Samson Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 I really want a big new truck and if my wife really loved me, she'd get it for me because I want it!
Author moimeme Posted July 18, 2004 Author Posted July 18, 2004 Should they?" You mean, like some kind of social engineering program: here's what everyone must think about A, B, and C. If you don't agree you should listen again? Is that what you mean? And if so, who would determine what A, B, and C are? What is your goal? To save people from forming opinions that you believe to not be in their best interests? ... how would you decide what their best interests are? Right. I wish to be set up as the Empress of All I Survey and determine what everyone thinks. Glad you caught that. I'm interested in exploring whether people think there has been a shift in the expectations, particularly of women, in relationships, not whether I ought to be arbiter of all social opinion. If the debate returns to my question, I'll reengage.
Author moimeme Posted July 18, 2004 Author Posted July 18, 2004 I really want a big new truck and if my wife really loved me, she'd get it for me because I want it! Sure, blow one of my assertions right to hell
midori Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 Originally posted by moimeme I'm interested in exploring whether people think there has been a shift in the expectations, particularly of women, in relationships, not whether I ought to be arbiter of all social opinion. If the debate returns to my question, I'll reengage. I've been addressing the points you've made in the course of this discussion, moimeme. Returning to the succinct question as re-stated: no. I don't think there's been a shift.
ladyangel Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 This thread is supposed to be about societal norms, not about answering LS posts. If that was aimed at me, excuse me! Originally posted by moimeme It appears that there has been some sort of bizarre twist in how people are being socialized in recent years. I have seen countless posts in which some female apparently expects that because she wants/needs/desires something, her man should jump to do it, get it, or give it to her. I'm not talking about standard relationship stuff like love, trust, affection, but of stuff like babies, rings, whatever. I have yet to see a man post saying "I really want a big new truck and if my wife really loved me, she'd get it for me because I want it". If he did, he'd be laughed off the board. So what's up with this? Are females being taught that men are their servants? Are they being told that men's role is to serve/please them in all their desires these days? Where are females getting this impression from? Is nobody being socialized to want to be fair, or even to give to their men? How, exactly, is it that the woman's every wish, desire, and whim must be honoured but not the man's? To try to reflect what I hear you saying, it appears that you think that people, specifically women, are being socialized in a bizarre fashion because some women are disappointed when they don't get what they think they should be getting from a man/relationship. You don't seem to think men fall into the same category. You seem to think that females are being taught that men are their servants and that they should serve and please them in all their desires, etc. I disagree. I think there are an equally significant number of men who have the same "illogical" thinking. Some men think that the woman's role is to cook, clean, have and take care of children, and not question anything the man wants to do, whether that be watching porn and masturbating instead of having sex with them, spending their money on, yes, trucks, motorcycles, sports cars and other toys and status symbols, instead of compromising and giving them what they might want in addition to what the man wants; hanging out at bars with their single buddies instead of being home with the family; or expecting sex on demand. A number of men expect women to work full-time AND do all of the above list of "female duties." I mean, the list of things some men expect can go on and on, just the same as the list of some women can. We do tend to live in a "me-me-me" society -- lol! -- but I don't think the media and PR are completely to blame, nor do I think a shift in direction of same would completely change our wants and desires, nor is it feasible. Nobody wants to live in a Communist society where you are told what you can and can't buy, do, think, and how to live. I think everybody would resent that. In my opinion, society's "norms" are not causing most of the problems in marriages and relationships. People cause their own problems between themselves. When people learn to compromise and put someone else and their feelings first at least 50% of the time, marriages will be more healthy. But that is up to them to do, not for someone else to tell force them to do.
