How often have we seen a wife talk down to her husband? Hit her husband for a silly comment? Have we come to believe nothing of it?
As cataloged here, my marital experiences mirror the results of the study. Sybil is allowed to get angry over any, little thing. Although she is not passive - aggressive, she has to really work to control her anger. Truly, she feels that she is justified in her behavior. Her reaction to me is my fault, I am able to control her emotions (apparently).
One of the comments posted on Dr. Helen's blog might shed some incite:
Well in a futile attempt at getting back to the question at hand, my experience has been that women behave passive-aggressively by demonstrating disapproval. For all our bluster, boys and men seek the approval of women. It begins sometime in middle school. I would venture that few men had girls falling at their feet but rather were consigned to trying to gain some girl's attention from amongst the multitudes of admires. This awareness of women's approval or disapproval becomes a primal force. Many women I've experienced understand this and use it as a weapon. It is usually worse when the man is not meeting some unspoken expectation of the woman. Not keeping her in the manner she feels she should or not having the job she feels is more socially appropriate. I know several men who found themselves divorced these very "failures." Not all women are like this mind you, a fortunate situation for us men. The longterm effect of this is that many men just stop seeking the company of women. At least, company not financially contracted. This generally leads to a vicious circle as women become "unhappy" at not getting the attention they desire from men at least on their terms. I experience this often in ballroom dancing, it seems many women can't suppress their displeasure at men who are learning and thus unable to produce the dance experience they desire. For some reason, they just can't comprehend that this attitude causes men to stop taking lessons and thus their are fewer men for them to dance with. I believe it stems from the habit learned in their teenage years that men exist to please them and by being petulant they get their way. They seem to not understand men adapt to this strategy by avoidance.
18 comments:
Excellent post.
Men are starting to realize that there are few to no positives in seeking the company of women outside contracting for specific services. Media focuses on the growing tendency of women to stay single to avoid overbearing or repressive husbands. But it seems largely ignored the growing realization of men at younger ages that marriage has little to no benefits for a man since it ties you to a woman who is likely to feel that once she has you "bagged" she no longer needs to meet your emotional or sexual needs yet she can be a complete, petulent bitch in demanding the meeting of her own.
Are there any good reasons left for a man to marry? If marriage is based on love, then a piece of paper shouldn't matter. Laws regarding paternity already demand a father support his children. All that is left is to ensure she gets her pound of flesh in alimony if he realizes she's a useless, childish bitch.
"For all our bluster, boys and men seek the approval of women.
Close. We're not seeking approval...we're seeking sex. And since we must have their consent, the only way is to play the dumb flattery game.
If we could just buy sex legally, women would find no men interested in marrying them. We'd hire housemaids and hookers and forget the concept of marriage entirely.
uggghhh... This post hits hard. Especially since Cubed and I are squaring off more often than not of late.
It boils down to a difference in the needs between men and women over all, and a refusal on both sides to recognize them and meet them in the way that the other needs them to.
What does make me angry about the previous comments and the post in general, is that because women express themselves differently than men here... it is o.k. to call them childish petulant bitches...
It just gauls me that there's just such a refusal for either side to try to understand. Though my experience dictates such an understanding might be clearly and utterly impossible... I remain forever hopeful that someday our differences can work harmoniously instead of being used to tear each other down.
One can always hope... at least I do...
pm-
You're not the first man to express those views. I dare say that many career women cannot find husbands because a husband wants a partner not competition. Ironically, one of feminisms great achievements is the ability for women have carefree sex with anyone they choose. The unintended consequence is that men will not marry a woman of this caliber.
square1-
The problem isn't women expressing themselves. The problem is women's anger. Especially over seemingly trivial things. Many of the women I know do nothing but "sweat the small stuff." All of this tension builds until they have a hair trigger. Also, this isn't just limited to man v. woman. Women tend to be angrier with other women than men. The level of petty spitefulness is a sight behold.
Again this boils down to understanding. What may seem trivial to you, may not be so to her. Anger is definitely a problem, especially when trying to communicate frustrations in a way that hopefully our partner can understand. The problem seems to be that guys believe as a result we are constantly on the attack, and as a result neither care to listen, or care to understand. And that breeds a lot of anger and resentment right there, that the small stuff, especially over time sets off.
"I believe it stems from the habit learned in their teenage years that men exist to please them and by being petulant they get their way"
This so funny and so very tragic.
I had always understand from women that we feel that we learned in our teenage years that we exist to please men. And now I find that men learned in their teenage years that they exist to please women.
So why is no one pleased?
Actually, I'd be thrilled to be with a woman who can stand toe-to-toe with me. Problem is the average woman cannot and instead resorts to childish tantrums and sexual guerrilla tactics to get her way instead of relying on reason to actually defend her position. Or pouting. Or slamming pots and pans and kitchen cabinets.
The average man wants to marry a self-sufficient, self-confident woman, not a bratty, dependent girl-child.
As for "women express themselves differently than men": If I won't accept the behavior out of my child, I sure as hell won't accept it out of my spouse!
