PDA

View Full Version : Question for the womenz - How many prefer dominant men?


Yellowbeard
06-26-2009, 10:41 AM
I'm divorced...exwife (XW) was an insecure, passive aggressive control freak. As such, she could never, ever, ever just be happy anytime she wasn't in charge of anything.

Anyway, this new woman I've been seeing for about 3 months...so different. She's got a got a great career, strong willed, and direct type woman. At the same time, she's not a control freak. In fact, she actually prefers for me to be in charge when we're together. And without getting TMI - I mean in charge in every way if you catch my drift.

Now, I don't consider myself to be an uber control freak, but I am a self confident, self aware, decisive man. So when she starts out most interactions from a position of...submissiveness...I just don't think about it and naturally take charge. She seems to then thrive with things working like that.

Anyway, the contrast is so different from XW. I've spoken w/ a few people about it now, and granted I'm aware XW has a bunch of issues, I've also gotten the impression that there are actually a lot of women out there like new woman. I'm just a bit not used to it after being married to the Queen of the Ice Harpies and still getting used to being w/ a woman that wants to let the guy be in charge.

So, for the womenz...how common is this? Is it the exception, or is it more common? Just curious.

yks 6nnetu hing
06-26-2009, 11:02 AM
hmph, haven't you heard? in any clearly and mutually agreed dominant/submissive relationship the submissive one is usually the one *really* in charge because they get to say "stop" and "go".












that being said, I'm a sub. Unless things aren't going my way. Then I nudge them back on track and go back to enjoying the... hmm... ride?

GonzoTheGreat
06-26-2009, 11:09 AM
Why ask specifically the women?
It seems to me that men are more likely to have somewhat reliable statistics on this. Of course, the "somewhat reliable" wouldn't be something I would advice anyone to base his or her dating behavior on.

Yellowbeard
06-26-2009, 11:35 AM
because if i ask the men i'm gonna get a lot of responses to the effect of:

-they always lay down the law to their women!!
-bring me a beer, biatch!! and it better be open!
-i lay the smack down on her behind and it keeps her in line!

and i figured i'd rather at least try to not start the next engagement in the war between the sexes, at least with the thread's original post.

GonzoTheGreat
06-26-2009, 11:59 AM
Makes sense, which on this board may not be a viable survival strategy.

Brita
06-26-2009, 01:19 PM
Depends what day you ask me.

Actually, I think I swing both ways, depending on my mood and the circumstances. I'd be interested to see what my husband would say about me...

Davian93
06-26-2009, 01:23 PM
Actually, I think I swing both ways...

Giggity...

Giggity, Giggity, Giggity...

JSUCamel
06-26-2009, 01:23 PM
Actually, I think I swing both ways

Giggity giggity.

Davian93
06-26-2009, 01:30 PM
LOL...same exact post from two different guys at the same time.

Brita did something right...as always. ;)

Brita
06-26-2009, 01:43 PM
Brita did something right...as always. ;)

Oh, you are so going to get bonded. Just wait until I talk to Sarafelle....

Davian93
06-26-2009, 01:53 PM
Oh, you are so going to get bonded. Just wait until I talk to Sarafelle....

~blushes~

John Snow
06-26-2009, 02:07 PM
because if i ask the men i'm gonna get a lot of responses to the effect of:

-they always lay down the law to their women!!
-bring me a beer, biatch!! and it better be open!
-i lay the smack down on her behind and it keeps her in line!


that you would expect those responses in this place?
Or did my sarcasm-o-meter fizzle again?

Crispin's Crispian
06-26-2009, 02:43 PM
that you would expect those responses in this place?
Or did my sarcasm-o-meter fizzle again?
I thought the same things...


or that he thought the menz (heh) of the board would make such sarcastic responses. That I could see.

Terez
06-26-2009, 02:56 PM
I like a man who will take the lead in things, but not to the point of being overbearing or bossy. So, dominant but not domineering?

Brita
06-26-2009, 03:13 PM
So, dominant but not domineering?

Perfect.

Sinistrum
06-26-2009, 04:18 PM
The way I've heard it explained by women who are attracted to dominant men is that there is a difference between confidence and being an asshole. Younger women tend to not get this distinction, hence they end up dating a lot of assholes early in life, but as women get older, it apparently gets a lot easier. They want a guy with confidence in himself and what he is doing. That tends to manifest itself a lot in taking the lead in a lot of things in a relationship. I think a lot of it comes down to basic biology in that they are attracted to the "alpha male."

However, they don't want someone who is going to be overbearing, rude, self-absorbed, narcissistic, or is overcompensating for insecurities by acting overly aggressive. That stuff is generally in the asshole side of the behavioral spectrum but initially that stuff can seem like "alpha male" behavior to the non-discerning observer. Just my two cents on the topic.

Terez
06-26-2009, 04:37 PM
We don't really expect men to be confident or dominant all the time, either. We just like for a man to show that he can. In general.

Some women do get off on a truly domineering guy in the bedroom, so if that's your thing, there is probably a woman out there for you.

Ishara
06-26-2009, 04:39 PM
Frankly, it depends on the situation. After a 12 hour day, do I want to be the one to decide (let alone make) what we're having for dinner? Hell no. I do appreciate the bf taking the lead and giving me some downtime.

But I'm also not afraid to let him know that he's doing something (like making the bed) wrong. Nor is he afraid to let me know when I am (like misusing the remote control).

It's give and take. I would HATE being in a relationship where I had control all the time. Who needs that? Honestly, I'd have very little respect for a man if all he let me do was walk all over him. At the same time, I'm very independent and have very distinct opinions about, well, everything. So a little pushback is good.

Oatman
06-27-2009, 01:57 AM
(like misusing the remote control)

Sorry to go off-topic, because I know that never happens on these forums, but exactly how does one misuse a remote control? Step 1: point, step 2: Push button.

GonzoTheGreat
06-27-2009, 05:40 AM
Sorry to go off-topic, because I know that never happens on these forums, but exactly how does one misuse a remote control? Step 1: point, step 2: Push button.I think that the problem occurs in step 0: pick it up.
If you look into the archives, you may find the thread I started about that, half a dozen or so years ago.

Anaiya Sedai
06-27-2009, 06:44 AM
We don't really expect men to be confident or dominant all the time, either. We just like for a man to show that he can. In general.


that's something I've actually had to teach the other half.. somehow he's got it into his head that I'm perfectly capable of doing almost everything for him, including answering questions people ask him.
Maybe I'm a bit of a control freak, but I like not having to be in charge ALL the time..

Sarevok
06-27-2009, 09:13 AM
I think that the problem occurs in step 0: pick it up.
If you look into the archives, you may find the thread I started about that, half a dozen or so years ago.
I think the biggest problem is:
Step 3: Push button
Step 4: push Button
Etc.
Etc.

Gilshalos Sedai
06-27-2009, 09:39 AM
Holy shit, Sinistrum listened to me!

GonzoTheGreat
06-27-2009, 03:17 PM
Holy shit, Sinistrum listened to me!It probably isn't contagious. Though I have to admit that I'm suddenly worrying about getting lizard flu.

Gilshalos Sedai
06-27-2009, 03:47 PM
Wait, are you saying you listen to me?

Terez
06-27-2009, 03:56 PM
He worries that he might have lizard flu, but he thinks that listening you is not contagious, and he claims not to have contracted that particular disease as of yet.

So, no.

greatwolf
06-27-2009, 06:26 PM
that being said, I'm a sub. Unless things aren't going my way. Then I nudge them back on track and go back to enjoying the... hmm... ride?

If I get it right, the ladies think its right to submit when its right to submit. Like maybe, when one is clueless as to what to do next? Nice for the BF to take over then.

AbbeyRoad
06-27-2009, 07:22 PM
I've dated many women over the last 10 years, and had plenty non-relationship sexual encounters. And from my experiences, most women I've come into contact with would not be considered "dominant" in terms of desiring control both sexually and non-sexually. I'd say of all the women I've had interactions with, and my friends as well, maybe less than 20% are the "dominant" type. Now, that's not to say that 80% are "easygoing," just that most women don't necessarily have to control every aspect of a relationship.

...from my experiences, which are albeit limited.

I have always adapted an almost WoT-esque philosophy with women. I don't put up a fight with most of the smaller things, and am very opinionated and confident (dominant, if you will) in the few decisions that I actually feel strongly about.

hippie-joe
06-27-2009, 09:07 PM
Sorry to go off-topic, because I know that never happens on these forums, but exactly how does one misuse a remote control? Step 1: point, step 2: Push button.

see i thought that was just a creative euphemism... but hey maybe my head is in the gutter

edit: scratch that... my head is nearly always in the gutter:p

hippie-joe
06-27-2009, 09:31 PM
i have a friend who used to work for a phone sex company, or at least i don't think she still does it. (she was my old roommates girlfrien now wife) she would come over and tell stories about the guys that would call her, most of which wanted her to dominate them, really wierd shit too. then when she came home she was practically a doormat. if my roommate said make dinner she went and did it, every week she'd come over and clean our house. even when they were broken up and he was dating another chick that dominated him. it was wierd.

after observing that for 6 months or so i have come to the conclusion that ppl generally don't want to get stuck in patterns. if you dominate all the time youget bored and want a change, that's when you flip over to the other end of the spectrum.

my room mate went from dominating to dominated, and hi girlfriend on a daily basis dominated at work then would come over to see him and be dominated.

in my personal experience my gf likes to have her way but in the bedroom she likes being tied up and taking it my way. of course my way is pretty spectular... *pops collar*
ever sense i can remember i been poppin my collar, poppin poppin my collar:p

lol

but i like to switch it up too. like i said, ppl get bored, i generally get bored rather quick and have to spice things up with new ideas. granted with the circumstances that i've been in, i've prolly only seen her a total of a month in the past year, facing all the legal recompences and obligations. so what i was refering to was the time b4 all that went down.

Ishara
06-27-2009, 10:03 PM
see i thought that was just a creative euphemism... but hey maybe my head is in the gutter As IF.

I have a habit of watching a show and flipping through the options at the same time. Our cable provider has a pop-up on the bottom 1/5 of the screen, so you can see most of what's on the screen (but not, say, subtitles). He hates that. I also don't flip fast enough for him. ;)

hippie-joe
06-27-2009, 10:20 PM
As IF.

I have a habit of watching a show and flipping through the options at the same time. Our cable provider has a pop-up on the bottom 1/5 of the screen, so you can see most of what's on the screen (but not, say, subtitles). He hates that. I also don't flip fast enough for him. ;)

oh i see, i've always had satellite if i had tv at all. with satelite you can watch the one show and flip through the guide, kinda like what you said only it doesn't cover up anything, it just shrinks the picture to make room for the guide

Zaela Sedai
06-28-2009, 10:50 PM
Well.. If your talking in bed I can go either way... tie me up tie you up on top on your knees... depends on the day :p LOL


As for the rest, I can be pretty easy going, I like things my way but I also like making others happy. SO I want you to do what you want as long as it includes me... does that make no sense? I did just drink a bunch of baileys....

yks 6nnetu hing
06-29-2009, 03:34 AM
I like the way T put it: dominant but not domineering.

I like for the guy to have opininons about things (such as what colour the drapes should NOT be) and there are some things that I will veeery gladly leave up to him and him alone although I do appreciate being consulted (such as picking out household equipment... like the tv). I hate to have to make all the decisions because *someone* can't be bothered to be bothered - that just gives you an idea of how much they care about the relationship in general: can't be bothered.