Samson Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 OK, Moimeme, I'll try a more serious reponse to your observation, which, in a nut shell seems to be the result of a backlash from the social changes women experienced during the 60's and 70's (of course, women that deem to post their male connected wants/needs/desires are going to predominate the site). My theory is based, like all my theories about female behavior, on the fact that men are always going to be one step behind women in the evolutionary process. We cannot begin to comprehend the subtle nature of whatever motivates women to behave the way they do, however, I'll give it the usual male shot in the dark: Being slow, we have just began to accept the social "norms" women created for themselves 30 years ago. However, women have found that some of these creations have inconvienient side effects, and being the agile adapters they are, have gone back into their files to "go back to the future." Men have abducated their position as "breadwinner" only to become irrelevant unless they can provide luxury: nannies for the baby, rings, vacations, a pool in the backyard, a Lexus instead of a Corrola.
ladyangel Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 I think I see what you're saying, Samson. As women have been able to earn more and become more independent and less reliant on men being the "breadwinners," they have slowly begun to think that perhaps a marriage should be more equal. Therefore, they have begun to expect a lot of the same things men have been taking for granted for years; sex when they want it, not just when he does; help around the house since they both work full-time, either in the work force or taking care of the children and the house; a more equal distribution of the family funds; having a more equal balance of nice things done for them, since they do nice things for their husbands; and yes, even nice jewelry (if that's what they choose to spend their share of the money on), vacations and cars, if they are contributing to the household and should have an equal say in how it is spent. I don't agree at all with a wife/family spending more than they have and going into deep debt just to keep up with the Joneses, but I think women are coming to believe that compromise and equality (fairness?) is the name of the game.
Samson Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 I think women are coming to believe that compromise and equality (fairness?) is the name of the game. [color=red]IAMLFMAO[/color] Exactly what I would have guessed a woman would say!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Perhaps you could convince others of this? If so, I know of one woman in particular who is quite happy to liquidate my every asset, and plunge me into debt to sustain her reclining position on the couch rather return to the world of the empolyed (or even under-employed) whilst I peel grapes for her to consume during the Oprah show every afternoon!
Curt Posted July 18, 2004 Moderators Posted July 18, 2004 Look all over the board, and more representatively, in "off-line" society in general. Look at the conflicted values, and completely unwieldy expectations that females and males have set up for each other. If they are the problem, the "norms" are not leading us to a more just, reasonable state for relationships. If anything, we are seeing continuing divorce rates as proof positive that people are not winning this race for equal, loving partnerships via "accepted norms." I believe the "pack mentality" of our society - one does it (or gets it), and the next thing they "all" do it (or want it) is the problem. You can call it keeping up with the Joneses - call it what ya will - but it is part and parcel of a huge issue. We are living often by what the "others" consider important, without really knowing what WE (as partners when referring to a relationship) want to consider important ourselves. As individual men/women, we have our peers (pack) sniff out the "ways to go," by whatever means the great mass considers appropriate. If the way be shown to all by reading Cosmopolitan and US (or whatever the hell other media "rags" are involved), or otherwise, then that's what we go with. Don't dare sit down and actually consider what both want from a relationship. Look at the ring on her finger. $15,000 - Woooooooow - He must really LOVE her! Say WHAT? Accepted SYMBOLS of love/affection/devotion. This came up a couple of days ago on the board as being an issue with relationships. If we don't have a CERTAIN symbol (an expensive one at that) we are not faring as well as a counterpart who, along with his/her beloved, may be able to have such a symbol. What bank does the transfer rate from diamonds into devoted love? Love to meet the a**h***! I could get into the porn and whatnot too, but ... nah! Curt
Samson Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 Accepted SYMBOLS of love/affection/devotion. ..................If we don't have a CERTAIN symbol (an expensive one at that) we are not faring as well as a counterpart who, along with his/her beloved, may be able to have such a symbol. What bank does the transfer rate from diamonds into devoted love? Curt, is this the sort of symbology you're referring?: I've got a beautiful princess cut engagement ring. We already have our wedding/honeymoon booked...in December we fly to Hawaii and sail along the outskirts of the islands, stopping at 5 of the 7 isles. It's a Hawaiian cruise and I couldn't be happier! We will be getting married on Kauai our second day of the cruise. If so, then [color=darkred]CONGRATULATIONS[/color] You're one of the "great mass."
