Solipsism. It’s been hashed out, rehashed and will be discussed over and over again. While the philosophical term of solipsism isn’t exactly on point for what it is in women (and men, though not nearly to the same degree and it also doesn’t appear to be constant in men) it seems to be the closest word we have right now to describe this phenomenon.
Solipsism is defined as a theory holding that the self can know nothing but its own modifications and that the self is the only existent thing; also: extreme egocentrism.
This phenomenon in women is best described as relating everything around her to her own experiences and feelings. Anything that a woman has not experienced herself, or at least been witness to, is far more difficult to comprehend or even believe. We hear something and we immediately go inside the file box in our brains to consider if we can empathize or sympathize with it (it also manifests in how any given situations will affect us personally, which in relating to the men in our lives, conflates the problem even further). We use it to aid in understanding a particular thing. It can really hinder us in certain situations and we have all seen examples of that in the manosphere. We read something that doesn’t jive with our experiences and we rebel against it (mostly because it causes some kind of pain). This pain can make it remarkably difficult to see past ourselves, our lives, and our exclusive experiences.
I’ve seen men complain numerous times that they will tell women a story about something that happened to them (or witness this happen to someone else) and then the woman comes right back to talk about herself. The complaint is about how self-centered women must be to hear someone complaining about something only to turn around and talk about herself. While I have no doubt that there are many women out there who are only interested in hearing their own stories and their own voices it occurred to me that the reason women will often do this is because it is their way of attempting to empathize or at least sympathize with the other person. When a woman talks with her friends about something she experienced, her friends will almost always chime in with their own similar experiences. I think we women do this with one another to give reassurance that what happened or what the first woman did is not out of the ordinary and will not get her kicked out of the herd. The other women are giving her comfort in saying, yes, something very similar happened to me, I understand how you feel and your feelings aren’t crazy. You still belong with us here. Whatever anxiety the original woman was feeling is now gone as she just discovered she is not atypical and her friends can vouch for her. It’s an incredibly comforting thing.
Problems arise, however, when women do this same thing to men. Men talk about their experiences and their problems in an effort to find solutions or to simply get something off their chest. They don’t much care about the herd or belonging, or even sympathy in many cases (at least from women. I am not sure how this works in a men only dynamic). Sometimes they may be seeking the woman’s comfort, but not in an effort to belong, rather in an effort to be supported and loved. When they express a problem with a woman and she then relays something that she’s witnessed or experienced, it comes across as the woman only caring about herself. She might only be trying to understand, to sympathize or empathize, but men don’t really want that from the women in their lives. A man wants solutions and if that is not possible he wants to know that he has her full support regardless of whatever problem he is experiencing. He doesn’t much care about belonging. What he does care about is that you have his back no matter what.
Olive had an excellent post up recently about support in this fashion and how her silence gave her boyfriend the space he needed to deal with a problem. She intentionally stayed back, close enough to offer her support, but far enough off to let him deal with it in the way he needed to. She was there when he needed her, backing him up with her presence but giving him silence and the room he needed to fix his problem. The second he needed her, she was there.
It’s often hard for women to realize that men do not need us to be their friends. They do not always need us to understand or to empathize. Often men and women simply cannot ever understand what the other is going through. Men want the women in their lives to be a source of comfort and support, a soft place to land when things get tough so tomorrow, the world doesn’t seem so cold, rough and hard.
**I know I missed somethings here. I can feel it. Heh. Give me some of your thoughts in the comments.
UPDATE: Athor Pel had some excellent insight on this:
For women out there, if you want a guy to be impressed with you or interested in you or otherwise see you as valuable in some way, stop trying to impose a frame on every situation, specially with respect to men. Let the man set the frame. Relax, wait to see where he takes you, literally and metaphorically.
If you can’t tell what the frame is, wait. Stop talking and wait. Let the guy finish his story. If he isn’t looking you directly in the eyes while waiting expectantly on you to say something then don’t say anything. It’s a simple rule, really it is.
Before blurting out your story about yourself and your friends and family ask yourself one simple question, “Will he find this story interesting or useful for the right reasons?” If you don’t know what the right reasons are then don’t say anything, you need more remedial help. If you don’t know what he finds interesting then endeavor to find out and you can’t do that while talking about yourself.
If you see all this as being all about the guy and not enough about you then you are exactly correct. This is a good thing because if the guy is a keeper then he’s already got you covered. You don’t need to worry about you anymore. Your job is to worry about him.
with the added explanation of . . .
Now that I’ve thought about this a little more I’m remembering some girls I dated when I was younger. They were like bumps on a log in that they seemed to almost have no personality of their own. If they did anything it was in response to something I did. They followed the “stop talking” rule to an almost absurd degree. They seemed to genuinely have nothing to say or they were afraid to say something, which is sad.
I can’t express how badly I needed this information. It makes so much sense, of course. Many thanks.
Thanks so much for the shoutout Stingray! I really enjoyed reading this post; it’s good to finally read a perspective on solipsism that’s more middle-of-the-road (not “those stupid women are so damn solipsistic and self-centered” but not “hey wait! I’m not like this! and aren’t men just as self-centered?”). I was thinking about writing a post about my own views on solipsism, but I think you might’ve covered everything. 😉
one of the worse feelings as a guy is opening up about a problem, revealing your past, or even just telling a funny story to have it be instantly turned into the opening act for a womans chance to talk about herself.
many conflicts I’ve had with women over this exact issue have just been cleared up with this post.
the only thing missing is “more”, just run the table on male-female communciation
Great post.
It makes sense now. At Thanksgiving, my grandpa told us that his friend of 60 years had died. My sister didn’t wait a beat to relate how one of her unknown neighbors had died recently. I was appalled by the apparent lack of empathy from my sister. It was as if she didn’t recognize my Grandfather as an emotional being.
If there is something that you have missed here, it is the lack of emotional connection women afford toward men’s stories. Yes, it could be similar that women approach women’s stories with immediate herding instincts. However, I don’t think women would go immediately for the herd ritual with another woman without first giving an emotional sound. (“Awwww, I am so sorry for that” “my neighbor died…”) instead of just “my neighbor died, too”
With men, women do not extend this emotional connection. It is as if they don’t recognize the emotions inside men as operative and living. Men can take care of their own emotions, I suppose. But, if a man is speaking of a pain, there is a reason. That reason isn’t to herd, as you say. Perhaps that is why this female solipsistic phenomena is recognized by men as being rude and harsh.
On a related note, you are correct about the female listening instinct to patch the herd up. However, at Thanksgiving, I believe I witness the female listening instinct to advantage an independent Alpha’s display of weakness as a chance to herd him.
Stingray, great post. I do like your take on Solipsism.
Context is everything.
Even if a man does not wish a woman to ‘meddle in his business’, I believe it helps him in some way to know that she cared, even if her way of showing this was ‘clumsy’ (eg. talking about herself which may seem selfish).
This does not work in the ‘interwebz’ because the usual body-language, facial expression, etc. cues are missing.
But in real life, a man will feel it if you are genuinely emotionally connecting with him. He may react in a way a woman doesn’t want or expect, but some time later, he does see her actions for what they were, i.e. in good faith. (If indeed they were in good faith, lol).
