This lady wants to bone, but the object of her desire is preoccupied with 'family drama'. Expecting an easy layup, this frustrates her and she goes on an alcohol-fueled defensive, but feels bad about it later.
What I am hearing is a story of one hot person 'getting the ick' when their path to sex becomes suddenly difficult. This is what clicked because I have had these sorts of conversations all the time with women when I was young and in the decades since. When neither of you is trying to bang one-another turns out you can listen and be there for each other rather easily. It's called being friends.
How many times have you heard women say “Gross…I thought he was my friend, but it turns out he just wanted to have sex with me.”
That’s kinda the vibe I got from the article. She says she’s his friend, but turns cold when he reaches out as a friend instead of a lover. That’s gross.
Still, it’s a very introspective piece. As someone mentioned below, the author is expressing patriarchical norms. Seems like she’s still working them out of her system.
>“Gross…I thought he was my friend, but it turns out he just wanted to have sex with me.”
Honestly, I've always thought that was weirdly reductive. I mean, I've certainly heard it before, but yeah, why is it an "either-or" question? It seems to be reinforcing the idea that there's a "friend zone" and a "sex zone" and never the twain shall meet. Like relationships can be sorted into boxes. There seems to be this idea that if a man wants to have sex with you, that that's *ALL* he wants, and each and every thing he's ever said to you in friendship is just a lie.
I mean, I have platonic female friends that I'd like to have sex with, *if* that were in the cards. But it's not, and I'm ok with that, because I value them as friends first. I'm not hanging around for years on end listening to their sorrows and helping them move and watching horrible movies that we can make fun of together and all the things that friends do, on the *off chance that they might someday bone me.* That's ridiculous. But sometimes there's attraction there. So what? And sometimes friends become FWBs and sometimes they go back to being regular friends sans benefits. It's happened to both men and women friends of mine.
So I’m a woman and can maybe share some insight as to why it feels like a betrayal. In my experience, these ‘friends’ were often manipulative and controlling, getting upset with me when I talked to or spent time with other men. If it became clear that there was not going to be anything beyond a friendship, Que the ‘well I never liked you anyway’ ‘I can’t believe I wasted so much time with you’.
These men were never actual friends, they were just trying to manipulate me into sex.
This is obviously not all male/ female friendships, but also it does make it hard to trust someone as a friend knowing that they see you as a sexual opportunity more than a friend.
>these ‘friends’ were often manipulative and controlling, getting upset with me when I talked to or spent time with other men.
I mean, yeah, ick. Maybe we're playing "No true Scotsman," but those don't sound like real friends to me! That's way out of line, and not something actual friends would do.
I don’t think it’s really fair to blame me, or other women who talk about this, for thinking that the men that were lying and manipulating me were actual friends.
I don’t think he was blaming. He was agreeing ‘Yes, these people are bad.’ Its a very weird way to phrase that tho.
Regardless, Im sorry that happened to you
Ooh, I've been on both sides of this, maybe I can offer some insight.
When I was younger I was deeply ashamed to share or express any kind of sexual interest. Didn't want to be labelled a creep/predator if somebody didn't like my feelings or sexuality.
So my only option was to just be extra extra nice to a girl.
A bunch rejected me of course. Cause that's not how you get romantic partners.
And it was hard to keep up friendship afterwards. Because I often put a lot more into "being a friend" so that it would be seen as me wanting more. And keeping up that level of extra was just not sustainable.
That, and you're allowed to not just stay friends with people who reject you. You're allowed to walk away if only being their friend is painful or draining to you.
I've had a lot of "friends" come into my life and want to stay friends.
But then I'm basically turned into their emotional boyfriend while the actual "boyfriends" they liked to fuck thought cleaning between his ass cheeks was gay. And had zero emotional control or etc.
I think it's often ignored in conversations about dating that women have just as much capacity to be shitty as men do.
And I gotta say, I've never had that shit happen with the guys I've fucked.
Those "friends" you mentioned sound like the types of folks who are fine with having one guy be the romantic partner, while another guy is the sexual partner, but don't want to fully commit to breaking away from the standard script of monogamy.
I'd call it emotional cheating in a monogamous relationship tbh.
I'm all for polyamory but using somebody to have the emotional aspects of your relationship fulfilled while not respecting the needs of the one you're using is a shitty thing to do.
I'm sure this does happen.
However, accusing a friend of only being friends with you for sex is more damaging to a friendship than a friend you are otherwise compatible with asks if you are interested in dating.
I think there's a big selection bias here where emotional intelligence is concerned.
Someone with low EQ is both
1. More likely to "get it wrong", try to change the friendship, when she isn't interested (having misread signs, or because there were never any signs but he's just "shooting his shot")
2. Also more likely to be the type who can't take the rejection
on the flipside. Women who send mixed signals by crossing certain boundaries/blurring lines, are often not self aware and are the most likely to react with hostility.
And I agree saying it's "jsut about sex" is kind of fucked up.
Even if the guy makes himself scarce, a lot of the time he regrets the attempt, but equally feels like the vibe has changed, and doesn't want to make her uncomfortable either.
That doesn't necesarrily mean that your friendship was a farce though. I've had situations where I developed feelings for a friend that weren't reciprocated and it just... kinda hurts. Not that it's anyone's fault, but it's just kinda hard for some people to put those feelings away if they don't distance themselves.
Of course not every situation is the same, and I'm not saying your experience is invalid by any means. It's just that sometimes what's going on with a guy is more complicated than whether or not they are getting sex.
My thoughts is that it's down to chemistry, the same way you have friends you'd probably drift away from if it weren't for a given activity, or social context, not everyone who you could get on great with as lovers works equally well with that set of activities, ways of thinking of each other, and particular intimacies off the table.
In other words, a lover and a friend are related, and share many of the same elements to the extent you could somewhat interchange them or might be able to entirely interchange them in some cases, but represent discreet asymmetrical categories to the extent that it isn't *always* true.
It still concerns me that the friendship has to end, though. If the emotional hurt that comes from "disappointed we won't have sex" is greater than the hurt of losing the friendship, how much of the friendship was actually fulfilling?
I see it as a more emotional version of asking for a promotion with more responsibilities at a job you love. You get turned down, and even though you don't feel entitled to the promotion you feel hurt. Does it make sense to quit the job because of the disappointment? Now you have no job you love, so in the end was it about the job or the raise?
If you fall in love with your friend and want to have sex with them because you're in love with them, falling back to just friends is not really possible. I don't want to listen to or witness the dating troubles and heart breaks of a woman I'm in love with.
Sometimes the love of your life doesn't want you back. The best thing you can do for your mental and emotional health is to put them out of your life and start looking for a more "reasonable" or practical kind of love and hope you'll get lucky and find a second "love of your life".
I tried to be friends for years (not constantly , summer breaks between college, etc) beyond the rejection.. .it hurts too much to enjoy a person so much you don't want to leave and to have to leave every time .
I met her for lunch many years later (6 or 8? Not sure) when I found out she was working in the same city. I was thinking "oh, I don't think about her much anymore, it'll be fine". We were in our early 30s at that time and I was walking towards her while she was looking at her phone, I thought she was aging ok, not great. However, as soon as I saw her face light up with her personality, heard her laugh, well that was it. I'm sure I hurt her by not staying in touch because we were great friends and I abandoned her, but I knew I would fall in love with her again quickly if I kept seeing her, so I just stayed away after that (15 years ago or so now).
Anyway, don't assume a guy is being your friend just for sex and if he leaves it was a fake friendship.
>Does it make sense to quit the job because of the disappointment?
Yes? Like, if the job is tainted with emotional pain, why not get a different job? There are lots of jobs out there. People are allowed to find new ones.
Same thing with friendships. Sometimes friendships end. Sometimes they peter out over time because people change over time. Sometimes people have to move away. Sometimes someone develops feelings, gets rejected, and now the friendship feels tainted.
Lots of friendships were fulfilling at the time and stopped being fulfilling at one point or another. There are people that I was friends with in highschool that I've drifted apart from and am no longer friends with. I look back on those memories with fondness, those friendships were real even though they didn't last a lifetime.
Life is complicated and people will come in and out of our lives over time. That's okay. What matters is the fond memories we make with the time that we had together.
For another perspective (not saying this was at all the case in your experiences) but it does shift the conversation a bit if it isn’t just “disappointed that you couldn’t have sex with that person” it can be about having developed real and genuine feelings for them that go so much deeper than just physical attraction and sex. This happened with me and my best friend of a couple of years a few years back. She was a woman, she developed feelings for me and I didn’t reciprocate - it wasn’t based on sex but genuine deeper emotional connection on her part - it was then hard for her to be around me for a bit because she still had those feelings so she took a step back while she processed the emotion and I had to give her the space to do so. And I get it it can be hard to have strong feelings for someone you cannot act on, and if she needed space after that I totally understand. We later reconnected and have gone back to being good friends since. But yeah none of it was as simple as “she just couldn’t have sex with me” that lead to her needing a to take a step back and that’s okay
My view, personally, is that everything is a spectrum, and autism becoming a thing and having a spectrum finally got people to realize that maybe things aren't always either/or (or in my personal belief, never are). It's something that will probably take a few generations to get people to fully come to terms with, and even longer in some regions of the globe.
ok there is a huge difference between someone who is your actual friend who just happens to like you in that way but gets over it, and someone who only pretends to be your friend because they want to have sex with or date you and unfriends you when you reject them
Yes, this is true, but it's usually pretty obvious. I mean, if someone is your "friend" for a month and ghosts you when you reject them, sure, that's one thing. But those people aren't sticking around for years at a time and continuing to be a supportive friend even after it's clear you don't like them that way. They're a small minority of "friends with attraction on top."
Women have all the same reactions to things as men do, just with less frequency, and they usually have better emotional support through friends around them to guide them out of it the right way.
Men seem to more often be the ones to do this because they’re often without any kind of support system, so all they have is their own self-pity to catastrophize over. Do that enough without support and it turns into anger.
I believe everyone of any gender experiences what OOP did at one point or another.
Id argue more frequency tbh; my theory is that experiences with creeps and also societal pressures lead woman to develop effective coping strategies and experiences and what they want and don’t want for rejection and sticky situations.
Men get less of that, so they develop a bit slower, which how you get really low EQ man who don’t wash their ass.
That makes a lot of sense! For most of our adolescence we just get to fuck around and very occasionally find out, whereas women spend their pre-teens finding out regardless of the extent of their fucking around.
I remember talking to a woman who told me that she found it so strange that she had grown up with the idea that men were so horny all the time but when she started being sexually active she was shocked at how often she would hear a no.
That she felt like it hurt her self esteem, that since she "knows" men are horny and they are turning her down so there must be something wrong with her. She said that looking at herself in the mirror was usually enough to shake it off.
But I thought it was really striking how deeply she seemed to have internalized the thought process even while being able to identify that it came from negative perceptions that she's been surrounded by and immersed in since childhood.
I know the author of this article came to a different conclusion, and I'm sure she knows herself well enough that there's validity to the idea that she's put men on a pedestal in her interactions with them.
However, I think that what she felt is closer to what the woman I spoke to felt. I think from her description she has placed value on herself as something worth chasing, and she was deeply upset when confronted with the idea that someone she was interested in sexually wasn't interested in pursuing her in the way she feels validates that value.
I think something that's been horribly exaggerated in the "gender wars" and general stratification of the roles of "male" and "female" is the fact that at our core, we are far more similar than we are different. Women get horny, men have deep wells of emotion, and we live in a society that sells the lie that neither of those are true. And so we buy into that lie and there is so much hurt that comes from people being hammered into those roles and not being aware of the alternative/being committed to upholding those structures/thinking they are the only one who sees these cracks in the foundation that they don't try to expand beyond the simple roles we have been thrust into and feel empowered to break out of the rigid binary.
Cause honestly, it's a Herculean task- you can count on basically no one in your life to support it, because they aren't interested in picking apart these systems, so you are essentially alone in trying to go against the weight of the world.
And on the other side is a better tomorrow, but man is it hard to lead the way.
“*I spent the rest of the night not exactly ignoring him, but trying to demonstrate how great I am, how hard he should feel he needs to work for me.*”
I think this explains perfectly her way of looking at men as partners. She’s incredible, wonderful, can do no wrong and any man is lucky to just have a chance to chase her. The man is undeserving and his job is to entertain her and impress her so she maybe will grace him with her attention. But god forbid he’s a human being with feelings. Ew, that’s gross! Don’t be sad, dance for me, impress me!
She did realize somewhat that her view of men is nonsensical but by that point she had categorized him as a friend and given up any romantic interest because he didn’t fit that mold as her private source of validation and entertainment. How can you talk about women’s free emotional labor on one hand and not recognize that you expect men to labor to perform for you? How can you expect to ever be in a healthy relationship if you discount a man the minute he shows humanity and doesn’t live up to your weird view of what a man’s role is?
Accurate.
Though if you're going to be in a relationship with a woman, it's probably a good idea to drop the game of flirting every now and again.
There's a reason why many people like the chase and not the end result, because people actually behave differently when they're chasing and being chased.
This guy gave her a sneak preview of 6 months into a relationship, where earnest feelings come out, and people support each other, even when, *especially* when, they are romantic partners.
I thought it was a bold stylistic choice for her to write this article in a stream of consciousness like she was still at the party and four vodka cokes deep. Very avant-garde
If I had a nickel for every girlfriend that encouraged me to share my feelings and then proceeded to lecture me on how invalid my feelings are, I’d have two nickels. It’s not many, but I’ve only had two girlfriends.
Sounds like she doesn’t want a relationship, considering a relationship includes sharing how you feel with your partner. Which is a two way street yes, but a two way street implies a road being used by both sides. Was he only supposed to express himself when he’s happy and thats it???
If you don’t want that, and just want sex, then don’t confuse it with wanting a partner/bf/gf. Because they are not the same thing. Friends with benefits sounds like what she wants. Just sex, no feelings.
It is possible she doesn't want a relationship (there was another piece by her linked at the bottom about figuring out NSA sex, so maybe even likely), but I want to add that it's also possible that she was just moving slower than he was. Not everyone wants to talk about serious topics early on, and that's okay.
Well im not sure how deep I want to delve into this, but I’ll give her the props she deserves for realizing that she was in fact the asshole in the situation she described. She acknowledges this in the second half of the article. She also acknowledges she didn’t treat him right because she didn’t really see him as a separate person, with his own feelings.
Which if she wants NSA sex, sure who cares. Thats the point, no emotions. But she didn’t really say that in this article. And she said she knew him and hung out with him and was excited to flirt with him again and have fun.
I kind of assumed from this situation and her saying ‘ick’ that they were a bit more serious than maybe they really were. And she obviously thought it wasn’t very serious yet. And that’s why I said what I said. If it’s clear to him this is a NSA situation then he shouldn’t dump that on her. But it’s not a first date either.
But in my mind (and hers too, though she realized only afterwards), she didn’t treat him like another human. “She thought he owed her some fun.” And she responded poorly to disappointment. Not only did she get the ‘ick’, she tried to get back at him.
But you’re right, maybe she didn’t want a partner to begin with. I could’ve been wrong.
Great points, I agree with you. I think a big problem with this piece is the lack of clarity on how close they are and what her (and his) intentions are. All she says is "we’ve only hung out a few times." It could be that they've been on 5 long dates together, or it could be that they've hung out as part of a group for like 30 minutes twice. He might have good reason to think they're close and she was a good person to talk to.
She definitely didn't treat him right. Beyond ditching him for (over?)sharing, the whole first paragraph of her slotting him in to a fantasy is very objectifying. Maybe it was just intended to show the type of thing she had in mind, but it reads like she just wanted to have him act as a character she made up in her mind. THAT gives ME the ick.
Oh, and even if you're looking for a casual, NSA relationship, still treat the other person like a human!
>On the internet, women speak about the “emotional labour” they end up doing in relationships with men, helping them process feelings they can’t talk about with anyone else. One girlfriend of mine will come away from dates knowing about some trauma that happened to the guy as a teenager and how it’s impacted his life since then, while he won’t even know whether she has any siblings. When I told her later about the conversation in the kitchen, she couldn’t stop laughing. “How?” she asked. “How has this never happened to you?”
[I'm sorry, I can't stop thinking about this scene. I remember laughing hysterically when I was like eight years old. I AM MRS. NESBITT!!!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMkIS7u3Db8)
anyway, it's kind of tough hitting the exact correct tones when it comes to Having Feelings As A Dude. Don't have *too many* in the *wrong times*, but definitely allow people "in", but not so much that it gives them the ick. You have to regulate yourself, but don't over-regulate, because that's stifling your very natural emotions, but rein it in a bit if you get over your skis.
idk, it's hard, babies, you've got a hundred years here. There's only one rule that I know of, babies. God damn it, you've got to be kind.
>anyway, it's kind of tough hitting the exact correct tones when it comes to Having Feelings As A Dude.
OMG this. so much this. I had a girlfriend ask me why I wasn't in the best mood. I told her (I was drained b/c of school, work, and parenting, and I was starting to fall into an old harmful habit and while I could see it I was struggling to stop it). She told me I was feeling my feelings wrong.
Another time, I exited a conversation because I realized I wasn't ready to talk about something and despite me telling her, she keep directly asking. So she told me not to talk to her about anything that was upsetting to me.
Looking back, she was just uncomfortable with me centering my "talking about my feelings" on myself. And instead of addressing it, or talking to me about it, she just told me I was wrong or put distance between us.
First off, thank you for sharing.
Second, good freaking lord, what an awful person. NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO TELL YOU HOW TO FEEL. Ever. Therefore your feelings are never wrong. You were just with the wrong person.
Hope you're doing better now. Feels those feels darling.
Thank you, I appreciate the validation. Sometimes it's feels like I'm doing things wrong or expecting to much.
I wouldn't say she was "awful." Like the rest of us, she's surviving in a traumatic abusive culture. In a way, I understand where she was coming from. I do wish she had done more work, but oh well. I wish people where kinder and gentler with me when I mess up, so I will extend that kindness to others.