Ishara
06-29-2009, 08:31 AM
As for the rest, I can be pretty easy going, I like things my way but I also like making others happy. It's scary how accurate that is for me as well Z.

Must be frustrating for the bf....;)

I hate to have to make all the decisions because *someone* can't be bothered to be bothered YES. That's the frustrating bit...not the actual decision making - the fighting over who will make the damn decision.

Zanguini
06-29-2009, 09:10 AM
hmm I make a goodly amount of desisions every day when i come home i want to be relieved of such burdens... especially for dindin ... and if i pick something i like she might not like it ... however if i make her pick out something i know she will like it... unless she is picking it out to please me... then my head starts to hurt....


*note:none of the above has to make since

Brita
06-29-2009, 09:22 AM
This is so annoying:

Hubby: "Where should we go for lunch?"

Me: "I don't really care, where would you like to go?"

Hubby: "I don't care either, you pick."

Me: "OK- Applebee's"

Hubby: "Nah, I don't feel like having Applebee's"

Me: "Well then you pick."

Hubby: "I don't know, it doesn't matter to me."

Me: "But you just....nevermind. OK, let's go to Moxie's."

Hubby: "Meh, OK" (in a disappointed tone)

This is actually as pared down version of the conversation, this usually takes about 5-10 minutes to resolve, I just didn't want to type out all of the blather.

Ishara
06-29-2009, 09:39 AM
For me, it's the distinterested tone of voice. The "sure, that sounds all right" said in the I could care less tone of voice that bugs me. Of course by that point I'm hungry enought to eat a bear (and acting like one), and he's tired. Fun times!

Zanguini
06-29-2009, 10:03 AM
bears are godless killing machines

http://www.kosebamsekompaniet.com/images/evil_teddy_bear.jpg

Davian93
06-29-2009, 10:10 AM
This is so annoying:

Hubby: "Where should we go for lunch?"

Me: "I don't really care, where would you like to go?"

Hubby: "I don't care either, you pick."

Me: "OK- Applebee's"

Hubby: "Nah, I don't feel like having Applebee's"

Me: "Well then you pick."

Hubby: "I don't know, it doesn't matter to me."

Me: "But you just....nevermind. OK, let's go to Moxie's."

Hubby: "Meh, OK" (in a disappointed tone)

This is actually as pared down version of the conversation, this usually takes about 5-10 minutes to resolve, I just didn't want to type out all of the blather.

LOL...the trick is you wanted him to pick a restaurant you really like, right?

I've had this same conversation several times and its quite perplexing if you aren't good at reading minds as a guy.

Brita
06-29-2009, 10:19 AM
LOL...the trick is you wanted him to pick a restaurant you really like, right?


Not quite, other way around. He says he doesn't care, and then shoots down my suggestions.

Davian93
06-29-2009, 10:48 AM
Not quite, other way around. He says he doesn't care, and then shoots down my suggestions.

Oh, yeah I kinda skimmed it the first time...that would be annoying.

Matoyak
06-29-2009, 10:48 AM
bears are godless killing machines

http://www.kosebamsekompaniet.com/images/evil_teddy_bear.jpg
I can't help but think Star Wars...:confused:

GonzoTheGreat
06-29-2009, 11:07 AM
bears are godless killing machines

http://www.kosebamsekompaniet.com/images/evil_teddy_bear.jpgWhy do I have to keep defending bear reputation?

2 Kings|2:24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

Terez
06-29-2009, 11:52 AM
Why do I have to keep defending bear reputation?

2 Kings|2:24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.
What does that even MEAN?

Sinistrum
06-29-2009, 02:03 PM
For me, it's the distinterested tone of voice. The "sure, that sounds all right" said in the I could care less tone of voice that bugs me.

Sorry ladies but there are times when we just don't know what we want with something or more often there are times when we really just don't care. I think its a huge leap in logic to assume that just because we don't jump at the chance to make a decision like where to go to eat for dinner, that it is somehow indicative of disinterest in the relationship. It just means we are viewing that decision in its proper context: unimportant decision that is neither life threatening nor time sensitive and therefore not requiring of immediate attention or input.

The only time such decisions become important to guys is when you gals make it important by attaching unrelated emotional significance to them. They haven't yet invented a word for how aggravating that is to a guy. Not every decision in a relationship has to be argued in committee and a guy not caring about the petty stuff like dinner or curtain colors isn't a relationship crime.

Ishara
06-29-2009, 03:18 PM
LOL. I don't see it as a relationship crime - just irritating. ;) About as irritating as when I suggest going out for dinner without a clear idea of where I want to go.

Ozymandias
06-29-2009, 05:50 PM
We don't really expect men to be confident or dominant all the time, either. We just like for a man to show that he can. In general.



Ha. Sounds typically feminine. You want a man with enough confidence to take control when you want him to (not that you'll ever give an indication of when those times are), but who knows exactly when to let you be in charge (also, no warning). And, of course, god forbid you step over that fine line one way or another, your either a jerk or a wuss.

Every woman expects a perfect guy, even if they don't say it in so many words. Not wants, mind you, but expects.

Brita
06-29-2009, 05:51 PM
Ha. Sounds typically feminine. You want a man with enough confidence to take control when you want him to (not that you'll ever give an indication of when those times are), but who knows exactly when to let you be in charge (also, no warning). And, of course, god forbid you step over that fine line one way or another, your either a jerk or a wuss.

Every woman expects a perfect guy, even if they don't say it in so many words. Not wants, mind you, but expects.

And your point is....:D

Ishara
06-29-2009, 08:22 PM
I call bullshit. Just because I expect my bf to recognize when I'm too tired to make a decision does not mean I expect him to be perfect. Please!

Sinistrum
06-29-2009, 08:36 PM
Just because I expect my bf to recognize when I'm too tired to make a decision does not mean I expect him to be perfect.

Yeah sorry, unless that fact is verbalized to him, its still an unreasonable expectation, IMHO. Men are not psychic.

Zaela Sedai
06-29-2009, 09:30 PM
Yeah all men should be like Edward Cullen




















HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA KIDDING!

Davian93
06-29-2009, 09:41 PM
Yeah all men should be like Edward Cullen




















HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA KIDDING!

All he is is a weak Dylan McKay wannabe anyway (the actor playing him)

Terez
06-29-2009, 10:14 PM
Wasn't Dylan a vampire slayer?

Ozymandias
06-29-2009, 10:59 PM
I call bullshit. Just because I expect my bf to recognize when I'm too tired to make a decision does not mean I expect him to be perfect. Please!

expecting him to read your mood without any sort of hint at all IS expecting him to be perfect.

My ex was a very cheerful girl, and whenever she was not being all happy and smiley I assumed something was wrong and she got mad, and then whenever she was happy I assumed all was well... and sometimes it wasn't and she got mad.

If your not gonna be open about it, then the ensuing miscommunication and misreading of moods or tempers is solely your fault

Brita
06-29-2009, 11:11 PM
My ex was a very cheerful girl, and whenever she was not being all happy and smiley I assumed something was wrong and she got mad,

Well, this isn't her fault, she was just not feeling super cheerful and you assumed something that wasn't there. How can she help that?

and then whenever she was happy I assumed all was well... and sometimes it wasn't and she got mad.

I don't know...could her "getting mad" actually be her attempt to tell you something is wrong?

Listen up guys-

My BIGGEST pet peeve with guys in general is that when their girl tries to tell them they are upset, angry or frustrated with something- the guy very often accuses them of "getting mad" or "over reacting" or "on the rag". I find guys have a VERY difficult time dealing with women's emotions, (I don't know if it scares them, or they feel they need to fix it or what) and if their girl is expressing some sort of negative emotion the guy accuses her of over-reacting, when really the guys response is an over-reaction.

So what happens? The girls stop telling the guys their feelings, because they are tired of being accused of being too dramatic or that it's that time of the month. And then the guys say "You never tell me what's wrong!" And then when we do, you say "Why are you getting all mad?" or "Why are you all upset?"

It's a vicious, frustrating cycle.

Ivhon
06-29-2009, 11:26 PM
Well, this isn't her fault, she was just not feeling super cheerful and you assumed something that wasn't there. How can she help that?



I don't know...could her "getting mad" actually be her attempt to tell you something is wrong?

Listen up guys-

My BIGGEST pet peeve with guys in general is that when their girl tries to tell them they are upset, angry or frustrated with something- the guy very often accuses them of "getting mad" or "over reacting" or "on the rag". I find guys have a VERY difficult time dealing with women's emotions, (I don't know if it scares them, or they feel they need to fix it or what) and if their girl is expressing some sort of negative emotion the guy accuses her of over-reacting, when really the guys response is an over-reaction.

So what happens? The girls stop telling the guys their feelings, because they are tired of being accused of being too dramatic or that it's that time of the month. And then the guys say "You never tell me what's wrong!" And then when we do, you say "Why are you getting all mad?" or "Why are you all upset?"

It's a vicious, frustrating cycle.

No need to get so pissy about it, jeez...

Must be that time of month.

Brita
06-29-2009, 11:28 PM
No need to get so pissy about it, jeez...

Must be that time of month.

LOL! I knew that was coming!

hippie-joe
06-29-2009, 11:35 PM
This is so annoying:

Hubby: "Where should we go for lunch?"

Me: "I don't really care, where would you like to go?"

Hubby: "I don't care either, you pick."

Me: "OK- Applebee's"

Hubby: "Nah, I don't feel like having Applebee's"

Me: "Well then you pick."

Hubby: "I don't know, it doesn't matter to me."

Me: "But you just....nevermind. OK, let's go to Moxie's."

Hubby: "Meh, OK" (in a disappointed tone)

This is actually as pared down version of the conversation, this usually takes about 5-10 minutes to resolve, I just didn't want to type out all of the blather.

see when i'm put in that stiuation i like to give a multiple choice answer, she doesn't care, oh... but she does, so i'll spout out a few ideas and let her choose.

this works the other way around ladies, it also may let you know how much your man pays attention to (know's) you, personally i don't like tests like that, but that's how women think right?

hippie-joe
06-29-2009, 11:50 PM
Ha. Sounds typically feminine. You want a man with enough confidence to take control when you want him to (not that you'll ever give an indication of when those times are), but who knows exactly when to let you be in charge (also, no warning). And, of course, god forbid you step over that fine line one way or another, your either a jerk or a wuss.

Every woman expects a perfect guy, even if they don't say it in so many words. Not wants, mind you, but expects.

why does that make me thik of faile and perrin's relationship? lol

hippie-joe
06-29-2009, 11:59 PM
bears are godless killing machines

http://www.kosebamsekompaniet.com/images/evil_teddy_bear.jpg

makes me think of critter christmas.

The time has come, it's almost here, it's almost critter christmas!


BLOOD ORGY! YAY!!!
http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/154748?source=SEO_SSP_Y&intcmp=SEO_SSP_Y&extcmp=SEO_SSP_Y

Sinistrum
06-30-2009, 12:59 AM
My BIGGEST pet peeve with guys in general is that when their girl tries to tell them they are upset, angry or frustrated with something- the guy very often accuses them of "getting mad" or "over reacting" or "on the rag".

