Are women usually the bosses in relationships?

poundapunnet

Deleted User wrote: »

Yet with the genders reversed the man is "controlling" and the woman should get sympathy rather than be described as "weak".

It's the weird types of derogatory language that seem acceptable to use on a gender specific basis that get me. A man can say "oh sure she's the boss of me, doesn't let me do anything" and the woman in turn can say "Sure he's useless, he couldn't tie his own shoes without me around to tell him how, I made him go to the shop for me the other day", and it's a grand funny joke, but reverse those genders and neither statement would be acceptable.

Wibbs

kowloon wrote: »

I would have said she was too afraid of being alone right up until that last line.

Yea you can have the fear of alone types alright, men and women. Equally I'd say on that score. But you can have people with pretty good choices in partners who still keep picking the idiots, because they're the ones who tickle their bean mentally and emotionally and I've found that more common with the ladies. IMHO many women are more led by their pants than men are accused of. They just dress it up in more romantic terms.

Again IMHO this is down to a historical fear of female sexuality within women themselves. The notion that if they want to ride a bloke it must in some way mean they have a connection, even a love for the bloke. They're more likely to mistake emotional and sexual excitement for love and compatibility, particularly when young and can easily get into dosgy relationships or what I call the Bonkzone(c)Wibbs(tm). Erica Jongs 1970's book "fear of flying" debated around this issue, describing the idea of the "zipless fcuk" as the perfect one off only sex type encounter, though in the book the heroine claims she never had such a thing, there were always some complications and that's not that long ago.


Historically men have generally been better at compartmentalising the ride versus love. Hell men often describe their willies as a somehow separate entity, somehow not quite a part of them. Hence they're less likely to fall into that kind of scenario. Of course they're more likely to engage emotionally first before any sex is on the table, the so called friendzone.

Thankfully this is changing with more and more women being open to just "scratching an itch" and leaving it at that and knowing the diff. Now it just needs more men to cop on around the friendzone issue.

Ihatecuddles

My fiancé is the boss, that's exactly how I like it

poundapunnet

Wibbs wrote: »

Again IMHO this is down to a historical fear of female sexuality within women themselves. The notion that if they want to ride a bloke it must in some way mean they have a connection, even a love for the bloke. They're more likely to mistake emotional and sexual excitement for love and compatibility, particularly when young and can easily get into dosgy relationships or what I call the Bonkzone(c)Wibbs(tm). Erica Jongs 1970's book "fear of flying" debated around this issue, describing the idea of the "zipless fcuk" as the perfect one off only sex type encounter, though in the book the heroine claims she never had such a thing, there were always some complications and that's not that long ago.


Historically men have generally been better at compartmentalising the ride versus love. Hell men often describe their willies as a somehow separate entity, somehow not quite a part of them.

There's simple physiological reasons for that too though. The odds of a one-off purely sexual encounter being as rewarding for a woman as for a man are pretty slim, most promiscuous women I know or those who engage in casual sex would be more likely to have a couple of regular fcuk buddies with whom they know the sex is good rather than purely relying on one night stands. And once you're engaging in sex with someone on a regular basis, the likelihood of emotional complications goes up.

And whether you want to argue from evolutionary biology or pure social conditioning, women tend to have more of a drive for a relationship than men at an earlier age. It's not that the sex drive is any weaker, it's just got more complicated motivations than getting your rocks off.

Curly Judge

I think that the partner with the lowest sex drive ends up being in control.
Consciously or subconsciously they end up using the difference in quota to control the situation.

seenitall

mauzo! wrote: »

My fiancé is the boss, that's exactly how I like it

You'd be something like this lady, so? (making news in the US today)

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/candace-cameron-loves-submissive-marriage/story?id=21461990

Sky King

Carlos Roca wrote: »

I think a lot of men don't mind sitting in the passenger seat when it comes to relationships.

Not when it comes to driving though

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

I can hear the screams of "victim blaming" in the distance. :pac:

For me blame is the wrong word and sentiment, I'd prefer to say that the responsibility for such a pattern ultimately lies with the person and so does the ability to change the program.

clairefontaine

Wibbs wrote: »

Yea you can have the fear of alone types alright, men and women. Equally I'd say on that score. But you can have people with pretty good choices in partners who still keep picking the idiots, because they're the ones who tickle their bean mentally and emotionally and I've found that more common with the ladies. IMHO many women are more led by their pants than men are accused of. They just dress it up in more romantic terms.