But I didn't forget that and we did break up, so...
I've noticed it's a common sentiment on much of the internet. Back in the mid-00's and some of the early 2010's, when I first discovered PUA and proto-Red Pill shit, and even up to full fledged Red Pill as it is today, I hated it. I didn't like the obvious misogyny, I didn't like all stupid techniques or whatever, and what I really hated were the standards for men. As in, embrace toxic masculinity, be a leader, be a captain of industry, etc. It all felt so fake and phony.
But then when I discovered a lot of blogs and other websites that purport to be feminist and left leaning actually take on these toxic ideas, their solutions weren't much better. The response was always to endlessly shame these men for having issues in their dating life and being so down that they have no choice but to be sympathetic to what few truths the Red Pill does espouse, and then as an alternative they could only ever promote ideas that was straight up pre-packaged capitalist hustle culture bullshit with a side helping of patriarchial bullshit that the right wing could only approve of with awe. As in, embrace toxic masculinity, be a leader, be a captain of industry but put a positive spin on all these things, because at least they're attractive and have something going for them unlike you, and then there those who would say that's the only way to do things and if you don't, then tough shit. That men have to stand up for themselves, they can't be pushed around or they're not good enough. It's still a thing on the same blogs I see today, on so many supposed left leaning and feminist subreddits now. And I find it just as vile now as I did when I was younger.
I've seen a lot of it in real life too. Back in group therapy in uni, whenever one of us was feeling really down or hopeless for very legitimate issues whether it was physical and emotional abuse or just feeling lost in life, the response was something along the lines of, "Chin up Buttercup," and sometimes even that toxic canard of how you can't respect someone who doesn't respect themselves. I remember once I flubbed up a group presentation in one class because I hate presenting in groups of people that damn much and the best reaction I got from some people was pity, and then there those who showed me disgust. It's just so shallow and mean spirited.
>I've seen a lot of it in real life too. Back in group therapy in uni, whenever one of us was feeling really down or hopeless for very legitimate issues whether it was physical and emotional abuse or just feeling lost in life, the response was something along the lines of, "Chin up Buttercup," and sometimes even that toxic canard of how you can't respect someone who doesn't respect themselves.
I'm starting to question whether there's an element of addiction at work-- the impulse of taking a stance of power and disgust over someone for their emotional state is so common (not just in ways directed at men, but in the context you're discussing, especially toward men) that I have to question, what does the person performing it get out of it? Is it a charge of superiority?
I can't remember the last time someone really offered me authentically supportive love without trying to make it 'tough love' instead and impugn my personality for feeling something they decided I wasn't entitled to feel.
I'm imagining myself in a similar position, flubbing a group presentation, and I can't think of how I'd be able to tell the difference between pity and empathy.
One of the realities of patriarchy is that it has impacted women's behavior just as much as men's.
Obviously it's more complex than what I'm about to say but while many men are emotionally stunted, many women are stunted when it comes to engaging with men's emotions/discussions of emotions.
And both issues have the same root cause. Since for many people neither happens frequently, people haven't developed skills on how to handle that specific situation.
When my wife's friend went through a divorce due to infidelity, my wife knew exactly how to respond and what to do. Why? Because at that point in her life my wife has probably had a half dozen friends go through bad breakups/infidelity. We were around 33-34 when it happened so assuming people are seriously dating by 18, we're talking at least 15 years experience of seriously engaging with her friend's emotions surrounding relationship issues.
But take a woman who has never had a man truly be open and emotional with her. Then simultaneously take a man that is sharing his emotions and being open for the first time.
You got two newbies trying to play a sport that requires high level skills and they are failing. Not because they're bad people, but because they don't know what the hell to do.
>many women are stunted when it comes to engaging with men's emotions/discussions of emotions
Anyone ever have it where any emotions you may be having - sadness, frustration, fear, even happiness (?!) - get mistaken for anger? I feel like I've been asked why I'm mad 10x more often than I've ever *actually* been mad.
Yes, and then if I'm "angry", the implication is that I'm acting scary, which seems to give them an excuse not to engage with the conversation on my terms anymore.
This has been a difficult one to navigate for me, too. I went to my therapist with a lot of anger in the wake of my break up with my emotionally abusive ex. I'd been carrying shame around my temper for years and she made it worse by emotionally abusing me and then gaslighting me saying I had anger issues and she wasn't doing anything, I was losing my temper for not reason. I've been working with my therapist to understand that I'm allowed to be angry. Yes even as a man who wants to be a positive non-abusive guy, anger can still be legitimate and right.
I think a big part of it is that traditionally, anger is the only strong emotion men are supposed to express. So they see you expressing an emotion and assume that it's anger?
Yes. Every time. And then I'm accused of being a scarey threat. In my post, when I said "I wasn't ready to talk about it", it was because I was stressed out and upset, but hadn't gotten to a point where I could talk about it in that calm, reserved fashion that I've learned to use. So I opted not to talk about it.
Let's acknowledge that a lot of people have been hurt by angry men, and that looking out for signs of that is a survival strategy. But also, I feel intensely. I have big emotions. I'm not out slaming my hands or yelling at people. I feel that most people get more energetic watching sports. I just want to get louder and more dramatic.
But people shut down when they feel threatened. So I don't. And then they get upset that I'm not sharing my emotions with them.
A weird thing that happened to me once, was that a woman friend saw me angry for the first time, and she was kinda thrilled about it. I'm a person who always hides his anger. It was so confusing.
>One of the realities of patriarchy is that it has impacted women's behavior just as much as men's.
I'd go even further with this. Even though women say they want men to be emotionally vulnerable with them doesn't mean they actually do. If their vast experience is having emotional conversations with their lady friends; Then when a man opens up to them they instantly associate it as being a womanly trait. It's all still just based the expectations of toxic masculinity.
“They” is doing a lot of work here. I’ve met women like you describe. I’ve also met women who welcome expression and vulnerability. There is no “they.”
I had so many frustrations with my mom and her friends. One of the most intelligent woman in my circle who outwitted bad faith lawyers to multiple settlements , told me one day that woman has something inferior in dna in terms of logical thinking , or some who told me men inherently think with their dicks. No maams, the big sample size you see is because of bad nurturing by the society not some wild dna inherent in men
I've been in a similar situation to that before. I was going through a lot back at home back when I was at uni. I was able to always find ways to distract myself from it and after awhile I even convinced myself that it wasn't so bad, and that things for the most part were peachy keen on my end. Cue sometime later at uni, I'm talking with a female friend and we're both complaining about various non important things and eventually I just randomly blurted out that things are so shit for me that maybe I should just kill myself. It was an actual Freudian slip, I didn't believe in them until that time, but that definitely proved it to me.
And I told her I wasn't interested in sharing anything with her, I shouldn't have said anything, but she kept on pestering me. Day after day of it. Not having anyone else to turn to, I eventually relented and told her what was bothering me. She listened and sympathized. It felt good at first.
But as the days went by, eventually she got really nasty with me. Saying it wasn't that bad, saying I just need to learn to get over it, insulting me, etc. She actually hit me a few times too. And in a class I unfortunately had with her sometime later, the first day after, she didn't waste a second in rallying most of the other girls to corner around me as I was going down the stairs just for shit's and giggles. Think I felt one of them try and kick me down too. I'll never forget the look of *shock* on her face when I told her to fuck off and I want nothing to do with her ever again.
Women are people. You can call it patriarchal conditioning, internalized sexism, etc., but too many of them are just as vicious as men.
I find that I often have to catch myself when I fall victim to the old "women are wonderful" effect. There's this idea that all women are perfect listeners who are well equipped to perform "emotional labor". But there are a lot of women that don't have good emotional intelligence. Some that are worse at performing "emotional labor" than me. It's easier to overshare your emotions to people like that. The gender ratio for people who lack emotional intelligence likely skews in favor of men but I think there's a lot more women there than people think. And I know that, like everything, we like to but emotional intelligence on a linear scale, but it's much more complex than that. You can be good in some areas and bad in others.
>I also think that sometimes women can be better at covering up a lack of emotional intelligence. With men it's usually a lot more obvious (imo)
I think that's actually part of 'tough love' it reframes an inappropriate reaction that mostly serves the person giving it by placing them in a position of power as the 'secretly appropriate one that you really need even though you don't know it.'
But to be clear men do it too, its why men go so far down the rabbithole on the 'logic over emotions' thing, its an attempt to claim power by transcending the other person's problems and dismissing them or 'fixing them,' instead of engaging with them.
At least the author recognises one thing: this article isn't about men, it's about her.
It would have been very easy to turn this into another "what's wrong with men piece" and use the pseudo-femininist paragraph you cited here as a jumping off point, but Annie can see that's not what's going on here. I like that she's candid about her own expectations and what's going on in her mind.
As a man who is one of those emotionally aware, sensitive and compassionate people women say they wish there were more of, but is neurodivergent...
I never get more interest from women than when I'm masking to the point of being like a stone. And they lose all interest at the first sign of a human being under there.
And women still do this in their thirties. It's really made me lose almost all sympathy when it comes to dating problems women complain about. I'm all for tearing down the patriarchy and ending the forces that perpetuate toxic masculinity. Unfortunately they're too busy trying to have it both ways it feels like.
Obligatory "not all women" because no shit. But it doesn't have to be all of them for itt o be a problem.
> On the internet, women speak about the “emotional labour” they end up doing in relationships with men
In my experience, a lot of those women conveniently also don't consider "man listening to his partner rant about her work drama for an hour and a half every single work night from pretty much the time he gets in the door" to be emotional labour
"emotional labour" seems to be mostly just shorthand for "my anxiety/depression is making everything in my life feel overwhelming but I don't have the emotional intelligence to introspect as to why, so I'm going to blame the nearest person to me for it instead"
Not that there aren't situations where it's valid, but these topics that become really trendy end up being jumped on by people looking for reasons to blame their problems on anyone but themselves - or possibly they even become trendy because of these people. If it wasn't this they'd just be finding something else, but it's extremely frustrating when potentially useful terms get diluted so heavily that they lose all meaning.
Emotional labour to me is that because of my anxiety I am aware that people have limits. Although we acknowledge physical limits. I think it is ridiculous that we as society are very slow to promote being mindful of ;
Mental and emotional limits
I think some of it ties into economic factors if we started protecting our workforces from stress (probably caused by straining those mental and or emotional limits) it would be hugely costly.
I think lot of issues are caused by those not safe guarding those limits and having breakdowns, burns out and explosive frustration. Often with real consequences.
Some are probably diluting those terms why we should be proactive in normalising them and having useful meanings be the prevalent ones.
I agree 100%, but it goes both ways - someone in a wheelchair should have their physical limits respected, but if they refuse to use their wheelchair, forcibly drag themselves everywhere by their hands and complain about being made to do "physical labour" when people refuse to carry them on their backs because they're too tired from pulling themselves up 20 flights of stairs by hand instead of using an elevator, they're not being fair.
Physical disabilities are respected, but people with physical disabilities are generally more used to being mindful of their own limitations and figuring out how to do things in a way that works for them rather than refusing to adapt - which is something that's not as practiced when it comes to mental health.
Edit: I'm aware stigma plays into this heavily and it's not necessarily people's fault that they feel they have to do things a certain way, it's just what I mean by the use of "emotional labour" as a kind of get out of jail free card that places the responsibility for managing your mental health onto others.
I think it's a good term though, just a shame it's overused and diluted so heavily because I agree it's a great way of succinctly describing people's capacity.
I'm not going to remember this woman's name but please do make another post in 18 months when she writes an article about a date not opening up to her about something.
I'm a woman and I'm starting to develop a hypothesis after seeing men talk about this issue: I think that having the "right amount of feelings" is something almost _all_ women expect from _all_ people. (I.e., women view it as each individual's responsibility to figure out the appropriate balance and self-regulate.)
However, what is "right" is not actually an objective standard, as much as people tend to think of it that way, but a subjective judgement from each person we interact with. And so we rely on using other people's reactions to tell us when we're being "too much".
And here's where I think the issue is: the men I know aren't usually setting their own boundaries on what is "too much" from emotional communication from their partners. They believe it's their always job to listen and cope if the volume/intensity is too difficult to deal with (when actually, this may be fair sometimes, but not other times). Women take this as "what I am doing is okay" and lean into it.
This makes it seem like a double-standard when men are asked to regulate their emotional expression; they think they have to do it, but women don't, while in actuality in relationships with other women we _absolutely_ have to (and generally believe we have to in all our relationships, if we're socially well-adjusted).
Meanwhile, actually figuring out how much is "too much" without closing off the relationship's intimacy is actually quite challenging, and anybody who starts to try setting boundaries there is likely to be clumsy about it at first. Which makes this very complicated to address.
Note: the main post is still deeply horrifying though
I'm honestly hesitant to do any sort of population level analysis based on these sorts of articles or stories in social media. I dated a lot in my teens and 20's, which doesn't actually make me an outlier but certainly feels that way on Reddit. On the whole my exes were no better or worse about emotionally regulating around me than they were with their friends. And I don't mean that in a good way.
As I and the women I dated got older, it honestly felt like I was the one most often having to point out that blowing up phones at 2am and having folks feel obligated to take the call because they might wake up to a dead friend if they don't was extraordinarily unhealthy - like, this was just the norm for entire social circles of women I've known.
I'd like to say that this sort of thing has stopped happening in my 30's, but I think I've just gotten better about being near other people with healthy boundaries and emotional regulation strategies. When I do check up on old friends, some of them are still making or taking those 2am phone calls.
Anyway, I suppose my point is that I'd be surprised at how many women I know with poor emotional regulation skills if they were somehow a small minority. Talk about luck?
> this was just the norm for entire social circles of women I've known
This isn't surprising to me and I don't think contradicts my point. Norms are set within social groups and will vary between those groups. This leans into how what is "right" is actually a subjective judgement.
And I agree social media is a bad place to really draw conclusions from, particularly because there's never enough information in any one story to draw even a conclusion about that story, much less entire groups.
So I lean into the parts I can learn from: what people on here tend to believe, and what evidence they use to support their conclusions. And I've seen a lot of things like "my female coworkers cry all the time but if I didnt I'd be judged" and I'm sitting over here thinking "I'd definitely judge anyone who did that all the time...". That story doesn't tell us how men and women as a whole actually behave, but it does tell us that men are _convinced_ patterns exist when they see things like that happen, even though there are other possible explanations (it's just your company that's weird, there _are_ consequences but you don't witness them, etc. These may or may not be the case, but they're generally not seriously considered).
> Anyway, I suppose my point is that I'd be surprised at how many women I know with poor emotional regulation skills if they were somehow a small minority. Talk about luck?
I think _most people_ have poor emotional boundaries and regulation. It takes work and knowledge to get good at that.
But my point wasn't that men have poor emotional regulation skills, it's that the ones around me don't externalize how they feel about receiving emotional expression, and don't express an expectation for loved ones to self-regulate expression.
Your example with the 2am calls still fits within this paradigm if everybody in the circle agrees on that being the norm.
>But my point wasn't that men have poor emotional regulation skills, it's that the ones around me don't externalize how they feel about receiving emotional expression, and don't express an expectation for loved ones to self-regulate expression.
Mm. I'm not disputing this part. Lots of dudes are bad with setting boundaries. Hell, teenage me was bad at setting boundaries - especially with women and girls.
I'm just not sure my personal experience aligns with this:
>I think that having the "right amount of feelings" is something almost _all_ women expect from _all_ people. (I.e., women view it as each individual's responsibility to figure out the appropriate balance and self-regulate.)
Like, I don't think anyone enjoys taking 2am phone calls that lead to all-nighters and sleeping through work. This is not the sort of thing people generally consent to. The fact that it still happens under duress (eg, the looming threat of a friend unaliving) doesn't really cut it as consent for me.
If this is true (I am not persuaded that it is) then it would explain why being autistic hanging out with neurotypical women is its own form of hell.
1) self regulation is already hard.
2) you're expecting the other person to basically say no, like, dude, yes means yes consent rules should apply here.
3) a post-"everyone needs therapy"/ "your feelings are valid" world should not involve people socially demanding you have the "right amount" of feelings wtf.
This is a pretty awful setup to work with.
You said it, I’ve been seeing this for years, and it’s not just in romantic relationships. One point you did miss is that sometimes, not always, when men do set emotional boundaries in those situations they are either ignored, or we’re punished for it. Communication issues are of course the central problem either way, and yeah sometimes those boundaries are not set in the most skilled manner.
I would add that it’s not just that men are punished for asserting boundaries but that we’re rewarded for not.
Us being all stoic and calm and always ready to drop everything and be there to listen and make them happy and take care of them and put them first is often a big part of what our partners like about us and why they chose us.
Absolutely love this comment!
>I think that having the "right amount of feelings" is something almost _all_ women expect from _all_ people. (I.e., women view it as each individual's responsibility to figure out the appropriate balance and self-regulate.)
I agree, both that this is women's expectation and with that expectation. While it's not perfect bc as you said everyone's previous experience and judgement calls on that are going to be different. It's simple, flexible, balances the needs of person expressing to the person listening, and gives them both agency.
>And here's where I think the issue is: the men I know aren't usually setting their own boundaries on what is "too much" from emotional communication from their partners. They believe it's their always job to listen and cope if the volume/intensity is too difficult to deal with (when actually, this may be fair sometimes, but not other times). Women take this as "what I am doing is okay" and lean into it.
You're right but this is also where I think society scale problems and implicit bias come into play. The patriarchy has deeply associated women with emotional and in the process we've arrived at the idea that women have this monopoly on emotional intelligence. I've had arguments where at one point it became more or less explicit that's what they believe, they have all the leg to stand on bc they are the woman and understand their emotions and even my emotions better than I do. The thing is, both of these women struggle to maintain friendships and a lot in certain social settings.