midori Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 Originally posted by Curt As individual men/women, we have our peers (pack) sniff out the "ways to go," by whatever means the great mass considers appropriate. If the way be shown to all by reading Cosmopolitan and US (or whatever the hell other media "rags" are involved), or otherwise, then that's what we go with. Don't dare sit down and actually consider what both want from a relationship. Look at the ring on her finger. $15,000 - Woooooooow - He must really LOVE her! Say WHAT? Accepted SYMBOLS of love/affection/devotion. This came up a couple of days ago on the board as being an issue with relationships. If we don't have a CERTAIN symbol (an expensive one at that) we are not faring as well as a counterpart who, along with his/her beloved, may be able to have such a symbol. What bank does the transfer rate from diamonds into devoted love? Love to meet the a**h***! Right, there are expectations that operate on both men and women in relationships, but the question is, is this a new thing? Is it a new thing that most people operate according to norms that they haven't stopped to question and may not even be conscious of? I think maybe the expectations take different forms, depending on lots of societal variables like relative affluence, etc. But are you saying that you think the unexamined assumptions and expectations are a new development, Curt?
Curt Posted July 18, 2004 Moderators Posted July 18, 2004 Not even remotely a new development. As old as time itself, but perhaps more magnified by the materialistic culture of the day. Curt
Caroli Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 If I want something, I buy it. If I don’t have enough money then I save money until I can have enough and then I buy it. I don’t expect that my boyfriend give to me the material things that I want. However, when is about what I want in our relationship that is different. The relationship is about two people, he and me, so if I am not comfortable with something I don’t expect that he immediately change that but I expect that he could be able to talk to me about that and we can agree what can we do together. I don’t understand how a lot of people can say: “boys are boys” and with that they justify some things of the man behavior but they complain about some woman behavior. So, “girls are not girls”?. I think that a lot of people here need to be more consistent in their way of thinking. In the same way that women expect some things from men they also expect some things from them.
BlockHead Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 Samson My theory is based, like all my theories about female behavior, on the fact that men are always going to be one step behind women in the evolutionary process. We cannot begin to comprehend the subtle nature of whatever motivates women to behave the way they do, however, I'll give it the usual male shot in the dark:I disagree. If anything, you should have learned that women usually send mixed signals.
Author moimeme Posted July 18, 2004 Author Posted July 18, 2004 perhaps more magnified by the materialistic culture of the day. Not so much a new thing, then, but a variation on an existing theme. But that covers the materialism component. What about in other matters. What about not even compromise but coming to consensus? What about truly being partners? Is that anybody's goal? Or maybe I should ask why it wouldn't be somebody's goal. What about joint decison-making and what about negotiation?
InmannRoshi Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 I'm glad a woman brought this question up. Otherwise, it would have been disregarded as the rantings of an embittered misogynist.
InmannRoshi Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 We live in an isolated world, and people now more than ever seek to fill their isolation with material goods. Memberships in social groups and clubs, both male and female oriented, have declined around the board ... from the bowling league to the Shriners. However, we all belong to the club of mass marketing, and mass marketing tells us love and connection is achieved through obtaining material possessions to fill the wealth. Perhaps its even more accute in females, as the nesting instict is still there (ever watched Oprah's "favorite things" episode ... scary), as they've now entered the workforce and perhaps have discovered that this perceived "career" that was supposed to be a source of stimulation and excitement has really turned out to be a daily grind of tedium and monotany, so they have an even larger void to fill ... women who stayed at home in previous generations had numerous social support programs with other women from tupperware parties to church functions to social groups of women who would gather and talk and support one another. In the work environment, not only are women not as supportive of each other, but its a competitive environment by its very natgure. Now the husband has to fill all of that, and the men in their lives are asked to fill more roles and are asked to be the sole source of anything a woman needs... including their self worth. Most of this wedding ring and extravagent wedding stuff seems to come from the "I wanted to be treated like a princess" syndrome. In our society, even the smallest amount of displayed humility is taken as weakness and a "doormat". We've always worshiped at the Cult of Personality, but now we've graduated to the Cult of Hubris. This whole modern mantra of self esteem to which we ohm to ourselves on a daily basis. Now I'm not saying confidence isn't important, but when did it become the end all and be all characteristic that we all must be attracted to. Why does confidence trump all other virtues, and when did it make earnestness and humility its suboridinate? There once was a time when pride was considered a deadly sin? Perhaps we've all been worshiping at the alter of Saint Norman Vincent Peale with such ferver and devotion that we never noticed that we've taken it a little too far. We applaud people with ludicrous amounts of self regard: musicians, actors, politicians, motivational speakers. We can't just admit we are unspectacular and ordinary people and the world will probably forget we even existed 100 years from now.