Again IMHO this is down to a historical fear of female sexuality within women themselves. The notion that if they want to ride a bloke it must in some way mean they have a connection, even a love for the bloke. They're more likely to mistake emotional and sexual excitement for love and compatibility, particularly when young and can easily get into dosgy relationships or what I call the Bonkzone(c)Wibbs(tm). Erica Jongs 1970's book "fear of flying" debated around this issue, describing the idea of the "zipless fcuk" as the perfect one off only sex type encounter, though in the book the heroine claims she never had such a thing, there were always some complications and that's not that long ago.


Historically men have generally been better at compartmentalising the ride versus love. Hell men often describe their willies as a somehow separate entity, somehow not quite a part of them. Hence they're less likely to fall into that kind of scenario. Of course they're more likely to engage emotionally first before any sex is on the table, the so called friendzone.

Thankfully this is changing with more and more women being open to just "scratching an itch" and leaving it at that and knowing the diff. Now it just needs more men to cop on around the friendzone issue.

I think women areafraid of their inner sirens, and maybe with good reason, let her loose and god knows what would happen, maybe some shaming, maybe some blaming, etc, maybe some assault. The fact that rape whistles come in your college welcome pack does not help.

Look how Marylin Monroe was both worshiped and adored,but also controlled and punished particularly by Hollywood. I'm fairly convinced her whole sexy shtick was tongue in cheek, that she is actually mocking the very men she is tantalising.

Back in my way younger days, my best friend and I would have a good laugh at how easy it was to turn a man to mush, just with a wink across the bar. We would go out and amuse ourselves endlessly entertaining this was.

If I told other female friends about this, they'd say in horrified tones "You are sooo mean!" and then sometimes, particularly if I told an older woman what we would do, she'd say "yeah I get that..." and be very understanding.

Ihatecuddles

seenitall wrote: »

You'd be something like this lady, so? (making news in the US today)

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/candace-cameron-loves-submissive-marriage/story?id=21461990

Exactly, I voice my opinion but allow him make the decisions, with almost everything

seenitall

mauzo! wrote: »

Exactly, I voice my opinion but allow him make the decisions, with almost everything

Bolded words very important I think, the same as the lady from the article saying she allows the hubby to make the final choice. Which implicitly points out who the real boss is. :pac:

Ihatecuddles

seenitall wrote: »

Bolded words very important I think, the same as the lady from the article saying she allows the hubby to make the final choice. Which implicitly points out who the real boss is. :pac:

oooo you're good!! Yeah I probably am the boss but let him think he is

poundapunnet

clairefontaine wrote: »

Back in my way younger days, my best friend and I would have a good laugh at how easy it was to turn a man to mush, just with a wink across the bar. We would go out and amuse ourselves endlessly entertaining this was.

If I told other female friends about this, they'd say in horrified tones "You are sooo mean!" and then sometimes, particularly if I told an older woman what we would do, she'd say "yeah I get that..." and be very understanding.

That is a bit mean but in fairness I think a lot of girls (guilty here too) fall prey to it during puberty, it's like discovering you have a super power. I'm really not surprised that a lot of men will put up with a lot of crap from a girl who'll sleep with them when their emotions and sexuality have been manipulated and mocked like that in the past at a time when they're hyper-aware of them, and to a certain extent I can understand the origins of a lot of the bile and anger that a lot of Irish men seem to direct towards ALL women.

Anyways I'll just shut up and stick to the lady loving.

seenitall

Whatever works for any individual relationship, I suppose.

For myself, I couldn't be in a relationship with someone who wanted to wear the pants so to speak, been there, done that, and it didn't work. The trouble is that there's so much fun to be had out of the 'alfa' types, they are very amusing with their insecurities, and feed my ego as well. Best for me to steer well clear, though.