Well don't overreact to stuff and we won't tell you that you're overreacting. :p

I find guys have a VERY difficult time dealing with women's emotions

Seriously though, this is entirely true. Your emotional make up is unfathomable. I think I need to start dating Vulcan chicks.

Frenzy
06-30-2009, 01:36 AM
because that's the description of Tenobia, and all Saldaean women are crazy.



and i am NOT touching the subject of this thread with a 10-foot cattleprod.

JSUCamel
06-30-2009, 01:50 AM
and i am NOT touching the subject of this thread with a 10-foot cattleprod.

How about with a 14-inch cucumber?

Frenzy
06-30-2009, 02:11 AM
How about with a 14-inch cucumber?
~takes cucumber and brains Camel with it~

Sinistrum
06-30-2009, 02:32 AM
No no no Camel. That's way too small. :p

Davian93
06-30-2009, 07:11 AM
My BIGGEST pet peeve with guys in general is that when their girl tries to tell them they are upset, angry or frustrated with something- the guy very often accuses them of "getting mad" or "over reacting" or "on the rag". I find guys have a VERY difficult time dealing with women's emotions, (I don't know if it scares them, or they feel they need to fix it or what) and if their girl is expressing some sort of negative emotion the guy accuses her of over-reacting, when really the guys response is an over-reaction.

So...what are you trying to say?

Ishara
06-30-2009, 08:23 AM
LOL. I don't know where I said that I expect a mind reader. If I've put in a 12-14 hour day, and had a hellish commute, come home and say I'm beat - then I think it's not unreasonable for him to deduce that I'm tired and possibly hungry. Honestly people.

Dav, you complain all the time about how women treat men as children etc. - you guys are smart enough to recognize when your gf is tired/ hungry/ cranky - no? I'll bet you Dav can tell when his gf needs a snack pretty intuitively. Taht's what I mean. Am I wrong?

GonzoTheGreat
06-30-2009, 08:32 AM
I don't know where I said that I expect a mind reader.You didn't, we read that in your mind. Obviously.

Davian93
06-30-2009, 08:51 AM
Dav, you complain all the time about how women treat men as children etc. - you guys are smart enough to recognize when your gf is tired/ hungry/ cranky - no? I'll bet you Dav can tell when his gf needs a snack pretty intuitively. Taht's what I mean. Am I wrong?

Of course I do...I was trying to be funny. And for the record, she never gets cranky. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Uno
06-30-2009, 08:55 AM
Eh, you guys are all crazy. MS and I don't play daft games where one expects the other to be a mind reader or any of that rubbish, and neither of us finds it hard to tell the other's mood. But, then, we're probably just better than the rest of you horrible lot.

Ishara
06-30-2009, 09:22 AM
That's probably true. LOL.

Ozymandias
06-30-2009, 10:14 AM
Well, this isn't her fault, she was just not feeling super cheerful and you assumed something that wasn't there. How can she help that?

If your normal personality default is to be cheerful, when your NOT cheerful, its fine to assume something is wrong. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Normally, when people are happy, they act happy. And when they're not, they don't! Difficult logic, I know. So once again, you assume that men should be able to know precisely when to ignore all social and emotional logic and conventions, and read your mind, and differentiate between when your happy but don't act happy, and when your sad and don't act happy. If your emotional expressions aren't going to be internally consistent then I absolve all responsibility for miscommunication.

I don't know...could her "getting mad" actually be her attempt to tell you something is wrong?

Yep. Of course, the more I tried to figure out what it was, either vocally or not, the angrier she got, and the more whatever that potential upsetting factor was got buried beneath the new wave of anger and frustration...

when all of it could have been avoided by her saying "Andrew, I'm upset because of X."

Guessing games are stupid when with a tenth of the effort of guessing (nevermind dealing with the fallout of wrong guesses), everything can be revealed. Women want that telepathic, perfect man, when if they just assumed that men AREN'T that way they'd get precisely the emotional support/treatment they wanted. Unless the guy IS a total jerk, in which case you've got a whole separate bag of issues.


So what happens? The girls stop telling the guys their feelings, because they are tired of being accused of being too dramatic or that it's that time of the month. And then the guys say "You never tell me what's wrong!" And then when we do, you say "Why are you getting all mad?" or "Why are you all upset?"

In my experience with women, in and out of relationships, women tend to vastly overreact and overplay minor issues in their lives. This, to a practical guy such as meself, is frustrating. Just because your friend showed up 10 minutes late to lunch doesn't mean I need to hear you whining about it for an hour; 5 minutes should be fine. And you can see that hearing about all those little, silly problems like its your entire life coming apart can desensitize me to even legitimate, big complaints that you might legitimately need some emotional or moral support on. By playing up small issues which are meaningless and which I will tune out, you make it easier for me to not realize whens omething truly is important to you.

And ladies... men are, on the whole, incredibly unperceptive. So you should stop killing your already slim odds of getting true understanding.

Terez
06-30-2009, 10:46 AM
Eh, you guys are all crazy. MS and I don't play daft games where one expects the other to be a mind reader or any of that rubbish, and neither of us finds it hard to tell the other's mood. But, then, we're probably just better than the rest of you horrible lot. I'm sure it's rather easy for her to read your mood: always cranky!

yks 6nnetu hing
06-30-2009, 10:53 AM
In my experience with women, in and out of relationships, women tend to vastly overreact and overplay minor issues in their lives. This, to a practical guy such as meself, is frustrating. Just because your friend showed up 10 minutes late to lunch doesn't mean I need to hear you whining about it for an hour; 5 minutes should be fine. And you can see that hearing about all those little, silly problems like its your entire life coming apart can desensitize me to even legitimate, big complaints that you might legitimately need some emotional or moral support on. By playing up small issues which are meaningless and which I will tune out, you make it easier for me to not realize whens omething truly is important to you.

I get what you're saying and to a point I agree with you. However, I recently read Saturday by Ian McEwan (awesome book, btw) where one of the passages that touched me the most was where the main character (a guy) comes to the realization about his mother, who is now suffering from the late stages of Alzheimers, and who he always treated in a slightly condescending way because she was a housewife and used to spend lots of time chatting and gossiping with the neighbours whereas he became a neurosurgeon... So anyway, he all of a sudden realizes that her chatting was not a sign of an "inferior" mind, it was a sign of a mind that was deeply interested in what goes on in other people's minds. Why they do what they do and so on.

If you think about it, no "big" problems appear out of thin air, there's always a trail of smaller problems that leads to the big problem or cluster around the big problem. And if your gf wouldn't analyze (or tell you about) the smaller problems then when she did tell you about the "big" problem you would have no idea where that came from. And sometimes a lot of small problems can form a big problem just becasue there are so many...

Example: a pregnant spanish co-worker of mine recently didn't get an extension on her contract. Can you see the little problems yet? 1) she's in a foreign country (therefore all the family and friends are not close enough) 2) pregnant 3)lost the job 4) not a chance of finding a new job because of #2 5) when the baby's born she'll have to go through loads of bureaucracy 6)when the baby's born, she still probably won't find a new job very quickly 7) not a lot of money becasue of the no work 8) did I mention pregnant? -- she is happily married though and the hubby has a good stable job so it's obviously not all bad.

So you see - life consists of a lot of small instances. that depending on how you look at them can form a positive or a negative picture, but if you don't think them through then, in my head (and I happen to be a female), you're missing most of it. And thinking things through is much more fun when you have someone to think with ;)

Davian93
06-30-2009, 11:12 AM
And ladies... men are, on the whole, incredibly unperceptive. So you should stop killing your already slim odds of getting true understanding.

Hey, speak for yourself there bucko. I think I'm have at least moderate perceptiveness at this point. Though after 5 years of being with my fiance, I would have to have figured out at least the basics or we wouldn't be together. Number 1 rule to a relationship...don't argue just to argue. The occasional surrender on a guy's part will pay dividends with most women. The ones where it doesnt...well then you shouldn't be with them anyway as they obviously have issues.

Crispin's Crispian
06-30-2009, 11:16 AM
I'm sure it's rather easy for her to read your mood: always cranky!
hahahaha...

Just to go on record, I agree with Uno. My wife and I don't play these games (not much). We know each other so well, and we've been doing the same routines for so many years, that we can tell almost immediately if there's a change in mood. And I can usually tell why she's upset or sad, even if she doesn't say a word about it.

One other note though. Guys, sometimes you just need to leave stuff alone. If you think your girl is upset or might be angry or something, it's probably enough to ask if she's OK (genuinely, not snarkily). If she snaps back, "Yes, I'm fine," then just shut up and drop it. The more you try to guess or deduce why she's upset, the bigger the hole you're likely to dig.

On the other hand, if she says, "no, I'm not OK," just be ready to listen. Again, I think digging for answers in this case isn't worth the effort. If she wants to tell you, she will. If she doesn't, don't force it.

And if she just simply expects you to figure it out with no clue, tell her you have no clue then drop it. Keep the ball in her court.

Ishara
06-30-2009, 11:36 AM
Women want that telepathic, perfect man, when if they just assumed that men AREN'T that way they'd get precisely the emotional support/treatment they wanted. Again, I call bullshit. Nowhere in this thread do I see any of the (ahem) WOMEN saying that. The women are trying to explain how things work from their perspective and are being told (a) that they're wrong and (b) that they're impossible to please.

Crispy's got it right in one. If you're with a person, don't play games. 'Nuff said. That doesn't mean that there isn't a certain amount of understanding if you've been in a relationship with a person for quite some time (which by the way, all the women with concrete examples of how it works fall under). If you've been with a person for some time and know them, you come to recognize things without them needing to be spoken. What is the problem with that?

And yes, Crispian (I'm trying here, but it's so HARD not to write the other nick), is TOTALLY right. If the other side (regardless of sex) isn't playing ball when you ask "what's wrong," then pause the game. But don't ask the question if you aren't going to be prepared to listen.

Ozymandias
06-30-2009, 12:00 PM
Hey, speak for yourself there bucko. I think I'm have at least moderate perceptiveness at this point. Though after 5 years of being with my fiance, I would have to have figured out at least the basics or we wouldn't be together. Number 1 rule to a relationship...don't argue just to argue. The occasional surrender on a guy's part will pay dividends with most women. The ones where it doesnt...well then you shouldn't be with them anyway as they obviously have issues.

Yeah... its taken you FIVE years and the best you can say about yourself is "moderate perceptiveness." I don't mean to be insulting to you or anyone in particular, but women are completely irrational and think and act in ways totally foreign to me or any other guy I've met. Having been with one woman for five years, you've learned to deal with her quirks and moods out of sheer repetition and Pavlovian training than out of any real ability to "perceive" anything about her.

If she started acting like a completely different person tomorrow, would you be able to keep up?

So you see - life consists of a lot of small instances. that depending on how you look at them can form a positive or a negative picture, but if you don't think them through then, in my head (and I happen to be a female), you're missing most of it.

Yes. I agree. But if my girlfriend/wife/fiancee/whatever comes home every day filled with an hour of bitching about every petty problem she encountered at work (and lots of my female friends do this, not just the "significant other" types) or during the day, I get tired and frustrated. And saying "stop, I'm not interested" is clearly not an option. So I get into a habit of just trying to nod and smile and make the appropriate sounds, and when something big comes up, like a problem with the boss, that might require some actual paying attention and consoling on my part, I'm just too worn out from listening to all the petty stuff to care that much.

