And are their relations and relationships, for lack of those intergender communication barriers, just a little bit less complicated than heterosexuals’?
Just wondering.
I think that all people are exempt from the “Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus” thing because I think it’s bunk.
But to answer your question, our relationships are wrought with the same joys and disappointments as hetero relationships. Money, cheating, domestic violence, children, illness, death. It’s all there. We do have the addtional hardship (in the U.S.) of being treated like second class citizens and/or facing ridicule and alienation from family so there’s that added stress.
But, I also think due to the added stresses and the fact that we aren’t allowed to have what heterosexuals have, we tend to take our committed relationships more seriously.
But over all, relationships are composed of individuals and that’s what makes or breaks them. My partner and I have disagreements and the fact that we are both women doesn’t make us understand each other all the time.
Yeah, but you don’t disagree over chick-flick versus the hockey game though, right?
The MAFM,WAFV theory have to do with intrinsic differences between the sexes, and how they typically play out. It’s not totally accurate, but a general guideline IMHO. My WAG is that if the homosexual partnership is caused by one member being transgendered then it would apply, but I don’t think all would consider that person truly ‘gay’, as for a ‘truly gay’ couple I don’t know, it would seem like one partner would be forced into the opposite gender role if this relationship is like a hetro one, so it would seem to apply also, but I’m not sure that is always the case.
Leaffan,
We actually agree on hockey games since we both like the Sabres.
I’ll pause while non-Sabres fans laugh. …
I read that piece of drek many years ago. The author points out at the end that there are many relationships where the woman takes the Mars roll and the man the Venus roll. I would imagine that there are many homosexual relationships where the couple fits into the Mars/Venus paradigm.
Not many laughing at the Sabres for the last 2 seasons!
Well, if you can’t figure it out for yourself, I’m certainly not going to tell you! <Sob>
Aren’t homosexuals generally found around Uranus?
::flees::
Well true to that. What if I told you we liked the Bills too? (Double the pain, I like the Bills and the Browns. :smack: )
Surprising it took nine posts for someone to do that . . .
I suppose you could say its easier in ways. But human nature being what it is, we manage to create our own communication problems and other random difficulties. Sometimes I think it’d be easier if my partner were of the opposite gender so I could use the “I just don’t understand women!” line.
It’s a metaphor for contrasting styles of communication, not a theory. Some men are also from Venus, some women are from Mars, and most people incorporate both modes, but whenever opposites attract, miscommunication is bound to occur.
I am generally considered the more masculine partner in my relationships with other men, but I used to be hopelessly Venusian when my partner came home from work with a worried expression. I would inquire, “What’s the matter,” and he would reply, “Nothing.” That drove me crazy. Was I imagining the troubled look on his face? Was I misreading all the clues? Could I no longer trust my senses? If he could only say, “It’s not serious, but I don’t feel like talking about it,” I would have been fine. It took me a long time to accept that “nothing” meant “nothing I want to talk about right now.”
Gay relationships are afflicted with all the communication problems straights cope with, but many of us are, of course, burdened with additional obstacles. I can’t hug my boyfriend or squeeze his hand affectionately while we’re shopping. I can’t kiss him on the cheek after the hot stock boy winks at me (a totally hypothetical situation). We can’t argue or reconcile in public. Small but significant expressions of affection or reassurance have to wait until we’re behind closed doors, sometimes long after the event. Either we become effective communicators or we’re lost.
To answer your question: No, our relationships are not a little less complicated when it comes to communicating. If anything, more so.
What are you confused about specifically?
I think what kanicbird is trying to say (and correct me if I’m wrong here) is that there is who you are versus who you are attracted to. Who you are and who you attracted to both can be defined as a complex set of different psychological, behavioral and physical characteristics that society (or sometimes biology) tends to attribute to either one sex or another (or somewhere in between). Interpersonal communication tends to span further than simply attraction, so relationship dynamic will be more related to who you are rather than who you are attracted to.
You can be gay because you are attracted to people with the same biological equipment, but otherwise identify with the gender that matches your sex. You can also be gay by identifying with many behaviors typically associated with the opposite sex, including being attracted to individuals of the same sex as yourself. Who you are and who your partner is will determine the relationship dynamics, rather than the sexual orientation labels you choose to put upon yourself.
[hijack]
I’ve never understood why John Whats-his-face gets all the publicity when all he did is repackage Deborah Tannen’s already-and-recently-published ideas and reword them (badly).
Better title.