I think that is very important for a woman to know that her actions may not seem appreciated at the time, but she shouldn’t really be bothered by that. Afterall, she doesn’t do what she does just to be ‘praised’ for it (although it is of course nice to be appreciated, I agree).
She does what she does because she believes it to be the right thing to do and because she cares.
Olive’s strategy of staying silent in certain situations also works, because her bf would have known that she knew him well enough to give him space, and NOT because she didn’t care.
Context is indeed everything. Intentions/motives count for a lot.
Sis,
I hope it helps.
Olive,
You’re welcome and thanks! There is more to it than this. I am sure I am missing something and it probably has a lot to do with what ST said. Context is king. Solipsism is a tough one. We have it for a reason and like hypergamy, it can be used for good or bad. We just need to realize it’s there. That is the really tough part.
Hmmm, more. I’m not really even sure right now how to break it down to give you more. Do you have any ideas of specifics?
Also, it’s important to keep in mind, watch her face. Sometimes she will be trying to empathize or sympathize with you and sometimes she will be trying to compete. Unfortunately, it’s not just a straight forward thing.
It’s so hard to tell what’s going on out of context. My best guess is that, since he was an alpha male, she didn’t want to gush over him. Most alphas do NOT like that. She wanted to subtly empathize with him. However, there is often a desire to impress when a strong man is involved and it is incredibly hard to turn off. It could have been a combination of empathy/sympathy while also trying to show “Hey, I understand you because someone close to me died, too. It looks like no one else does, but I do.”
Again, context is so important. Watch faces and body language. Sympathy will have a leaning in or a more bent over look. Propping oneself up with have more of a slight air of superiority that is trying to be hidden. This is more likely to happen around a person she is wanting to impress. I couldn’t say what your sister meant, again, it’s likely both given that your grandfather is alpha.
I don’t mean to diminish your sister. I just want to make sure nothing is left out. Solipsism is a tough thing to crack.
This is so very important and I think where all of the confusion comes from. We women are too good at hiding our motivations, sometimes. So good, in fact, that we can hide them from ourselves.
I agree. The danger, I have found (by personal experience) is that sometimes in our quest to show that we care, we make it about ourselves. It becomes so important to show we care that we strive to quash that need in such a way that it no longer is about the man we wish to help. It becomes about our need to show our emotion. This is something I struggle with often. When in doubt, I state it simply, “I’m here. Just let me know if you need anything” or I sit close by in silence. Letting my presence speak for itself. The urge to help, to convey sympathy needs to be squashed sometimes, otherwise we do, unintentionally, make it about us. On the internet, it’s nearly impossible.
To women counting on men understanding non-verbal cues: Men are not good with body language. I just got done with [The definitive book of Body Language] (http://www.amazon.com/Definitive-Book-Body-Language/dp/0553804723)
The author points out that a brain scan study has reveled men to have only 6 non-verbal receptors in their brains while women have 17. Women can literally watch movies without the sound on and explain what happened.
Men have more then one arm tied behind their back when it comes to non-verbal communication. If women are depending on men reading their non-verbal empathy, don’t. This could be a large part of the problem.
Perhaps, in the story I related above, my sister showed a non-verbal sign of empathy. It was lost on me, and I will guess my grandfather as well.
Related to this, men are terrible at picking up on women’s non-verbal indications of interest (IOI). We just don’t see them, and are conditioned to question them when we do. Too bad they didn’t teach this stuff in high school health class.
dorsey,
Yes, I agree. I meant to add in my comment that if you are not sure what just happened with a woman, ask another woman who was watching (tricky as well as they may just stick up for each other). If the other woman is willing, she will tell you exactly if there was empathy or not. I think men can hone their body language skills with lots of practice, but you will likely never be at the same level as another woman. (Speaking of movies, my husband marvels at how I can know the end of a movie, sometimes only 5 minutes in. It’s because of so many nonverbal cues and experience).
Maritus told me 2-3 years into our marriage “You need to stop hinting at things. I will never get the hint and it’s pointless. If you want or need something, just come right out and ask.” Same thing here.
If a woman is afraid of calling out a man’s manhood in a situation like this, she should do it when the two of them are alone. Or just give a simple hug but it must be something direct.
As for health class, they are too busy teaching about bananas.
I am bad at reading faces, but I remember what was spoken clearly. My grandfather had been describing how he is making a woodsplitter from scratch, doing all the welding and mechanics himself. My sister made what was supposed to be a joke I think, saying “I could use a man like you around the house, I have a few projects I am thinking of right now…” She is recently separated from her husband, and attempting to manipulate my family to shame me into a provider role as a stop-gap.
My grandfather ignored her. She went into a 20 minute description of her personal life that bored everyone at the table. My grandfather interrupted her by speaking over her and addressing my father. ‘my friend of 60 years just died’. To me, I though he was disciplining my sister. The meaningless chatter that she had displayed had been patiently waited through. When he spoke, it was to silence her, and address my father.
My sister didn’t allow my father to respond, she responded as I have written above. My mom helped her, filling in details and asking questions in the silence between my sister’s pauses. My grandfather didn’t acknowledge them, although it appeared they were performing for him. My sister had felt shamed by separating from her husband, this being the first Thanksgiving they had been apart.
To me, it appeared that her attempt to gain honor (do women try for honor? I don’t know the proper word here) with my grandfather mattered more then my grandfather’s 60 year friendship.
Your sister and your mom are trying to get your sister back into your Grandfathers circle (or his good graces. I would not say honor, no. Women can understand honor, but it is more difficult for us as we cannot get there through masculine means. We have to do it through feminine means and most don’t understand how to do it and therefore it’s difficult to grasp).
I cannot be sure, having not been there, but I think your sister was making a vain attempt at understanding (yet not so much real empathy) in an attempt to be *seen* by your grandfather again. If she had offered true sympathy (as she couldn’t ever understand how he felt there) he would have *seen* her again, I think. At least, he would have started to. In short, yes. I think you are right. Where she stood in his eyes was more important than his loss. And I would wager quite a bit of money that your Grandfather knew it.
Pingback: The Way Women Respond to Tragedy « stagedreality
Have actually been working on a post on this for a week now – yours helped me finally knock it out and finish it Stingray.
Hopefully it can fill in some of the perspective on it from a 27 year old male point of view and answer those questions of “More”
I’m glad it helped, Leap. I’ve had notes on this post in my draft for weeks and kept putting it off. I am continuously amazed at how the bloggers sort of ebb and flow from one another. There isn’t always an apparent thread, but it’s there. I’ve started many posts only to see the next day that someone else wrote about it and did a far better job. Your post is excellent and really did get into *more*. I can’t believe I didn’t think of the lingerie and food aspect! Awesome.
Anyone wanting to see it, look here.
Yeah. Yours definitely helped. After talking about the post to a couple women who tried to relate to it, though in that ‘cute’ kind of way I describe in the post, I knew I had to try and figure out why I both appreciated their efforts but really wish they hadn’t even bothered trying to ‘relate’ to it. They both listened and asked thoughtful questions geared more towards understanding, but if they had only done that and not tried to relate it would have felt much more authentic and caring. I didn’t call them out on it because I couldn’t articulate why I was reacting that way, I only knew that it made the conversation about them for a brief time.
Now I know.