Again, I call bullshit. Nowhere in this thread do I see any of the (ahem) WOMEN saying that. The women are trying to explain how things work from their perspective and are being told (a) that they're wrong and (b) that they're impossible to please.

And in multiple posts, if you read between the lines, you see women on here, who are for the most part much more down to earth (though I haven't met any of you personally, so maybe I'm wrong) than the average human female, expecting a perfect guy. Someone who is dominant when you want him to be dominant, but passive when you need space/want to take charge. Someone who knows just how your feeling at all times, even when you don't tell him/even give him even a subtle sign. I'm sorry, but thats asking for a perfect guy. Its like when you look on a craigslist personal (which are hilarious) and see the girl who "only" wants a smart, funny, handsome guy who loves to dance, cuddle, watch bad movies, and is in touch with his feminine side but is also manly.

I'm sorry, but that just doesn't happen that often. Everyone has faults. I wish I could be with Natalie Portman, but I don't expect it, and most girls DO expect to be with the guy-version of her (whoever that is). All you have to do is listen to what their asking for, and when I see things like:

Actually, I think I swing both ways, depending on my mood and the circumstances.

or

We don't really expect men to be confident or dominant all the time, either. We just like for a man to show that he can. In general.

or

At the same time, I'm very independent and have very distinct opinions about, well, everything. So a little pushback is good.

It makes me think that women expect a perfect guy. Because if I push back on the wrong things, then I sleep on the couch. So its a matter of picking the right things to be dominant and aggressive about... with no hint of what that is, of course, which brings us right back around to me needing to be a mind reader.

I mean, Ishara, if you come home every day beat from your long work day and pissed and beat and want to be pampered a little, thats fine. But then your asking for a guy to be a wuss and pamper you all the time, because every day you come home tired from the commute/long workday.

Terez
06-30-2009, 12:04 PM
Well, Ozy...I haven't had a relationship in about 7 years, so perhaps my expectations of men are not entirely realistic. But I have no use for a man that doesn't meet those expectations, so...

*shrug*

Brita
06-30-2009, 12:13 PM
Don't get me wrong, my husband and I get along famously, and very rarely fight. We disagree, but rarely have an actual emotional fight. But I have dated a few guys that think like Ozy does.

Mutual respect and affection go a LONG way to resolving almost all these issues.

women are completely irrational and think and act in ways totally foreign to me or any other guy I've met. Having been with one woman for five years, you've learned to deal with her quirks and moods out of sheer repetition and Pavlovian training than out of any real ability to "perceive" anything about her.

Starting with this mind frame to build a relationship foundation is going to make it pretty tough going.

Terez
06-30-2009, 12:18 PM
Yeah, I stopped reading after the "completely irrational" bit, lol...

Crispin's Crispian
06-30-2009, 12:24 PM
I don't mean to be insulting to you or anyone in particular, but women are completely irrational and think and act in ways totally foreign to me or any other guy I've met.

Where do you hang out?

Having been with one woman for five years, you've learned to deal with her quirks and moods out of sheer repetition and Pavlovian training than out of any real ability to "perceive" anything about her.
Bullshit. Calling them "quirks and moods" is unbelievably condescending both to Dav and is fiancée. So far you have Uno, me, and Dav all saying the same thing. Maybe you should be thinking about how you deal with women, rather than the other way around.

If she started acting like a completely different person tomorrow, would you be able to keep up?
Why would he want to? If she started acting like a different person, she wouldn't be the woman he's loved all this time.

So I get into a habit of just trying to nod and smile and make the appropriate sounds, and when something big comes up, like a problem with the boss, that might require some actual paying attention and consoling on my part, I'm just too worn out from listening to all the petty stuff to care that much.
Again, who are these women you hang out with? Maybe you're just barking up the wrong trees, dude.

Ishara
06-30-2009, 12:48 PM
LOL. Ozy sounds like he needs a hug.

While I appreciate being called more down to earth (and I'm assuming here) more rational then your "typical" woman, I just find your perspective so hard to understand!

The quotes made me laugh, but are taken kind out of context I think. I used my example (about being tired etc) to try and clarify things and now I come off as the pampered bitch with the subserviant man. ROFL. Trust me when I say nothing could be further from the truth. It's give and take. I think that covers off most aspects of most relationships. I only use personal examples, cause hey, that's what I know!

Women want that telepathic, perfect man, when if they just assumed that men AREN'T that way they'd get precisely the emotional support/treatment they wanted. For the record, i think perfect is boring. Don't want perfect. I want what I have. A partner who treats me with respect, who takes care of me and lets me take care of him. It's not perfect, it's sometimes pretty messy and tumultuous, but it sure as hell beats perfect!

And no, he's the polar opposite of me in every way. Every. Way. We balance each other out. It works.

Ozymandias
06-30-2009, 01:13 PM
Bullshit. Calling them "quirks and moods" is unbelievably condescending both to Dav and is fiancée. So far you have Uno, me, and Dav all saying the same thing. Maybe you should be thinking about how you deal with women, rather than the other way around.

I'm not critiquing how you deal with the women in your lives, not at all. And "quirks and moods" isn't condescending; thats what personality is, more or less. Its not condescending and I don't even see how it could be.

Why would he want to? If she started acting like a different person, she wouldn't be the woman he's loved all this time.

Which is all a very nice side-stepping of the initial point. Take your straw men somewhere else.

Again, who are these women you hang out with? Maybe you're just barking up the wrong trees, dude

While I don't doubt thats partially true (if your Jewish, it comes with the territory), your all basing your observations off of one woman who you've spent a long, long time with. And while I don't mean to horn in on all of your love-connection soulmate thing going on over there, at least part of that if because you've spent so long with one woman. Being perceptive means being universally perceptive, not just of the moods of your one partner you have years of experience with. If you swapped wives with each other for a year, do you think you'd be equally able to understand the new wife's subtle mood indicators (when they have them)? And none of that "well I wouldn't want to because she's not the woman I love" BS. Thats completely tangential.

And not too take one or two people out of context and as an umbrella for all women, but look at Terez and Brita. They both pretty unashamedly admit that they expect a man to be just about perfect. And its a more subtle and insidious kind of expectation than expecting good looks. I mean, if I come out and say I don't want to date a fat girl, or an ugly girl, or whatever, I'm gonna be freakin blasted halfway to Alpha Centurai, and thats a long way. But why is that any different than a woman saying she wants someone who knows exactly when to be X and when to be Y, and who can read her moods like a book besides?

Brita
06-30-2009, 01:28 PM
They both pretty unashamedly admit that they expect a man to be just about perfect.

Just for the record, I don't expect my man to be perfect- in fact that would drive me crazy because I am far from perfect and I'd feel like a fool everyday beside someone who was emotionally perfect. I don't know where you got the impression I want that. If I attach an emoticon beside a statement, it usually implies I am joking and being light-hearted.

And when I said I swing both ways between wanting to be submissive or dominant, I was just being honest. I wasn't saying I expect everyone to understand exactly when I'm feeling a certain way, and that I'll get angry if they don't understand it. You added all that from your own experiences. I think most people swing between the two, depending on the issue, the circumstances and how strongly one feels about it. It has nothing to do with expecting my partner to be perfect....

Terez
06-30-2009, 01:35 PM
There are certain things that I expect in a man that are important to me. Other things, I don't care much about, so there is a great deal of room for imperfections (especially considering that the things I expect are the sort of things that you don't really have to be born with). I expect for a guy to be able to have meaningful conversations about our relationship and what we expect from each other. I've dated guys who were little more than skin-deep, and it just doesn't work (that's when the games start to come in, and I don't have the patience for it). If you can have meaningful conversations about the relationship with your girl, then trust me, it won't take years for you to be able to read her moods.

Davian93
06-30-2009, 01:37 PM
And not too take one or two people out of context and as an umbrella for all women, but look at Terez and Brita. They both pretty unashamedly admit that they expect a man to be just about perfect.

I wasn't getting that from either of them in the posts. Everyone has idiosyncracies, men and women. I don't think my fiancee acts any more irrational than I do FWIW. And it didn't take me 5 years to figure her out but I would say our relationship has gotten stronger every year we're together just as any relationship should. And why, barring bi-polar disorder, would someone ever simply change from one day to the next? If someone (your ex perhaps?) did that it was because she was being fake with you and then went to being her true self.

It honestly sounds like you had a really bad breakup and she seriously F#@*#ed up your view on women for a while. It happens to everyone at least once so there's no real cause to worry about it. Honestly, its probably best it happened when you were dating and you don't have a nasty divorce to deal with too. Lots of times, one person will basically lie to their partner and pretend to be someone they're not and they always eventually revert to their true self. These relationships usually do not end well.

The basis of a strong relationship is compromise and loving the other person more than you love yourself. If both people in it do that, things will be fine.

Brita
06-30-2009, 01:40 PM
I wasn't getting that from either of them in the posts. Everyone has idiosyncracies, men and women. I don't think my fiancee acts any more irrational than I do FWIW. And it didn't take me 5 years to figure her out but I would say our relationship has gotten stronger every year we're together just as any relationship should. And why, barring bi-polar disorder, would someone ever simply change from one day to the next? If someone (your ex perhaps?) did that it was because she was being fake with you and then went to being her true self.

It honestly sounds like you had a really bad breakup and she seriously F#@*#ed up your view on women for a while. It happens to everyone at least once so there's no real cause to worry about it. Honestly, its probably best it happened when you were dating and you don't have a nasty divorce to deal with too. Lots of times, one person will basically lie to their partner and pretend to be someone they're not and they always eventually revert to their true self. These relationships usually do not end well.

The basis of a strong relationship is compromise and loving the other person more than you love yourself. If both people in it do that, things will be fine.

Dav- will you marry me? :p

Sinistrum
06-30-2009, 01:43 PM
One other note though. Guys, sometimes you just need to leave stuff alone. If you think your girl is upset or might be angry or something, it's probably enough to ask if she's OK (genuinely, not snarkily). If she snaps back, "Yes, I'm fine," then just shut up and drop it. The more you try to guess or deduce why she's upset, the bigger the hole you're likely to dig.

I'm taking serious issue with this. From my point of view you can't do this with most women. It comes down to relationship fundamentals. I've had this discussion with Gilly and she actually agrees with me on this one. If something is wrong with one of the persons in the relationship, then the only mature and rational response to resolve the issue is to communicate about it. That is the only way the problem has a chance of getting resolved without negative consequences for the relationship. Open communication, IMHO, is the foundation of any solid relationship. As a result neither side should EVER have to guess what is wrong with the other.

A woman saying nothing is wrong when there clearly is something wrong and indulging in these petty little guessing games isn't communicating. This kind of behavior is deceptive, emotionally manipulative, passive aggressive, and completely infantile. All not communicating about a problem does is allow it to fester and create even more frustration and anger about it, the fall out of which almost every time is worse than the original problem. Even if it is the smallest problem in the world, as yks pointed out, small problems tend to escalate into larger problems when not addressed. So yeah, sorry, but I absolutely will not tolerate this "nothing's wrong I'm ok" crap when there clearly is something wrong out of a relationship partner. Either you communicate openly with me or not at all.