WilyCoyote

Most fellas don't want an Alpha Female type unless they're partnering them in a card game/tennis etc. It's the nature of the beast.

seenitall

WilyCoyote wrote: »

Most fellas don't want an Alpha Female type unless they're partnering them in a card game/tennis etc. It's the nature of the beast.

I find the alpha types funny and annoying in equal measure, both male and female. That said, most people, whether alpha or beta or epsilon, do get partnered up, so I wouldn't put too much credence on your point.

WilyCoyote

seenitall wrote: »

I find the alpha types funny and annoying in equal measure, both male and female. That said, most people, whether alpha or beta or epsilon, do get partnered up, so I wouldn't put too much credence on your point.

Well I know a few Alpha/Alpha pairs and have sworn that I will not be in their company again. Was at a party a few weeks ago in one of these households and find it makes me uneasy. Endless conflict flying under the radar but occasionally bubbling over. I find both types irritating but when they pair up together ..........

seenitall

WilyCoyote wrote: »

Well I know a few Alpha/Alpha pairs and have sworn that I will not be in their company again. Was at a party a few weeks ago in one of these households and find it makes me uneasy. Endless conflict flying under the radar but occasionally bubbling over. I find both types irritating but when they pair up together ..........

Yeah, I suppose someone who is determined to have the last word on everything absolutely needs to be with someone who will be ok with that. My ex was an alpha in that sense, and that's one reason why I'm turned off them now - I wasn't ok with it. Now he is with someone who is ok with him always being in the right and even condescending to her, and they have a good, happy relationship. When I see their harmony, I just go WOW to myself.

Different people need different things.

Muise...

seenitall wrote: »

I find the alpha types funny and annoying in equal measure, both male and female. That said, most people, whether alpha or beta or epsilon, do get partnered up, so I wouldn't put too much credence on your point.

what about the poor Deltas? You skipped them!

seenitall

Muise... wrote: »

what about the poor Deltas? You skipped them!

Well said, and I forgot Gammas, as well, didn't I? How discriminatory of me. Truly morto

Wibbs

seenitall wrote: »

The trouble is that there's so much fun to be had out of the 'alfa' types

Lovely car alright.

Muise...

seenitall wrote: »

Well said, and I forgot Gammas, as well, didn't I? How discriminatory of me. Truly morto

OMG omega!

gifted

Women want to be the boss since the beginning. Take Adam and Eve..God told them not to eat the fruit from the garden..what did the woman do?...stared the big fellow down and plucked that apple..and then gave it to Adam and told him to eat it (which he did )..all this while looking at God

PizzamanIRL

Yes. The men need to get their dick wet so women have all control.

Wibbs

clairefontaine wrote: »

I think women areafraid of their inner sirens, and maybe with good reason, let her loose and god knows what would happen, maybe some shaming, maybe some blaming, etc, maybe some assault. The fact that rape whistles come in your college welcome pack does not help.

Oh that has a big part to play, though it has been my experience, in Ireland(and some EU) anyway that "slut" calls are made about women more by other women than men as a general thing. Honestly I can't recall the last time I heard a bloke call a woman a slut, beyond the odd time when a guy was dumped/ignored and even then it was much more a catchall insult with little to do with her sexual proclivities. When women used the term it meant base promiscuity and disapproval. Still it was rare enough. The rape whistle stuff is just an example of a peculiarly (recent) American cultural thing of the fear that "everyone/thing is out to get you" perpetrated by the media and too much left wing college culture with a political axe to grind, cos as I pointed out elsewhere the hype surrounding it is far from the much less dangerous reality.

Look how Marylin Monroe was both worshiped and adored,but also controlled and punished particularly by Hollywood. I'm fairly convinced her whole sexy shtick was tongue in cheek, that she is actually mocking the very men she is tantalising.

Maybe, though aimed at what she might have seen as "nobodies", the "somebodies" carted her from casting couch to casting couch and from VIP to VIP carrying her neurosis's as she went. TBH I could never see the appeal of her at all, or that type of dollybird in general.

Back in my way younger days, my best friend and I would have a good laugh at how easy it was to turn a man to mush, just with a wink across the bar. We would go out and amuse ourselves endlessly entertaining this was.