This is a great post, Stingray. My fiance has been going through rough patches at work recently and I have been trying to figure out how I can support him better. I must be doing ok since he still comes to me to vent instead of seeking distance, but I’m sure I can do better still.
On the other hand this also explains why I’m easily accepted into men’s only company like hunting clubs – I have always felt very keenly that I should not respond to their stories/jokes/complaints by relating my own. When there is lots of testosterone around I feel distinctly that that kind of behaviour would be utterly out of place. But it takes only one other woman in the company and I automatically switch into female-style communication. It’s as though if there are other women I *have* to be ‘on their side’. Funny, because I much prefer the company of men to women, but it’s like my brain forces me to behave in a way that matches the woman, even if I don’t like her.
I’ve always been vaguely puzzled by the radically different ‘feel’ of communication in all-male company vs not and I could never quite place it. Now it makes total sense.
Phedre,
If you haven’t yet, you should read Leap of a Beta’s post linked above. It’s quite good.
Heh, yep. I am the same way. I’ve spent my life around the company of men and I still do this. Since better understanding what is going on over the past year or so, I have trued harder not to do this. It makes people uncomfortable. It’s interesting to observe.
(Huh, did I just do what I was talking about in the post? It’s uncanny how automatic it is . . . 😉 )
No, actually, it doesn’t help us afterwards, because your refusal to put in the comparable effort to get it right and help us then and there shows us just how little you actually care. You don’t keep trying until it hurts, until it costs you somehow, the way we do. You don’t reciprocate; you only do just enough to keep your own self-image sufficiently clean, and if beyond that, just enough to keep us going, keep us serving.
That’s really why you talk about contexts and intentions and motives mattering so much. It’s to establish a narrative that you can be excused from trying as hard and as much as we do to get it right and to actually succeed simply because your feelings should — just, somehow, magically! — count as much as the tangible, real-world results automatically required of us as men.
You treat context and intentions and motives like that to provide yourselves with Get-Out-Of-Male-Comparable-Responsibility-Free cards. It’s your means of rationalizing your choice to not equally reciprocate our gifts, our efforts, our sacrifices on your behalf.
It doesn’t really fool us, any more than it fools us when immature guys try to use it to establish their credibility in a male space without putting in the actual effort needed to earn that. We know better. We’ve been those guys ourselves, and learned the difference:
That is male reality. Right there. That is the bottom line we are raised with and that we die clutching. To us, using ‘context’ and ‘intentions’ and ‘motives’ as an excuse from providing actual results is just loser whining about your best. You get no credit for it, and should not expect any.
We men only really care about results because results are just about the only thing that get men cared about in return for, at all. Anything less from you is just you stringing us along to keep the goods and services flowing to you as fast and easy and cheap as you can get away with at minimal effort.
That’s what your talk about ‘context’ and ‘intentions’ and ‘motives’ says to us. It’s all rationalizations for not stepping up the way we do and reciprocating equally. When we hear you talking about context and intentions and motives as though they were at all comparable to tangible results, what we hear you saying is:
this is the absolute bare minimum we can get away with giving you in order to keep our own wants well-supplied at your male expense while still preserving our own positive self-images.
I would ask you to take this further please. How would you expect a woman to reciprocate your gifts, efforts, and sacrifices for your behalf?
What kind of “tangible results” do you expect?
welcome to the female shower room. i LOVE looking at you ladies nakie.
Pingback: Meet the new Angie Varona « dannyfrom504
Haha, Stingray, now I’m definitely going to do it:
It’s amazing to me how strongly imbedded the solipsism is and how if I stand back and reread my comments I can pretty much detect it at least somewhere.
And then the number of times I have wanted to post something in a manoshere blog only to realise that my post boiled down to ‘NAWALT, but otherwise, yes, most women *are* like that.’ It’s like I can’t prevent my brain from first of all comparing myself to the proposed idea and accepting or rejecting it automatically based on that. *Then* I can say ‘well, I guess for the most part it is true of womankind’. Do men not do this at all? Or is it just that most women can’t look beyond that at all whereas men can?
“Do men not do this at all? Or is it just that most women can’t look beyond that at all whereas men can?”
We just accept the exceptions from the start. If I say, “All 3/8 inch nuts will fit on all 3/8 inch bolts” I don’t have to say “Except the 4% that are made wrong in the factory”. That would be silly. It’s just the way it is.
We accept, live with, and actually expect things not to be similar all the time. We just don’t care because you don’t plan to build something using defective nuts or bolts – you plan to use the standard that works, but make sure you have an insurance or fallback for the defects you run into that don’t work for you.
I don’t force my nuts to work for defects.
😉
Stingray,
I too am interested in what exactly Acksiom would like from a woman, specifically HIS woman in a situation where a sympathetic ear is needed.
Having detached myself from the storm that caused all of this talk about solipsism/empathy, I am now in a position to view all of this with ‘intellectual curiosity’ as opposed to an emotional passion.
“No, actually, it doesn’t help us afterwards, because your refusal to put in the comparable effort to get it right and help us then and there shows us just how little you actually care.”
How exactly do YOU want a woman to care, Acksiom? The reason I ask this is, it seems to vary quite a bit, from man to man. This is the very reason I mention ‘context’. Some men prefer a woman to ‘shut up’ and not say anything at all. Others (perhaps like you?) want more – but I am not sure what.
When I say ‘context’, I partly mean that the woman should do what she suspects the man in question would like. She has to already know him and what he would want. So this would work well for one’s husband, for instance.
And, some situations call for one course of action as opposed to another…
Tell me, what would be YOUR preferred course of action if you had some bad news you just broke to your gf or wife? How would you like her to react?
When you talk of ‘results’, what do you mean?
Do you mean that the woman should solve the problem for you? That giving her empathy is not going far enough?
This would be interesting to know.
I know how my own menfolk (including my fiancé) would like me to react when they have a problem. So for me personally, I have a ‘context’ to work from.
But I find it interesting to know how other men see things. So your thoughts on this would be invaluable, if you care to share.
@Phedre:
Men do that too, but it’s generally not the first reaction. It’s part of the dialogue. The easiest way I can describe this is that when men relate their own experience in response to another’s, it adds to the original idea, rather than taking away from it and making it about someone else. Our personal experience is only important in how it relates to the topic at hand, not in and of itself, which is how women come across.
Thanks Vicomte, that makes sense.
Women come across that way because we do literally perceive our personal experience as the single most important datum. Not just in the sense that because it was directly experienced it has the highest truth value, but that because it was experienced it must be the centre/core of the whole idea. Any additional information, any ‘theory’ can only be a branch off of the centre, which is the experience.
It is profoundly difficult to step away from this kind of thinking, since it is imbedded, but I think with great attentiveness it can be done.
Stingray, have you tried striking it at the core, or only in individual manifestations, like responding to men’s troubles as above?
SpaceTravellar,
Something I have learned is that anytime I feel I have to respond to something with emotional passion, I need to step away from the keyboard. I hope that doesn’t sound like I’m chastising you as I’m not. It’s just something that has aided me many times. I’ve deleted many comments for this very reason.
Be in the present moment. Deal with the matter and topic at hand.
acksiom does make a good point about “getting it right then and there”.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CONTEXT AND INTENTION AND MOTIVE, other than the matter at hand anything else is solipsism at work.
