I think in reality, men don’t care about all that BS she rattled off. A man just wants a woman to do one thing. Look like Margot Robbie. After that we don’t care if she’s the Queen of England or droning on about mortgage-backed securities.
I kind of feel like that’s more like “male loser culture”. From my experience and observation, a normal man deals with the various issues of growing up, makes and loses friends, finds a girlfriend here and there, maybe marries, figure out a career and basically figures out a life based on his abilities. For the most part, it sort of just happens. I also saw from time to time there were men for who this didn’t “just happen” and they seemed to struggle.
I wonder now where more and more of these men, instead of finding constructive ways to grow and improve themselves, they instead glom onto people like Andrew Tate lifestyle thinking they can craft themselves into Tyler Durden from Fight Club.
Why? Do believe your opinions are more reflective of men as a group than mine?
I was making a joke, but there is some truth in it that a lot of men (particularly those who frequent the manosphere) are more interested in a woman’s appearance than really anything else of substance.
It’s not funny because it’s not true or because it is true?
I stand by my theory that, based on pro-feminist films like Barbie, Gone Girl, the Substance, statements by posters like @Spice_Weasel and my observations with my own wife and other women I know, women as a whole seem to get overly worked up over trying to maintain a complex and often contradictory standards that they believe society has set for them that often makes them feel like they aren’t doing enough. And that this standard is largely in their mind, fed by media more than any real demands by their partner.
Ok, she doesn’t have to be Margot Robbie. But I think most men just want to find a woman they are attracted to who is just easy to hang out with.
I would imagine that a man with no skills and no education would be left behind or in the lower tiers in almost any society.
? Because of course only her partner’s demands count as “real”, while any societal “standard” about expectations for women is merely “in their mind”?
I’m sure you didn’t mean it that way, but this does come across as dismissing societally prescribed gender roles as essentially nonexistent in the case of an individual woman, as long as her individual man generously refrains from enforcing them.
That is definitely a phenomenon among some. And of course completely missing the point of Fight Club.
One of the broader questions I’ve brought up on this board before is what is the alternative we’re offering these men? Are there ways we could make it easier for them to volunteer, be in positions of leadership in their community, or facilitate wholesome male bonding?
Because what is the alternative for them? “Suck it up” doesn’t appear to be working.
That might be true, but for me I’m not sure if it’s social expectations for women so much as the fact that I love my son and I love my job and take both very seriously. That tension is something my husband feels just as much, if not more because he frequently has to deal with clients in crisis, and prioritizing other things over people in crisis feels understandably pretty bad for him.
I admire him a lot. I probably sell myself short sometimes just because I think he is so great. He is wont to tell his clients that they won’t feel better unless they start making some changes and contributing to their household or their community any way they can. It’s astonishing the number of people who think sitting in a therapist’s office is going to solve all their problems for them. No, you actually have to be the one to change your own life. Therapy is just handing you a tool kit. At a certain point you’ve got to take the kit and get to work.
That’s a pretty drastic difference from what you said earlier.
For one thing, various men don’t all find the same women attractive; and “attractive” isn’t just a matter of looks, though looks can have a good deal to do with it. For a more major point, “easy to hang out with” is a really major addition — and will vary even more drastically from man to man.
And while people (of any gender) who are casually dating may have only those requirements, nearly everybody has additional requirements for a marriage or similar long term relationship, though again not everyone has the same ones. Often a lot of these are back-of-the-head assumptions, which can cause problems when partners don’t share them. Many people expect financial contribution, many people expect housekeeping contribution (and often disagree as to what’s necessary, though IME the neater/fussier person can be any gender), many people expect children, people who expect children have expectations about childcare, people who don’t want children have expectations about preventing them. Some people expect assistance in one way or another at their paid job. Some people expect conformity to certain ideas of what they consider prestigious behavior, so their idea of their reputation won’t be damaged by association, or because keeping up their idea of their reputation requires the assistance of a partner. (Could be feeding the harvesting crew, could be providing for a Superbowl party, could be arranging and hosting a 1% banquet. People vary.) Some people require particular religious and/or political beliefs, or at least the willingness to pretend to have them. Some people require particular knowledge bases or the willingness to acquire them, because they expect to be able to have conversations about them.