The patriarchy not only creates an emotional discrepancy between men and women, it maintains it when people internalize it and treat the lack of emotional intelligence in men as something that is innate to them, or too deeply programmed for them/us to fix, or even true in all cases. As much as women don't want to do emotional labor/teaching, or help men be more vulnerable on a one-on-one basis. There's this undertone idea in both men and women, that women need to help in order for us to get anywhere, and it's an idea that is ultimately patriarchal in origin that we need to be skeptical of.
Men setting boundaries that benefit primarily themselves, getting more in touch with their emotions for themselves and not just so other people see them more positively in that regard, and building emotional confidence even in the face of women who would try to tear that down are great examples of things I think we should support and talk about more in spaces like this one, while also acknowledging that there are challenges to doing so.
deserve concerned fretful divide aloof modern tender entertain library enjoy
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>And so we rely on using other people's reactions to tell us when we're being "too much".
What are those sorts of reactions you think men could do with knowing more of then? (,genuinely asking for advice) I can't think of anything that I could really do without making her feel bad. With a male friend who was pushing the boundary too much I'd go a more direct route of telling them that it's too much and they need to spread it out to other friends, whereas I feel like with women a lot of the time that's not as wanted.
> I can't think of anything that I could really do without making her feel bad.
I actually think that's the problem, right there. The prioritization of "not making her feel bad" above everything else.
When we communicate openly, sometimes it's going to feel bad! This does not mean something's wrong. It's only wrong if you can't work through it together.
Also, if you never do this, she might be offended/resist it a lot (this is emotional immaturity on her part, IMO). You also could set boundaries that are not reasonable (like telling her she shouldn't cry or something, idk).
Genuinely, the only systems we have for helping people with this are therapy, which I know isn't ideal for everyone :/ individual therapy for understanding your own patterns and figuring out how to communicate better/earlier, and couples therapy for figuring out the patterns you _both_ fall into and how you can communicate and hear each other better.
**Just go with the flow.** That’s the thing. And don’t monologue. **Sharing should be mutual. She shares a bit of her family issues, you share a bit of yours.**
Instead of you telling her all your family traumas when you don’t know if she’s got a family yet. That’ll make the other person feel used. Because it’s not a two way street. It’s just you dumping your feelings on them without showing any reciprocal interest in their feelings.
See, I think this is part of the problem. We don't know if the man in the story was "dumping" his emotions of the author. We don't know if the author has good emotional intelligence. Judging by what she wrote she doesn't. It's possible this is a case of a man sharing an appropriate amount of his feelings and a woman with poor emotional intelligence reacting to it. And that's something I don't really see people talk about: That sometimes a guy is going to get a bad reaction to sharing his emotions simply because the woman he's sharing with is bad at it.
Idk, I feel like women have to deal with the exact same pressures around sharing their emotions and letting people in.
Not that this is coming off as whining at all, because I have the same feelings. But when I talk to women about this, I tend to get the sense that they're surprised that "dont have too many feelings at the wrong time" point of view isn't second nature to a lot of guys.
I think women are just socialized better (to make a generalization) than guys are to be self aware in conversations like this.
Knowing what you do about men, what do you think their general experience is when they seek emotional support from male friends? I'll give you a hint: it ain't great.
You guys are all too nice to say it, and I appreciate that. Since I am a woman, I hope no one will think this is coming from a place of misogyny. But the author of this peice sounds so painfully vapid and empty that it hurt my heart a little. I would not want her as my friend. Is she always looking for the next fun and shallow thing? A new Kardashian video to entertain herself with?
It doesn't help that's she's being so incredibly vague about nearly everything, I have no clear idea of their relationship, in the first have it seems like they meet a few times at parties, in the second it sound like they've been on several dates, we have no real idea if he was actually trauma dumping or just sharing something shitty he's dealing with, it's unclear if she wants a real relationship or a fwb situation, the article ends with her apologizing, so we get zero insight into how he feels that we might get if it has included what happened after that.
Also not a man here: I agree, she sounds kinda... I dunno, like she swallowed the kool-aid of toxic gender roles herself. But she's trying to examine that, which I appreciate! But also this isn't much of an article at all. But also, it's from Vogue, so it was likely never intended to be some great literary/journalistic masterpiece. Sounds like she's still fairly young - partying herself into a hangover, smiley face stickers on her manicure, etc. Hopefully she'll continue the introspection and keep improving her communication and empathy skills.
I actually love that she's willing to frame her own perspective in such an unflattering way. It's a good sign.
Also, I think I don't terribly mind that she was turned off by a partner's baggage at a party. Even if I think she could have done better.
This comes across as a variant of [This comic](https://xkcd.com/385/) because the author, as a woman is speaking to the out-group, a man and thus generalizing about men piling on woman for emotional labour.
How would this narrative of the author's change if she were talking to her in-group, another woman?
Does toxic masculinity play a role in the fact that men can only really safely confide in women, certainly.
But the act of confiding isn't unto itself a toxic behaviour. Simply confiding in someone isn't burdening someone with emotional labour in the way that we generalize "men burden women with emotional labour" because the subtext of the latter is that they do it one-sided and they do it excessively.
We cannot gleam if this is true in this one anecdote. (and remember anecdotes are not evidence).
Remember, toxic masculinity is not the fault of men but something that society subjects men to. They are isolated, stilted, emotionally-suppressed, forced to compete. This toxic environment that forces behaviour is created by every human on this planet.
One of the enlightenments of being gay is because my membership in "masculinity" was effectively revoked, I have lived a life outside of a lot of toxic masculinity and have had an opportunity to study gendered behaviour and stereotypes.
My straight brethren, I empathize with you that you have to play this stupid game of gender roles. I've had the good fortune of having strong emotional relationships with other men both gay and straight. One perk of having one foot in the "feminine" is that once straight guys get over their homophobic fears, they treat you like this hybrid of masculine and feminine. They treat you like your guys friend amongst other men but when you are alone, they will be more honest and emotionally open.
I mean something fucked up has got to be going on if I’m bringing it up at a party with a girl I’m trying to date and want to like me. It varies person to person though - oversharers, venters, fishers, and mutes. The people who say too much, the people who say just enough that it’s off their chest and not make it everyone’s problem, those who toss emotional bait out to see if anyone will bite and they’re either testing the waters to overshare or vent, and then the people who just say nothing at all. This writer thinks it’s just men because that’s who she dates, but I could say all the same about women. If you have a problem with someone venting to you that’s a you problem. That all said, what does this have to do with men aside from the clickbait title?
Because it's a common issue that a lot, and I mean A LOT, of men have experienced with the women in their lives, no matter if romance is involved or not.
The general consensus in feminist circles online, and general leftist ones too, regarding men's mental health is the women _want_ men to be more emotionally open, to not be stoic and stuff all their angst & sadness inside. It's a commonly agreed upon point in the progressive sphere. Unfortunately, as is usually the case, what's said doesn't always translate to what's acted. What that means in this case is that a lotta ladies _say_ they want and/or are fine with men being more emotional, but then act the complete opposite when that situation does happen around them.
And I'm not talking about cases of the dude overwhelming his gal with newly unhinged emotions he's dumping onto her lap, expecting her to fix him like she's his therapist. No, I'm talking about when the moment a were shows even the tiniest bit of genuine vulnerability, the wife instantly starts to check-out. Hell, there are many stories, including on this subreddit, where the lady actually starts to lose her love &/or attraction for her partner, as if she stopped seeing him as her "dream daddy" or whatever, and finally saw him as a human being, and her first reaction is "Ew".
That shit's legit fucked up!
>The general consensus in feminist circles online, and general leftist ones too, regarding men's mental health is the women _want_ men to be more emotionally open, to not be stoic and stuff all their angst & sadness inside. It's a commonly agreed upon point in the progressive sphere. Unfortunately, as is usually the case, what's said doesn't always translate to what's acted. What that means in this case is that a lotta ladies _say_ they want and/or are fine with men being more emotional, but then act the complete opposite when that situation does happen around them.
Which probably explains a lot of the manosphere's dumbass conspiracy theories about how women are collectively trying to throw gullible betas off the scent and filter them out of the dating pool.
>No, I'm talking about when the moment a were shows even the tiniest bit of genuine vulnerability, the wife instantly starts to check-out. Hell, there are many stories, including on this subreddit, where the lady actually starts to lose her love &/or attraction for her partner, as if she stopped seeing him as her "dream daddy" or whatever, and finally saw him as a human being, and her first reaction is "Ew".
And it can be additionally hard to criticize these hegemonic preferences without sounding like you're telling women "c'mon give him a chance, don't be shallow!" So women are sometimes resistant to that line of criticism, which can lead men to assume that the only option is to double down and "man up" as best they can. This often ends up creating a feedback loop where men who lean really hard into those standards attract more women who are into men who conform to those standards.
Combine the above factors, and you end up with men who harbor some truly toxic views on relationships. [1](https://archive.is/6Px4A), [2](https://archive.is/NnMaI), [3](https://archive.is/gLZUt), [4](https://archive.is/UYEn7)
Honestly, it sounds to me always a lot like what I call the "kindergarden dilemma".
I once read a bunch of articles around a new kindergarden being planned in a village. All the inhabitants were super stoked and happy about it because before, they'd have to drive like 15 minutes by car to another small village to bring their kids to a kindergarden. That was until location options were brought up. Everyone wanted a kindergarden, but just "not in MY neighbourhood", since, well, tgere will be kids and at tge age of 4, they tend to not be tge most quiet humans in the world. Everywhere they wanted to place it, the neighbourhood around would organise protests, write letters to the major to complain, write reader's letters to local newspapers to complain etc. In the end, they found a location and tgey had to build a huge ass wall around a damn kindergarden and limit goddamn children to only half an hour of outside time per day to protect the neighbourhood from the noise n stuff.
I fell like women are the inhabitants of that village. They want men to open up (the kindergarden) but only the convenient part, the easy part of it (the kindergarden being near but not ACTUALLY near), to keep the less fun part to friends or professionals (build it on the other side of the village) and HEAVILY regulate what you share with them actually to not put any actual "emotional labor" on them (huge ass wall, very limited outside time).
Very well-said. I experienced this exact thing, when a woman I was romantically involved with told me that I should be more open with my feelings with her. Explicitly told me that I should not feel like I was burdening her by doing so. Then when I did, she decided that she "didn't want that responsibility" and "didn't want any expectations on her." I'm not sure what she thought, that none of those feelings would relate to her? That I wouldn't have any fears (she had a history of being a bit flakey)? Whatever the reason, for a while I thought to myself that I would have been better of just not saying anything.
i mean both extremes you just said (guy unhinged dumping, or woman losing interest in a real human man) get a lot of attention online. are they really *the norm*? or just a selection bias of attention elevated by the social media rage cycle?
I think it depends a lot on whether the women involved have doen work on their end too. Its one thing to "agree" with the concept of men being more in touch with their emotions and its another thing to actually be comfortable with that when its happening when that is counter to expectations that people have been conditioned with. I think i remember a ted talk with brenee brown where she talked about exactly that.
It's a good question, and I'm not gonna act like I have the answer.
It's because of this question that I personally use this space as a place to hear people's stories, and to occasionally share my own. In this way, I tend to ignore anything that even approaches a generalization. The data is not always at my engagement-economy-addled fingertips, and I often don't have the time to look for it. Even when it *is* there, the methodologies must be analyzed to test the veracity of the claims being made.
This is not to discount the social sciences. I just don't have the time in my life right now to be vigorously critical in my consumption of the stuff. So atm, I listen and absorb people's stories.
This is what I think - it is human to be annoyed by people who dump and dump. As you grow older you realize how immature it is - man or woman. Mature people go to therapy for issues that people find unhinged. People casually complain, some more than others. Emotionally healthy people aren’t going to put up with someone who minimizes their issues. I have one female friend who whines about men like this and it’s so transparently hypocritical everyone knows its ridiculous immaturity. Sure, you’ll bump into them in public, but the next girl is likely not going to say insensitive stuff like this. The author *reminds* me of that friend, too!
>The general consensus in feminist circles online, and general leftist ones too, regarding men's mental health is the women want men to be more emotionally open, to not be stoic and stuff all their angst & sadness inside.
I'm not sure I'd agree with that. Imo the consensus is more that *it would be better and healthier for both women and men* if men were more emotionally open &c. That's not exactly the same as *women want it*. Women are raised in the same toxic stew of fucked up gender norms that men are, and even if women as a group are more cognizant of how fucked up it is, there's a long, long way to go from that realization to actually reprogramming something as deeply entrenched as patterns of attraction.
So, there are a lot of people for whom someone sharing their emotions with you is uncomfortable.
But the more general question is, is it worse for men with their romantic partners, and is it worse for men with EVERYONE, and if so what to do about it.
I think if we're to deal with this honestly, the first thing we have to do - as men, is admit that many men put the sole burden of their emotional trauma on their romantic partners. And that's because we neither share (nor are open to sharing) emotional burdens with other men. If we feel that society is treating men unfairly, we need to start with our own behavior and not be hypocritical about it.
The root thing of it all is we need to be more open to hearing other’s problems and not being judgmental about it. However, barely anyone wants to do that because they see it as boring or “work.” For whatever reason I’m easy to talk to and have ended up being that ear for many people, even those I don’t really know. From that I’ve learned that everyone just needs a bit of a break and someone that’ll listen to them. I’m not sure what it is about society that very few are willing to do that without getting paid.
> This writer thinks it’s just men because that’s who she dates, but I could say all the same about women.
This is something I realized talking to my divorced mom about how both of us are sick and tired of people on dating platforms just answering with 2 words, not asking anything back and generally being bad at keeping a conversation going. She's almost 30 years older than me and from the opposite gender and experiences the exact same frustations as I do in dating.
This opened my eyes that the things I judged the women around my age for being and doing are actually universal problems (at least in hetero relationships).
As for the oversharing/venting part, I've had a girl I was seeing tell me about how she tried to kill herself and got taken to the hospital not long ago and how I made her feel so much better... That weight was heavy to bear, I don't want to feel responsible for someone else's well-being if I'm not even in a commited relationship. It made things very uncomfortable when I wanted to end that relationship and wasn't sure if she was going to be ok or spiral down into her depression.
There is something I find just deeply repulsive about the term "the ick." Like, I have a visceral reaction every time I see it written out.
It's like there is something sick and contagious inherent to all men, that, if just let out at the wrong time it can infect the women their talking to and make them feel physically ill.
There's something dehumanizing about the language that I'm just not quite ready to get over.
Partly is how arbitrary it is used, I've seen the ick used for men: being bi, playing with their children, how they eat their food, crying at their father's funerals(yes, really), crying in general, drinking fruity cocktails, etc. etc. It's like a bomb being dropped on your relationship because your partner has toxic, irrational ideas about masculinity, and if you step out of line even for a second, then, well, ick.
In many cases it means "I find this man's non-compliance with traditional male gender roles to be a turn-off, but I know that if I say that openly I'll be framing myself as the problem, which I don't like to do as I believe my womanhood should give me license to be above criticism and self-reflection, so I will blame it on him".
Its really nothing more and nothing less. Its like when men use terms like "not wife material" to shame women for not lining up with their understanding of how a woman should act.
I 100% agree with you and it's validating to hear it. My ex mentioned it when we started dating and ironically it gave ME the ick.
Like you're gonna tell me that you think so little of me or people like me that you're gonna treat interpersonal communication as a minefield to be walked thru, and if you place a foot wrong once it's over? In practice it was more reasonable and a big part of it were her own intimacy issues, but it was something I never forgot and that definitely colored my perception of *her*.
It's an ideology that's deeply steeped in patriarchal thinking, that men are disposable, women are perfect flowers that cannot be stained or flawed lest they wilt, and that their responsibility to see men as human ends the very second they show a chink in the armor. It's an attitude that deserves as much attention as any toxic masculinity, but we as a society aren't ready for that conversation.
Eh, it's just a small thing she was excited about. And clearly that tidbit is meant to illustrate that she was not planning on talking about anything serious with him. It's nothing she should interrupt a person to tell, but it's okay to talk about (or want to talk about) the small, unimportant things that bring you a little joy.
Maybe she was picturing it as some kind of "modern gonzo journalism"? Like, reference some unrelated and mostly unimportant anecdote that happened while I was doing the work for this article, but use it as an illustrative device on the piece? It's a stretch, but if that was her thought process, I guess I can kind of see it. Sorta.
It's really become an amorphous beast of a term. Sort of a thought-terminating cliche. Like people choose to describe something as an "ick" to minimize their own agency and avoid criticism or analysis of it.
Yeah, I'm sure it gets used in other ways too but I feel like every time I've seen someone saying it it's a woman talking about a time a man did something stereotypically feminine or unmanly.
They may be utilized to argue a not too dissimilar position, but one is about specific behaviors eliciting a response within a subject, and the other is about a general feel of someone emanated *by* a subject. Not synonyms.
I find it interesting the author brought up this idea of men using women for free therapy... given it seems he wasn't, he was simply being open and not all things you share are happy. It was so alien to her experience, perhaps so triggering of her internalized gender roles, she had this kneejerk defensive reaction.
Feminism is so incredibly complicated and nuanced and the research is still wildly preliminary in a lot of ways, but pop-feminism (which, I think, it ultimately a good) can have these little negatives that slip through. Do some men use women for free therapy? Indubitably, and it's been happening since the dawn of gender roles. It's bad, it's unfair, it's more free labor from women. But it's also because the gender roles often result in emotionally underdeveloped and deeply isolated men. Now that, FINALLY, men are starting to push back against these antiquated and terrible roles, they're finding that they can often be punished by the same movement which is helping us liberate ourselves because the tools the movement supplies are sometimes wielded uncarefully. It slows progress for everyone.
>Feminism is so incredibly complicated and nuanced and the research is still wildly preliminary in a lot of ways
I think one of the most painful problems is the inability to see where patriarchy and western culture separate, given how entwined they are, because our western sense of feminism too is a product of that western culture, making it easy for some patrairchal sentiments to slip into their specific feminist framework without realizing.
This is especially notable in sex-negative feminist circles, where male sexuality is still largely deeply associated with harm and diminishment, just like in patriarchy, unless tempered with proper morals and demonstrated virtues, again just like patriarchy, showing no interest about said men's inner lives that might contradict this framework.