A man just wants you to leave your world and be present with him in the moment or deal with the situation in the moment. Even admitting “you’re bad at it and need to work on it” is still a way to ignore and get out of the moment.
If your man comes home bleeding and says he’s just been shot, there is no context or intention or motive. Show a reaction of actual concern for his well being, get him a towel, put pressure on the wound, call 911, and encourage him to relax or if the wound isn’t that bad have him tell you what happened if he’s up to it.
Theres no reason for a woman in that moment to say, “I was shot two years ago and it wasn’t what I expected”. there is no context, intention or motivation for that response.
In Dorsey’s thanksgiving situation the “matter at hand was Grandfathers friend died”
All his sister and mom had to do was ask a question about his Grandfathers friend, or ask how was Grandfather holding up, or give Grandfather a hug and a “I love you” after dinner, whatever intention, motives or contexts would have been made plain right then and there.
-they failed to realize Grandfather was coming to terms with his own mortality and wanted a solution about death or comfort about death from his family unit.
As well with the wood splitter “the matter at hand is Grandfather is talking about the wood splitter”
Instead ask “how does one make a wood splitter” or simply saying “that’s cool Grandpa”.
In both instances the mother and sister have no fair context, intention or motive in interjecting themselves into the Grandfathers topic because once they do they instantly have: changed. the. topic. its no different than heckling a comedian
A man is looking for and wants to be an audience, a partner, a participant, a solution in the present moment about the matter at hand.
With a women it’s not that and what im seeing in the comments from women is that they can be “solipsistic” about their own solipisism as another way to still not engage in the present moment, agh! So frustrating.
I have. I tried to for quite some time. I couldn’t do it and I’m not sure it can be done. I don’t think it’s learned but utterly inherent. The harder I tried to strike at the core, the worse it was. What finally helped me the most? Acceptance. It is part of who I am and part of being a woman. The more I accepted it the more I could see it outright, accept the feelings that came, brush them aside and then do as Leap described above. Depending on the subject matter I can now deal with it in a fraction of a second, while some topics still take quote some time. I can’t EVER let my guard down though (in certain situations), as when I do, it can take over.
Me,
When I was speaking about context above, I was thinking of dorsey’s example. I wasn’t thinking of the context of the situation between the man and woman having the conversation. Rather the context of the situation as a whole with dorsey looking on. He needed to be aware of the context that his sister was coming from. We are crafty and we can use solipsism to try and empathize (though obviously men do not like this) or we can use it to our advantage. Men need to pay attention to the context to see which might be happening under the surface.
As far as context, motivation, and intent from the woman. I agree with you. However, not every situation is as easy to breakdown especially when we are prone to projection as well. It why at the end of the post I suggested a silent support. Being there and making it well known that, as a wife, you are simply there at his beck and call until things are better.
Yes. But remember the women were mostly talking to each other and this is how we relate and understand each other. In a comments sections such as this, other than asking questions, what else would you suggest we do? Saying we understand would be patronizing, because we don’t. And what would work for you might be completely different than would work for Aksiom, dorsey, Leap or Vicomte.
Thanks Stingray. I’ll be paying attention to this now and will see how far I can take it.
By the way, have you found any personal benefit in disengaging from your innate thinking patterns like that?
Stingray, you’re skipping ahead of yourself. It’s too early in the process to be considering such things. The results don’t provide the process; the process provides the results.
You have to begin by identifying what gift/effort/sacrifice/etc. on a man’s part that you’re choosing to reciprocate. That’s the starting point. What are you grateful for from men in general, or from a man in particular?
If you don’t know — or rather, haven’t chosen or decided upon that first — then there’s no point in continuing. You have to know or choose what you’re paying back before it can be reciprocation.
Understand? I can’t just hand you the answers you asking for. You have to do the process yourself to get them. The standard for ‘tangible results’ has to start inside you, from your own personal understanding of what men in general or a man in particular gave up or spent or sacrificed for your benefit, not from my personal subjective quirks.
If you want me to take this further, you yourself have to identify what you’d be reciprocating. I can’t decide that for you. Doing it yourself is an example of ‘putting in the comparable effort to get it right.’
Phedre,
Understanding a whole lot more about myself and my husband. It has helped me to be a better wife. It’s painful to see was my thinking process what like before I learned this stuff. But I couldn’t have changed any of it without first understanding it (and I could never have understood any of it without my husband standing his ground and calling me out on it).
Maritus and I rarely fight any longer. We have brief discussions where we both lay out our concerns, make a decision and then it’s over. I could never have done that before. My emotions and my self would get so much in the way that I couldn’t see beyond them to even comprehend what was going on. Maritus would simply tell me I was being irrational and walk away. I would be left stunned not really knowing what just happened.
On the rare occasion we do both get angry, we still can have a perfectly civil conversation. Our words might be more terse and we aren’t smiling, but it’s still a conversation with a means to an end. When it’s over we give each other the time needed to calm down and afterwords, it is truly over. It’s been dealt with. I can recognize much better now when the problem is simply with me and I need to just deal with it myself or when there is something bigger where we figure it out together. Realizing that many of our arguments were over inane stuff that I had no business even bringing up has really helped in SO many ways.
Also, I don’t get as upset over things like I used to. I can read something that I would have taken very personally before and it’s barely a blip on the radar now. My emotions are far more in check and I can logically think through them without difficulty most of the time now.
Acksiom,
I really hope this doesn’t come across as snarky because it’s not meant that way. Have you read any of my other posts or is this your first one? Aside from masculinity and femininity, one of the main themes of this blog is taking care of one’s man/husband in an effort to pay back. I’m not sure that I’ve ever phrased it that way, but I talk a lot about women realizing what their husbands do for them and how grateful they should be and things they should do to show how grateful they are. I couch it more in ways a wife should care for her husband. Here is one example and another. If you have read these and this is just your first time commenting then I have several things that I am fully aware of that my husband in particular and other men in my life have given up for me.
But as far as what men do, soldiers, construction workers, basically where all of what I have around me comes from and what intangibles I have (freedom, health, safety), I wouldn’t know what to do. I always look a man in the eye and thank him when appropriate and i do it sincerely. However, how does one thank and pay back an entire group of men, most/all of whom I will never meet?
Stingray,
I agree about stepping away when emotions run high. Believe it or not, I am actualy quite dispassionate about this subject now!
It is only of intellectual interest to me now. Like I said, the important lesson for me is how to relate to my own network of men. I have that locked down.
Me,
I would hope that you believe that a woman in the situation you describe (of the bleeding man) would react in exactly the way you describe. Otherwise, then of course any sane person would agree with you that she is stupid or incredibly callous.
The situation Stingray is talking about here is that of an emotional past event in a man’s life that he relays to a woman.
The respose from men seem to be very varied. Which is good, of course!
The reason context is everything is that it tells a man where the woman is coming from (and not to excuse her because ‘she didn’t do it right’).
Let us not forget that people of different ages or genders have completely different experiences. In the story above about the granddad who lost someone after 60 years, I agree it IS annoying for him to hear the grand daughter’s report of an unknown person’s death. But let’s not forget that she has NOT lived 60 years, let alone lost someone after 60 years. How could she truly relate to what he is saying?