Oh I can understand that alright. As poundapunnet notes it's like a superpower and very tempting when young. And very few men will ever get to understand that kinda power from the inside, unless they're a 20 year old world famous rockstar. I'd reckon the average averagely pretty 20 year old woman has had more of that power of sexual attention in her life than someone like Mick Jagger at his peak.

poundapunnet wrote: »

I'm really not surprised that a lot of men will put up with a lot of crap from a girl who'll sleep with them when their emotions and sexuality have been manipulated and mocked like that in the past at a time when they're hyper-aware of them, and to a certain extent I can understand the origins of a lot of the bile and anger that a lot of Irish men seem to direct towards ALL women.

I can kinda understand it. When it's aimed at specific women who pull that guff. Yea there are enough of them, again particularly when young, but I don't get the overall application to women as a gender. My reductionist head won't allow me as there are just too many variables at play.

Kinda like that thread on this PUA stuff and the evolution into the "manosphere", Return of Kings, a jezebel with testicles stuff. The women that those guys are describing I have actually met. Quite the number of them over the years. The ones where PUA stuff I can well see working, the ones who you cna string along/screw at will if as they put it "your game is tight". For me these guys are reflecting a reality and they are often more right than wrong about this. However they make a couple of rookie errors; 1 they overanalyse the dynamic(Very common with many blokes who have a need to see a pattern) and 2 they extrapolate this to all women based on a self selected subset of women.

I'll put my hand up and admit I've done this myself. During my manslut phase back in the day I came to the conclusion that women couldn't be trusted, that they'd go where their emotions and their squishy bits took them and these emotions could turn in a heartbeat. Oh the stories I could tell... and those stories would get me rep points on such manosphere forums. However, again when my objective brain finally kicked in it was obvious that I was moving around in an environment that would select for such women and I was further selecting for such women within that environment. Yes I was dead right about that subset of women, but was ignoring the rest because it didn't fit into my worldview at the time and one sees a world one wants to see. More one creates a world that one wants to see. Any other viewpoint is uncomfortable when you're that far down the rabbit hole. What I have learned as a near maxim is that people would rather be proven right than be happy or wise.

Anyways I'll just shut up and stick to the lady loving.

seenitall wrote: »

I find the alpha types funny and annoying in equal measure, both male and female. That said, most people, whether alpha or beta or epsilon, do get partnered up, so I wouldn't put too much credence on your point.

The whole "alpha" thing seems to be again(IMHO) a peculiarly American cultural thing and has some deep roots. I'd trace it - in my usual arseways fashion - back to Darwin. Oh yes. I am mad, hear me wibble. *pours glass of red vino on a school night* When natural selection, more survival of the fittest, gained legs as a concept, different and on the surface quite disparate cultures took it to heart in different ways. Marxism took it one way, Fascists and Hitler took it another way and the US culture yet another. All had this notion of eugenics, survival of the strong, the "alpha" to one degree or other and all took it in pseudoscientific directions(all seemed to dig Nietzsche at some level. Rarely a good thing). IMH America(narrowly) avoided Fascist and Marxist thought on this, because of the deeply held American notion of the individual, so the other isms couldn't get that much of a foothold beyond the fringes. But the survival of the fittest/god helps those who help themselves stuff can remain strong in the culture.

Annnyway... the notion of Alpha in humans is a pretty daft one. Again the variables are too great and status changes with environment. On a purely Darwinian scale it gets even trickier. EG Prez Obama might be held up as an "Alpha male"(I've seen such a definition), yet from a purely Darwinian viewpoint he's in the twopenny ha'penny place compared to a bloke in the projects who has 8 kids by 6 different mothers by the time he's 25. On the selfish gene front the baby daddy beats him hands down. More a true alpha male would be so self assured and acting on that self assurance that he'd be close enough to a socio/psychopath as makes no difference. That covers most of the monsters in human history. Hardly something to aspire to.

El_Dangeroso

WilyCoyote wrote: »

Most fellas don't want an Alpha Female type unless they're partnering them in a card game/tennis etc. It's the nature of the beast.

Anyone who uses the term alpha anything to describe themselves are usually anything but.

It's usually code for 'I'm an obnoxious arsehole who alienates people'. True alpha members of any human group normally have more respect than fear and are leaders who foster co-operation and harmony within a group.