Brita
06-30-2009, 01:55 PM
Have you never just felt bummed out for no apparent reason? I know I have. And there is nothing I can put my finger on, I just want to curl up, read a book, take a nap, go for a run or whatever else comforts me on these blue days. If my hubby asks if there's something wrong, and I say "No I'm just bummed," then yes, I do just want to be left alone for a bit. I guess by saying that I am communicating, but if he doesn't trust me or take my word for it, then he will keep bugging me when nothing is actually wrong.

But if he wraps me up in a big hug and says "Go relax, I'll take the kids for a bike ride", then guess who's getting grilled cheese that night?

Albeit- there are times when someone (and it's not just women that do this) is playing games, and that's just not cool. But I think what Crispy is saying is that in a strong relationship, you trust one another to be honest. And if someone says nothing is wrong, then trust them. I know my husband would hate it if I pestered him about something being wrong and he was just not as cheerful as usual. I ask him once and then take his word for it.

And if someone is playing games, approaching it in this manner will make the games very unenjoyable for them, because you are not playing into their hand. If you take their word for it, and if they are left to stew, that is their own fault for not being honest with the one person they should be most honest with.

Sinistrum
06-30-2009, 02:04 PM
Have you never just felt bummed out for no apparent reason?

No, not really. Whenever I'm bummed out, there is typically a reason for it, such as I slept poorly last night, or the a/c's out, or a date didn't go well. Either way, there is a strong difference between "nothing I'm ok" and "I'm just bummed out." The latter is still actual communication.

Crispin's Crispian
06-30-2009, 02:07 PM
I'm taking serious issue with this. From my point of view you can't do this with most women. It comes down to relationship fundamentals. I've had this discussion with Gilly and she actually agrees with me on this one. If something is wrong with one of the persons in the relationship, then the only mature and rational response to resolve the issue is to communicate about it. That is the only way the problem has a chance of getting resolved without negative consequences for the relationship. Open communication, IMHO, is the foundation of any solid relationship. As a result neither side should EVER have to guess what is wrong with the other.

A woman saying nothing is wrong when there clearly is something wrong and indulging in these petty little guessing games isn't communicating. This kind of behavior is deceptive, emotionally manipulative, passive aggressive, and completely infantile. All not communicating about a problem does is allow it to fester and create even more frustration and anger about it, the fall out of which almost every time is worse than the original problem. Even if it is the smallest problem in the world, as yks pointed out, small problems tend to escalate into larger problems when not addressed. So yeah, sorry, but I absolutely will not tolerate this "nothing's wrong I'm ok" crap when there clearly is something wrong out of a relationship partner. Either you communicate openly with me or not at all.
You're exactly right, Sinistrum, and that's exactly what I'm saying. If you have to play juvenile guessing games, something is wrong with the relationship.

What I said was

And if she just simply expects you to figure it out with no clue, tell her you have no clue then drop it. Keep the ball in her court.

If she doesn't like it, she can leave. You'll be happier in the end. If she's the kind of woman you (apparently) want to be with, she won't do this.

Brita
06-30-2009, 02:08 PM
Either way, there is a strong difference between "nothing I'm ok" and "I'm just bummed out." The latter is still actual communication.

True.

And if she just simply expects you to figure it out with no clue, tell her you have no clue then drop it. Keep the ball in her court.

Exactly. And furthermore:

And if someone is playing games, approaching it in this manner will make the games very unenjoyable for them, because you are not playing into their hand. If you take their word for it, and if they are left to stew, that is their own fault for not being honest with the one person they should be most honest with.

Sinistrum
06-30-2009, 02:14 PM
And what I'm saying is that is that I won't even give her a chance to return serve. If a woman I'm with pulls that crap, then I'm out the door faster than Jessie Owens at a KKK meeting (sorry just watched Blazing Saddles again). When I say I won't tolerate it, I mean I won't tolerate it.

Crispin's Crispian
06-30-2009, 02:19 PM
I'm not critiquing how you deal with the women in your lives, not at all. And "quirks and moods" isn't condescending; thats what personality is, more or less. Its not condescending and I don't even see how it could be.

In the context, it sounded condescending because you were downplaying emotions. But if you didn't mean it that way, I'll take your word for it.


Which is all a very nice side-stepping of the initial point. Take your straw men somewhere else.

...
While I don't doubt thats partially true (if your Jewish, it comes with the territory), your all basing your observations off of one woman who you've spent a long, long time with. And while I don't mean to horn in on all of your love-connection soulmate thing going on over there, at least part of that if because you've spent so long with one woman. Being perceptive means being universally perceptive, not just of the moods of your one partner you have years of experience with. If you swapped wives with each other for a year, do you think you'd be equally able to understand the new wife's subtle mood indicators (when they have them)? And none of that "well I wouldn't want to because she's not the woman I love" BS. Thats completely tangential.
It's not tangential, but I think maybe I see the problem. Are you suggesting that women want men to have instant knowledge of their emotional state upon initiation of the relationship? If that's what you're seeing out there, then I totally agree that's unfair. There's the whole process of "getting to know each other" where that kind of emotional learning takes place.


And not too take one or two people out of context and as an umbrella for all women, but look at Terez and Brita. They both pretty unashamedly admit that they expect a man to be just about perfect. And its a more subtle and insidious kind of expectation than expecting good looks. I mean, if I come out and say I don't want to date a fat girl, or an ugly girl, or whatever, I'm gonna be freakin blasted halfway to Alpha Centurai, and thats a long way. But why is that any different than a woman saying she wants someone who knows exactly when to be X and when to be Y, and who can read her moods like a book besides?
Well yeah. Because it's superficial to want a perfect body, but not superficial to want a perfect personality. But even so, I don't see a problem with having standards. I wouldn't particularly want to date an ugly woman either. Of course, thats somewhat subjective.

Would you be blasted for wanting a woman who (can learn) to understand your needs, aspirations, desires, etc.? Probably not. Or, at least, I wouldn't blast you.

Davian93
06-30-2009, 02:33 PM
Dav- will you marry me? :p

LOL...Sure, why not?

Ozymandias
06-30-2009, 03:30 PM
Well yeah. Because it's superficial to want a perfect body, but not superficial to want a perfect personality. But even so, I don't see a problem with having standards. I wouldn't particularly want to date an ugly woman either. Of course, thats somewhat subjective.

Why? Why is one superficial and the other isn't? I mean, in the commonly used metaphoric sense, not the literal sense. Its another of those PC police kind of things. Not that I'm saying personality isn't really important... but (and this seems to not hold true for women as much) a guy who says he wants an attractive or very attractive significant other is usually considered shallow. Even when its coupled with wanting everything else. Ideally, I want the whole package, and looks play a pretty large role in that. Not the only role, or even the biggest role.. but it matters. And you really cannot say that anymore.


Would you be blasted for wanting a woman who (can learn) to understand your needs, aspirations, desires, etc.? Probably not. Or, at least, I wouldn't blast you.

No, and this is precisely my point. If I say I want a woman who can learn to understand and relate to me, and share those dreams/aspirations, I'm a good guy looking for the right things. God forbid I add to that and say I'd like someone I'm physically attracted to as well. I dumped someone recently because she was totally insane, even if she was good looking, and I'd do the same if it was someone who was a fattie hambeast (thank you craigslist for the new greatest adjective ever) who was very nice. Looks matter

I wasn't getting that from either of them in the posts. Everyone has idiosyncracies, men and women. I don't think my fiancee acts any more irrational than I do FWIW. And it didn't take me 5 years to figure her out but I would say our relationship has gotten stronger every year we're together just as any relationship should. And why, barring bi-polar disorder, would someone ever simply change from one day to the next? If someone (your ex perhaps?) did that it was because she was being fake with you and then went to being her true self.

Haha I understood and decided the deal with the problems I found in my (ex)girlfriend a long time ago. My point was that your "understanding" and "perception" are unique to your fiancee and come from experience and not perception. There are people (not me) who are natually able to pick up on certain social cues better than others; these people are perceptive. Spending 5 years with someone just means you have experience in reading THEM, not their entire sex.

And I don't believe in "being true to yourself." You are how you act. Because all we are, is who we are in relation to everyone else. There is no "me," there is only the me that all of you see (or read or perceive through digital media or whatever, the point is clear without the technical qualifying).

And while I hold it against my ex for doing something similar to that, it doesn't bother me, because I do it to. I'm not the same person, always. Who I was with her was different from who I was with everyone else, and I'm not surprised nor even particularly disappointed that she was the same way.

Crispin's Crispian
06-30-2009, 03:59 PM
Why? Why is one superficial and the other isn't? I mean, in the commonly used metaphoric sense, not the literal sense. Its another of those PC police kind of things. Not that I'm saying personality isn't really important... but (and this seems to not hold true for women as much) a guy who says he wants an attractive or very attractive significant other is usually considered shallow. Even when its coupled with wanting everything else. Ideally, I want the whole package, and looks play a pretty large role in that. Not the only role, or even the biggest role.. but it matters. And you really cannot say that anymore.

I was being somewhat tongue-in-cheek. Anyone who says looks don't matter at all is probably lying.

Gilshalos Sedai
06-30-2009, 04:02 PM
As one of the other long-time married women on this board, I think I'll take a page from Frenzy's book and comment no further.


I'd like to propose this as a translation for "Nothing." It's shorthand for, "Nothing I can put my finger on at the moment, but stay tuned for further updates but leave me the fuck alone before I find something sharp before YOU become the reason I'm feeling 'nothing'."

JSUCamel
06-30-2009, 05:14 PM
Wimmins. Can't live with em, can't live without em.

Terez
06-30-2009, 05:20 PM
Wimmins. Can't live with em, can't live without em.
I call bullshit. We have plenty of long time married guys to counter the first point, and people like Gonzo to counter the second. :)

Cary Sedai
06-30-2009, 06:43 PM
I'd like to propose this as a translation for "Nothing." It's shorthand for, "Nothing I can put my finger on at the moment, but stay tuned for further updates but leave me the fuck alone before I find something sharp before YOU become the reason I'm feeling 'nothing'."

I like to describe exactly that as PMS. I don't know if men ever feel this way, but I can speak from experience about how I feel. Sometimes for no reason I'm angry/frustrated/irrate/etc. When I feel this coming on, I just remind myself it's hormonal, I'm probably going to start my period in a week and warn Zan.

For example: The other day we were watchin Harry Potter, and we were sharing a bag of popcorn. The bag was in my lap, for some hormonal reason I was extremely irrated evertime he reached across me for a handful of popcorn. I thought "geez, what's wrong with me, it's just popcorn, he's barely brushing against my arm..." Then it hit me! "OH! I'm about to start my period." We finished the popcorn, I told him I was not in a good mood (like I said, I like to let him know). He asked why, and I told him PMS, then confessed to the completely absurd and unreasonable emotional reaction I had. We both laughed. I just accept that sometimes I'll be in a mood for no reason, then I warn him. It seems the most logical and honest way to go about it, and he accepts that and we don't worry about it. At least I don't think he worries about it. He's always considerate and sweet and loving, so if he's being more so because of my emotional state, I have't noticed. (yeah, yeah, go ahead and make fun! :p )

Anyhow, back to the original topic. I think we share or take turns being dominate. Some areas I'm more dominate, some he is. We are both confident in different areas, and where we are stubborn in the same area, we just figure out who's turn it is to make the decision!