You may say she should have shut up then. Fine, she should have.
But no complaints if you are grieving and no-one responds because they are too afraid to say anything that would offend…
All one has to know is that the person who is doing the consoling is not out to hurt you, and is not entirely stupid. If you truly believe one of these cases (stupidity or malice), then you are well entitled to be angry at them of course!
And I suspect that this is really the problem underlying this debate: some men here believe (some) women to be somewhat stupid or callous (but are not actually saying it outright – which somehow says something good about these men, lol).
But this only helps to make my point about context. One’s perception of anything is clouded by one’s past experience/prior(fixed) ideas.
Trust me when I say that if this is the case (that women appear stupid/callous), then one can completely understand the reaction you are having to women, like in the case of the *stupid* granddaughter and the case of the *stupid* woman whose husband is bleeding and she is busy telling him how she got shot once…
If this is the context underlying your perception of the woman, then OF COURSE you are going to be offended by whatever she says. I would too, if I thought the person I am telling my sad story to is not very bright or is emotionally dead inside.
And this is perhaps why we may be talking past each other.
I am presenting the case of an intelligent woman trying to ‘do it right’ (nevermind that it may be impossible for her to completey get it right given that she simply cannot have had the same experience as you) and perhaps you have the opposite (or at least differing) view of said woman’s intelligence and sense of compassion, and therefore her ability to respond in an appropriate manner.
This is why I say the context is crucial. Whatever your perception is, that is what you will believe, and not necessarily what is being presented to you. Not to say that your perception is wrong. I too think that granddaughter’s comment was downright stupid. It happens to be my perception. It may be yours. Someone else might disagree. Certainly granddaughter herself.
The person/woman to whom you are ‘offloading’ is also making a judgment about how you respond to him or her. If she feels you are someone who is perpetually ‘unconsolable’, she may stop trying.
She also needs to step back and see that you are in too much pain to respond in a positive way to her. Her perception of you may therefore also affect how she relates to you in the future. If she is of the type who will say, ‘Ah, he is hurting. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and trust that his outburst at me is NOT because he hates me, but because he is simply suffering’, then great.
But more often than not, she might think, ‘Well, I never. It’s not like I don’t have problems of my own. I offer some support and it is thrown back at me. I won’t do this again!’
*End of marriage/relationship/friendship*
It is sad, but there we are. Both parties need to ‘adjust’ to the other and not stand rigidly on ceremony. Granted, it is harder for the person undergoing current or past pain to see beyond their nose, simply because they are ‘buried’ their problems too deep, and it is better if the other party is very tolerant at this tme.
This is why patience is a golden virtue in women. Because it is us that often fall into the role of ‘consoler’ (like it or not) and due to gender differences, are often ‘judged’ to have done it wrong. It is as it is. Interesting phenomenon, this. I could go on forever about this.
Oops, it seems I have.
Erm, did I say I was ‘dispassionate’ about this issue?
🙂
Oh yeah, trying to empathize by telling them that same thing happened to you. Done that, because I really wasn’t sure what else to do. Except trying to fix the problem (duh ). Here you have someone telling you about some problem. You’re supposed to show COMpassion, suffer with them, because they must feel pretty bad being so low all by themselves. You gotta bring yourself down too. Or else your lack of life problems will upset them unintentionally. I could have of course told them “Damn, that sucks” instead, but it has an air of “Lol, glad I’m not you!” about it.
That is how *I* would explain this mentality where women try to talk to someone in trouble/pain and use themselves as an example. But I could be wrong.
Thanks for the great article. It sounds like you care about your husband, and importantly, you go the extra step and show this gratitude in a tangible way. This is admirable. Even if you do not perfectly express your appreciation, men do realize when you are sincere in your appreciation, and we do enjoy that you make the effort.
I wanted to follow up on what Acksiom said about woman’s refusal to put in the comparable effort. I’ve rarely noticed a desire by women to make this comparable effort. It is still shocking to me that women can accept any gift/effort/sacrifice that a man provides, and yet have no desire, and feel no responsibility to reciprocate in kind.
Serious question for the women – are women told they are not required to reciprocate? If so, how do you reconcile that with good manners or respect for others? (They can/should do for me, but I don’t need to do anything in return, or need only make a token effort.)
When women are pressed on why they so rarely are willing to reciprocate TO THE SAME EXTENT as the initial gift/effort/sacrifice, I’ve noticed two commonly occurring answers:
1. “What sort of show of reciprocation do you want?” First of all, this comes across like she is saying “Why do you think you DESERVE to be reciprocated?” Also, this bafflement she has over the “one correct way” to reciprocate/express appreciation, sounds more like a convenient excuse to delay or avoid doing anything. After all, she COULD try a variety of different methods to reciprocate, and then observe which her man prefers. Not knowing the “one correct way” to reciprocate is not a valid excuse for refusing to even try.
2. “I thought about it a lot, and I just don’t see what I can do to properly reciprocate you for all the things you have done.” The unspoken rest of that sentence is “…and so I didn’t do anything, because I never really wanted to”. It is no coincidence that doing nothing was always her preferred plan of inaction anyway.
These “answers” start to look like delaying tactics that are used to push back the day of reckoning when the woman will have to reciprocate. What comes across then, is the woman’s sense of entitlement to a relationship that is lopsided in the amount of efforts each party puts in (the man put in a lot of effort and gets little in return, the woman puts in little effort, but gets a lot from the man). This unfairness, laziness, sense of entitlement in the relationship is deeply offensive to men.
A woman who takes the initiative to reciprocate TO THE SAME EXTENT as the initial gift/effort/sacrifice is rare indeed. What angers men is that most women don’t think they should have to reciprocate at all, and that men’s sacrifices should keep flowing to them endlessly, and that men should not complain about this or want to change it.
this popcorn owns.
i need to come to the shower-room more often.
Hyperion, the feminine-imperative conditioning overtly teaches that gifts are only gifts if they’re given without the expectation of reciprocation, otherwise they’re just ploys to get something. So if someone gifts you in some way, you would only reciprocate if you didn’t think yourself worthy of the gift, which of course as a Super Awesome/Sexy/Independent Woman would never be the case.
The gifts are laid at the pedestal of her Awesomeness. If you’ve been particularly generous you will get a kiss or a thank you back.
Whatever women may say when confronted about it is only rationalisation in the moment, and they might be feeling very confused by what you’ve brought up even as they’re explaining to you why they behaved the way they did.
I don’t know how much of this is women’s innate nature and how much (definitely some) is amplified by the feminist teachings, but what is certain is that until women are overtly taught humbleness and submission this kind of behaviour will continue.
You gotta bring yourself down too.
Yup, and unless you come up with something you can relate to that induces something resembling the same feelings in you, it’s more than difficult to show empathy in a womanly way. This is how women do it. The hard part is for us to understand this is NOT what men want. They couldn’t care less if we can feel what they feel (they probably don’t even want us to). What they really want is an acknowledgement of their feelings and possible solutions to the problems. In short, they want to be treated like men, not women.
Hmm, I don’t think I ever encountered what Hyperion is talking about, but some of my friends are such givers and then feel angry their gifts aren’t reciprocated and that the person is completely unresponsive. I tell them to stop giving, as the recepient might not want so much giving anyway, and since they aren’t responding, maybe those gifts are more needed by someone else.