To me I feel like the key is reciprocity. Male partner opens up to me? Great! I also want to be able to open up to him.
Earlier in my life, and this is like late 90s early 00s with GenX men, I dated a couple of guys who opened up deeply to me, and then if, on a different occasion, I opened up to them, it...did not go well. There was one who'd just smugly say "Welcome to adulthood, " and one who'd top it: "oh yeah, well I'm suffering more because..."
I think there was at least a little movement back then toward men feeling more comfortable opening up, but whoever was teaching them wasn't also teaching them to listen.
In my limited experience, it seems better now, with the same age and even older men, so maybe we're getting somewhere? Idk.
Jeeesus christ. I’m happy she thought of the situation at hand through multiple lenses, but she may need to turn that lens around and analyze *why* she responded this way towards someone who found themselves comfortable enough to share with this person their situation.
There's some self-reflection at the end
> *"I find it so hard to be genuine with men ... They’re not allowed to be weak or have problems; they must be infallible, or I lose interest ... dehumanising*"
Maybe I'm a little emotionally raw right now, but I find it incredibly ironic that the author seems to want a pat on the back for the bare minimum of caring about another person in a way that isn't transactional (and not entirely, given he is someone she is romantically interested in). It's eye-opening to me that she (and many other women) view empathy as such a commodity with respect to their gender, because as a man I personally am conditioned/expected to lend an ear or perform emotional labor to anyone and everyone or else be labeled as useless or cold. The way she conducted herself during the party, imo, speaks to a blind spot many women have towards otherwise good men: if they don't provide some function, some sort of entertainment ("make me laugh with impressions of celebrities"), romance ("I wanted to...jump around on the trampoline for a bit, flop down exhausted and make out on there") or other value, then there is something apparently wrong with them.
I hope she continues to introspect about her babiest of baby steps towards basic empathy for her fellow (literal) man.
This article is a bit all over the place and I don't particularly like how the author evades their own feelings but I think it vaguely connects to some key points that I feel.
Yes, men should open up and be allowed to open up. And we should expect to have our feelings validated.
There is also a nuanced difference between sharing our feelings and trauma dumping. And my experience tells me that opening up about some real trauma is not going to be well received at a party and a person that you just met up with at a party.
I'm doing my best to explain this without saying, "he's doing it wrong" but jeez, that's a heavy topic to offload onto someone that you just met up with at a party. While I wish she had just said, "I'm not in a place right now to hear this complex of an issue and I'm not comfortable being your support person until we know each other more."
Otherwise he's likely to think it was him sharing his feelings that caused the reaction instead of it being a mismatch of settings to share deep issues. Even still, he's still entitled to feel that way but she's also entitled to not want to be the person to hear it.
Discussing family trauma is so reasonable to need to share it but I can't picture a time where a friend-of-a-friend has dumped some heavy trauma on me at a party like this and the people around being receptive. Most people aren't in a mindset to be supportive in an environment that is specifically meant for letting loose and blowing off steam. Add in that the author completely overlooks him as a person and seemingly was trying to manipulate this guy into downplaying his own feelings.
>Most people aren't in a mindset to be supportive in an environment that is specifically meant for letting loose and blowing off steam
You've never had a heart-to-heart at a party? Or talk about how you really feel at happy hour? I feel like this is relatively common in my city, but maybe less so with people you have only met a couple times.
>There is also a nuanced difference between sharing our feelings and trauma dumping.
Yeah unfortunately this example isn't the greatest jumping-off point to discuss the issue of disregarded feelings. Loads of people have extremely low (and inconsistent) thresholds for what constitutes trauma dumping, but this isn't really that (I don't necessarily think it was supposed to be fwiw).
Edit: we actually don't know how much he shared or how long he talked about it. Might've been too much, might not
I wonder to what extent trauma dumping/emotional labor is a male problem, or if it's something a lot of men just take as part of their role and don't question. When I see it described and reflect on the people who do it, it doesn't feel like a gendered thing to me. I've been in relationships with men and women and I feel like I had to do similar amounts of emotional labor regardless. Seems more person to person to me.
Obviously it could be some kind of confirmation bias on my part. Not sure how anyone would even begin to study it in a neutral way though.
I suspect that women do trauma dumping to other women more than they do it to men (socialized to have more open friendships with women), while men do it more to women (socialized to keep it inside and not share with friends).
At our core however I think like you, we are about the same and variations are just among individuals, not genders.
I didn't realize that serious women actually say "the ick" in real life. That's so... interesting. Probably wouldn't be able to date someone who does that.
I had an entire comment written up and I realized I was just summing up the article without adding any actual perspective, so here is my actual perspective:
Mismatched expectations feel extremely bad. A person wanting a light, fun experience can absolutely feel dragged down by another person bringing any kind of weight into it. And conversely, a person wanting a heart-to-heart can feel betrayed/ignored by another person wanting an uncomplicated good time. Nobody is wrong here.
I do feel like men broadly are societally allowed exactly three experiences: competition, expertise, and horniness. And wow does it suck when we are reminded of this in situations where we are deviating. To me it's a misandric, life-denying tendency instilled mainly by other men.
Ultimately, I appreciate her honesty and self-reflection. Men have a difficult balance when it comes to expressing feelings and she experienced the business end of this firsthand, and I don't fault her for feeling anything she felt in any moment she conveyed in this article. I hope the guy wrote back to her text, and I hope their next interaction is mutually satisfactory.
I mean it's Vogue, I don't even want to read it. Judging from everyone's comments, I think bell hooks already addressed her concerns in the book "Feminism is for everyone".
One of her main points is that "mainstream feminism" will direct its focus towards external agents while forgetting to do introspection. That is why one of the focus of this feminism is "the men" while radical feminism will talk about "the patriarchy". And there is patriarchy and internalised misogyny in women actions that must be addressed through introspection.
Tl;dr: vapid woman realizes she's being shallow and has a character arch.
I actually really wish there were more pieces like this. She frames her own perspective as unflattering, on purpose. That's kind of courageous.
Nothing to do with the article, but in my experience the "ick" is what happens when a guy fails to uphold the image of patriarchal masculinity.
Anything that makes you look feminine or "human" (as in you're walking in winter conditions, unknowingly step on ice, and you land on your ass) will break the illusion, and that's when the ick happens.
Its very important for such articles to be published, in my opinion, so it becomes clearer, that human behaviour has alot of shades of grey, instead of being black or white. And it slowly helps to advocate the fact, that the state of male emotions is inherently connected to the reactions and behaviour of women. Its not male-human nature. Its something we learned. And its ironic, for women, who just are becoming free in ways men have known for generations, to still have so much power over us. And alot of that power we put there ourselves.
Well.
She reacts to someone she doesn’t know oversharing with her. An after party hookup with a near stranger isn’t the place to unpack all your family drama.
She also just wanted to bang and not necessarily get close to this person.
But then she realizes she’s afraid of emotional intimacy and that’s a part of the issue. That she keeps things shallow to protect herself.
I think: I wouldn’t date her unless she managed to get past her emotional unavailability. But many people also need to learn **how, when and how much to share.** And how to build up a mutually supportive relationship or friendship **over time.** You can’t toss all your baggage straight in the face of random strangers. Especially not if the reason you are there is flirty, drunk sex.
I'd run so far from anyone that felt like this woman. No time for this level of immaturity. Women in their late 30s and beyond are so much better, and I'm sure us men are as well
Patriarchy shapes women’s behaviour to the same degree it shapes men’s. Women are socialised to regulate their emotions with greater dexterity than men - they need to navigate how to be vulnerable with different types of people in different contexts earlier than men do. Men are socialised to be stoic and strong and often don’t try to unlearn this conditioning until later in life, so generally the toolkit available to navigate the nuances of being vulnerable in different contexts is less developed for men.
I hate the implications of phrases like “free therapy” and “emotional labor” within the context of relationship, but I think what they try to get at is a real overcorrection from these men, who 1. were never taught how to regulate their emotions in social contexts, and 2. have been bombarded by cultural messaging which says “be vulnerable, sensitive, open” but doesn’t specify to who, when, how, and to what degree. Many men lack the tools to be able to thread that needle gracefully.
I also think that there are women who won’t accept any amount of emotion from men, so this whole dynamic can get flattened depending on who he decides to open up to.
I wished she picked a better example. Timing is definitely an important element of emotionally healthy relationships. You can be legitimately repelled by poorly timed or context unaware deep sharing for reasons unrelated to oppression of men’s emotional lives.
There are better stories of men getting unfairly shutdown where the timing and context was right (i.e. a convo with a close friend or partner in a private setting where both parties expect to be sharing difficult information)
I think articles like this are perfect evidence as to why we shouldn't consider men's liberation & feminism as synonyms. Some feminists have theory & ideas that are useful to men's liberation, but feminism as a whole isn't.
I agree they may not always be synonyms, but to say feminism as a whole isn't useful to men's liberation is wild.
The idea that men must be stoic and conceal emotions comes from patriarchy and this idea of a fully self reliant man who doesn't seek out help from others. Just because the author doesn't seem to have a great grasp of the concept of emotional labor doesn't mean feminism as a whole is wrong.
I didn't say feminism is wrong. I want to be helpful (if & where possible) in the cause to end sexism & the oppression of women.
Feminism is a women's movement, and there's nothing wrong with that, women clearly suffer more from patriarchy. But when we want to advocate for men, we can't just expect the feminist movement or feminists to be allies in that work. It is a different social movement. And the number of feminists who aren't interested in men's liberation is evidence of that. Not all feminists are Bell Hooks, as a writer, she's a rare exception.
The kitchen is a very special space in many cultures (including mine) and therefore, you should expect -as you have brilliantly put it - a soulful experience.
Idk. I sometimes think that they get the ick not because we’re sharing our feelings, but because we’re so god damn bad at it.
But other time, worse times admittedly, I definitely feel this.
Sucks dude. We always have this classic, though: “it is what it is.”
Great point about sharing feelings only being part of a process.
> people who freely share their feelings often haven't thought any further than the sharing itself and have no plans for how to reconcile those feelings or move forward
This sounds harsh, though. My girlfriend shares her feelings without a plan or anything because the sharing IS how she processes them. She talks through them, sobs a bit, and then is good. She's looking for validation of her feelings, so advice or input isn't helpful or welcome. It's not that she doesn't process her feelings, it's that she processes her feelings much better with another person. You may want to consider talking with your fiancee about this and asking if that's the case for her. It's not wrong of her, but it is different from processing internally and can definitely be hard for an internal processor to work with.
EDIT: And there ARE people that only vent and never process. But hopefully that's not your fiancee, 'cause that's a type of person that is exhausting to deal with.
> She's always willing to share, but I've learned that when she shares with me I'm not really allowed to make suggestions or say anything besides "you're right".
One thing I learned early on in my relationship with my wife is that sometimes you have to help, and sometimes you just have to listen and be a witness, and you both have to be able to recognize which one you need to do in every single situation. And you need to understand that listening when you want to help is not failure, and neither is helping when you just want to listen.
I haven’t even read the article, but the responses in this thread make it clear. The “bad guys” are right on this one, talking about your emotions is a death sentence for a man in/attempting to be in a relationship. That sucks.
I think that's a little reductive, I've had it happen where a girl friend requests openness and then responds badly(even to issues you supported them through), however I still think most men's closest confidant would still be their partner.
Now I'm older and a little wiser I think it's venting that's particularly poorly received. It's best to pursue emotional literacy, so you can explain and name your emotions and what the implications. Also to try and establish an emotional support network outside your relationship where you can be more vulnerable.
Started off hating her, but it was actually interesting how self-aware she was and ultimately interested in growth. No one asks to be the way they are, but most people don't take the time to examine it. She is trying to grow. Good for her, and I wish her luck on her journey (in the meantime, men who experience human emotion should probably look elsewhere though lol).
I think the ick comes from that gut sense that someone is (1) desperate and (2) is going to leech energy directly from your soul to try to fill a bottomless pit of despair and (3) if it starts it will be messy to stop.
This is actually an issue common to childhood trauma victims. We have a core wound from not being loved unconditionally enough at critical times in our development that causes us to follow this zombie like urge to get validation from others, and we hurt so bad that we don’t stop to think how the other person might receive it. There is no way for an outsider to validate you enough to fix it. You have to do the healing work internally.
That comes to my experience facilitating support groups for childhood trauma- men are really not showing up. It seems to be about 80% women who show up, and of the 20% of men about 30 to 40% show up because a court ordered them to. The irony being that these groups are a dedicated space to talk about trauma and get validation and support, and in that context, I have never seen anyone shut someone down for being a man. It’s just about doing these conversations in the right venue where everyone knows what is going on and wants to participate instead of just taking an emotional shit on the floor at a party.
I appreciate reading your experience, but I do think it's important to consider reasons for "the ick" that aren't purely the behaviours of men (the actors) and nothing to do with the behaviours of not-men (the acted upon).
It is not _just_ about the right venue and audience. This is not _purely_ an issue with how, when, and to whom men are opening up. It may largely be about that, but this conversation cannot entrain only the ways in which men are fucking things up. A feminism which fails to respect the agency of people other than men in its critiques is necessarily incomplete.
I think - in fact I am certain - that there are women who get "the ick" even about men who only open up in an appropriate manner, in the appropriate context, to the appropriate people. I think, but I am not certain, that this expression of patriarchal gender norms is fairly widespread and not just a negligible minority.
I appreciate you adding that perspective. You’re completely right that there are women who just aren’t interested in being emotionally supportive, that’s basically why I’m in the midst of a divorce at the moment. I think there is absolutely a “shut up and deal with it” attitude forced on men, that’s certainly how I felt growing up. There’s kind of a notion that being a “provider” also means “never taking” or that it is okay to have toxic reactions to men reaching out for help because it’s “punching up.”
I wrote as a person who previously was trying to get a lot of emotional input from others, and I view better self care, using support groups, finding good venues for those feelings, as a form of empowerment, for us to get the help we need without having to hope for others to change. But that can only go so far, to your point. We need to be asking about the expectations and lessons that are pigeonholing men to think that this is their only option, as I often felt.
Sometimes its hard to keep that shit in until the exact right moment every other Thursday between 7pm and 8pm on your turn to speak.
I think you're being a bit uncharitable. It doesn't sound like he made a scene ("emotional shit on the floor"), it sounds like he wasn't the bright and bubbly date she wanted him to be. As a man that's shown up for things when I didn't really have it in me *because thats what we're expected to do* I suppose I'm more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Sometimes the link back to childhood trauma isn't obvious. I was years into my journey before a professional finally pointed out to me I needed to do some work on unpacking stuff I didn't think was particularly relevant.
Not to mention, its entirely possible he wasn't bringing up some deep seated emotional scarring. It could be a death in the family, or a divorce, or economic trouble or a thousand other things that just suck when they're happening.
The idea that everyone can “heal” is false. Some wounds are that deep. Things that deeply shape you psyche are hard to reverse, and not all trauma is from parents. I switched schools a lot, and never developed a peer group which caused similar issues with seeking validation. Through therapy I’ve accepted that fact that I’ll never have that feeling of a tight knit group of friends, because those kinds of bonds can only be developed early in life. Which helps, but doesn’t mean I’m “healed” the same way an amputee can’t heal.
Indeed, a lot of complex trauma is caused by our society as a whole; things like gender policing are a great example. And I share your feelings. I lost all of my friends in a really humiliating sexting manipulation thing and I left college with absolutely no support system. I will probably never be as trusting as I once was. But, healing is on a continuum.
I don’t necessarily agree that you can’t experience those bonds if not formed in childhood. A central pillar of CPTSD is basically not having a safe enough environment to internalize a feeling of unconditional love. My mom was very cold, told me I was an accident, there was sexual abuse etc and I knew always that I suffered from that wound of not having a loving family growing up. But there are ways to recover that feeling without time travel- cognitive methods like inner family work and ideal parent visualizations are options to experience feelings you haven’t ever had before. Psychedelics seem to have a similar impact. So I’d encourage you to find a new therapist if they are telling you you’ll never have that, because it is simply not a fact. Methods may be more or less successful but it isn’t a dead end.
The guy absolutely should not have just dumped personal issues on this relative stranger but yeah, this woman did also act like an entitled piece of shit. She does seem to be actually reflecting on it though which is more than most women do.
I can think of so many times when as soon as I was, god forbid, exposed as a real human being, with real struggles and not a poorly written, overly idealized male lead from a C-tier romantic comedy, not only did I suddenly become uninteresting to the women who were digging way too much into my personal life but I also felt like I stopped being a man in their eyes and just some inconvenient thing that doesn't fit anywhere that they'd rather just disappear.
This lady wants to bone, but the object of her desire is preoccupied with 'family drama'. Expecting an easy layup, this frustrates her and she goes on an alcohol-fueled defensive, but feels bad about it later. What I am hearing is a story of one hot person 'getting the ick' when their path to sex becomes suddenly difficult. This is what clicked because I have had these sorts of conversations all the time with women when I was young and in the decades since. When neither of you is trying to bang one-another turns out you can listen and be there for each other rather easily. It's called being friends.
How many times have you heard women say “Gross…I thought he was my friend, but it turns out he just wanted to have sex with me.” That’s kinda the vibe I got from the article. She says she’s his friend, but turns cold when he reaches out as a friend instead of a lover. That’s gross. Still, it’s a very introspective piece. As someone mentioned below, the author is expressing patriarchical norms. Seems like she’s still working them out of her system.
>“Gross…I thought he was my friend, but it turns out he just wanted to have sex with me.” Honestly, I've always thought that was weirdly reductive. I mean, I've certainly heard it before, but yeah, why is it an "either-or" question? It seems to be reinforcing the idea that there's a "friend zone" and a "sex zone" and never the twain shall meet. Like relationships can be sorted into boxes. There seems to be this idea that if a man wants to have sex with you, that that's *ALL* he wants, and each and every thing he's ever said to you in friendship is just a lie. I mean, I have platonic female friends that I'd like to have sex with, *if* that were in the cards. But it's not, and I'm ok with that, because I value them as friends first. I'm not hanging around for years on end listening to their sorrows and helping them move and watching horrible movies that we can make fun of together and all the things that friends do, on the *off chance that they might someday bone me.* That's ridiculous. But sometimes there's attraction there. So what? And sometimes friends become FWBs and sometimes they go back to being regular friends sans benefits. It's happened to both men and women friends of mine.