You know, I sometimes admire you fellas who are confident (crazy?) enough to chat about some of these subjects.
"I would venture that few men had girls falling at their feet but rather were consigned to trying to gain some girl's attention from amongst the multitudes of admirers."
Well it's not verbatim, but my mother gave me a speach that included this very idea when I was ready to launch into Junior High School and, for a time, reminding myself of this daily kept me in less trouble than I woulda been in. As it was I did many things that I now realize were attempts to do just that, fall at young women's feet to get their attentions. To no avail, I might add.
I will add fuel to the fire and say that as a married adult I now find I am THE MAN. And the figurative punching bag. If she has a problem, big or small, real or imagined, important or trivial, I get yelled at. Literally yelled at. She'll talk to me about issues she has with me but when it ahs to do with someone or something else, she goes off on me. Red-faced, nasty, angry, the real deal. And she'll NEVER be like that to anyone else. Oh, except the kids.
And the dance thing, well, let's just say there's a reason why I'll only do the proverbial 'slow dance' with her.
The interesting thing is when I look at me I realize that many of the things that bring out my anger are probably, to her, trivial just as many of the things she gets angry about I feel are trivial. That doesn't change the fact that she gets angry a lot more often than I do, just an observation.
I'll agree that a woman might see things in a different way than a man. I'd go out on a limb and say that men would expect that to be the case. In male-male relationships, a difference of opinion usually does not lead to an angry shouting match. If I am not seeing Sybil's point of view (either being obtuse or it is a silly point), her anger at me will not make me see that point of view any better. Becoming angry (not mildly irritated but angry) only cements in the man's mind that women are ruled by their emotions.
I'll readily agree that women are more susceptible to being ruled by their emotions. I know I'm guilty of it, and well as most women I know, at various times in our lives.
The issue I take with this is the fact that my husband at times seems to have NO emotion about things. His even keel, something that initially attracted me to him, sometimes becomes endlessly infuriating when I feel that I'm the only one that FEELS anything.
When we encounter a dry spell in our sex life (which happens frequently), he doesn't mention it. I try to remain quiet about it because I don't want to pressure him, but eventually I speak up, and he'll admit to feeling frustrated too. Why doesn't he tell me that? All that time I felt frustrated alone.
When I'm feeling lonely or desperate or overwhelmed, many times he feels the same way... or so I hear after the fact. This type of passive emotion makes me batty and I feel the urge to become more animated and "passionate".
I'm not trying to indict my husband for being "responsible" for my emotions and behaviours, but simply stating this is what happens.
He claims to not feel as comfortable expressing his emotions, and I feel this is probably my fault for trying to force it out. Or maybe it has nothing to do with me and more to do with his upbringing, and the opinion and emotion-stifling father he grew up with. Who knows.
The fact is, and speaking only for myself here, one of the reasons my husband & I are attracted to each other is this very reason. We don't fight and argue; I don't yell, he doesn't yell. I'm not saying we don't disagree; we CERTAINLY do... but we don't "fight", and I have found getting nasty is a therapeutic way to make me feel better at the time, but does far more damage in the long run.
But I am excitable and passionate about things, and he is laid-back and relaxed. His demeanor soothes me; my passion ignites him. And those are the very things that drive us crazy about each other. Sometimes my passion does not ignite him; sometimes it wears him out. Sometimes his calmness drives me mad.
Regarding the "reasons to marry", speaking as someone with no children, it's more than just a piece of paper. I'm self sufficient. I have a good job, and I could support myself. I don't "need" my husband to go out and earn his paycheck in order to support me. We've been there for each other for nearly 10 years in our endeavors, and we have celebrated our successes and we have held hands in the rough times. The "piece of paper" is a reminder that we're in this together. We have invested our love, time, futures, and our lives in each other. Not being married, and this is just my opinion, would make it much easier to depart should things get difficult. Being partners makes it more permanant feeling, more definite.
As far as womens attitudes about "bagging" their man and becoming a petulant bitch... I will state that I thought that once I got married, we'd be having fun, exciting sex and doing wonderful, romantic, fun things for each other. Unfortunately, my husband thought that once he got married, he'd be DONE with those things, as though there were tasks to be completed and he was done. That certainly goes both ways.
Taja, I've experienced similar to you in some ways. For me also it seemed once we got married my husband was done being polite and caring. When we'd have disagreements... the gloves came off... no hurtful name or topic was off limits... and his best defense was the ever scorched earth offense. So naturally my gloves came off too. It was that or utter annhilation. Unfortunately it's a lot harder for me to put mine back on than it is for him. But we are both working towards better, and we have both grown by leaps and bounds. He has shown remorse for the things he's said in the past as have I. Trouble is when something is said touches off that familiar old feeling, old tactics resurface. It's a hard pattern to break.
Am I angrier than my husband... no... I really don't think I am. When the spark hits the powder though I have noproblems letting it be known... and therefor... he feels I'm always on the attack... I'm always picking fights... I'm always the bitch.