I honestly have no problem with a woman talking about herself…it’s your nature. But let me present to you this.
Beforehand when I tried to converse with a woman it was more asking her questions like an interview setting to get her to talk about herself…while it did get her to talk about herself she didn’t seem to like it.
After reading Roosh’s book about meeting girls during the day, he made it out to not interview but instead talk about yourself with statements and have bait for girls to latch on to so they can talk about themselves. I’ve tried this too and I can say it seems to work better.
Is it better to say “How was your day?” to a lady…or talk about your day first without asking her and then have her talk about her day during the conversation. It seems to be asking questions isn’t as much a lead as bringing something yourself for her to latch on to.
” the feminine-imperative conditioning overtly teaches that gifts are only gifts if they’re given without the expectation of reciprocation,”
But it’s kind of true, isn’t it? I think giving gifts with expectation of something in return is kinda dishonest and I don’t do it. Unless you made a deal with the person that you’re gonna reciprocate, there is nothing to get mad about if someone didn’t return a gift. You don’t just impose an obligation to give on someone by giving them something.
However, in a relationship it’s different – then you agree with each other on how you are to be treated, and if they aren’t reciprocating, they did a bait and switch. I think it’s best to never call your requirements in a relationship “gifts”. They are not gifts. The stuff you DIDN’T require are gifts ;^)
Stingray,
Yeah, no real need to bring yourself down if you can’t. It looks awkward. But I hope men are at least somewhat lenient about this, as the women who do this are really trying and could learn better ways, if they aren’t beaten down for their clumsy attempts :^)
My example about statements about myself I tried out with my dance instructor. In my mind it was pretty mundane stuff even though I made it sound interesting (expierence with a chiropractor, power outtage during the weekend, what I ate for Thanksgiving)…she engaged into the conversation easier than when I ask questions about what she was doing.
Here’s where one the rules of game comes to men’s rescue in dealing with what looks like stupid callous women.
Watch what she does, not what she says.
@ Hyperion: This unfairness, laziness, sense of entitlement in the relationship is deeply offensive to men.
And it should be. I think what Phedre said is quite accurate. Up on that pedestal men should be grateful to be allowed to give a gift! Now I exaggerate, but not too much. I do think some of this is innate, but it is highly exaggerated by feminist teaching, to men and to women. When a woman is constantly given things just for being, it messes with her. She doesn’t know how to appreciate things because she has never known differently. When a man gives her what she actually wants, which is his inattention (go figure) it takes her off the pedestal and makes her work for him. I do think this is also innate. Then she can better see.
What angers men is that most women don’t think they should have to reciprocate at all, and that men’s sacrifices should keep flowing to them endlessly, and that men should not complain about this or want to change it.
When a woman is on the pedestal she begins to think that her very presence is her reciprocation (again, these are not overt thoughts in her head, mostly feelings that she cannot express). It is only when she has been knocked off that she can see that the man she is attracted to must be treated like a man.
Beforehand when I tried to converse with a woman it was more asking her questions like an interview setting to get her to talk about herself…while it did get her to talk about herself she didn’t seem to like it.
This doesn’t work because it starts to feel like an interrogation. It’s very uncomfortable and it leads to us wanting to back away rather than offer more because we cannot relate to anything you are saying (we cannot relate to you). I think this strategy starts right out in putting us above you. We want to pursue you, relate to you, follow you. We can do that when you offer us things about yourself. It makes us try to feel what you feel right from the get go and establishes that as a connection. The more she can relate, the more she will connect and make that *chemistry*.
For women out there, if you want a guy to be impressed with you or interested in you or otherwise see you as valuable in some way, stop trying to impose a frame on every situation, specially with respect to men. Let the man set the frame. Relax, wait to see where he takes you, literally and metaphorically.
If you can’t tell what the frame is, wait. Stop talking and wait. Let the guy finish his story. If he isn’t looking you directly in the eyes while waiting expectantly on you to say something then don’t say anything. It’s a simple rule, really it is.
Before blurting out your story about yourself and your friends and family ask yourself one simple question, “Will he find this story interesting or useful for the right reasons?” If you don’t know what the right reasons are then don’t say anything, you need more remedial help. If you don’t know what he finds interesting then endeavor to find out and you can’t do that while talking about yourself.
If you see all this as being all about the guy and not enough about you then you are exactly correct. This is a good thing because if the guy is a keeper then he’s already got you covered. You don’t need to worry about you anymore. Your job is to worry about him.
Athor Pel,
GOLD. May I add that to the end of the post?
It’s a simple rule, really it is.
The rule is extremely simple. I can’t begin to explain how hard the action is before one has practiced it for quite some time. This is NOT an excuse, because not only can it be done, it must be. For you ladies out there who are not practiced in this, start now. It will serve your men very well in the future.
“Solipsism” is a poor term, but that infelicitous and inaccurate wordmongering never stopped the manosphere.
The fundamental element of La Différence with regard to the sexes’ divergent methods of gathering information is abstraction vs. particularity. Harvey Mansfield alerted me to this brilliant observation in Manliness.
A woman’s maternal instinct gathers her attention inward, toward home, family, and self. It is an innate selfishness that is not necessarily deleterious. A mother thinks of her children, her home, her self before she gives a thought to such manly abstractions like duty, honor, and country, who in terms of the domicile are interchangeable/expendable. Just about every “Men are from Mars/Women are from Venus” cliché can be reduced to this fundamental wisdom.
Yes, women have trended toward radical particularity — me, me, me — in this age of self-esteem and feminism, but “solipsism” per se means believing oneself to be the only thing that exists. I like to shock feminists as much as the next neanderthal — and sometimes exaggeration is appropriate — but overinterpreting a very real phenomenon ruins an important point by riding it Quixote-like to absurdity.
I wrote more in depth about this in an earlier comment here a few months ago. It is a basic lesson that can’t be emphasized enough in our age of confusion and lies. The whole discussion in that thread is related to this one.
Matt
I know. Alas, I haven’t anything better.
You said in your linked comment:
and
The purpose of this post is to begin to point out this lie, to point out that women have a tendency to think very differently than men. These differences can be use for good, (as you stated: There is a very good reason for this difference, which relates to the maternal point-of-view. The woman is designed to look out from the household, to regard her charges as the most important things in the world, from self/family to tribe to nation to people to principle to God. Whereas male love begins from the furthest out of the concentric circles, from God to principle to people to nation to tribe to family.) or bad (as evidence of women taking it so far that they don’t know how to be grateful or even recognize what they have been given).
You know, as I was writing this post, I knew it was going to irritate you. 🙂 Until men and women can see it for what it is and handle it accordingly, I will worry more about riding it to absurdity. We are at the point where your general woman and general man can’t even have a conversation because they just assume they are completely alike. He believes she thinks like a man and she believes he thinks like a woman and neither has a clue what they other is saying. When people can have a better idea that we actually are different I will worry about that more.
Do you have any suggestions for a better term? Having a single word to focus on is invaluable in my opinion. I realize that people coming in here that have a full grasp of the dictionary term for solipsism will be at a disadvantage and I do not like that many words “evolve” to the point that their original meaning is no longer relevant (the word gay), but I don’t have the solution for a better term and stick with what is now widely known and understood.