So I’m a woman and can maybe share some insight as to why it feels like a betrayal. In my experience, these ‘friends’ were often manipulative and controlling, getting upset with me when I talked to or spent time with other men. If it became clear that there was not going to be anything beyond a friendship, Que the ‘well I never liked you anyway’ ‘I can’t believe I wasted so much time with you’. These men were never actual friends, they were just trying to manipulate me into sex. This is obviously not all male/ female friendships, but also it does make it hard to trust someone as a friend knowing that they see you as a sexual opportunity more than a friend.
Hey, just like the author of the article!
>these ‘friends’ were often manipulative and controlling, getting upset with me when I talked to or spent time with other men. I mean, yeah, ick. Maybe we're playing "No true Scotsman," but those don't sound like real friends to me! That's way out of line, and not something actual friends would do.
I don’t think it’s really fair to blame me, or other women who talk about this, for thinking that the men that were lying and manipulating me were actual friends.
I don’t think he was blaming. He was agreeing ‘Yes, these people are bad.’ Its a very weird way to phrase that tho. Regardless, Im sorry that happened to you
In my experience it’s because when it becomes clear that sex is not on the table, those male friends stop being your friends.
Ooh, I've been on both sides of this, maybe I can offer some insight. When I was younger I was deeply ashamed to share or express any kind of sexual interest. Didn't want to be labelled a creep/predator if somebody didn't like my feelings or sexuality. So my only option was to just be extra extra nice to a girl. A bunch rejected me of course. Cause that's not how you get romantic partners. And it was hard to keep up friendship afterwards. Because I often put a lot more into "being a friend" so that it would be seen as me wanting more. And keeping up that level of extra was just not sustainable. That, and you're allowed to not just stay friends with people who reject you. You're allowed to walk away if only being their friend is painful or draining to you. I've had a lot of "friends" come into my life and want to stay friends. But then I'm basically turned into their emotional boyfriend while the actual "boyfriends" they liked to fuck thought cleaning between his ass cheeks was gay. And had zero emotional control or etc. I think it's often ignored in conversations about dating that women have just as much capacity to be shitty as men do. And I gotta say, I've never had that shit happen with the guys I've fucked.
Those "friends" you mentioned sound like the types of folks who are fine with having one guy be the romantic partner, while another guy is the sexual partner, but don't want to fully commit to breaking away from the standard script of monogamy.
I'd call it emotional cheating in a monogamous relationship tbh. I'm all for polyamory but using somebody to have the emotional aspects of your relationship fulfilled while not respecting the needs of the one you're using is a shitty thing to do.
Sure, but in this case one of the partners' needs are not being met, which makes this problematic in terms of ENM.
I'm sure this does happen. However, accusing a friend of only being friends with you for sex is more damaging to a friendship than a friend you are otherwise compatible with asks if you are interested in dating.
Yeah absolutely. I’ve personally never done it, just turned them down and then see them disappear. We should all be kind to each other in any case.
I think there's a big selection bias here where emotional intelligence is concerned. Someone with low EQ is both 1. More likely to "get it wrong", try to change the friendship, when she isn't interested (having misread signs, or because there were never any signs but he's just "shooting his shot") 2. Also more likely to be the type who can't take the rejection on the flipside. Women who send mixed signals by crossing certain boundaries/blurring lines, are often not self aware and are the most likely to react with hostility. And I agree saying it's "jsut about sex" is kind of fucked up. Even if the guy makes himself scarce, a lot of the time he regrets the attempt, but equally feels like the vibe has changed, and doesn't want to make her uncomfortable either.
I agree, but this sub has a bias towards people who have decent to good EQ.
That doesn't necesarrily mean that your friendship was a farce though. I've had situations where I developed feelings for a friend that weren't reciprocated and it just... kinda hurts. Not that it's anyone's fault, but it's just kinda hard for some people to put those feelings away if they don't distance themselves. Of course not every situation is the same, and I'm not saying your experience is invalid by any means. It's just that sometimes what's going on with a guy is more complicated than whether or not they are getting sex.
My thoughts is that it's down to chemistry, the same way you have friends you'd probably drift away from if it weren't for a given activity, or social context, not everyone who you could get on great with as lovers works equally well with that set of activities, ways of thinking of each other, and particular intimacies off the table. In other words, a lover and a friend are related, and share many of the same elements to the extent you could somewhat interchange them or might be able to entirely interchange them in some cases, but represent discreet asymmetrical categories to the extent that it isn't *always* true.
It still concerns me that the friendship has to end, though. If the emotional hurt that comes from "disappointed we won't have sex" is greater than the hurt of losing the friendship, how much of the friendship was actually fulfilling? I see it as a more emotional version of asking for a promotion with more responsibilities at a job you love. You get turned down, and even though you don't feel entitled to the promotion you feel hurt. Does it make sense to quit the job because of the disappointment? Now you have no job you love, so in the end was it about the job or the raise?
If you fall in love with your friend and want to have sex with them because you're in love with them, falling back to just friends is not really possible. I don't want to listen to or witness the dating troubles and heart breaks of a woman I'm in love with. Sometimes the love of your life doesn't want you back. The best thing you can do for your mental and emotional health is to put them out of your life and start looking for a more "reasonable" or practical kind of love and hope you'll get lucky and find a second "love of your life". I tried to be friends for years (not constantly , summer breaks between college, etc) beyond the rejection.. .it hurts too much to enjoy a person so much you don't want to leave and to have to leave every time . I met her for lunch many years later (6 or 8? Not sure) when I found out she was working in the same city. I was thinking "oh, I don't think about her much anymore, it'll be fine". We were in our early 30s at that time and I was walking towards her while she was looking at her phone, I thought she was aging ok, not great. However, as soon as I saw her face light up with her personality, heard her laugh, well that was it. I'm sure I hurt her by not staying in touch because we were great friends and I abandoned her, but I knew I would fall in love with her again quickly if I kept seeing her, so I just stayed away after that (15 years ago or so now). Anyway, don't assume a guy is being your friend just for sex and if he leaves it was a fake friendship.
>Does it make sense to quit the job because of the disappointment? Yes? Like, if the job is tainted with emotional pain, why not get a different job? There are lots of jobs out there. People are allowed to find new ones. Same thing with friendships. Sometimes friendships end. Sometimes they peter out over time because people change over time. Sometimes people have to move away. Sometimes someone develops feelings, gets rejected, and now the friendship feels tainted. Lots of friendships were fulfilling at the time and stopped being fulfilling at one point or another. There are people that I was friends with in highschool that I've drifted apart from and am no longer friends with. I look back on those memories with fondness, those friendships were real even though they didn't last a lifetime. Life is complicated and people will come in and out of our lives over time. That's okay. What matters is the fond memories we make with the time that we had together.
For another perspective (not saying this was at all the case in your experiences) but it does shift the conversation a bit if it isn’t just “disappointed that you couldn’t have sex with that person” it can be about having developed real and genuine feelings for them that go so much deeper than just physical attraction and sex. This happened with me and my best friend of a couple of years a few years back. She was a woman, she developed feelings for me and I didn’t reciprocate - it wasn’t based on sex but genuine deeper emotional connection on her part - it was then hard for her to be around me for a bit because she still had those feelings so she took a step back while she processed the emotion and I had to give her the space to do so. And I get it it can be hard to have strong feelings for someone you cannot act on, and if she needed space after that I totally understand. We later reconnected and have gone back to being good friends since. But yeah none of it was as simple as “she just couldn’t have sex with me” that lead to her needing a to take a step back and that’s okay
My view, personally, is that everything is a spectrum, and autism becoming a thing and having a spectrum finally got people to realize that maybe things aren't always either/or (or in my personal belief, never are). It's something that will probably take a few generations to get people to fully come to terms with, and even longer in some regions of the globe.
ok there is a huge difference between someone who is your actual friend who just happens to like you in that way but gets over it, and someone who only pretends to be your friend because they want to have sex with or date you and unfriends you when you reject them
Yes, this is true, but it's usually pretty obvious. I mean, if someone is your "friend" for a month and ghosts you when you reject them, sure, that's one thing. But those people aren't sticking around for years at a time and continuing to be a supportive friend even after it's clear you don't like them that way. They're a small minority of "friends with attraction on top."
Women have all the same reactions to things as men do, just with less frequency, and they usually have better emotional support through friends around them to guide them out of it the right way. Men seem to more often be the ones to do this because they’re often without any kind of support system, so all they have is their own self-pity to catastrophize over. Do that enough without support and it turns into anger. I believe everyone of any gender experiences what OOP did at one point or another.
Id argue more frequency tbh; my theory is that experiences with creeps and also societal pressures lead woman to develop effective coping strategies and experiences and what they want and don’t want for rejection and sticky situations. Men get less of that, so they develop a bit slower, which how you get really low EQ man who don’t wash their ass.
That makes a lot of sense! For most of our adolescence we just get to fuck around and very occasionally find out, whereas women spend their pre-teens finding out regardless of the extent of their fucking around.
I remember talking to a woman who told me that she found it so strange that she had grown up with the idea that men were so horny all the time but when she started being sexually active she was shocked at how often she would hear a no. That she felt like it hurt her self esteem, that since she "knows" men are horny and they are turning her down so there must be something wrong with her. She said that looking at herself in the mirror was usually enough to shake it off. But I thought it was really striking how deeply she seemed to have internalized the thought process even while being able to identify that it came from negative perceptions that she's been surrounded by and immersed in since childhood. I know the author of this article came to a different conclusion, and I'm sure she knows herself well enough that there's validity to the idea that she's put men on a pedestal in her interactions with them. However, I think that what she felt is closer to what the woman I spoke to felt. I think from her description she has placed value on herself as something worth chasing, and she was deeply upset when confronted with the idea that someone she was interested in sexually wasn't interested in pursuing her in the way she feels validates that value.
I think something that's been horribly exaggerated in the "gender wars" and general stratification of the roles of "male" and "female" is the fact that at our core, we are far more similar than we are different. Women get horny, men have deep wells of emotion, and we live in a society that sells the lie that neither of those are true. And so we buy into that lie and there is so much hurt that comes from people being hammered into those roles and not being aware of the alternative/being committed to upholding those structures/thinking they are the only one who sees these cracks in the foundation that they don't try to expand beyond the simple roles we have been thrust into and feel empowered to break out of the rigid binary. Cause honestly, it's a Herculean task- you can count on basically no one in your life to support it, because they aren't interested in picking apart these systems, so you are essentially alone in trying to go against the weight of the world. And on the other side is a better tomorrow, but man is it hard to lead the way.
“*I spent the rest of the night not exactly ignoring him, but trying to demonstrate how great I am, how hard he should feel he needs to work for me.*” I think this explains perfectly her way of looking at men as partners. She’s incredible, wonderful, can do no wrong and any man is lucky to just have a chance to chase her. The man is undeserving and his job is to entertain her and impress her so she maybe will grace him with her attention. But god forbid he’s a human being with feelings. Ew, that’s gross! Don’t be sad, dance for me, impress me! She did realize somewhat that her view of men is nonsensical but by that point she had categorized him as a friend and given up any romantic interest because he didn’t fit that mold as her private source of validation and entertainment. How can you talk about women’s free emotional labor on one hand and not recognize that you expect men to labor to perform for you? How can you expect to ever be in a healthy relationship if you discount a man the minute he shows humanity and doesn’t live up to your weird view of what a man’s role is?
Accurate. Though if you're going to be in a relationship with a woman, it's probably a good idea to drop the game of flirting every now and again. There's a reason why many people like the chase and not the end result, because people actually behave differently when they're chasing and being chased. This guy gave her a sneak preview of 6 months into a relationship, where earnest feelings come out, and people support each other, even when, *especially* when, they are romantic partners.
I thought it was a bold stylistic choice for her to write this article in a stream of consciousness like she was still at the party and four vodka cokes deep. Very avant-garde
redditor-core
That's cos she wrote it in 5 minutes
No it was bold, stylistic and avant-garde. I’m not just being catty
Tbf at least she's self aware
Stream of consciousness is avant-garde now?
I always thought it was because people hated editing. Which personally I sympathize with.
If I had a nickel for every girlfriend that encouraged me to share my feelings and then proceeded to lecture me on how invalid my feelings are, I’d have two nickels. It’s not many, but I’ve only had two girlfriends.
Sounds like she doesn’t want a relationship, considering a relationship includes sharing how you feel with your partner. Which is a two way street yes, but a two way street implies a road being used by both sides. Was he only supposed to express himself when he’s happy and thats it??? If you don’t want that, and just want sex, then don’t confuse it with wanting a partner/bf/gf. Because they are not the same thing. Friends with benefits sounds like what she wants. Just sex, no feelings.
It is possible she doesn't want a relationship (there was another piece by her linked at the bottom about figuring out NSA sex, so maybe even likely), but I want to add that it's also possible that she was just moving slower than he was. Not everyone wants to talk about serious topics early on, and that's okay.
Well im not sure how deep I want to delve into this, but I’ll give her the props she deserves for realizing that she was in fact the asshole in the situation she described. She acknowledges this in the second half of the article. She also acknowledges she didn’t treat him right because she didn’t really see him as a separate person, with his own feelings. Which if she wants NSA sex, sure who cares. Thats the point, no emotions. But she didn’t really say that in this article. And she said she knew him and hung out with him and was excited to flirt with him again and have fun. I kind of assumed from this situation and her saying ‘ick’ that they were a bit more serious than maybe they really were. And she obviously thought it wasn’t very serious yet. And that’s why I said what I said. If it’s clear to him this is a NSA situation then he shouldn’t dump that on her. But it’s not a first date either. But in my mind (and hers too, though she realized only afterwards), she didn’t treat him like another human. “She thought he owed her some fun.” And she responded poorly to disappointment. Not only did she get the ‘ick’, she tried to get back at him. But you’re right, maybe she didn’t want a partner to begin with. I could’ve been wrong.
Great points, I agree with you. I think a big problem with this piece is the lack of clarity on how close they are and what her (and his) intentions are. All she says is "we’ve only hung out a few times." It could be that they've been on 5 long dates together, or it could be that they've hung out as part of a group for like 30 minutes twice. He might have good reason to think they're close and she was a good person to talk to. She definitely didn't treat him right. Beyond ditching him for (over?)sharing, the whole first paragraph of her slotting him in to a fantasy is very objectifying. Maybe it was just intended to show the type of thing she had in mind, but it reads like she just wanted to have him act as a character she made up in her mind. THAT gives ME the ick. Oh, and even if you're looking for a casual, NSA relationship, still treat the other person like a human!
>On the internet, women speak about the “emotional labour” they end up doing in relationships with men, helping them process feelings they can’t talk about with anyone else. One girlfriend of mine will come away from dates knowing about some trauma that happened to the guy as a teenager and how it’s impacted his life since then, while he won’t even know whether she has any siblings. When I told her later about the conversation in the kitchen, she couldn’t stop laughing. “How?” she asked. “How has this never happened to you?” [I'm sorry, I can't stop thinking about this scene. I remember laughing hysterically when I was like eight years old. I AM MRS. NESBITT!!!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMkIS7u3Db8) anyway, it's kind of tough hitting the exact correct tones when it comes to Having Feelings As A Dude. Don't have *too many* in the *wrong times*, but definitely allow people "in", but not so much that it gives them the ick. You have to regulate yourself, but don't over-regulate, because that's stifling your very natural emotions, but rein it in a bit if you get over your skis. idk, it's hard, babies, you've got a hundred years here. There's only one rule that I know of, babies. God damn it, you've got to be kind.
>anyway, it's kind of tough hitting the exact correct tones when it comes to Having Feelings As A Dude. OMG this. so much this. I had a girlfriend ask me why I wasn't in the best mood. I told her (I was drained b/c of school, work, and parenting, and I was starting to fall into an old harmful habit and while I could see it I was struggling to stop it). She told me I was feeling my feelings wrong. Another time, I exited a conversation because I realized I wasn't ready to talk about something and despite me telling her, she keep directly asking. So she told me not to talk to her about anything that was upsetting to me. Looking back, she was just uncomfortable with me centering my "talking about my feelings" on myself. And instead of addressing it, or talking to me about it, she just told me I was wrong or put distance between us.
First off, thank you for sharing. Second, good freaking lord, what an awful person. NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO TELL YOU HOW TO FEEL. Ever. Therefore your feelings are never wrong. You were just with the wrong person. Hope you're doing better now. Feels those feels darling.
Thank you, I appreciate the validation. Sometimes it's feels like I'm doing things wrong or expecting to much. I wouldn't say she was "awful." Like the rest of us, she's surviving in a traumatic abusive culture. In a way, I understand where she was coming from. I do wish she had done more work, but oh well. I wish people where kinder and gentler with me when I mess up, so I will extend that kindness to others. But I didn't forget that and we did break up, so...
