiply my risk of getting hit by a meteorite by two and I would not change my behaviour, even if you multiplied by a thousand. load two chambers in a revolver rather than one? (i.e. double the risk) I didn’t want to play in the first place, but I’m a lot less keen now.
multiplying the risk matters, but so does the risk being multiplied – well, duh!
this smells of a feminist line of BS for use as a reply to menopause in women. there’s no like for like comparison between menopause and disability. stop believing what feminists say unthinkingly – they lie, like a flatfish.
140% of the risk of Autism if the Dad is in his 40s. this is a skyrocketing change guaranteed to produced genetically damaged kids? ORLY?
But…140% of what?
so another good point is made – changes in rates of diagnosis vs increasing age of fathers. let’s not be assuming that increasing rates of diagnosis is explained by increasing age of parents, that would be dumb, wouldn’t it?
if marriages have a 50% fail rate, or 10%(?) for UMC and above, surely we should be stopping men getting married, rather than fathering kids in their forties…shouldn’t we? I mean, that’s where the main risk is for their lives.
1 in 2 marriages
1 in 88 various degrees of abnormality
you do the maths
people’s inability to ask basic scientific questions depresses me…check the numbers, methodology, agenda. otherwise you are just sheep to be manipulated by big business / government / employers etc.
@Lisa C
I think it would be different if they started out on equal footing, and then he lost his job once they were committed. In this case, I think he started out not wanting anything serious because of his situation, but then he fell for her anyway. When they had a conversation about their relationship, he told her that he would keep doing his best to hold her at arm’s length as long as he was unemployed. She could see no way to proceed under such an artificial structure, and had no interest in dialing the relationship back to casual. Also, he now feels that he must move wherever a job offer occurs, so he doesn’t feel geographically stable either. It’s a bad situation. I know she is brokenhearted, I don’t know about him.
@Susan
I just thought that I should make clear about the beer, though I’m happy that I amused as well…
« 1 2 3 4 5 … 11 »