Makes sense…I’ve basically had to rebuild my personality to more red pill and conversing with women was a big one. It’s another arena men have to lead. It also suggests why narcissism on the Dark Triad is something attractive about a man. If he can talk about himself well then it would be easier for ladies to relate.
So then why do some women complain about men that talk about themselves all the time? Just to complain, the man isn’t talking about things she can’t relate to, or do they not get how conversing works?
taterearl
Ha! Good question. Those men that talk about themselves all the time are probably conversing like a woman would. Since he is conversing like a woman there would be no attraction and no desire to relate. I’m trying to pinpoint details of what this might look like but I can’t right now. If this doesn’t make sense, let me know and I will see if I can describe it better.
Stingray,
Sure, include it.
_______________________
But…
Now that I’ve thought about this a little more I’m remembering some girls I dated when I was younger. They were like bumps on a log in that they seemed to almost have no personality of their own. If they did anything it was in response to something I did. They followed the “stop talking” rule to an almost absurd degree. They seemed to genuinely have nothing to say or they were afraid to say something, which is sad.
At the time I saw them as boring and they got nexted.
I was just as young as they were at the time and had thin gruel myself with regards to dazzling personality traits. It’s just a function of age and experience. I have many more stories to tell now. From reading through all this I see that those stories are needed in order for a girl to get a read on who the guy is.
One of the things I saw about my ex-wife was that she would mold herself to whoever she was around. Her character, her personality would change to suit the people around her. At the time I saw it as a moral weakness and lost much respect for her as a result. Now I’m finding out that most women are like that and it’s just how they’re built.
Ugh, I know nothing and I thank God He has my back when it really matters.
@ Emma the Emo
“I think giving gifts with expectation of something in return is kinda dishonest…”
That is a convenient excuse offered by takers to 1) explain away any responsibility to reciprocate, and 2) rationalize away any guilt they may have for not reciprocating by blaming the giver.
I’m not sure why you describe having an expectation of give and take in a relationship as dishonest. I don’t see how giving time and effort with no expectations of anything in return is more “honest”. It is however ideal for the taker.
I’m talking about fair and unfair. Over time in a relationship, if one side only/primarily takes, and the other only/primarily gives, then the giver is being treated as a sucker, and the taker will continue to take advantage as long as the giver is willing to give. If you want to bring honesty into it – it would be honest if the taker announced at the beginning of the relationship that she never intends to reciprocate. Blaming the giver for wanting to be treated fairly only adds insult to injury.
I’d guess a man conversing like a woman would be just talking with nothing important to say or a flow to the conversation. I’ve listened to two women talk to each other and it might be exciting to them but boring to me.
I tried it out again today with some female acquaintances…instead of the usual “how ya doing” questions I started out making statements about anything that popped into my mind. Turns out you can get a good conversation going if you have interesting things for them to latch onto. The easy part is when you finally hit something where they talk about something interesting about themselves…you can talk less.
At that point, do you really have to talk at all? 😉
“The purpose of this post is to begin to point out this lie, to point out that women have a tendency to think very differently than men.”
thus the point of the sphere and why i tend to read more of the women’s site’s. i don’t need help understanding attracting women, but i do enjoy learning how women think in regards to relationships.
plus……Stingray’s a hottie. lol.
“I’m not sure why you describe having an expectation of give and take in a relationship as dishonest.”
I don’t. Reread my post. I simply refuse to call those things gifts. They are fair requirements and should be there.
I think I will reexplain my point .
Sometimes, friends and relatives come to me and complain that someone went over their boundaries. Or they give and give, and the other person isn’t giving back as much. When I ask them if they explicitly stated those boundaries or requirements in a relationship, the answer is often no, not really. But you really have to state them. Not doing so, and being really giving just attracts users. Not only that, but some people are laid back and don’t need all that giving you are doing. Say, if they never remember your birthday and you always remember theirs, it might be because they really wouldn’t give a damn if you didn’t.
So many misunderstandings and anger come from never stating what you want clearly, and then having unmet expectations. Perhaps this is not what Hyperion is talking about, but i’ve seen it so many times I had to add this.
That is not to say stating your requirements will always weed out all users, but it sure helps.
Thank you, Danny. 🙂
No, I don’t have any suggestions, and I’m not trying to be fussy. Yes, a peeve of mine is that some of the best words have been appropriated for the worst uses, but that’s English. The great Latin term homo, meaning human being, is now shorthand for gay. The first letter of the Greek alphabet denotes “pick-up artist.” The most generic action verb we have — to do — means to have sex, i.e., “do it.” Etc.
The post doesn’t irritate me at all. Get the knowledge out to as many people as you can, however you can. I’m advocating precision of thought more than precision of communication. If the nominal understanding leads to a deeper appreciation of the thought, then the word-placeholder has fulfilled its function.
Game Fundamentals 101 requires a slap upside the head — the shock of the red pill has a purpose. In the case of female solipsism, there are also graduate-school levels of thinking that many here are prepared to engage. The self-centered female perspective (a.k.a. the maternal instinct) has a deep provenance that shouldn’t be 100% eradicated. But shhh! Don’t tell that to a beta squinting for the first time in the light of truth.
Matt
I fully agree. It would be detrimental to eradicate it. We would start to become men.
Women wouldn’t posses this trait if it weren’t necessary for something. We’re women, and not men for a reason. I am approaching this in a “start to squelch the bad while recognizing the purpose” kind of way. Both are necessary and while some are ready for graduate school, many are still in elementary. Addressing both is no easy task.
I mistyped. I meant that the use of the word would irritate you. I was smiling writing the beginning of the post, thinking of how you would respond. 😉
On a side note, I’m not quite sure I will yet, but I had thoughts about what you wrote at Roissy’s yesterday to “white woman” Nothing directly about her, but about what you told her. If I can organize them, may I use part of your comment? Also, is Kate GeishaKate?
Sure, cut, copy, paste however you like. That’s the whole point of blogging, isn’t it? There’s no such thing as copyright on the internet. We’re all about open-source here. But you are a naturally good editor, you understand the value of attribution anyway.
I don’t see your email address here anywhere, Stingray. Is that a policy? If not, drop me a line at king1xa at yahoo dot com
My mother has done this to me for as far back as I can remember – I make a comment about something I did, accomplished, or am having trouble with – and *instantly* she goes to “That reminds me about….” The end result is I’d have to listen to her tell her story while I get absolutely no indication of interest in my story, even after I’ve been quite vocal about how inappropriate and unhelpful her behavior was. She may be trying to “bond” or something, but all it’s done is make my experience and feelings seem completely and utterly without worth to her except as an trigger for her to tell one of her stories.
The moral of this story is, ladies – if your man has a story to tell – LISTEN. Ask questions, be attentive, make (short!) observations when appropriate, but most of all just listen until it’s clear he’s finished getting whatever it is off his chest. The simple act of being heard and having his story treated as important to his hearer can do wonders for a man’s psyche, and may be all he needs from you.
Once that’s happened, then and only then can you even think about relating your similar-sounding story. Telling your story / similar experience too soon will communicate that your story is more important than his is, and men don’t really like being put down like that.