Our "what's for dinner fight" is exactly like Zan already said:

hmm I make a goodly amount of desisions every day when i come home i want to be relieved of such burdens... especially for dindin ... and if i pick something i like she might not like it ... however if i make her pick out something i know she will like it... unless she is picking it out to please me... then my head starts to hurt....

I feel exactly the same way, so we usually just try to keep track of who's turn it is to make the decision, or we compromise with something like "I'll pay, but you have to decide where. Or, If you drive, I'll decide where"

And sometimes, we go get mcd's for me and taco bell for him!

JSUCamel
06-30-2009, 07:16 PM
Well, the trick is to admit that you don't know what the problem is and that you're just moody. Most of the time, they just say "Nothing" and shrug and then get upset that we don't know why they're upset.

On other side of the field, when a guy says he's thinking about "nothing", believe him. lol I can't tell you how many times I'm just staring off into the distance, spacing out, and she says "What are you thinking?" and it jolts me back to reality, and I say "Nothing", and she glares at me and thinks I'm thinking dirty thoughts about another woman.

I mean, I've done that before too, but 95% of the time when I say "Nothing", it's because I was literally not thinking.

If I'm thinking about something that's intensely private or offensive or whatever, I'll make something else up.

Sinistrum
06-30-2009, 10:50 PM
He asked why, and I told him PMS, then confessed to the completely absurd and unreasonable emotional reaction I had.

This is totally acceptable. Its a-ok for a woman in a relationship to either not know why they are in a mood or chalk it up to "PMS" "hormones" or whatever else you think might be causing it. Trying to pretend like nothing is wrong is absolutely not ok. Saying "nothing" is dishonest, condescending, and insulting to our intelligence. As for being afraid of a woman's emotional reaction if I don't let the matter drop, quite frankly, if a woman I'm with pulls this "nothing's wrong" crap with me, they should be more afraid of my emotional reaction that I should be of theirs. Like I said, I'm more than willing to walk over something like this.

Uno
06-30-2009, 11:09 PM
I don't know. DT will tell you that immediately after our wedding, I was commenting on how easy marriage was, in spite of the ill omen that the designated best man could not make it for rites. (Yeah, I haven't fogotten about that..I imagine you're probably reading this.) Seven years later, I still think it's pretty easy, but maybe it's just the combination of a kind and understanding wife and a husband who's frankly more than a bit potty that turns out to be a winner.

Frenzy
07-01-2009, 01:16 AM
But if he wraps me up in a big hug and says "Go relax, I'll take the kids for a bike ride", then guess who's getting grilled cheese that night?
totally. i'd rep you for that if it'd let me.

Jalyn
07-01-2009, 02:11 AM
It's been an awful long time since I was in a relationship, but I'd say there are three general translations to "Nothing."

1. You had better already know what the hell is wrong and find a way to somehow fix it, or we are so very done. (Can be a reasonable or unreasonable response and can be either sarcastic or rabidly angry.)

2. Nothing. There's a ton of subsets to this one:
a. You're reading me wrong, I'm fine
b. I don't want to talk about it
c. It's nothing you can help me with and I'd like to deal with it on my own
d. I'm in a bad mood but I don't have any idea what's wrong
e. It's not important
f. I'm upset, but I'd like to think it through before I react

3. I'm being a pain in the ass and want you to guess.


On the OP, totally depends on the day, my mood and what we're talking about. 90% of the time, I'm about as laid back as they come about most things. Choosing a restaurant? So long as you have a base idea of what I like and dislike, I don't care. If you suggest something I hate, I'll probably counter-suggest something. The day that I want something specific, I'll say so. The same goes for most things.
Does that make me submissive? Oh, hell no. It means that as long as things fit within a subset of things that I like, I don't have a problem with it most of the time.
I will note, though, when I tell you to go out with your friends, get the heck out of my sight. I need alone time or you're starting to irritate me. (Generally the same thing, you're very presence is irritating me because I want to be by myself.)

Sinistrum
07-01-2009, 03:29 AM
1. You had better already know what the hell is wrong and find a way to somehow fix it, or we are so very done. (Can be a reasonable or unreasonable response and can be either sarcastic or rabidly angry.)

2. Nothing. There's a ton of subsets to this one:
a. You're reading me wrong, I'm fine
b. I don't want to talk about it
c. It's nothing you can help me with and I'd like to deal with it on my own
d. I'm in a bad mood but I don't have any idea what's wrong
e. It's not important
f. I'm upset, but I'd like to think it through before I react

3. I'm being a pain in the ass and want you to guess.

None of which actually qualify as the definition of the word nothing in the english language except 2a.

GonzoTheGreat
07-01-2009, 06:13 AM
But most women here speak American, not English, so that objection is irrelevant.

Ozymandias
07-01-2009, 08:43 AM
It seems the most logical way to go about it

I guess someone is White Ajah

Cary Sedai
07-01-2009, 05:52 PM
I guess someone is White Ajah

Not a chance! Green all the way! Well, and the sub ajah of the green which is the Pink, of which I am the founder. :p

Jalyn
07-01-2009, 08:35 PM
None of which actually qualify as the definition of the word nothing in the english language except 2a.

So? It's shorthand for "don't worry about it" without having to get into a drawn out conversation about why you don't have to worry about it. Everyone speaks in these standard conventions.

If you ask me how I'm doing and I say "fine," I could mean:
1. Are we ready to start the actual conversation now?
2. Everything's gone to hell in a handbasket and I don't want to talk about it (or, you don't want to know)
3. Everything's pretty much ok

Sinistrum
07-01-2009, 10:14 PM
So? It's shorthand for "don't worry about it" without having to get into a drawn out conversation about why you don't have to worry about it. Everyone speaks in these standard conventions.


Uh not really. I, and most other rational human beings that I know, use words according to their stated objective definitions. So when I say nothing is wrong, I mean nothing is wrong, and furthermore, when someone else says nothing is wrong to me, I assume they mean nothing is wrong. The same thing goes for when I say "I'm fine."

This is so, because subjective definitions of words defeat the point of language. The only way language is effective at communicating an idea is if the words in it have universally accepted meanings. This is why dictionaries exist. So when someone says nothing is wrong but they are clearly visably upset, that constitutes a lie that is denying a readily ascertainable truth IMHO, which is why it infuriates me so much. It is both dishonest and insulting to someone's intelligence.

Secondly, short hand is only useful if both parties understand what it means. Since you offered about eight different definitions for one word, your shorthand is absolutely useless to a guy. The only way it is not, is if he is a telepath that can read your mind and pick which definition fits for which specific instance. I don't think I need to demonstrate any further how unbelievably irrational and unreasonable it is for women to rely on this kind of short hand. If something is upsetting a woman and a man asks about it, it is absolutely incumbent upon women in a relationship to communicate that clearly, even if it is just to say "I feel crummy and I don't know why." Anything else is just deceitful and infantile gamesmanship.

Ishara
07-02-2009, 12:16 AM
Secondly, short hand is only useful if both parties understand what it means. Ah, but again, most of us are in relationships where that short hand is understood.

And personally I have a problem with the whole PMS excuse. Just cause I'm hormonal doesn't mean that I get to take shit out on my boyfriend. I know that's not where you were going Cary, and I know it's important to be self-aware, but frankly, my hormones are my problem - not his.

Of course, I'm not trying to say that I'm not a happier person when given a cookie. Stops the fights from a-brewin when they shouldn't. ;)

hippie-joe
07-02-2009, 12:42 AM
Wimmins. Can't live with em, can't live without em.

i always thought the saying went something like, "can't live with 'em, can't kill 'em." ]

Neilbert
07-02-2009, 12:46 AM
3. I'm being a pain in the ass and want you to guess.

So? It's shorthand for "don't worry about it" without having to get into a drawn out conversation about why you don't have to worry about it.

Does not compute.

Everyone speaks in these standard conventions.

If by everyone you mean socially manipulative douche bags then yeah, everyone does. But the people I choose to associate with, no, not at all.

If you ask me how I'm doing and I say "fine," I could mean:
1. Are we ready to start the actual conversation now?

See, if you ask me how I'm doing and I say "fine" it always means "I am not interested in having a conversation about how I am doing." Which is essentially two of your choices, but Christ help you if it happens to be the day for lucky number three. :rolleyes:

Clear and open communication is a must for any successful relationship (and not just the romantic kind).

Jalyn
07-02-2009, 12:51 AM
Secondly, short hand is only useful if both parties understand what it means. Since you offered about eight different definitions for one word, your shorthand is absolutely useless to a guy.

Except, the actual shorthand is "nothing that you need to worry about at this time for some reason or another" making it completely useful. Believe it or not, you don't need to know everything that goes through your SO's head. Whether she's not going into it because she doesn't want to talk about it or whatever, it's not mandatory to explain to you.

Again, it's been an awful long time since I was in a relationship, but any guy that couldn't handle me giving them a short nothing in response to "what's wrong" because I had a really bad day at work and if I go into it I'm going to blow but if I let it go I'll be fine... Well, that would be a shorter relationship than most of them.

Neilbert
07-02-2009, 12:52 AM
Yeah, except you're a goddamn liar.

3. I'm being a pain in the ass and want you to guess.

1. You had better already know what the hell is wrong and find a way to somehow fix it, or we are so very done. (Can be a reasonable or unreasonable response and can be either sarcastic or rabidly angry.)

You can't keep yourself straight in this thread. How do you expect to not confuse a mate?

Jalyn
07-02-2009, 01:00 AM
Yeah, except you're a goddamn liar.





You can't keep yourself straight in this thread. How do you expect to not confuse a mate?

Are you completely incapable of understanding conversations?

The entire "shorthand" conversation was fairly obviously referring to the second grouping of possibilities that I gave and had nothing to do with the first or third.

I think the way that I stated the third made it fairly bloody obvious that I was considering it completely unreasonable but something that some people do.

As for the first, I noted that it could be either reasonable or not - depends entirely on the context. For a simple example, if you forget the 3 month anniversary of the day that you had coffee and the SO is unreasonably pissed off and expects you to know why, it's unreasonable. If you forget your 30th wedding anniversary, being pissed and expecting you to know why, probably OK.

And, really, if you're going to be a complete ass, especially if you're going to accuse me of lying, maybe you should reread first.

Sinistrum
07-02-2009, 04:33 AM
Believe it or not, you don't need to know everything that goes through your SO's head. Whether she's not going into it because she doesn't want to talk about it or whatever, it's not mandatory to explain to you.

Yeah gee, that's great. So why exactly do you have to say "nothing?" I mean what's stopping you from saying "I feel crummy but I don't want to talk about it?" Oh wait, because that would actually be a rational and honest response to the question, and lord knows we can't have someone giving those kind of answers. :rolleyes:

Seriously, I'm not asking for 24/7/365 access into a woman's head. Frankly, the mere prospect of that scares the living crap out of me. I am merely asking for the same thing I give in return in a relationship, and that is open and honest answers to questions my SO asks. Saying "nothing's wrong" when you are visably upset is about as far from that as you can get.

What is more, can you honestly say you wouldn't get mad, if you were upset, and your SO didn't ask about? I mean seriously?! We have the right, no scratch that, duty, to ask in that situation because a. there's always the chance that you're upset over something we did and b. showing concern is part of the whole point of being in a relationship. So yeah, we have the right to ask, and yeah we have the right to expect an open and honest answer when we ask. Both rights are based on relationship fundamentals 101.

but any guy that couldn't handle me giving them a short nothing in response to "what's wrong" because I had a really bad day at work and if I go into it I'm going to blow but if I let it go I'll be fine... Well, that would be a shorter relationship than most of them.