RDM_83 again

I don't think its automatically such a bad thing that someone does enter a relationship with a woman thats a bit more bossy, there is a serious self-destructive streak in some Irish guys and some times the person is self-aware enough to recognize that (and more are possibly unconsciously aware of that).

Another thing I have noticed about online is that the "experts" on relationships tend to be single or have gone through quite a lot of partners, if they are experts on it shouldn't they be better at at picking the right person :P
Physician, heal thyself

poundapunnet

Wibbs wrote: »

I can kinda understand it. When it's aimed at specific women who pull that guff. Yea there are enough of them, again particularly when young, but I don't get the overall application to women as a gender. My reductionist head won't allow me as there are just too many variables at play.

Kinda like that thread on this PUA stuff and the evolution into the "manosphere", Return of Kings, a jezebel with testicles stuff. The women that those guys are describing I have actually met. Quite the number of them over the years. The ones where PUA stuff I can well see working, the ones who you cna string along/screw at will if as they put it "your game is tight". For me these guys are reflecting a reality and they are often more right than wrong about this. However they make a couple of rookie errors; 1 they overanalyse the dynamic(Very common with many blokes who have a need to see a pattern) and 2 they extrapolate this to all women based on a self selected subset of women.

Just to be clear I don't think they're right, but I can understand the origins of the sentiment. In your teens the power is mostly on the girls' side, which is also when most people first enter into the world of sexual attraction and sexual relationships, it's very very easy for a boy to get burned badly during those years and as a pure self-defence reflex to apply the lessons he's learned to all women. But one would hope that like you, most men will grow up and assess the situation a bit more rationally.

And there is always a section of the population that's going to continue to operate along those toxic lines. If a man off the Return of Kings site (I love that place, it's gas, but I'd be very disturbed if I thought it was representative) says things like "women like money, women can be manipulated and tricked into giving you sex if you know a few rules", they're really only wrong in leaving out the word "some" at the start, no matter what Jezebel says. SOME women will use their sexuality as a weapon, SOME women do fall for that PUA horsesh1t. I don't see how anybody can be happy in those kinds of relationships, they seem to indicate a level of hatred and disrespect (on both sides) towards 50% of the population of the earth, and you're opting out of a loving, respectful sexual relationship with a partner you regard as your equal, which is a very rewarding thing.

I have to say that from the outside, watching people my age and younger in heterosexual relationships (and having had some myself) Irish men and women in that age bracket seem to really fcuking hate each other on some basic level. Seems to calm down towards your thirties and onwards for most people though.

Wibbs

gifted wrote: »

Women want to be the boss since the beginning. Take Adam and Eve..God told them not to eat the fruit from the garden..what did the woman do?...stared the big fellow down and plucked that apple..and then gave it to Adam and told him to eat it (which he did )..all this while looking at God

Interior. Day. Heaven.

God

Wut the fcuk just happened there Gabriel?


Gabriel

I told you man, baad idea. Don't wanna say I told you so, but you're out your comfort zone here. The universe? Yea. Mountains and life and sunsets? Hell yea, props to you, but then you got cocky. Sorry dude, had to be said.

God

Watch it Gabes, remember what happened to the other guy?

Gabriel

Dude. It's me man. But you can see what happened. You told them, leave the fecking fruit alone and then..?

God

Yea, sorry man, good point. Jesus, what was I thinking. Hang on.(beat) Jesus. I like that sound. Note it down for future ref would ya?

Gabriel

Yea no worries boss, but for your sake don't mix it up with these women creatures again. I'm saying this as a friend, you know? It never ends well. The snake I like, don't get me wrong, but...

God

Yea fair enough G. Hang on. I've just invented "lunchtime". I like the sound of that. Oh(beat) hang on(beat) I've just invented "a cup of tea". I'm on a bloody role here.

Gabriel

... as bloody usual

God

Enough of that Gabes, lets put the kettle on.

Gabriel

WTF is a kettle? YOu can't just go around making stuff up. Oh wait.

God

No worries oul son, I have it covered. Hang on(beat) what's the woman up to now? Trust me Gabes, never get hitched.