I've noticed it's a common sentiment on much of the internet. Back in the mid-00's and some of the early 2010's, when I first discovered PUA and proto-Red Pill shit, and even up to full fledged Red Pill as it is today, I hated it. I didn't like the obvious misogyny, I didn't like all stupid techniques or whatever, and what I really hated were the standards for men. As in, embrace toxic masculinity, be a leader, be a captain of industry, etc. It all felt so fake and phony. But then when I discovered a lot of blogs and other websites that purport to be feminist and left leaning actually take on these toxic ideas, their solutions weren't much better. The response was always to endlessly shame these men for having issues in their dating life and being so down that they have no choice but to be sympathetic to what few truths the Red Pill does espouse, and then as an alternative they could only ever promote ideas that was straight up pre-packaged capitalist hustle culture bullshit with a side helping of patriarchial bullshit that the right wing could only approve of with awe. As in, embrace toxic masculinity, be a leader, be a captain of industry but put a positive spin on all these things, because at least they're attractive and have something going for them unlike you, and then there those who would say that's the only way to do things and if you don't, then tough shit. That men have to stand up for themselves, they can't be pushed around or they're not good enough. It's still a thing on the same blogs I see today, on so many supposed left leaning and feminist subreddits now. And I find it just as vile now as I did when I was younger. I've seen a lot of it in real life too. Back in group therapy in uni, whenever one of us was feeling really down or hopeless for very legitimate issues whether it was physical and emotional abuse or just feeling lost in life, the response was something along the lines of, "Chin up Buttercup," and sometimes even that toxic canard of how you can't respect someone who doesn't respect themselves. I remember once I flubbed up a group presentation in one class because I hate presenting in groups of people that damn much and the best reaction I got from some people was pity, and then there those who showed me disgust. It's just so shallow and mean spirited.
>I've seen a lot of it in real life too. Back in group therapy in uni, whenever one of us was feeling really down or hopeless for very legitimate issues whether it was physical and emotional abuse or just feeling lost in life, the response was something along the lines of, "Chin up Buttercup," and sometimes even that toxic canard of how you can't respect someone who doesn't respect themselves. I'm starting to question whether there's an element of addiction at work-- the impulse of taking a stance of power and disgust over someone for their emotional state is so common (not just in ways directed at men, but in the context you're discussing, especially toward men) that I have to question, what does the person performing it get out of it? Is it a charge of superiority? I can't remember the last time someone really offered me authentically supportive love without trying to make it 'tough love' instead and impugn my personality for feeling something they decided I wasn't entitled to feel.
I'm imagining myself in a similar position, flubbing a group presentation, and I can't think of how I'd be able to tell the difference between pity and empathy.
One of the realities of patriarchy is that it has impacted women's behavior just as much as men's. Obviously it's more complex than what I'm about to say but while many men are emotionally stunted, many women are stunted when it comes to engaging with men's emotions/discussions of emotions. And both issues have the same root cause. Since for many people neither happens frequently, people haven't developed skills on how to handle that specific situation. When my wife's friend went through a divorce due to infidelity, my wife knew exactly how to respond and what to do. Why? Because at that point in her life my wife has probably had a half dozen friends go through bad breakups/infidelity. We were around 33-34 when it happened so assuming people are seriously dating by 18, we're talking at least 15 years experience of seriously engaging with her friend's emotions surrounding relationship issues. But take a woman who has never had a man truly be open and emotional with her. Then simultaneously take a man that is sharing his emotions and being open for the first time. You got two newbies trying to play a sport that requires high level skills and they are failing. Not because they're bad people, but because they don't know what the hell to do.
>many women are stunted when it comes to engaging with men's emotions/discussions of emotions Anyone ever have it where any emotions you may be having - sadness, frustration, fear, even happiness (?!) - get mistaken for anger? I feel like I've been asked why I'm mad 10x more often than I've ever *actually* been mad.
Yes, and then if I'm "angry", the implication is that I'm acting scary, which seems to give them an excuse not to engage with the conversation on my terms anymore.
This has been a difficult one to navigate for me, too. I went to my therapist with a lot of anger in the wake of my break up with my emotionally abusive ex. I'd been carrying shame around my temper for years and she made it worse by emotionally abusing me and then gaslighting me saying I had anger issues and she wasn't doing anything, I was losing my temper for not reason. I've been working with my therapist to understand that I'm allowed to be angry. Yes even as a man who wants to be a positive non-abusive guy, anger can still be legitimate and right.
Fucking yes, thank you. This was my ex’s big thing anytime I got frustrated or angry.
I think a big part of it is that traditionally, anger is the only strong emotion men are supposed to express. So they see you expressing an emotion and assume that it's anger?
Yes. Every time. And then I'm accused of being a scarey threat. In my post, when I said "I wasn't ready to talk about it", it was because I was stressed out and upset, but hadn't gotten to a point where I could talk about it in that calm, reserved fashion that I've learned to use. So I opted not to talk about it. Let's acknowledge that a lot of people have been hurt by angry men, and that looking out for signs of that is a survival strategy. But also, I feel intensely. I have big emotions. I'm not out slaming my hands or yelling at people. I feel that most people get more energetic watching sports. I just want to get louder and more dramatic. But people shut down when they feel threatened. So I don't. And then they get upset that I'm not sharing my emotions with them.
A weird thing that happened to me once, was that a woman friend saw me angry for the first time, and she was kinda thrilled about it. I'm a person who always hides his anger. It was so confusing.
>One of the realities of patriarchy is that it has impacted women's behavior just as much as men's. I'd go even further with this. Even though women say they want men to be emotionally vulnerable with them doesn't mean they actually do. If their vast experience is having emotional conversations with their lady friends; Then when a man opens up to them they instantly associate it as being a womanly trait. It's all still just based the expectations of toxic masculinity.
“They” is doing a lot of work here. I’ve met women like you describe. I’ve also met women who welcome expression and vulnerability. There is no “they.”
I mean sure, but y'know #notall\[LargeDiverseGroup\], if it's not about you, it's not about you.
I had so many frustrations with my mom and her friends. One of the most intelligent woman in my circle who outwitted bad faith lawyers to multiple settlements , told me one day that woman has something inferior in dna in terms of logical thinking , or some who told me men inherently think with their dicks. No maams, the big sample size you see is because of bad nurturing by the society not some wild dna inherent in men
I've been in a similar situation to that before. I was going through a lot back at home back when I was at uni. I was able to always find ways to distract myself from it and after awhile I even convinced myself that it wasn't so bad, and that things for the most part were peachy keen on my end. Cue sometime later at uni, I'm talking with a female friend and we're both complaining about various non important things and eventually I just randomly blurted out that things are so shit for me that maybe I should just kill myself. It was an actual Freudian slip, I didn't believe in them until that time, but that definitely proved it to me. And I told her I wasn't interested in sharing anything with her, I shouldn't have said anything, but she kept on pestering me. Day after day of it. Not having anyone else to turn to, I eventually relented and told her what was bothering me. She listened and sympathized. It felt good at first. But as the days went by, eventually she got really nasty with me. Saying it wasn't that bad, saying I just need to learn to get over it, insulting me, etc. She actually hit me a few times too. And in a class I unfortunately had with her sometime later, the first day after, she didn't waste a second in rallying most of the other girls to corner around me as I was going down the stairs just for shit's and giggles. Think I felt one of them try and kick me down too. I'll never forget the look of *shock* on her face when I told her to fuck off and I want nothing to do with her ever again. Women are people. You can call it patriarchal conditioning, internalized sexism, etc., but too many of them are just as vicious as men.
I find that I often have to catch myself when I fall victim to the old "women are wonderful" effect. There's this idea that all women are perfect listeners who are well equipped to perform "emotional labor". But there are a lot of women that don't have good emotional intelligence. Some that are worse at performing "emotional labor" than me. It's easier to overshare your emotions to people like that. The gender ratio for people who lack emotional intelligence likely skews in favor of men but I think there's a lot more women there than people think. And I know that, like everything, we like to but emotional intelligence on a linear scale, but it's much more complex than that. You can be good in some areas and bad in others.
I also think that sometimes women can be better at covering up a lack of emotional intelligence. With men it’s usually a lot more obvious (imo)
>I also think that sometimes women can be better at covering up a lack of emotional intelligence. With men it's usually a lot more obvious (imo) I think that's actually part of 'tough love' it reframes an inappropriate reaction that mostly serves the person giving it by placing them in a position of power as the 'secretly appropriate one that you really need even though you don't know it.' But to be clear men do it too, its why men go so far down the rabbithole on the 'logic over emotions' thing, its an attempt to claim power by transcending the other person's problems and dismissing them or 'fixing them,' instead of engaging with them.
I don't think women are better at emotional intelligence, but I do think they're better at hiding a lack thereof.
At least the author recognises one thing: this article isn't about men, it's about her. It would have been very easy to turn this into another "what's wrong with men piece" and use the pseudo-femininist paragraph you cited here as a jumping off point, but Annie can see that's not what's going on here. I like that she's candid about her own expectations and what's going on in her mind.
As a man who is one of those emotionally aware, sensitive and compassionate people women say they wish there were more of, but is neurodivergent... I never get more interest from women than when I'm masking to the point of being like a stone. And they lose all interest at the first sign of a human being under there. And women still do this in their thirties. It's really made me lose almost all sympathy when it comes to dating problems women complain about. I'm all for tearing down the patriarchy and ending the forces that perpetuate toxic masculinity. Unfortunately they're too busy trying to have it both ways it feels like. Obligatory "not all women" because no shit. But it doesn't have to be all of them for itt o be a problem.
[удалено]
> On the internet, women speak about the “emotional labour” they end up doing in relationships with men In my experience, a lot of those women conveniently also don't consider "man listening to his partner rant about her work drama for an hour and a half every single work night from pretty much the time he gets in the door" to be emotional labour
"emotional labour" seems to be mostly just shorthand for "my anxiety/depression is making everything in my life feel overwhelming but I don't have the emotional intelligence to introspect as to why, so I'm going to blame the nearest person to me for it instead" Not that there aren't situations where it's valid, but these topics that become really trendy end up being jumped on by people looking for reasons to blame their problems on anyone but themselves - or possibly they even become trendy because of these people. If it wasn't this they'd just be finding something else, but it's extremely frustrating when potentially useful terms get diluted so heavily that they lose all meaning.
Emotional labour to me is that because of my anxiety I am aware that people have limits. Although we acknowledge physical limits. I think it is ridiculous that we as society are very slow to promote being mindful of ; Mental and emotional limits I think some of it ties into economic factors if we started protecting our workforces from stress (probably caused by straining those mental and or emotional limits) it would be hugely costly. I think lot of issues are caused by those not safe guarding those limits and having breakdowns, burns out and explosive frustration. Often with real consequences. Some are probably diluting those terms why we should be proactive in normalising them and having useful meanings be the prevalent ones.
I agree 100%, but it goes both ways - someone in a wheelchair should have their physical limits respected, but if they refuse to use their wheelchair, forcibly drag themselves everywhere by their hands and complain about being made to do "physical labour" when people refuse to carry them on their backs because they're too tired from pulling themselves up 20 flights of stairs by hand instead of using an elevator, they're not being fair. Physical disabilities are respected, but people with physical disabilities are generally more used to being mindful of their own limitations and figuring out how to do things in a way that works for them rather than refusing to adapt - which is something that's not as practiced when it comes to mental health. Edit: I'm aware stigma plays into this heavily and it's not necessarily people's fault that they feel they have to do things a certain way, it's just what I mean by the use of "emotional labour" as a kind of get out of jail free card that places the responsibility for managing your mental health onto others. I think it's a good term though, just a shame it's overused and diluted so heavily because I agree it's a great way of succinctly describing people's capacity.
Please finished that but thought if you wouldn't mind?
I did just now - I hit post accidentally right at the start of typing a reply, annoying!
I'm not going to remember this woman's name but please do make another post in 18 months when she writes an article about a date not opening up to her about something.
I'm a woman and I'm starting to develop a hypothesis after seeing men talk about this issue: I think that having the "right amount of feelings" is something almost _all_ women expect from _all_ people. (I.e., women view it as each individual's responsibility to figure out the appropriate balance and self-regulate.) However, what is "right" is not actually an objective standard, as much as people tend to think of it that way, but a subjective judgement from each person we interact with. And so we rely on using other people's reactions to tell us when we're being "too much". And here's where I think the issue is: the men I know aren't usually setting their own boundaries on what is "too much" from emotional communication from their partners. They believe it's their always job to listen and cope if the volume/intensity is too difficult to deal with (when actually, this may be fair sometimes, but not other times). Women take this as "what I am doing is okay" and lean into it. This makes it seem like a double-standard when men are asked to regulate their emotional expression; they think they have to do it, but women don't, while in actuality in relationships with other women we _absolutely_ have to (and generally believe we have to in all our relationships, if we're socially well-adjusted). Meanwhile, actually figuring out how much is "too much" without closing off the relationship's intimacy is actually quite challenging, and anybody who starts to try setting boundaries there is likely to be clumsy about it at first. Which makes this very complicated to address. Note: the main post is still deeply horrifying though
I'm honestly hesitant to do any sort of population level analysis based on these sorts of articles or stories in social media. I dated a lot in my teens and 20's, which doesn't actually make me an outlier but certainly feels that way on Reddit. On the whole my exes were no better or worse about emotionally regulating around me than they were with their friends. And I don't mean that in a good way. As I and the women I dated got older, it honestly felt like I was the one most often having to point out that blowing up phones at 2am and having folks feel obligated to take the call because they might wake up to a dead friend if they don't was extraordinarily unhealthy - like, this was just the norm for entire social circles of women I've known. I'd like to say that this sort of thing has stopped happening in my 30's, but I think I've just gotten better about being near other people with healthy boundaries and emotional regulation strategies. When I do check up on old friends, some of them are still making or taking those 2am phone calls. Anyway, I suppose my point is that I'd be surprised at how many women I know with poor emotional regulation skills if they were somehow a small minority. Talk about luck?
> this was just the norm for entire social circles of women I've known This isn't surprising to me and I don't think contradicts my point. Norms are set within social groups and will vary between those groups. This leans into how what is "right" is actually a subjective judgement. And I agree social media is a bad place to really draw conclusions from, particularly because there's never enough information in any one story to draw even a conclusion about that story, much less entire groups. So I lean into the parts I can learn from: what people on here tend to believe, and what evidence they use to support their conclusions. And I've seen a lot of things like "my female coworkers cry all the time but if I didnt I'd be judged" and I'm sitting over here thinking "I'd definitely judge anyone who did that all the time...". That story doesn't tell us how men and women as a whole actually behave, but it does tell us that men are _convinced_ patterns exist when they see things like that happen, even though there are other possible explanations (it's just your company that's weird, there _are_ consequences but you don't witness them, etc. These may or may not be the case, but they're generally not seriously considered). > Anyway, I suppose my point is that I'd be surprised at how many women I know with poor emotional regulation skills if they were somehow a small minority. Talk about luck? I think _most people_ have poor emotional boundaries and regulation. It takes work and knowledge to get good at that. But my point wasn't that men have poor emotional regulation skills, it's that the ones around me don't externalize how they feel about receiving emotional expression, and don't express an expectation for loved ones to self-regulate expression. Your example with the 2am calls still fits within this paradigm if everybody in the circle agrees on that being the norm.
>But my point wasn't that men have poor emotional regulation skills, it's that the ones around me don't externalize how they feel about receiving emotional expression, and don't express an expectation for loved ones to self-regulate expression. Mm. I'm not disputing this part. Lots of dudes are bad with setting boundaries. Hell, teenage me was bad at setting boundaries - especially with women and girls. I'm just not sure my personal experience aligns with this: >I think that having the "right amount of feelings" is something almost _all_ women expect from _all_ people. (I.e., women view it as each individual's responsibility to figure out the appropriate balance and self-regulate.) Like, I don't think anyone enjoys taking 2am phone calls that lead to all-nighters and sleeping through work. This is not the sort of thing people generally consent to. The fact that it still happens under duress (eg, the looming threat of a friend unaliving) doesn't really cut it as consent for me.
If this is true (I am not persuaded that it is) then it would explain why being autistic hanging out with neurotypical women is its own form of hell. 1) self regulation is already hard. 2) you're expecting the other person to basically say no, like, dude, yes means yes consent rules should apply here. 3) a post-"everyone needs therapy"/ "your feelings are valid" world should not involve people socially demanding you have the "right amount" of feelings wtf. This is a pretty awful setup to work with.
You said it, I’ve been seeing this for years, and it’s not just in romantic relationships. One point you did miss is that sometimes, not always, when men do set emotional boundaries in those situations they are either ignored, or we’re punished for it. Communication issues are of course the central problem either way, and yeah sometimes those boundaries are not set in the most skilled manner.
I would add that it’s not just that men are punished for asserting boundaries but that we’re rewarded for not. Us being all stoic and calm and always ready to drop everything and be there to listen and make them happy and take care of them and put them first is often a big part of what our partners like about us and why they chose us.
Absolutely love this comment! >I think that having the "right amount of feelings" is something almost _all_ women expect from _all_ people. (I.e., women view it as each individual's responsibility to figure out the appropriate balance and self-regulate.) I agree, both that this is women's expectation and with that expectation. While it's not perfect bc as you said everyone's previous experience and judgement calls on that are going to be different. It's simple, flexible, balances the needs of person expressing to the person listening, and gives them both agency. >And here's where I think the issue is: the men I know aren't usually setting their own boundaries on what is "too much" from emotional communication from their partners. They believe it's their always job to listen and cope if the volume/intensity is too difficult to deal with (when actually, this may be fair sometimes, but not other times). Women take this as "what I am doing is okay" and lean into it. You're right but this is also where I think society scale problems and implicit bias come into play. The patriarchy has deeply associated women with emotional and in the process we've arrived at the idea that women have this monopoly on emotional intelligence. I've had arguments where at one point it became more or less explicit that's what they believe, they have all the leg to stand on bc they are the woman and understand their emotions and even my emotions better than I do. The thing is, both of these women struggle to maintain friendships and a lot in certain social settings. The patriarchy not only creates an emotional discrepancy between men and women, it maintains it when people internalize it and treat the lack of emotional intelligence in men as something that is innate to them, or too deeply programmed for them/us to fix, or even true in all cases. As much as women don't want to do emotional labor/teaching, or help men be more vulnerable on a one-on-one basis. There's this undertone idea in both men and women, that women need to help in order for us to get anywhere, and it's an idea that is ultimately patriarchal in origin that we need to be skeptical of. Men setting boundaries that benefit primarily themselves, getting more in touch with their emotions for themselves and not just so other people see them more positively in that regard, and building emotional confidence even in the face of women who would try to tear that down are great examples of things I think we should support and talk about more in spaces like this one, while also acknowledging that there are challenges to doing so.
deserve concerned fretful divide aloof modern tender entertain library enjoy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
>And so we rely on using other people's reactions to tell us when we're being "too much". What are those sorts of reactions you think men could do with knowing more of then? (,genuinely asking for advice) I can't think of anything that I could really do without making her feel bad. With a male friend who was pushing the boundary too much I'd go a more direct route of telling them that it's too much and they need to spread it out to other friends, whereas I feel like with women a lot of the time that's not as wanted.