You're right, it probably would be a short relationship. Any guy with an ounce self respect isn't going to put up with passive aggressive gamesmanship like this.

GonzoTheGreat
07-02-2009, 05:28 AM
You're right, it probably would be a short relationship. Any guy with an ounce self respect isn't going to put up with passive aggressive gamesmanship like this.The impression I get it is that "nothing" is a shorthand for "nothing you can help me with, explaining why not will merely make things worse while letting me get rid of it myself will clear it up shortly*". The issue is not passive agressive gamesmanship#, it is simply individualism. Some things are better kept private. Any guy who thinks a woman can't handle anything at all on her own may be right, but saying so in this thread ain't wise.

* Shortly means here: in time for next day's aggravations to seem fresh and new.

# Gameswomanship?

Ishara
07-02-2009, 08:10 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure I see it as gamesmanship. It's just an effing question that should never be asked.

In my books:

1. "What's wrong?" Followed by "Nothing." Ugh.

2. "Are you okay" Followed by "I'm fine."

3. "What are you thinking."

WHY do these things need to be uttered? Why? They ALL cause more trouble then they're worth, imo.

Gilshalos Sedai
07-02-2009, 10:03 AM
I actually ask Bryan, "Can I ask why you're pissed?"

If the answer's, "No," then it ain't me he's pissed at. (It's usually my mother at this point, but frankly, I think Bryan deserves Canonization for working in the same office with her.)

That seems to get a better response than, "What's wrong?" Which answer, if it ain't me, is usually a very surly and snapped, "Nothing," especially if he doesn't want to unload on me about my mother again.

Bryan will ask, "What are you thinking?" when I'm staring off into space. Usually I'm working on my novel at that point so going into detail gets a long conversation going.




And Ishara, as far as PMS, it's not an "excuse," it's a reason. And frankly, for some of us, it's taken a great deal of time to notice the warning signs and take steps, so yeah, a mature woman doesn't necessarily not suffer from it, she just sees it coming and holds herself in check. Bryan has commented that he can't always tell when I'm PMS'ing, now. Whereas in the past the whole frickin planet would know. And it got worse the worse my thyroid got. If you were never one of those women prone to being totally nuts once a month, more power to you, but frankly, not everyone's that lucky.

And I was kinda trying to avoid bringing PMS into this discussion. We women are pretty much told from birth that PMS is a weakness and we should never acknowledge it. Well, I've learned a lot about hormones in the past 3 years and frankly, I think those of us who manage to control some of the worst aspects of those behavior changing pests should get a medal, not jokes about Hillary Clinton nuking the Russians/Chinese/Al Quaida, "at that time of the month." It takes a great deal of Zen and iron control to ride some of those hormone roller coasters without letting them control you and snapping the head off the nearest waiter just because you need to yell at SOMETHING.

We should teach our daughters not to ignore those feelings, but to see them coming and control their responses to them. For instance, Cary's example about the popcorn. How many of us would know that's what it was in our teens or early twenties? We wouldn't. We'd have snatched that popcorn bag away and picked a fight. So, we tell our daughters when they start feeling the urge to punch something or cry at a long distance commercial, that it's not a bad thing and they don't have to be controlled by it, that they can control it.



So, frankly, while answering "nothing," isn't the major lie some of you guys would like to call it, it is, however, NOT the most mature response and women shouldn't be using it to communicate their displeasure to you or with you, or even to use it because they don't want to admit that they ain't really in control at the moment and Mother Nature's driving the Bitch Bus. A simple, "Leave me alone for a minute," would be much better.

However, I'm still going to use it with Bryan because for us it IS shorthand for, "I'm too pissed at the moment, give me about an hour to stop wanting to punch a wall, Ok, because I love you and I really don't want to take this out on you because you're not to blame." Bryan and I both have major Irish tempers, but we don't like to let them out to play because that's bad for our health.

Neilbert
07-02-2009, 10:14 AM
The entire "shorthand" conversation was fairly obviously referring to the second grouping of possibilities that I gave and had nothing to do with the first or third.

Your second grouping was just as confused and contradictory as the first.

Except, the actual shorthand is "nothing that you need to worry about at this time for some reason or another" making it completely useful.

1. Are we ready to start the actual conversation now?
2. Everything's gone to hell in a handbasket and I don't want to talk about it (or, you don't want to know)

If you're going to get all offended over me calling you a goddamn liar, maybe you should stop being a goddamn liar.

It takes a great deal of Zen and iron control to ride some of those hormone roller coasters without letting them control you and snapping the head off the nearest waiter just because you need to yell at SOMETHING.

Nobody is ever going to give you a medal for not taking your personal issues out on someone else. Sorry.

Yeah, I'm not sure I see it as gamesmanship. It's just an effing question that should never be asked.

It's a hamfisted conversation starter. The problem with the question is that it requires that you know zero about the person to ask it. That's probably why it grates on people.

Gilshalos Sedai
07-02-2009, 10:22 AM
Nobody is ever going to give you a medal for not taking your personal issues out on someone else. Sorry.

Neilbert, walk a mile in someone else's shoes first, mmk?

Neilbert
07-02-2009, 10:23 AM
No. Personal issues are personal issues, and you do not deserve respect for not taking them out on someone else. Full stop.

Yellowbeard
07-02-2009, 10:24 AM
Yeah, I'm not sure I see it as gamesmanship. It's just an effing question that should never be asked.

sometimes it's passive aggressive games, sometimes it's not. it depends on the person doing it. with my XW, i can guarantee you that if she's acting squirrelly and you ask about it...if she says "nothing"...then she's just being passive aggressive and expecting you to know the truth inately, while at the same time you have no basis for having any inkling about what it really is. and when your jedi mind powers fail to enlighten to you, she gets super pissy and angry, only she doesn't let that on either...instead she just goes and screws someone else because she's mad and thinks she's got to get even w/ you. of course, that's why she's XW now.

with my current SO, nothing means nothing. and she just tells you if something is wrong, and whether she wants to talk about it.

the difference is, w/ one, you can't trust a word she says (that would be XW). w/ the other, you can know for certain that every word she says is true (that would be SO).

i don't think sini's or ishara's or gonzo's points are better than each other. it's all based on the past experiences we've all had. their points are all true for certain people, and not for others. everyone is different. you can't paint everyone w/ the same brush.

Gilshalos Sedai
07-02-2009, 10:26 AM
No. Personal issues are personal issues, and you do not deserve respect for not taking them out on someone else. Full stop.

Neilbert, your compassion for your fellow man is astounding.


Yellowbeard: I do believe that's very true. Every person's different, and every relationship's different.

Neilbert
07-02-2009, 10:29 AM
Neilbert, your compassion for your fellow man is astounding.

Coming from the person who seems to think it's ok to bitch out a waiter because she is PMSing that's ironic as fuck.

This may come as a shock to you, but my belief that personal issues should not be taken out on other people stems from compassion for fellow man.

Yellowbeard
07-02-2009, 10:51 AM
Yellowbeard: I do believe that's very true. Every person's different, and every relationship's different.

yeah it takes time and letting the person in question build up a track record of behavior to really be able to tell things about them.

i always say you have to wait until the first fight before you can really tell whether it's worth investing in a relationship with someone. how someone conducts themself while resolving a conflict is a much better indicator of their character than how they act while under the influence of the honeymoon phase hormones.

No. Personal issues are personal issues, and you do not deserve respect for not taking them out on someone else. Full stop.

minor quibble. and maybe i'm misinterpretting a few things in addition to this quote that neil wrote.

seems that maybe there's a point being made that you do things to try to get respect from others. and if you don't get respect from others for doing them, they aren't worth doing. sorry if i'm reading the undertones wrong on that, but i think that's flawed.

nothing starts with getting respect or any other validation from others. it's fleeting. a person should start all their interactions from a standpoint of self-respect. it's all about trying to hold yourself to a high quality standard of behavior simply because you want to, regardless of if others give you props for it.

it's easy to be a good person when others are watching. what counts is how you act when others are NOT watching.

case in point...not taking your personal issues out on someone else shouldn't be because you want said someone else to respect you. it should be because you respect yourself.

Gilshalos Sedai
07-02-2009, 10:53 AM
Thanks so much for misreading what I said. That's helpful.


Allow me to clarify. I DON'T think it's OK, that's why I was giving props to my fellow women who DO make the effort to realize what's going on and NOT to run with every single feeling they get, including bitching out a waiter. Because frankly, it's a bit hard to recognize at the time that you're being irrational because your behavior makes sense to you. But trying to explain PMS to people who don't get it is like trying to explain color to a blind man (and that goes for those blessed few women who don't get it, or who only get mild versions of it). I'm giving praise to women who HAVE taken the time to not just let it all out and be a bitch, but who have taken the time and the discipline to reign it in and recognize where the irrationality comes from. It's not an ISSUE, it's a biological fact and it's not the same as a temper trantrum. But it can be controlled and it can be, I hate to use the word "overcome," but it fits.

I'm really struggling to find a metaphor here that works because anything I come up with links it negatively with some disease or mental illness. Which it's not, it's just biology. But just like you learn to control your bowel muscles to graduate to potty training, someone with those hormonal issues should learn to control them. (Did that help? Or make it worse? It's an awkward metaphor and I'm not sure potty training is apt.)

Since I didn't really want this thing to verge into a PMS thread and I apparently made it go there anyway, I'm just going to try to stop explaining and leave, now. ;)

So, this is the part that y'all are having such issues with:

I think those of us who manage to control some of the worst aspects of those behavior changing pests should get a medal, not jokes about Hillary Clinton nuking the Russians/Chinese/Al Quaida, "at that time of the month."

Good grief. OK, let me rephrase: I'd like to give a medal to those of us who get control of our hormonal issues (along with EVERYTHING ELSE we have to deal with), instead of being rewarded with "jokes about Hillary Clinton nuking the Russians/Chinese/Al Quaida, 'at that time of the month.'"

Neilbert
07-02-2009, 10:54 AM
^^^ no that just made it worse. you don't deserve respect for not shitting yourself either. understanding and managing your biology just makes you not a child, not somebody worthy of muchos kudos.

minor quibble. and maybe i'm misinterpretting a few things in addition to this quote that neil wrote.

You are. I'm saying that not taking your emotional issues out on someone else is a given. Not doing it makes you a jerk, but doing it doesn't make you worthy of respect, it just makes you not a jerk.

and if you don't get respect from others for doing them, they aren't worth doing. sorry if i'm reading the undertones wrong on that, but i think that's flawed.

You are misreading the undertones, I don't think that at all, but thanks for asking. :)

case in point...not taking your personal issues out on someone else shouldn't be because you want said someone else to respect you. it should be because you respect yourself.

Bingo.