PizzamanIRL wrote: »

Yes. The men need to get their dick wet so women have all control.

They're not the only ones who need to get wet.

Wibbs

poundapunnet wrote: »

I have to say that from the outside, watching people my age and younger in heterosexual relationships (and having had some myself) Irish men and women in that age bracket seem to really fcuking hate each other on some basic level. Seems to calm down towards your thirties and onwards for most people though.

Being of a more *ahem* advanced age than your good self PaP , I would say that this "hatred" vibe seems to be a newish thing. When I was 20 odd, I really didn't see this divide nearly as much as it seems to be the case these days. Yea you had the odd moaner on both sides giving out about the other, but that was usually because some woman/man had recently done them wrong, not this "gender war", lines are drawn stuff. I dunno, IMHO the interwebs can focus this into a non issue at times, but sadly because it's all pervasive it seems like reality and reality follows suit?

beano345

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I don't think its automatically such a bad thing that someone does enter a relationship with a woman thats a bit more bossy, there is a serious self-destructive streak in some Irish guys and some times the person is self-aware enough to recognize that (and more are possibly unconsciously aware of that).

Another thing I have noticed about online is that the "experts" on relationships tend to be single or have gone through quite a lot of partners, if they are experts on it shouldn't they be better at at picking the right person :P
Physician, heal thyself

I'd agree with that have known a few fellas who were lose cannons in their days until they met their partners then again ive seen some turn to the bottle because of their other halfs,as one of my more wilder mates put it when he first met his gf, "did you ever see someone taming a wild horse? Well that's the calming effect she has on me"

Annasopra

old hippy wrote: »

I've noticed this amongst boards that there's an awful lot of sweeping generalisations about women. Fat women, ugly women, pushy women, independent women, ginger women. women who wear too much make up, women who don't wear make up, women who wear skimpy clothes and on and on and on.

Some are, some aren't

poundapunnet

Wibbs wrote: »

Being of a more *ahem* advanced age than your good self PaP , I would say that this "hatred" vibe seems to be a newish thing. When I was 20 odd, I really didn't see this divide nearly as much as it seems to be the case these days. Yea you had the odd moaner on both sides giving out about the other, but that was usually because some woman/man had recently done them wrong, not this "gender war", lines are drawn stuff. I dunno, IMHO the interwebs can focus this into a non issue at times, but sadly because it's all pervasive it seems like reality and reality follows suit?

Oh it's definitely times a million on here, also I'm a bit more aware of it than I might otherwise be because over the past year or so four of my friends' long term relationships have ended, so I've been listening to a lot of giving out and thinking about it a bit too much. I don't think the hatred is conscious or anything though, it's just an impression I've gotten, and seems a big difference between Irish on Irish relationships and those that are either between an Irish person and someone from another background or two non-Irish people (though obviously that's a smaller sample size for me to draw on). I think a lot of it is absorbing bad models of relationships from our parents' and grandparents generation and unconsciously repeating them in a completely transformed social setting.

seenitall

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Another thing I have noticed about online is that the "experts" on relationships tend to be single or have gone through quite a lot of partners, if they are experts on it shouldn't they be better at at picking the right person :P
Physician, heal thyself

LOL, so true. Not that I think I am an expert in the slightest, but I do find the topic of the relationship dynamics fascinating - perhaps I wouldn't have if I had got hitched to my college sweetheart and everything had been hunky dory from there on in.

But oh no, not me. I always have to take the scenic route.

Legs.Eleven

I genuinely think myself and me fella are absolutely equal, thank fcuk. No nagging from either side; we both just quietly take control of what we view as important (he's actually the tidier one of us about the house). An Irish women from a supposedly matriarchal society according to this thread and a man from a fairly macho culture. Interesting buzz. Works well.

FizzleSticks

This post has been deleted.

Chefrio

FizzleSticks wrote: »

The boss just translates as the controlling one to me!

I'm in a relationship where no one bosses the other around, it's splendid! I've seen people of both genders trying to be the dominant force in the relationship, usually the insecure and jealous types who control the other person as if they were an accessory to themselves rather than a person who can make decisions for themselves.