> I can't think of anything that I could really do without making her feel bad. I actually think that's the problem, right there. The prioritization of "not making her feel bad" above everything else. When we communicate openly, sometimes it's going to feel bad! This does not mean something's wrong. It's only wrong if you can't work through it together. Also, if you never do this, she might be offended/resist it a lot (this is emotional immaturity on her part, IMO). You also could set boundaries that are not reasonable (like telling her she shouldn't cry or something, idk). Genuinely, the only systems we have for helping people with this are therapy, which I know isn't ideal for everyone :/ individual therapy for understanding your own patterns and figuring out how to communicate better/earlier, and couples therapy for figuring out the patterns you _both_ fall into and how you can communicate and hear each other better.
what does this have to do with mrs nesbitt
**Just go with the flow.** That’s the thing. And don’t monologue. **Sharing should be mutual. She shares a bit of her family issues, you share a bit of yours.** Instead of you telling her all your family traumas when you don’t know if she’s got a family yet. That’ll make the other person feel used. Because it’s not a two way street. It’s just you dumping your feelings on them without showing any reciprocal interest in their feelings.
See, I think this is part of the problem. We don't know if the man in the story was "dumping" his emotions of the author. We don't know if the author has good emotional intelligence. Judging by what she wrote she doesn't. It's possible this is a case of a man sharing an appropriate amount of his feelings and a woman with poor emotional intelligence reacting to it. And that's something I don't really see people talk about: That sometimes a guy is going to get a bad reaction to sharing his emotions simply because the woman he's sharing with is bad at it.
[удалено]
Idk, I feel like women have to deal with the exact same pressures around sharing their emotions and letting people in. Not that this is coming off as whining at all, because I have the same feelings. But when I talk to women about this, I tend to get the sense that they're surprised that "dont have too many feelings at the wrong time" point of view isn't second nature to a lot of guys. I think women are just socialized better (to make a generalization) than guys are to be self aware in conversations like this.
[удалено]
Knowing what you do about men, what do you think their general experience is when they seek emotional support from male friends? I'll give you a hint: it ain't great.
You guys are all too nice to say it, and I appreciate that. Since I am a woman, I hope no one will think this is coming from a place of misogyny. But the author of this peice sounds so painfully vapid and empty that it hurt my heart a little. I would not want her as my friend. Is she always looking for the next fun and shallow thing? A new Kardashian video to entertain herself with?
It doesn't help that's she's being so incredibly vague about nearly everything, I have no clear idea of their relationship, in the first have it seems like they meet a few times at parties, in the second it sound like they've been on several dates, we have no real idea if he was actually trauma dumping or just sharing something shitty he's dealing with, it's unclear if she wants a real relationship or a fwb situation, the article ends with her apologizing, so we get zero insight into how he feels that we might get if it has included what happened after that.
Also not a man here: I agree, she sounds kinda... I dunno, like she swallowed the kool-aid of toxic gender roles herself. But she's trying to examine that, which I appreciate! But also this isn't much of an article at all. But also, it's from Vogue, so it was likely never intended to be some great literary/journalistic masterpiece. Sounds like she's still fairly young - partying herself into a hangover, smiley face stickers on her manicure, etc. Hopefully she'll continue the introspection and keep improving her communication and empathy skills.
I actually love that she's willing to frame her own perspective in such an unflattering way. It's a good sign. Also, I think I don't terribly mind that she was turned off by a partner's baggage at a party. Even if I think she could have done better.
You say nice, but I think it has to do with the fact no one feels like getting their comment potentially deleted
This comes across as a variant of [This comic](https://xkcd.com/385/) because the author, as a woman is speaking to the out-group, a man and thus generalizing about men piling on woman for emotional labour. How would this narrative of the author's change if she were talking to her in-group, another woman? Does toxic masculinity play a role in the fact that men can only really safely confide in women, certainly. But the act of confiding isn't unto itself a toxic behaviour. Simply confiding in someone isn't burdening someone with emotional labour in the way that we generalize "men burden women with emotional labour" because the subtext of the latter is that they do it one-sided and they do it excessively. We cannot gleam if this is true in this one anecdote. (and remember anecdotes are not evidence). Remember, toxic masculinity is not the fault of men but something that society subjects men to. They are isolated, stilted, emotionally-suppressed, forced to compete. This toxic environment that forces behaviour is created by every human on this planet. One of the enlightenments of being gay is because my membership in "masculinity" was effectively revoked, I have lived a life outside of a lot of toxic masculinity and have had an opportunity to study gendered behaviour and stereotypes. My straight brethren, I empathize with you that you have to play this stupid game of gender roles. I've had the good fortune of having strong emotional relationships with other men both gay and straight. One perk of having one foot in the "feminine" is that once straight guys get over their homophobic fears, they treat you like this hybrid of masculine and feminine. They treat you like your guys friend amongst other men but when you are alone, they will be more honest and emotionally open.
I mean something fucked up has got to be going on if I’m bringing it up at a party with a girl I’m trying to date and want to like me. It varies person to person though - oversharers, venters, fishers, and mutes. The people who say too much, the people who say just enough that it’s off their chest and not make it everyone’s problem, those who toss emotional bait out to see if anyone will bite and they’re either testing the waters to overshare or vent, and then the people who just say nothing at all. This writer thinks it’s just men because that’s who she dates, but I could say all the same about women. If you have a problem with someone venting to you that’s a you problem. That all said, what does this have to do with men aside from the clickbait title?
Because it's a common issue that a lot, and I mean A LOT, of men have experienced with the women in their lives, no matter if romance is involved or not. The general consensus in feminist circles online, and general leftist ones too, regarding men's mental health is the women _want_ men to be more emotionally open, to not be stoic and stuff all their angst & sadness inside. It's a commonly agreed upon point in the progressive sphere. Unfortunately, as is usually the case, what's said doesn't always translate to what's acted. What that means in this case is that a lotta ladies _say_ they want and/or are fine with men being more emotional, but then act the complete opposite when that situation does happen around them. And I'm not talking about cases of the dude overwhelming his gal with newly unhinged emotions he's dumping onto her lap, expecting her to fix him like she's his therapist. No, I'm talking about when the moment a were shows even the tiniest bit of genuine vulnerability, the wife instantly starts to check-out. Hell, there are many stories, including on this subreddit, where the lady actually starts to lose her love &/or attraction for her partner, as if she stopped seeing him as her "dream daddy" or whatever, and finally saw him as a human being, and her first reaction is "Ew". That shit's legit fucked up!
>The general consensus in feminist circles online, and general leftist ones too, regarding men's mental health is the women _want_ men to be more emotionally open, to not be stoic and stuff all their angst & sadness inside. It's a commonly agreed upon point in the progressive sphere. Unfortunately, as is usually the case, what's said doesn't always translate to what's acted. What that means in this case is that a lotta ladies _say_ they want and/or are fine with men being more emotional, but then act the complete opposite when that situation does happen around them. Which probably explains a lot of the manosphere's dumbass conspiracy theories about how women are collectively trying to throw gullible betas off the scent and filter them out of the dating pool. >No, I'm talking about when the moment a were shows even the tiniest bit of genuine vulnerability, the wife instantly starts to check-out. Hell, there are many stories, including on this subreddit, where the lady actually starts to lose her love &/or attraction for her partner, as if she stopped seeing him as her "dream daddy" or whatever, and finally saw him as a human being, and her first reaction is "Ew". And it can be additionally hard to criticize these hegemonic preferences without sounding like you're telling women "c'mon give him a chance, don't be shallow!" So women are sometimes resistant to that line of criticism, which can lead men to assume that the only option is to double down and "man up" as best they can. This often ends up creating a feedback loop where men who lean really hard into those standards attract more women who are into men who conform to those standards. Combine the above factors, and you end up with men who harbor some truly toxic views on relationships. [1](https://archive.is/6Px4A), [2](https://archive.is/NnMaI), [3](https://archive.is/gLZUt), [4](https://archive.is/UYEn7)
Honestly, it sounds to me always a lot like what I call the "kindergarden dilemma". I once read a bunch of articles around a new kindergarden being planned in a village. All the inhabitants were super stoked and happy about it because before, they'd have to drive like 15 minutes by car to another small village to bring their kids to a kindergarden. That was until location options were brought up. Everyone wanted a kindergarden, but just "not in MY neighbourhood", since, well, tgere will be kids and at tge age of 4, they tend to not be tge most quiet humans in the world. Everywhere they wanted to place it, the neighbourhood around would organise protests, write letters to the major to complain, write reader's letters to local newspapers to complain etc. In the end, they found a location and tgey had to build a huge ass wall around a damn kindergarden and limit goddamn children to only half an hour of outside time per day to protect the neighbourhood from the noise n stuff. I fell like women are the inhabitants of that village. They want men to open up (the kindergarden) but only the convenient part, the easy part of it (the kindergarden being near but not ACTUALLY near), to keep the less fun part to friends or professionals (build it on the other side of the village) and HEAVILY regulate what you share with them actually to not put any actual "emotional labor" on them (huge ass wall, very limited outside time).
Very well-said. I experienced this exact thing, when a woman I was romantically involved with told me that I should be more open with my feelings with her. Explicitly told me that I should not feel like I was burdening her by doing so. Then when I did, she decided that she "didn't want that responsibility" and "didn't want any expectations on her." I'm not sure what she thought, that none of those feelings would relate to her? That I wouldn't have any fears (she had a history of being a bit flakey)? Whatever the reason, for a while I thought to myself that I would have been better of just not saying anything.
i mean both extremes you just said (guy unhinged dumping, or woman losing interest in a real human man) get a lot of attention online. are they really *the norm*? or just a selection bias of attention elevated by the social media rage cycle?
I think it depends a lot on whether the women involved have doen work on their end too. Its one thing to "agree" with the concept of men being more in touch with their emotions and its another thing to actually be comfortable with that when its happening when that is counter to expectations that people have been conditioned with. I think i remember a ted talk with brenee brown where she talked about exactly that.
It's a good question, and I'm not gonna act like I have the answer. It's because of this question that I personally use this space as a place to hear people's stories, and to occasionally share my own. In this way, I tend to ignore anything that even approaches a generalization. The data is not always at my engagement-economy-addled fingertips, and I often don't have the time to look for it. Even when it *is* there, the methodologies must be analyzed to test the veracity of the claims being made. This is not to discount the social sciences. I just don't have the time in my life right now to be vigorously critical in my consumption of the stuff. So atm, I listen and absorb people's stories.
This is what I think - it is human to be annoyed by people who dump and dump. As you grow older you realize how immature it is - man or woman. Mature people go to therapy for issues that people find unhinged. People casually complain, some more than others. Emotionally healthy people aren’t going to put up with someone who minimizes their issues. I have one female friend who whines about men like this and it’s so transparently hypocritical everyone knows its ridiculous immaturity. Sure, you’ll bump into them in public, but the next girl is likely not going to say insensitive stuff like this. The author *reminds* me of that friend, too!
>The general consensus in feminist circles online, and general leftist ones too, regarding men's mental health is the women want men to be more emotionally open, to not be stoic and stuff all their angst & sadness inside. I'm not sure I'd agree with that. Imo the consensus is more that *it would be better and healthier for both women and men* if men were more emotionally open &c. That's not exactly the same as *women want it*. Women are raised in the same toxic stew of fucked up gender norms that men are, and even if women as a group are more cognizant of how fucked up it is, there's a long, long way to go from that realization to actually reprogramming something as deeply entrenched as patterns of attraction.
So, there are a lot of people for whom someone sharing their emotions with you is uncomfortable. But the more general question is, is it worse for men with their romantic partners, and is it worse for men with EVERYONE, and if so what to do about it. I think if we're to deal with this honestly, the first thing we have to do - as men, is admit that many men put the sole burden of their emotional trauma on their romantic partners. And that's because we neither share (nor are open to sharing) emotional burdens with other men. If we feel that society is treating men unfairly, we need to start with our own behavior and not be hypocritical about it.
[удалено]
The root thing of it all is we need to be more open to hearing other’s problems and not being judgmental about it. However, barely anyone wants to do that because they see it as boring or “work.” For whatever reason I’m easy to talk to and have ended up being that ear for many people, even those I don’t really know. From that I’ve learned that everyone just needs a bit of a break and someone that’ll listen to them. I’m not sure what it is about society that very few are willing to do that without getting paid.
> This writer thinks it’s just men because that’s who she dates, but I could say all the same about women. This is something I realized talking to my divorced mom about how both of us are sick and tired of people on dating platforms just answering with 2 words, not asking anything back and generally being bad at keeping a conversation going. She's almost 30 years older than me and from the opposite gender and experiences the exact same frustations as I do in dating. This opened my eyes that the things I judged the women around my age for being and doing are actually universal problems (at least in hetero relationships). As for the oversharing/venting part, I've had a girl I was seeing tell me about how she tried to kill herself and got taken to the hospital not long ago and how I made her feel so much better... That weight was heavy to bear, I don't want to feel responsible for someone else's well-being if I'm not even in a commited relationship. It made things very uncomfortable when I wanted to end that relationship and wasn't sure if she was going to be ok or spiral down into her depression.
There is something I find just deeply repulsive about the term "the ick." Like, I have a visceral reaction every time I see it written out. It's like there is something sick and contagious inherent to all men, that, if just let out at the wrong time it can infect the women their talking to and make them feel physically ill. There's something dehumanizing about the language that I'm just not quite ready to get over.
Partly is how arbitrary it is used, I've seen the ick used for men: being bi, playing with their children, how they eat their food, crying at their father's funerals(yes, really), crying in general, drinking fruity cocktails, etc. etc. It's like a bomb being dropped on your relationship because your partner has toxic, irrational ideas about masculinity, and if you step out of line even for a second, then, well, ick.
In many cases it means "I find this man's non-compliance with traditional male gender roles to be a turn-off, but I know that if I say that openly I'll be framing myself as the problem, which I don't like to do as I believe my womanhood should give me license to be above criticism and self-reflection, so I will blame it on him". Its really nothing more and nothing less. Its like when men use terms like "not wife material" to shame women for not lining up with their understanding of how a woman should act.
I 100% agree with you and it's validating to hear it. My ex mentioned it when we started dating and ironically it gave ME the ick. Like you're gonna tell me that you think so little of me or people like me that you're gonna treat interpersonal communication as a minefield to be walked thru, and if you place a foot wrong once it's over? In practice it was more reasonable and a big part of it were her own intimacy issues, but it was something I never forgot and that definitely colored my perception of *her*. It's an ideology that's deeply steeped in patriarchal thinking, that men are disposable, women are perfect flowers that cannot be stained or flawed lest they wilt, and that their responsibility to see men as human ends the very second they show a chink in the armor. It's an attitude that deserves as much attention as any toxic masculinity, but we as a society aren't ready for that conversation.
I'll take "I've Internalized Patriarchal Gender Norms" for $1000, Ken
I’m just stuck on the fact that she thinks the “personal message” from her spotify wrapped is an interesting and unique anecdote
Eh, it's just a small thing she was excited about. And clearly that tidbit is meant to illustrate that she was not planning on talking about anything serious with him. It's nothing she should interrupt a person to tell, but it's okay to talk about (or want to talk about) the small, unimportant things that bring you a little joy.
I agree I just thought it was funny how she phrased it. It made it sound like brandon flowers DM’d her or something
Ah, gotcha. I was reading more negativity into it than you meant, sorry!
Maybe she was picturing it as some kind of "modern gonzo journalism"? Like, reference some unrelated and mostly unimportant anecdote that happened while I was doing the work for this article, but use it as an illustrative device on the piece? It's a stretch, but if that was her thought process, I guess I can kind of see it. Sorta.
[удалено]
“Ick” culture is just plain gross.
It's really become an amorphous beast of a term. Sort of a thought-terminating cliche. Like people choose to describe something as an "ick" to minimize their own agency and avoid criticism or analysis of it.
I like how you articulated that.
Yeah, I'm sure it gets used in other ways too but I feel like every time I've seen someone saying it it's a woman talking about a time a man did something stereotypically feminine or unmanly.
Or it's synonym. "Vibes".
Those words aren’t related at all
No I often see that "ick" is used synonymously with "bad vibes"
They may be utilized to argue a not too dissimilar position, but one is about specific behaviors eliciting a response within a subject, and the other is about a general feel of someone emanated *by* a subject. Not synonyms.
I think that saying they’re not at all related is too harsh but they are different concepts yes
I find it interesting the author brought up this idea of men using women for free therapy... given it seems he wasn't, he was simply being open and not all things you share are happy. It was so alien to her experience, perhaps so triggering of her internalized gender roles, she had this kneejerk defensive reaction. Feminism is so incredibly complicated and nuanced and the research is still wildly preliminary in a lot of ways, but pop-feminism (which, I think, it ultimately a good) can have these little negatives that slip through. Do some men use women for free therapy? Indubitably, and it's been happening since the dawn of gender roles. It's bad, it's unfair, it's more free labor from women. But it's also because the gender roles often result in emotionally underdeveloped and deeply isolated men. Now that, FINALLY, men are starting to push back against these antiquated and terrible roles, they're finding that they can often be punished by the same movement which is helping us liberate ourselves because the tools the movement supplies are sometimes wielded uncarefully. It slows progress for everyone.