Yellowbeard
07-02-2009, 11:02 AM
You are. I'm saying that not taking your emotional issues out on someone else is a given. Not doing it makes you a jerk, but doing it doesn't make you worthy of respect, it just makes you not a jerk.

okay. but here's the hard part. emotions aren't logical. they don't always make sense. and they are sometimes contradictory. lots of times people that take their emotions out on others don't really know they are doing it as a result.

the trick is to develop the self control so you rule your emotions, and don't let them rule over you. being able to see thru the emotional haze when in a highly emotional state is extremely hard. it clouds our perception of things.

sometimes when someone is asked what's wrong and they say "nothing"...it's an attempt to not take anything out on the undeserving, or not dump on them, etc.

yks 6nnetu hing
07-02-2009, 11:03 AM
I'm saying that not taking your emotional issues out on someone else is a given. Not doing it makes you a jerk, but doing it doesn't make you worthy of respect, it just makes you not a jerk.

*points at Neilbert* Jerk.

Edit: because people are trying to rationally and clearly explain to you a certain phenomenon and you are lashing out quite emotionally here.

Neilbert
07-02-2009, 11:05 AM
^^ I was waiting for that. It's not hypocrisy if you admit you're wrong.

Edit: because people are trying to rationally and clearly explain to you a certain phenomenon and you are lashing out quite emotionally here.

And I am rationally and clearly explaining why not being a bitch doesn't garner any respect. What's your problem? (Except for Jaylin, who is a goddamn liar, and even then I explained my accusations which were really self evident)

lots of times people that take their emotions out on others don't really know they are doing it as a result.

I know and anyone who does this, including myself, should be ashamed.

sometimes when someone is asked what's wrong and they say "nothing"...it's an attempt to not take anything out on the undeserving, or not dump on them, etc.

And sometimes it's manipulative bullshit, like we have seen in this thread. I'm perfectly fine with "nothing" meaning "I don't want to talk about it" it's the other definitions that I have a problem with. (See Sinistrums posts for more detail)

Although asking someone what's wrong is an invitation to vent if you are really sincere about it, which changes the situation. Problem is most people aren't.

Good grief. OK, let me rephrase: I'd like to give a medal to those of us who get control of our hormonal issues (along with EVERYTHING ELSE we have to deal with), instead of being rewarded with "jokes about Hillary Clinton nuking the Russians/Chinese/Al Quaida, 'at that time of the month.'"

Everyone has their own issues. You aren't special.

Isabel
07-02-2009, 11:34 AM
sigh.....

Brita
07-02-2009, 12:07 PM
with my current SO, nothing means nothing. and she just tells you if something is wrong, and whether she wants to talk about it.

the difference is, w/ one, you can't trust a word she says (that would be XW). w/ the other, you can know for certain that every word she says is true (that would be SO).

BINGO! It's all about a trusting, rerspectful relationship. If you've got it, then answering "Nothing" is OK, and the guy doesn't have to freak out and accuse the girl of playing manipulative mind games, or be afraid she is going to freak out on him later for not digging further.

All the examples Jalyn gave for the different nuances of nothing are true, but the added phrase to all of them should be: "And don't worry I"m not going to freak out on you later about this". So if you've got a girl that is honest, just relax. If she says it's nothing, give her some space and chill out. It will probably blow over in a couple of hours and life carries on. Or maybe in a couple of hours she'll be ready to talk about it. Either way, if she is worth your affection it will all be OK, and she'll appreciate the respect and the space you gave her.

If she does freak out on you after saying "Nothing" then slip out the back Jack (as Sini said)- not a good sign.

GonzoTheGreat
07-02-2009, 12:11 PM
emotions aren't logical.What???

I mean ... WHAT?????


Oh.

StrangePackage
07-02-2009, 12:11 PM
No. Personal issues are personal issues, and you do not deserve respect for not taking them out on someone else. Full stop.

I'm sure there's a potshot to be taken here about how your utter lack of social skills and sterling personality are your own personal issues that you inflict upon this board at every available opportunity, but I can't be bothered to be witty right now.

Brita
07-02-2009, 12:11 PM
We should teach our daughters not to ignore those feelings, but to see them coming and control their responses to them. For instance, Cary's example about the popcorn. How many of us would know that's what it was in our teens or early twenties? We wouldn't. We'd have snatched that popcorn bag away and picked a fight. So, we tell our daughters when they start feeling the urge to punch something or cry at a long distance commercial, that it's not a bad thing and they don't have to be controlled by it, that they can control it.


Amen! Life is a helluva alot better once you can recognize PMS for what it is. End stop. Like gil, I am not interested in a big PMS discussion. It is what it is. But I had to give props for this paragraph. If I could rep, I would have just repped her, but since I can't ~~ahem~~, I had to post it.

Sinistrum
07-02-2009, 01:20 PM
how someone conducts themself while resolving a conflict is a much better indicator of their character than how they act while under the influence of the honeymoon phase hormones.

Best bloody point in this entire debate. Fight Club ftw.

If she says it's nothing, give her some space and chill out. It will probably blow over in a couple of hours and life carries on.

The problem with this Brita, is that it could very well happen like this. However, there could still be an underlying issue that needs to be addressed that is still percolating in the background even after a SO has cooled off. In order to avoid this, we need more information on the issue than a curt "nothing." If nothing else we at least deserve to know whether the issue has to do with us and whether there is anything we can do to help. Saying "nothing" doesn't communicate that.

As for the PMS discussion, I've said this to Gilly over an AIM conversation that has mirrored this discussion. Speaking for myself, dealing with it as a guy has never been an issue for me. Its not something I look down or stigmatize, even if it can get a tad frustrating getting caught in the crossfire sometimes. I far prefer the consequences of that to the consequences of someone attempting to bottle up their emotions and shut me out in the process.

And yeah, before anyone else chimes in about privacy and individuality, sorry folks, but as I've stated before in different words, a SO's emotional well being is sort of the point of being in a relationship. The price for getting the emotional pay off that relationships provide is giving the other person access to your thoughts and emotions. It is impossible for one person to give another emotional and mental support without that access.

Gilshalos Sedai
07-02-2009, 01:23 PM
So, Sini's a Sensitive Guy and DOES want to have The State Of Our Relationship Talks? Am I reading this right?


And yes, I'm teasing.

Brita
07-02-2009, 01:35 PM
The problem with this Brita, is that it could very well happen like this. However, there could still be an underlying issue that needs to be addressed that is still percolating in the background even after a SO has cooled off. In order to avoid this, we need more information on the issue than a curt "nothing." If nothing else we at least deserve to know whether the issue has to do with us and whether there is anything we can do to help. Saying "nothing" doesn't communicate that.


I can't argue with you on that one. You make a good point. But what if it is a cheerful "nothing" or a sincere "nothing"? To be badgered after that is only frustrating.

And yeah, before anyone else chimes in about privacy and individuality, sorry folks, but as I've stated before in different words, a SO's emotional well being is sort of the point of being in a relationship. The price for getting the emotional pay off that relationships provide is giving the other person access to your thoughts and emotions. It is impossible for one person to give another emotional and mental support without that access.

You are right there as well, but there are instances where there are legitimate reasons to not want to talk about it, all of which have been mentioned here. Emotional intimacy is very important, but so is respecting your SO need for space and private thoughts. Just because you are in a relationship doesn't give your SO the right to hound you for every feeling and thought you may be having. And yes, some thoughts are meant to be private and have every right to remain so.

i.e. I have a very vivid imagination, and my 30 minute commute provides me ample time dream up all sorts of ridiculous scenarios. Sometimes I imagine my family has died tragically and wonder how I would carry on, or that someone has broken into my house and I play out how I would save my kids. If I get home a little distracted and maybe even a little teary eyed because my mind has been wandering into all these dramatic realms, and my hubby says "What's wrong?", and I say "Nothing" with sincerity and a smile, I would not appreciate being forced to explain my 30 minutes of daydreaming. I DO appreciate my hubby taking my word for it. Later on I might tell him my complicated scenarios, I might not. Some things can still be a person's own private thoughts.

This is a bit of an esoteric example, but I'm just trying to show there is give and take, understanding and respect, trust and honesty, in healthy realtionships that do not make this type of discussion black and white, but surround it with a lot of grey. Sometimes "nothing" really is "nothing", and if you force the issue it then can unnecessarily becomes "something".

I now feel like I am rambling- I apologize if I am.

Gilshalos Sedai
07-02-2009, 01:40 PM
You do that too? I thought I was the only wierdo!

Crispin's Crispian
07-02-2009, 01:47 PM
You do that too? I thought I was the only wierdo!
Guys do it, too.

And we don't usually want to talk about it. It's "nothing."

Gilshalos Sedai
07-02-2009, 01:55 PM
"Sorry, dear, I was daydreaming about what I'd do if you died in a flaming car wreck on I10. Nothing personal," I can see where explaining that would get uncomfortable.

Ishara
07-02-2009, 02:04 PM
LOL. Yeah, I do that ALL the time.

Sinistrum
07-02-2009, 02:27 PM
But what if it is a cheerful "nothing" or a sincere "nothing"? To be badgered after that is only frustrating.

Well unless you've got multiple personalities or live in the Dollhouse, a cheerful and sincere nothing is mutually exclusive with the idea of being visably upset, thus prompting the question "what's wrong?"

my hubby says "What's wrong?", and I say "Nothing" with sincerity and a smile, I would not appreciate being forced to explain my 30 minutes of daydreaming.

Or you could always just say "I was day dreaming."

Sometimes "nothing" really is "nothing", and if you force the issue it then can unnecessarily becomes "something".

My point is that "nothing" should mean "nothing" all the time, especially if you don't want the issue forced. Otherwise, when you are dealing with multiple and inconsistent definitions for the word, the issue will be force most, if not all of the time so that way a man can figure out what the hell you are talking about.

Brita
07-02-2009, 02:36 PM
My point is that "nothing" should mean "nothing" all the time, especially if you don't want the issue forced. Otherwise, when you are dealing with multiple and inconsistent definitions for the word, the issue will be force most, if not all of the time so that way a man can figure out what the hell you are talking about.

OK, geez, no need to get pissy about it :p

Seriously, I see your point Sini.

Sinistrum
07-02-2009, 02:47 PM
I'm not pissy. It's nothing, really. :p

Jalyn
07-02-2009, 06:48 PM
Your second grouping was just as confused and contradictory as the first.


If you're going to get all offended over me calling you a goddamn liar, maybe you should stop being a goddamn liar.


And maybe you should stop being a goddamn idiot.

I gave a 3 possibilities of what nothing could mean in response to "what's wrong," the second one included multiple reasons why the answer is shorthand for "don't worry about." Sini and I went on to have a conversation about that and whether it was appropriate. I don't see a problem with it, he does. In that conversation I gave an example of another time that people use a verbal shorthand that can mean quite a few different things to show that people use these types of non-answers all the time in completely innocuous ways. If you think that I was stating that the conversation that followed was about the list of things "I'm fine" could mean, perhaps you really do need a list in comprehension.



Sini - Of course it makes just as much sense to say "I don't want to talk about it" (or whatever the reasoning is) as "nothing." Assuming, of course, that you know the SO's reaction to that will be to move on to another topic rather than to push at what it is you don't want to talk about. I simply don't think it's horrendous to answer "nothing" in that situation either.


(You know what's really funny about this whole conversation? I can't think of a single time where I answered simply "nothing" to this question where it didn't mean, "I'm fine." It's much more likely to be "nothing, I'm just tired" or "I'd rather not talk about it" or "Don't get me started.")

Also - absolutely do the daydreaming thing. Never been called on it, that I remember, but yeah, the answer would probably be "Er. Nothing." And I would mean it quite literally.