There's usually one who takes the lead makes the final decisions more that the other, even if it's 51:49.

I don't agree that the "boss" is usually insecure or jealous, well none more so than your average person. I think some people will just tend to take the lead more than others, it 's perfectly natural.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

Being of a more *ahem* advanced age than your good self PaP , I would say that this "hatred" vibe seems to be a newish thing. When I was 20 odd, I really didn't see this divide nearly as much as it seems to be the case these days. Yea you had the odd moaner on both sides giving out about the other, but that was usually because some woman/man had recently done them wrong, not this "gender war", lines are drawn stuff. I dunno, IMHO the interwebs can focus this into a non issue at times, but sadly because it's all pervasive it seems like reality and reality follows suit?

There's also the fact that people with little or no strong feeling on the matter won't comment so it seems like the "gender wars" thing is bigger than it is. Add in Daily Mail and "Blogosphere" (having been online since before some boards users were born I ****ing loathe using that term) thing of controversy for the sake of clicks and pageviews and it can seem more than it is. Of course it can end up having the effect of creating the issue that it apparently addresses.

nullzero

Here's the thing; Women (largely) tend to be quite idealistic. Men (again largely) tend to be quite pragmatic. This leads to women getting annoyed about things not meeting their expectations (idealism) and taking their frustrations out on their pragmatic male partners who generally put up with more than they probably should in the name of having a quiet life. This of course isn't true in every situation but it does tend to be true for a lot of couples.

Legs.Eleven

Wibbs wrote: »

Being of a more *ahem* advanced age than your good self PaP , I would say that this "hatred" vibe seems to be a newish thing. When I was 20 odd, I really didn't see this divide nearly as much as it seems to be the case these days. Yea you had the odd moaner on both sides giving out about the other, but that was usually because some woman/man had recently done them wrong, not this "gender war", lines are drawn stuff. I dunno, IMHO the interwebs can focus this into a non issue at times, but sadly because it's all pervasive it seems like reality and reality follows suit?

Wasn't around in my day (13 years ago since I was 20) either as far as I was aware.

RDM_83 again

seenitall wrote: »

LOL, so true. Not that I think I am an expert in the slightest, but I do find the topic of the relationship dynamics fascinating - perhaps I wouldn't have if I had got hitched to my college sweetheart and everything had been hunky dory from there on in.

But oh no, not me. I always have to take the scenic route.

Yeah its not an attack or anything just find it strange, its like if one person has owned a new car every 3 years are they really the person you want to rely on to advise you on which one to buy if your not going to replace it for a decade.

To be honest I don't mind it at all on a thread like this where its discussions on an abstract I just don't like it when its an advice thread and everybody is jumping on the "dump them" band wagon.

WilyCoyote

gifted wrote: »

Women want to be the boss since the beginning. Take Adam and Eve..God told them not to eat the fruit from the garden..what did the woman do?...stared the big fellow down and plucked that apple..and then gave it to Adam and told him to eat it (which he did )..all this while looking at God

Now now now! It wasn't the apple on the tree ........ 'twas the pear on the ground

RDM_83 again

Legs.Eleven wrote: »

I genuinely think myself and me fella are absolutely equal, thank fcuk. No nagging from either side; we both just quietly take control of what we view as important (he's actually the tidier one of us about the house). An Irish women from a supposedly matriarchal society according to this thread and a man from a fairly macho culture. Interesting buzz. Works well.

Genuine question though, aren't the Spanish like the Italians though, in that its a macho culture in public but are still a really matriachal society

seenitall

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Yeah its not an attack or anything just find it strange, its like if one person has owned a new car every 3 years are they really the person you want to rely on to advise you on which one to buy if your not going to replace it for a decade.

To be honest I don't mind it at all on a thread like this where its discussions on an abstract I just don't like it when its an advice thread and everybody is jumping on the "dump them" band wagon.

Well, I've been in a bad marriage and I've been single, so I know which one is better for my self-esteem and general well-being, and I do try to encourage people in bad or abusive relationships to leave them when I make a contribution in RI. If you read the RI forum, you will be aware that sometimes "dump them" is the only recourse left if the OP is to safeguard their sanity in the long term. These people generally don't post for the fun of it.