Author moimeme Posted July 18, 2004 Author Posted July 18, 2004 InmannRoshi Most of this wedding ring and extravagent wedding stuff seems to come from the "I wanted to be treated like a princess" syndrome. In our society, even the smallest amount of displayed humility is taken as weakness and a "doormat". We've always worshiped at the Cult of Personality, but now we've graduated to the Cult of Hubris. This whole modern mantra of self esteem to which we ohm to ourselves on a daily basis. Now I'm not saying confidence isn't important, but when did it become the end all and be all characteristic that we all must be attracted to. Why does confidence trump all other virtues, and when did it make earnestness and humility its suboridinate? There once was a time when pride was considered a deadly sin? Perhaps we've all been worshiping at the alter of Saint Norman Vincent Peale with such ferver and devotion that we never noticed that we've taken it a little too far. We applaud people with ludicrous amounts of self regard: musicians, actors, politicians, motivational speakers. We can't just admit we are unspectacular and ordinary people and the world will probably forget we even existed 100 years from now. I could not possibly agree more.
Author moimeme Posted July 18, 2004 Author Posted July 18, 2004 As for women and their feelings, I believe that all humans, no matter their gender, have an obligation to try to be reasonable and fair to each other. That means men to women, women to men, women to women, and so on. And sometimes, for whatever reason, our feelings towards one another are not reasonable or fair, and in those cases I believe we need to recognize where we've gone wrong and fix it for the sake of the other humans around us. And that includes me, myself - 'moi-même'. And let us be perfectly clear; I hate unfairness, unkindness, and unreasonableness, not any gender, race, religion, or music taste.
Curt Posted July 18, 2004 Moderators Posted July 18, 2004 The "partnership" idea is exactly what I (and I hope a number of other people) look for. The problem is that, unless I am really out to lunch, there are more people today into the "Cosmo is the way to go", pop-culture mentality, than perhaps even I would like to realize. As a result, what you have is a numbers situation - the "real" ones (male and female) may, in fact, be few and far between. I cannot even count the number of people I come across each day, that appear to be more into unbalanced relationships (whether they can perceive them as such or not), games, etc., than are interested in coming together in love to enrich each other's lives. I'm farrrrrrrrr from perfect, but I don't see that way as the way decent, loving individuals should go. Normative or not, I don't want any part of it. I am looking for a woman that loves me, not what my bank account can give her, but what we bring to each other's lives. God save me from any woman who looks at an engagement ring I give her and wonders, "Hmmm ... is this the BEST he could do?" "Hers is so much bigger, and her fiance doesn't make as much as he does." Worse still, would be to find myself saying, "If she loved me, she would get me this/do this/say this." I would hope that we could discuss and come to some concensus/compromise to any disagreement we might happen to find ourselves in. Hopefully, if the "normative/pop-culture" way is how we are to have loving relationships these days, I shall be spared from that institutional horror. I don't mean to be melodramatic, but I feel strongly about this stuff. Curt
Author moimeme Posted July 18, 2004 Author Posted July 18, 2004 the "real" ones (male and female) may, in fact, be few and far between. I was just bemoaning that very fact with a dear friend earlier today. And you weren't being melodramatic. It is frustrating and disappointing that people seem (and I say 'seem' because maybe it's just a perception) to not even be interested in being 'real'.