While there are some people satisfied with a partner who just looks pretty and will go along with their particular taste in hanging out, it doesn’t seem to me that there are a lot of them; especially among people older than, say, mid twenties.
Well, let’s turn that around. As long as her man likes her for who she is, how many of those “societally prescribed roles” actually matter?
Like of all the crazy, contradictory rules that character rattled off in the film (or whatever equivalent any individual woman might have) at any point does she feel she has the agency to say “yeah…I’m just not going to do some of these”?
Um… Most women interact with people other than their husband. I’ve ignored a lot of societal expectations, but i think it hurt me at work. One if the reasons i hang out with a lot of queer groups is that people there don’t enforce gender norms on me, but i do have other social interactions. And i was lucky to have a family that was supportive. My sister says my parents thought i was gay when i was a kid, though.
Yeah I was about to make the same point. Unless your partner is the only one you interact wife, societal expectations still apply. I know people who get really stressed when they are about to have visitors because they feel their house/apartment has to be pristine. My parents did not raise me like that with it being more important to be welcoming than it was to make sure everything looked perfect. Having visitors is a great excuse to clean up a bit of course, but it never has been one that causes me stress if I haven’t dusted every single surface.
That is definitely the case among the people I know in my generation compared to the generation above mine. I tend to know more highly educated people in general, though.
I definitely internalized somewhat the idea that I had to do everything and be good at it, with the resultant feeling terrible when I wasn’t, especially when the kids were little. I still feel that way sometimes especially since I do feel I’m still the “house manager” – like, I have generally been the one who keeps track of all the kids’ schedules, when they have to apply for what if applicable (though Older Kid, now in high school, is becoming responsible for much more of her own crap these days), communicating with school/church/etc. about whatever, maintaining communication lines and relationships with other parents, etc. and then I have been delegating stuff to my husband. More recently I’ve been better about asking my husband to take on some tasks with the kids entirely (instead of having me delegate bits and pieces to him) and keeping myself hands-off. I think that’s been really good for our whole family. The kids adore when he does stuff with them and it means he’s more plugged in to what is going on in their lives and I’m more relaxed and my executive functioning doesn’t get overwhelmed. I should have done that before – he is fine with doing it. But of course when the kids were small we both tended to be cranky because there was more stuff to do than there was time anyway.
Yeah, I mentioned this above but I think some societal rules matter and some are fine to ignore. Like, if not following societal rules means my kids have more trouble making friends because other parents of potential friends side-eye our family, I’m going to try to the extent I can (I couldn’t, when Older Kid was in Swank Private School for a year, the societal rules of Swank Private School People were too hard for me to emulate) because my kids have enough trouble with social stuff as it is. (And doing that calculation is something that women are more likely to do than men, in my experience. My husband worries about our kids’ social issues too – but he worries about it more on the level of their individual actions (which of course are the most important!) rather than thinking about the consequences of our family as embedded in a larger societal framework that the kids are part of, if that makes any sense. I don’t know if it will to you.)
But many of the rules (I mentioned party favors above) can be ignored without any adverse effects. It also depends on who you are with, of course; I’ve got to the point where I have a bunch of very nonjudgmental people in my life, and I like it that way!
I think most men don’t want a bunch of B.S. when they get home from work. They just want peace. They don’t want moaning, groaning, arguing, drama, bickering, nonsense, craziness, etc. Just peace.
And men in our society have traditionally been socialized to believe that they’re entitled to the peace they want in their home. Irrespective of whatever non-peaceful situations are affecting the other inhabitants of the home.
The man of the house has the right to consider any such situations “not his problem”, and to resent being expected to share in coping with them. Any lack of peace is treated as something that other inhabitants of the home—-usually his wife, primarily or solely—-are gratuitously and unjustly choosing to inflict on him.
Let’s turn that around, and ask how many men have zero discomfort about doing conventionally “unmanly” things, “as long as his woman likes him for who he is”.
It’s not a large number. Most men feel at least somewhat constrained by societal norms of masculinity, even if their female partner doesn’t give a hoot about them.
That’s generally just taken for granted as normal and inevitable, whereas women feeling constrained by societal norms of femininity get criticized for worrying about stuff that’s “largely in their mind”.