I also like to encourage people to be brave and proactive about approaching people or getting into relationships, or solving the problems in their existing ones, if that's what they want to do.

clairefontaine

beano345 wrote: »

I'd agree with that have known a few fellas who were lose cannons in their days until they met their partners then again ive seen some turn to the bottle because of their other halfs,as one of my more wilder mates put it when he first met his gf, "did you ever see someone taming a wild horse? Well that's the calming effect she has on me"

Honestly I've always wonder if it's better to be with someone who draws your best behavior out of you, who makes you act your most noble self, or better to be with someone with whom you can let your hair down and fly your freak flag.

anncoates

clairefontaine wrote: »

Honestly I've always wonder if it's better to be with someone who draws your best behavior out of you, who makes you act your most noble self, or better to be with someone with whom you can let your hair down and fly your freak flag.

Both?

FizzleSticks

This post has been deleted.

Lou.m

The more dominant personality is the boss and there is usually one in every relationship at any given time.

In some situations one partner may take the lead then at other times this switches.

One partner can be overbearing one moment then docile in a situation where they are less at ease.

Sometimes one partner is the boss at other times the other one is in the same relationship.

Daqster

My last g/f told me that only Alphas could turn her on, hence why she was with me, but the fcuking thing kept breaking down and so she lift me, bitch.

Seriously though, I'd say I'm the boss in my relationship. Don't think I have ever had my g/f tell me what to do, she knows better than to tbh and I don't mean that to sound macho but I just think that all men should be like that. If you don't stand up to women, let them know who's boss, making it very clear from the start that you will dictate how the house and home is going to be run, then they will take liberties with you and it. If for even one second she told me.. to.. eh.. oh shit she's back early.. I'm only supposed to use the internet during the day. I'll finish this post later.

Legs.Eleven

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Genuine question though, aren't the Spanish like the Italians though, in that its a macho culture in public but are still a really matriachal society

I personally wouldn't view Spain as a really matriarchal society tbh. Although Spanish women are strong and know their own minds and are confident , I believe they've had to be as Machismo really is alive and well here and it's not just whistles and cat calls in the street.

When I lived in Ireland, I felt equal but I don't here. When having your coffee in a cafe in the morning and watching another women getting wheeled out of her house in a body bag doesn't raise eyebrows (not even my own - I'm well used to it) or when you have to call the police on your neighbour for beating the ****e out of his partner yet again (happened to me).

They did a survey recently and asked young women their views on being hit by their boyfriend. 60% of them said if they were hit by their boyfriends, it would be proof they were loved because they wouldn't hit them unless they cared.

I teach mainly women in my company classes (because the men who make up all the managerial and CEO positions get private classes) and all of them have stated that women are second class citizens here. I had one group last year in Real Madrid with both men and women and we were talking about sexism. I told them that compared to my own country, I found Spain quite sexist and gave the example how in all the companies I've ever taught, I've rarely, if ever, come across a female boss. Their response? "Women are too bitchy and catty to be bosses". Both women and men agreed on this. :eek:

The Spanish work the longest work day in Europe and people finish work about 7 or 8pm (but often later; there's rarely a fixed time). Women, who usually do the child-minding, have the option of a reduced timetable but are discriminated against as a result (according to them) in a culture where presenteeism is valued over anything else.

Women might run the home (because they've had no choice) but men wield the power here. You might get the impression that things have progressed from the outside, but like most things since the democracy, there's been progress in laws but not in the mentality and that will take time to catch up. The last government brought in quotas but that does nothing but stick a plaster over a deeper, underlying issue.

My own observations from couples here (and this is purely anecdotal) are women who I believed to be strong, pandering and becoming quite clingy and subservient in relationships. As far as I can see, men have the last word here. Things have a long way to come; don't be fooled by the strong Latin mother stereotype who calls the shots. That might be the case on a very superficial level I don't believe that's the case at all when it really comes to down to it but again, I'm only going on what I've been told by female students, friends' relationships and from observing my boyfriend's family and the dynamics within it. I'm not a sociologist and I'm an outsider, so I can't claim to be an expert. I do think it's changing though but not at the same pace as other European countries.