I don't know... maybe he's right.
Sybil is allowed to get angry over any, little thing. Although she is not passive - aggressive, she has to really work to control her anger. Truly, she feels that she is justified in her behavior. Her reaction to me is my fault, I am able to control her emotions (apparently).
Aphron, I think "is allowed" is an important part of the problem. Through therapy, retrouvaille, and just really honest heart to hearts with RS, we've spent a lot of time working out how to sharing our emotions. I recently talked about unreasonable feelings on my blog, and basically, when someone "feels" something that isn't supported by the evidence, is blown out of proportion or irrational, then those feelings do not need to be validated by the other. Listened to with love, acknowledged, but not validated.
When I am a bit out of control, I have come to depend on and appreciate when RS asks me, "Is this something you really believe, or are you just responding in anger?" Most of the time its the second. Of course the flip side of that, is when we are having a spat, he can't walk away until its done. And him asking that question usually gets us to the end of a fight a lot sooner than when he doesn't. I'll be honest: I don't always respond to that question very well. But it is pointed enough that usually it gives me the moment I need to stop and evaluate why I am responding in a certain way.
I guess my point is that nobody, male or female, should be allowed to use their feelings as an excuse to tear down or hurt someone else or act childishly. And if she is truly being unreasonable, then personally, I don't feel you need to "allow" it and should call her on it.
Which, sadly, I know is much easier said than done. I sure hope you both can find a way to reduce the volatility in your marriage. Her angry responses that demand you apologize for her reactions are not going to make that happen.
taja-
Sybil often accuses me of being emotionless. To some degree that is true. However, if being full of emotion makes me act as she does, then I am happy to be emotionless. As a general rule, men do not express their emotions well. We do have emotions.
square1-
Anyone that uses that "scorched earth" style of arguing is wrong. Sybil tends to do that. She will yell, call me names, etc. These types are not, necessarily, trying to build understanding or consensus, but they are trying to win at all costs, instead. Sherman said it best: "War is hell."
terese in heaven-
Emotional blackmail is wrong no matter who is doing it. See above about "scorched earth."
While Queenie is not a yeller, she does tend to call me names and to belittle my thoughts any time we have a 'discussion'. Unfortunately for her her mouth is set with a hair trigger. Often she never gets to hear what I really believe out of sheer impatience. If I pause to consider a question she asks or if I dare to consider 'the other side' to clarify the issue in my mind she will cut me off, say something rude, and 'end' (in her mind) the argument assuming that I disagree with her (and am being an idiot). I've learned that the only way to resolve things when she tries to emotionally detach is to go right back after her. She doesn't like this at all but it is effective in getting her off-balance enough that she actually listens to what I have to say rather than dismissing it outright. It also catches her off guard enough that the name-calling and the nasty quips fail her and we can finish up. Sure wish it didn't have to be this way.
Prior to learning this trick I would let her disengage and then wait patiently for her to bring up the subject in front of friends or relatives and listen to what she thought my opinion was. Since she often cut off arguments long before she knew what I was really thinking her statement of 'my side' was usually quite enlightening and somehow mildly entertaining. I am somewhat ashamed to admit that I used to take delight in correcting her in front of others to 'get back' at her for jumping to conclusions without hearing me out in the first place.
Even now she will often behave in this same manner when something gets her emotions in an uproar. I find she does not listen to me and assumes I'm a enemy combatant which means I have to bide my time and let her go until she disenganges, verbally 'whack her upside the head' to get her attention, and then she will actually listen to me and my true thoughts. More often than not she is very surprised when she hears my real thoughts. Too often she assumes that any man, including me, thinks the same way that those dumb women's magazines stereotype 'all' men's thoughts to be on a given subject (did that make sense?).
Sadly because of all the dodge-and-parry of this emotional roller-coaster we have never (and probably will never) experience the proverbial make-up fun that some other couples do. So much the pity.
For some reason, this is reminding me of Tom Cruise's character in "Magnolia"... Frank TJ Mackey, the self-help "respect the c*ck" guy.
A lot of this behavior for women seems to be the norm in society, and it's joked about. So women see it as being okay. And a lot of times, it's not.
That's not to say men don't have their own stereotypical faults as well, I suppose.
As for PM's comment about men only seeking sex... I'm not sure that's entirely true. Boys at a very young age do stupid things to impress girls, and I don't think it's any latent sexual desires or urges. We care what women think of us, even the ones we aren't trying to get into bed.
xi summitt-
I'm there, brother. Like you, I feel that my side isn't taken into consideration. I end up airing the laundry in front of the public. Very passive-aggressive. I'm working on changing that behavior. That stuff tends to pop out.
ftn-
The media shows men as spineless noodles and women as mean-spirited. They are rarely called out on their behavior. Is that a reflection of society, or does that strengthen their attitudes?
This sounds like a meeting of the He-Man Woman Haters Club.
But seriously, if Sybil acts this way, somewhere along the line, YOU allowed it. People only treat you the way you allow them to.
Post a Comment