HokeyReligions Posted July 18, 2004 Posted July 18, 2004 I haven't read through the whole thread yet, so pardon me if I'm repeating others! Good observation! I remember talking to my daughter about sex and relationships and commitment and respect, and along with that we talked about expectations. I do remember her (of course, she was only 8 or 9 and not an adult) talking about the ring, and the house, and where HE would take HER on the honeymoon, etc. All materialistic things. I asked her what she thought her role would be for him, and she surprised me by saying "doing laundry, cooking, keeping house, etc." all the old traditional roles! We did have some discussions about that. She had it figured somehow that HE = MATERIAL and SHE = SERVICE. She changed her views as she was getting older---mainly because her role models were the total opposite. I work and buy things for everyone else and support everyone else. Hubby takes out the trash. When I tell him to. Maybe it all boils down to too many people watching old reruns of Father Knows Best or The Donna Reed Show on Nick at Night. LOL! Seriously, though. Now that you have pointed it out, I do see the trend.
InmannRoshi Posted July 19, 2004 Posted July 19, 2004 The cause of human suffering is undoubtedly foundi n the thirsts of the physical body and the illusions of worldly passion. If these thirsts and illusions are traced to their source, they are found to be rooted in the intense desires of physical instincts. Thus, desire, having a strong will to live as its basis, seeks that which it feels desirable, even if it is sometimes death. This is the called the Truth of the Cause of Suffering. The Fourfold Noble Truth -- The Teaching of Buddha If someones desires are left unchecked, then their suffering will likely be out of check too. Not only are they being unfair to others, they are being unfair to themselves. How many of the threads on LS have to do with "IM NOT GETTING WHAT I DESERVE (STOMPING FOOT) !!!" Their unscrutinized desires have led to their suffering. Its not unkind or hatefull to point that out to them.
marribell Posted July 19, 2004 Posted July 19, 2004 Originally posted by moimeme ...some female apparently expects that because she wants/needs/desires something, her man should jump to do it, get it, or give it to her. I'm not talking about standard relationship stuff like love, trust, affection, but of stuff like babies, rings, whatever.Don’t men have their part of guilt for it? I did not expect any ring from my first husband. I was absolute happy and giving, my ex wasn’t happy having a wife who goes one step forward than he in education, success (cultural thing). At some point he said he needs someone who rises kids. We were rising one BTW, he meant who only rising kids…For me was very important what I am doing and that I am very successful in doing it. Now that ring issue. From beginning of our relationship my fiancé proudly told me how nice he was to ex buying her an expensive ring, how he surprised her with it ... I never-ever wanted a ring. I could buy one if I wanted to. I have some remarkable jewelry left from my grandmother. Very few times I wore them I ended up carrying it in my purse. Don’t like people stare at me, find it too fancy for me, I am a modish person. With all his past stories he made me to expect that he will surprise me with a ring one day. And I was shocked to know that my case is different. It doesn’t have to be an expensive ring, the same way he was still caring ex’s pics with him when we met but he never thought about carrying mine. He didn’t care to explain or let me know that he is going to do an exception…Only after I came up with a question he told me his new view about buying a ring to a woman. It was just few years ago, right before we started to date , that he wrote a letter to ex telling that he is going to buy a new ring for her. I have accidentally read that letter one year ago. It was after she cheated on him and left him. I had to work hard to come over that. I still need to work on it. I loved all your critical observation regarding my diamond ring post. It was what I expected. It was like putting a cold water on a face that needed it. Originally posted by moimeme I have yet to see a man post saying "I really want a big new truck and if my wife really loved me, she'd get it for me because I want it". If he did, he'd be laughed off the board. They want to get only what the society or we make them to expect to get. I am also not speaking about love or affection but something materialistic or some service. They don’t expect that we buy gifts or earn more money than they, but they expect some other services, like taking the trash out every evening or sitting at home and rising kids, letting them to make the main decisions, giving up to do what we like to… Have read some posts here.
Author moimeme Posted July 19, 2004 Author Posted July 19, 2004 they expect some other services, like taking the trash out every evening or sitting at home and rising kids, letting them to make the main decisions, giving up to do what we like to I don't think I've even seen one post where a man has said he wanted this. (I just know there'll be a post like that any minute now! Samson, buzz off! )
Recommended Posts