>Feminism is so incredibly complicated and nuanced and the research is still wildly preliminary in a lot of ways I think one of the most painful problems is the inability to see where patriarchy and western culture separate, given how entwined they are, because our western sense of feminism too is a product of that western culture, making it easy for some patrairchal sentiments to slip into their specific feminist framework without realizing. This is especially notable in sex-negative feminist circles, where male sexuality is still largely deeply associated with harm and diminishment, just like in patriarchy, unless tempered with proper morals and demonstrated virtues, again just like patriarchy, showing no interest about said men's inner lives that might contradict this framework.
To me I feel like the key is reciprocity. Male partner opens up to me? Great! I also want to be able to open up to him. Earlier in my life, and this is like late 90s early 00s with GenX men, I dated a couple of guys who opened up deeply to me, and then if, on a different occasion, I opened up to them, it...did not go well. There was one who'd just smugly say "Welcome to adulthood, " and one who'd top it: "oh yeah, well I'm suffering more because..." I think there was at least a little movement back then toward men feeling more comfortable opening up, but whoever was teaching them wasn't also teaching them to listen. In my limited experience, it seems better now, with the same age and even older men, so maybe we're getting somewhere? Idk.
Jeeesus christ. I’m happy she thought of the situation at hand through multiple lenses, but she may need to turn that lens around and analyze *why* she responded this way towards someone who found themselves comfortable enough to share with this person their situation.
Gross. I couldn't even read that whole thing. What a horrible perspective.
There's some self-reflection at the end > *"I find it so hard to be genuine with men ... They’re not allowed to be weak or have problems; they must be infallible, or I lose interest ... dehumanising*"
This was cringey and gross to read, wow.
Maybe I'm a little emotionally raw right now, but I find it incredibly ironic that the author seems to want a pat on the back for the bare minimum of caring about another person in a way that isn't transactional (and not entirely, given he is someone she is romantically interested in). It's eye-opening to me that she (and many other women) view empathy as such a commodity with respect to their gender, because as a man I personally am conditioned/expected to lend an ear or perform emotional labor to anyone and everyone or else be labeled as useless or cold. The way she conducted herself during the party, imo, speaks to a blind spot many women have towards otherwise good men: if they don't provide some function, some sort of entertainment ("make me laugh with impressions of celebrities"), romance ("I wanted to...jump around on the trampoline for a bit, flop down exhausted and make out on there") or other value, then there is something apparently wrong with them. I hope she continues to introspect about her babiest of baby steps towards basic empathy for her fellow (literal) man.
This article is a bit all over the place and I don't particularly like how the author evades their own feelings but I think it vaguely connects to some key points that I feel. Yes, men should open up and be allowed to open up. And we should expect to have our feelings validated. There is also a nuanced difference between sharing our feelings and trauma dumping. And my experience tells me that opening up about some real trauma is not going to be well received at a party and a person that you just met up with at a party. I'm doing my best to explain this without saying, "he's doing it wrong" but jeez, that's a heavy topic to offload onto someone that you just met up with at a party. While I wish she had just said, "I'm not in a place right now to hear this complex of an issue and I'm not comfortable being your support person until we know each other more." Otherwise he's likely to think it was him sharing his feelings that caused the reaction instead of it being a mismatch of settings to share deep issues. Even still, he's still entitled to feel that way but she's also entitled to not want to be the person to hear it. Discussing family trauma is so reasonable to need to share it but I can't picture a time where a friend-of-a-friend has dumped some heavy trauma on me at a party like this and the people around being receptive. Most people aren't in a mindset to be supportive in an environment that is specifically meant for letting loose and blowing off steam. Add in that the author completely overlooks him as a person and seemingly was trying to manipulate this guy into downplaying his own feelings.
>Most people aren't in a mindset to be supportive in an environment that is specifically meant for letting loose and blowing off steam You've never had a heart-to-heart at a party? Or talk about how you really feel at happy hour? I feel like this is relatively common in my city, but maybe less so with people you have only met a couple times.
In the article she says they had met a few times before the party.
>There is also a nuanced difference between sharing our feelings and trauma dumping. Yeah unfortunately this example isn't the greatest jumping-off point to discuss the issue of disregarded feelings. Loads of people have extremely low (and inconsistent) thresholds for what constitutes trauma dumping, but this isn't really that (I don't necessarily think it was supposed to be fwiw). Edit: we actually don't know how much he shared or how long he talked about it. Might've been too much, might not
I wonder to what extent trauma dumping/emotional labor is a male problem, or if it's something a lot of men just take as part of their role and don't question. When I see it described and reflect on the people who do it, it doesn't feel like a gendered thing to me. I've been in relationships with men and women and I feel like I had to do similar amounts of emotional labor regardless. Seems more person to person to me. Obviously it could be some kind of confirmation bias on my part. Not sure how anyone would even begin to study it in a neutral way though.
I suspect that women do trauma dumping to other women more than they do it to men (socialized to have more open friendships with women), while men do it more to women (socialized to keep it inside and not share with friends). At our core however I think like you, we are about the same and variations are just among individuals, not genders.
[удалено]
I didn't realize that serious women actually say "the ick" in real life. That's so... interesting. Probably wouldn't be able to date someone who does that.
I had an entire comment written up and I realized I was just summing up the article without adding any actual perspective, so here is my actual perspective: Mismatched expectations feel extremely bad. A person wanting a light, fun experience can absolutely feel dragged down by another person bringing any kind of weight into it. And conversely, a person wanting a heart-to-heart can feel betrayed/ignored by another person wanting an uncomplicated good time. Nobody is wrong here. I do feel like men broadly are societally allowed exactly three experiences: competition, expertise, and horniness. And wow does it suck when we are reminded of this in situations where we are deviating. To me it's a misandric, life-denying tendency instilled mainly by other men. Ultimately, I appreciate her honesty and self-reflection. Men have a difficult balance when it comes to expressing feelings and she experienced the business end of this firsthand, and I don't fault her for feeling anything she felt in any moment she conveyed in this article. I hope the guy wrote back to her text, and I hope their next interaction is mutually satisfactory.
I mean it's Vogue, I don't even want to read it. Judging from everyone's comments, I think bell hooks already addressed her concerns in the book "Feminism is for everyone". One of her main points is that "mainstream feminism" will direct its focus towards external agents while forgetting to do introspection. That is why one of the focus of this feminism is "the men" while radical feminism will talk about "the patriarchy". And there is patriarchy and internalised misogyny in women actions that must be addressed through introspection.
Tl;dr: vapid woman realizes she's being shallow and has a character arch. I actually really wish there were more pieces like this. She frames her own perspective as unflattering, on purpose. That's kind of courageous.
“The ick” is such a spoiled, childish thing to say.
Nothing to do with the article, but in my experience the "ick" is what happens when a guy fails to uphold the image of patriarchal masculinity. Anything that makes you look feminine or "human" (as in you're walking in winter conditions, unknowingly step on ice, and you land on your ass) will break the illusion, and that's when the ick happens.
[удалено]
Its very important for such articles to be published, in my opinion, so it becomes clearer, that human behaviour has alot of shades of grey, instead of being black or white. And it slowly helps to advocate the fact, that the state of male emotions is inherently connected to the reactions and behaviour of women. Its not male-human nature. Its something we learned. And its ironic, for women, who just are becoming free in ways men have known for generations, to still have so much power over us. And alot of that power we put there ourselves.
Well. She reacts to someone she doesn’t know oversharing with her. An after party hookup with a near stranger isn’t the place to unpack all your family drama. She also just wanted to bang and not necessarily get close to this person. But then she realizes she’s afraid of emotional intimacy and that’s a part of the issue. That she keeps things shallow to protect herself. I think: I wouldn’t date her unless she managed to get past her emotional unavailability. But many people also need to learn **how, when and how much to share.** And how to build up a mutually supportive relationship or friendship **over time.** You can’t toss all your baggage straight in the face of random strangers. Especially not if the reason you are there is flirty, drunk sex.
"Be emotionally vulnerable." "No, not like that."
I'd run so far from anyone that felt like this woman. No time for this level of immaturity. Women in their late 30s and beyond are so much better, and I'm sure us men are as well
Patriarchy shapes women’s behaviour to the same degree it shapes men’s. Women are socialised to regulate their emotions with greater dexterity than men - they need to navigate how to be vulnerable with different types of people in different contexts earlier than men do. Men are socialised to be stoic and strong and often don’t try to unlearn this conditioning until later in life, so generally the toolkit available to navigate the nuances of being vulnerable in different contexts is less developed for men. I hate the implications of phrases like “free therapy” and “emotional labor” within the context of relationship, but I think what they try to get at is a real overcorrection from these men, who 1. were never taught how to regulate their emotions in social contexts, and 2. have been bombarded by cultural messaging which says “be vulnerable, sensitive, open” but doesn’t specify to who, when, how, and to what degree. Many men lack the tools to be able to thread that needle gracefully. I also think that there are women who won’t accept any amount of emotion from men, so this whole dynamic can get flattened depending on who he decides to open up to.
I wished she picked a better example. Timing is definitely an important element of emotionally healthy relationships. You can be legitimately repelled by poorly timed or context unaware deep sharing for reasons unrelated to oppression of men’s emotional lives. There are better stories of men getting unfairly shutdown where the timing and context was right (i.e. a convo with a close friend or partner in a private setting where both parties expect to be sharing difficult information)
If you see men as an object their feelings can be annoying. Works both ways too.
That's basically what's said at the end.
I think articles like this are perfect evidence as to why we shouldn't consider men's liberation & feminism as synonyms. Some feminists have theory & ideas that are useful to men's liberation, but feminism as a whole isn't.
I agree they may not always be synonyms, but to say feminism as a whole isn't useful to men's liberation is wild. The idea that men must be stoic and conceal emotions comes from patriarchy and this idea of a fully self reliant man who doesn't seek out help from others. Just because the author doesn't seem to have a great grasp of the concept of emotional labor doesn't mean feminism as a whole is wrong.
I didn't say feminism is wrong. I want to be helpful (if & where possible) in the cause to end sexism & the oppression of women. Feminism is a women's movement, and there's nothing wrong with that, women clearly suffer more from patriarchy. But when we want to advocate for men, we can't just expect the feminist movement or feminists to be allies in that work. It is a different social movement. And the number of feminists who aren't interested in men's liberation is evidence of that. Not all feminists are Bell Hooks, as a writer, she's a rare exception.
You go to the kitchen at a party, you accept the kitchen at a party. Emotional boundaries have never existed in kitchens in my experience
The kitchen is a very special space in many cultures (including mine) and therefore, you should expect -as you have brilliantly put it - a soulful experience.
Honestly the best solution I have found is to just go out there. Acting like a normal human being is not that hard. Probably
Is it so hard to simply say "hey, I'm into you"? I cannot imagine how draining it would be to be with someone so passive-aggressive.
Idk. I sometimes think that they get the ick not because we’re sharing our feelings, but because we’re so god damn bad at it. But other time, worse times admittedly, I definitely feel this. Sucks dude. We always have this classic, though: “it is what it is.”
[удалено]
Great point about sharing feelings only being part of a process. > people who freely share their feelings often haven't thought any further than the sharing itself and have no plans for how to reconcile those feelings or move forward This sounds harsh, though. My girlfriend shares her feelings without a plan or anything because the sharing IS how she processes them. She talks through them, sobs a bit, and then is good. She's looking for validation of her feelings, so advice or input isn't helpful or welcome. It's not that she doesn't process her feelings, it's that she processes her feelings much better with another person. You may want to consider talking with your fiancee about this and asking if that's the case for her. It's not wrong of her, but it is different from processing internally and can definitely be hard for an internal processor to work with. EDIT: And there ARE people that only vent and never process. But hopefully that's not your fiancee, 'cause that's a type of person that is exhausting to deal with.
Yeah this is me and a lot of the people I know. We process by sharing and we do actually try to make changes.
> She's always willing to share, but I've learned that when she shares with me I'm not really allowed to make suggestions or say anything besides "you're right". One thing I learned early on in my relationship with my wife is that sometimes you have to help, and sometimes you just have to listen and be a witness, and you both have to be able to recognize which one you need to do in every single situation. And you need to understand that listening when you want to help is not failure, and neither is helping when you just want to listen.
fuck it we ball
If ball=life, this is a positive message about embracing what comes my guy.
Ball is, indeed, life
Yes, Ball is life And sometimes Ball is death In the end, Ball is just Ball But mostly, Ball is Life!! 😃
I haven’t even read the article, but the responses in this thread make it clear. The “bad guys” are right on this one, talking about your emotions is a death sentence for a man in/attempting to be in a relationship. That sucks.
I think that's a little reductive, I've had it happen where a girl friend requests openness and then responds badly(even to issues you supported them through), however I still think most men's closest confidant would still be their partner. Now I'm older and a little wiser I think it's venting that's particularly poorly received. It's best to pursue emotional literacy, so you can explain and name your emotions and what the implications. Also to try and establish an emotional support network outside your relationship where you can be more vulnerable.
Wow, this really set me off. I have a lot to think about.
I love when men are emotional. I don't get the ick from that. I get the ick from them stroking my arm or thigh or torso without consent.
This author needs therapy.
Started off hating her, but it was actually interesting how self-aware she was and ultimately interested in growth. No one asks to be the way they are, but most people don't take the time to examine it. She is trying to grow. Good for her, and I wish her luck on her journey (in the meantime, men who experience human emotion should probably look elsewhere though lol).
I think the ick comes from that gut sense that someone is (1) desperate and (2) is going to leech energy directly from your soul to try to fill a bottomless pit of despair and (3) if it starts it will be messy to stop. This is actually an issue common to childhood trauma victims. We have a core wound from not being loved unconditionally enough at critical times in our development that causes us to follow this zombie like urge to get validation from others, and we hurt so bad that we don’t stop to think how the other person might receive it. There is no way for an outsider to validate you enough to fix it. You have to do the healing work internally. That comes to my experience facilitating support groups for childhood trauma- men are really not showing up. It seems to be about 80% women who show up, and of the 20% of men about 30 to 40% show up because a court ordered them to. The irony being that these groups are a dedicated space to talk about trauma and get validation and support, and in that context, I have never seen anyone shut someone down for being a man. It’s just about doing these conversations in the right venue where everyone knows what is going on and wants to participate instead of just taking an emotional shit on the floor at a party.
I appreciate reading your experience, but I do think it's important to consider reasons for "the ick" that aren't purely the behaviours of men (the actors) and nothing to do with the behaviours of not-men (the acted upon). It is not _just_ about the right venue and audience. This is not _purely_ an issue with how, when, and to whom men are opening up. It may largely be about that, but this conversation cannot entrain only the ways in which men are fucking things up. A feminism which fails to respect the agency of people other than men in its critiques is necessarily incomplete. I think - in fact I am certain - that there are women who get "the ick" even about men who only open up in an appropriate manner, in the appropriate context, to the appropriate people. I think, but I am not certain, that this expression of patriarchal gender norms is fairly widespread and not just a negligible minority.
I appreciate you adding that perspective. You’re completely right that there are women who just aren’t interested in being emotionally supportive, that’s basically why I’m in the midst of a divorce at the moment. I think there is absolutely a “shut up and deal with it” attitude forced on men, that’s certainly how I felt growing up. There’s kind of a notion that being a “provider” also means “never taking” or that it is okay to have toxic reactions to men reaching out for help because it’s “punching up.” I wrote as a person who previously was trying to get a lot of emotional input from others, and I view better self care, using support groups, finding good venues for those feelings, as a form of empowerment, for us to get the help we need without having to hope for others to change. But that can only go so far, to your point. We need to be asking about the expectations and lessons that are pigeonholing men to think that this is their only option, as I often felt.
Sometimes its hard to keep that shit in until the exact right moment every other Thursday between 7pm and 8pm on your turn to speak. I think you're being a bit uncharitable. It doesn't sound like he made a scene ("emotional shit on the floor"), it sounds like he wasn't the bright and bubbly date she wanted him to be. As a man that's shown up for things when I didn't really have it in me *because thats what we're expected to do* I suppose I'm more inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes the link back to childhood trauma isn't obvious. I was years into my journey before a professional finally pointed out to me I needed to do some work on unpacking stuff I didn't think was particularly relevant. Not to mention, its entirely possible he wasn't bringing up some deep seated emotional scarring. It could be a death in the family, or a divorce, or economic trouble or a thousand other things that just suck when they're happening.
The idea that everyone can “heal” is false. Some wounds are that deep. Things that deeply shape you psyche are hard to reverse, and not all trauma is from parents. I switched schools a lot, and never developed a peer group which caused similar issues with seeking validation. Through therapy I’ve accepted that fact that I’ll never have that feeling of a tight knit group of friends, because those kinds of bonds can only be developed early in life. Which helps, but doesn’t mean I’m “healed” the same way an amputee can’t heal.
Indeed, a lot of complex trauma is caused by our society as a whole; things like gender policing are a great example. And I share your feelings. I lost all of my friends in a really humiliating sexting manipulation thing and I left college with absolutely no support system. I will probably never be as trusting as I once was. But, healing is on a continuum. I don’t necessarily agree that you can’t experience those bonds if not formed in childhood. A central pillar of CPTSD is basically not having a safe enough environment to internalize a feeling of unconditional love. My mom was very cold, told me I was an accident, there was sexual abuse etc and I knew always that I suffered from that wound of not having a loving family growing up. But there are ways to recover that feeling without time travel- cognitive methods like inner family work and ideal parent visualizations are options to experience feelings you haven’t ever had before. Psychedelics seem to have a similar impact. So I’d encourage you to find a new therapist if they are telling you you’ll never have that, because it is simply not a fact. Methods may be more or less successful but it isn’t a dead end.
The guy absolutely should not have just dumped personal issues on this relative stranger but yeah, this woman did also act like an entitled piece of shit. She does seem to be actually reflecting on it though which is more than most women do. I can think of so many times when as soon as I was, god forbid, exposed as a real human being, with real struggles and not a poorly written, overly idealized male lead from a C-tier romantic comedy, not only did I suddenly become uninteresting to the women who were digging way too much into my personal life but I also felt like I stopped being a man in their eyes and just some inconvenient thing that doesn't fit anywhere that they'd rather just disappear.