An Observer,
I think it’s important for women to realize that they actually are putting their men down when they do stuff like this. They *feel* like they are bonding or supporting (or seeking your attention) but in essence we disparage you. Thank you.
I discussed this post with my husband this morning as I realized that I do this exact thing at times and he has expressed his distaste for it in the past. Glad you wrote this, I would have never gotten the concept that following someone’s story with my similar story was not clearly seen by Everyone as a sympathetic and empathetic thing. My DH definitely does NOT and when we got done discussing it, he asked the closing question: “Will you please stop doing it now?” So there you go. 🙂
And this point is still left undone, how does a man convey to a woman: mother, sister, signifigant other what she is doing? How does the Grandfather in the Thanksgiving scenario playfully or seriously relay to his grandaughter inserting yourself puts me down.
Me,
Your question is good, because there can be very few signs of pained response from a man who has been slighted this way. Some men try to show no signs at all, they would rather sacrifice their feelings on the matter. In the said example, my Grandfather sat in silence, listening to my sister. There were plenty of non-verbal cues that he was not enjoying her display, but he attempted to hide those as well (nodding his head in approval while slightly grimacing)
The only constructive way I can think to deal with this would be to have a one-on-one conversation with the woman, explain the effect of her telling-her-story-too-soon, and hope realization sinks in and changes her behavior.
If it doesn’t, the next time she pulls that stunt you could interrupt her story “I’m sorry, but Gramps wasn’t finished”, “That’s nice, but I’d like to hear the rest of Gramps’s story first.” Or wait for her to finish her story, be completely non-responsive to it, and then ask Gramps to pick up where he left off. While it won’t eliminate his pain at being invalidated, it’ll help give him permission and encouragement to finish his story.
Having been on the wrong end of this destructive behavior for so long, I can’t think of a “playful” way to deal with this slight, so hopefully someone who’se not so close to the issue can chime in.
I think conveying the message would have to be different depending on the woman. Some are going to need utter strength and to be shot down, but I think this pool of women would be on the smaller side. If it’s a woman whom doesn’t command your respect (such as you just met or your just acquaintances) something between playful directness with a just a touch of power in the eyes would be very good (i’m not very good with the wording when it comes to this stuff. The idea is to embarrass her. It’s a powerful tool while still coming across from a place of strength while being funny).
If you command her respect, then just a look of disdain coupled with a touch of anger will usually work. You man can convey more thoughts in a look that you realize. It is a very powerful tool at your disposal. Remember, we will watch your face and your body language and listen to your tone and take far more information from that than what you say.
Logic will likely not work as well. Rhetoric will be much more affective. It allows is to feel what you feel. It sends the message home in a direct manner.
An Observer,
Telling your mother that she is being inappropriate will not work. If you have been trying to stop this behavior for this long and it’s still not sinking in, what I would suggest, and it’s harsh but I think it would work, is that the next time she does this to you, very calming stand up when she begins her story, say something along the lines of “We’re not talking about you, here,” with only a slight touch of anger (she will sense it) and walk away. Leave even. Be calm, above all else. If your not, it won’t work. Let some emotion enter your voice and body, but not too much. Contained emotion in a calm man and then taking away your presence can be very effective.
I am of the opinion that a son will become a man of the house at some point. Maybe not the man of the house, but a man of it. She may not see you that way and you need to demonstrate it. Even if it’s not your house and you should still respect her home, you are a man and it’s her job to treat you as such.
“However, how does one thank and pay back an entire group of men, most/all of whom I will never meet?”
@Stingray: Well, again, first you have to begin by identifying what gift/effort/sacrifice/etc. on a man’s part that you’re choosing to reciprocate. That’s the starting point. What are you grateful for from men in general, or from a man in particular?
Pick something specific to reciprocate, and we’ll go from there. That’s all you need to do at this step. Just pick something specific. Please.
Acksiom,
Ok, from my husband, for providing everything for me (maybe it sounds to general, but I am a SAHM, this is literal). From men, my comfort (electricity, roads, my washing machine, my safety, you get the point). Still too general? Then I guess just pick one, but I think they all lump together in a fashion.
Here’s one very specific. I thank men for giving me the means (guns) to protect myself and my family when I am alone with them. I thank them for engineering this.
Okay, guns it is. And more specifically, reciprocation for the engineering thereof, or at least the democritization of their availability.
Step 2: Receiver of Reciprocation — Particular or general? General; you’re not intending to thank someone+ in particular, but rather men in general.
Step 3: Amount of Reciprocation — How much do you value what they gave up/spent/sacrificed for your benefit? How much do you value what you gained as a result? This is where you have to start choosing the answers for yourself again.
In situations like that, where I don’t already know where to start because I have no real data for metrics and standards, I pick two extremes, and assign them values of 1 and 10 respectively. “Make a note to myself to blog about it sometime” and “Spend the majority of my free time paying back (or forward) for this in real-world goods and services” would be okay examples here.
But only you know (A) how much you value what *you* think men in general, as males, gave up to make guns reliable and/or available, and (B) how much you value what you gained from that. I’d give the first about a 2 because I don’t think men and boys had to sacrifice much just to get the engineering and/or commoditization done. I assume they got paid and enjoyed the work at least somewhat. But I’d give the second a 10 because I consider the democritization of force extremely important, enough that it’s one of those measures that can never be fully repaid. I value it very highly.
So I don’t have to do a lot (2) to reciprocate that, because it didn’t cost them all that much, but I definitely must (10) do something, because it’s that important to me.
Step 4: Nature of Reciprocation — I start by asking Same, or complementary? Doing or helping firearms engineering/distribution yourself, or doing or helping with something complementary where women similarly have the primary responsibility and agency? If you can’t give back in the same way, give back in an appropriate way where you do have resources.
But that tends to require more creativity, so it’s not as easily abstracted into a process like this, so that’s where I’ll pause for feedback.
How much do you value what they gave up/spent/sacrificed for your benefit?
I’d say 2 as well, for the reasons you specified as well as I think many of these men truly loved the work they were doing.
How much do you value what you gained as a result?
10 – It is invaluable
Step Four, It can’t be the same, I have neither the knowledge nor the capability. It would have to be complimentary. That is where I fall short. I haven’t a clue as to what to do.
I have more thoughts, but I’ll wait as they do not relate to this exercise. I’ll wait to see your response.
I commented a little while ago (I think on the Ask Your Questions thread) about this topic, and I was a little suspicious (probably defensive) of this description of women. But just today, I realized something. While my reading in the manosphere has been informative and perspective-changing, I haven’t been all that concerned about the decline of women or men because my husband and I are still benefiting from our traditional marriage roles. He works; I stay home with the kids and cook, clean, garden, budget, etc. Divorce will never threaten our marriage, because we are both committed to making it work. I will never walk away from him, so the issues of alimony and child-support, while interesting, aren’t of any direct concern to me. That’s solipsism exactly, isn’t it: I am absolutely, definitely more interested in the well-being of my own family than in society as a whole. Ha. Thank God for men.
Sarah,
Yep, that is exactly what solipsism is. And in your case, completely normal and even healthy. The problem from so many women today is that they have been taught to and absolutely let it run wild and have difficulty seeing much of anything beyond there small little sphere.