Breaking Up or Staying Together: What Should You Do?

[DaveC426913]

How in the world is what I said patronizing? I simply alluded to the fact that a relationship is very important to a woman, probably in the top five things most important to her, right next to her hair and clothes.

You're a bleep.

I'll take the infraction. It's worth it.

Edit by Evo

 

[DaveC426913]

OK. Seriously jack, apparently someone needs to take you by the hand.

Men are as needy for relationships and as shallow about their appearance as women are. You've fallen a self-perpetuating TV sitcom stereotype that suggest women are the only ones who can be desparate for relationships.

And you're perpetuating a cliche by somehow thinking that hair and clothing have anything to do with the topic at hand. Really? wtf? Next you'll be telling us that all librarians with horn-rimmed glasses are closet sex-addicts.

Seriously, there is more dimension to people in real life than wherever it is you've been getting your material from.

 

[brainstorm]

Next you'll be telling us that all librarians with horn-rimmed glasses are closet sex-addicts.

So much for that fantasy

 

[jackmell]

I stand by my opinion that a relationship is vital to a woman; she can hardly live without it. A man can. And her hair is very important to her as well as how she looks in clothes. I mean she wants to attract a man and her hair and how she looks is a crucial component to that strategy.

 

[DaveC426913]

I stand by my opinion...

No problem with that. One can only opine about their areas of experience, no more. You're sheltered from the larger body of women and men who have the full gamut of personalities.

 

[brainstorm]

I stand by my opinion that a relationship is vital to a woman; she can hardly live without it. A man can. And her hair is very important to her as well as how she looks in clothes. I mean she wants to attract a man and her hair and how she looks is a crucial component to that strategy.

I agree that if a woman's mother was telling her to fix her hair and get some new clothes if she wants to get a bf, she wouldn't get the same criticism you are getting on this thread. However, I think it has to do with your posts making it sound like women's main concern in life is their relationship and everything else, like work or science, is less meaningful to them.

Second, I'm curious what you think the difference is between men and women that a relation is less vital to men and they can live without it, whereas women cannot. I'm not saying I agree with you, necessarily. I'm just curious how you reason that this difference is caused if it in fact exists.

 

[FrancisZ]

I too think that the attention on attractiveness is masking deeper feelings.

I agree: that does sound possible, Nuke. No disrespect to you. I know I've sometimes made excuses myself, that I only realized years later wasn't really what was bothering me.

Don't take this as advice or as insight - same with any replies in this thread. Take it as food for thought. We know nothing. Only you know how you feel and why you feel that way.

[PLAIN]http://img2.moonbuggy.org/imgstore/orson-welles-clapping.gif What Dave said. Couldn't have said it better.

Right now I'll just make myself and anyone I meet miserable.

Ahh! Don't be so hard on yourself. There are plenty of other people in the world looking to beat a person up emotionally (and some physically).

So much for that fantasy

I know. I totally love librarians too. Smart woman with glasses in a blouse and medium length skirt. I believe it was the immortal bard that said it best: "Raaarrr!"

I stand by my opinion that a relationship is vital to a woman;

It's more accurate to say: "it's important to a woman...[that's actually looking]." Same as it would be for a man whose looking. But also: it obviously isn't contingent upon anyone's personal attractiveness themselves (especially being that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all). I believe that the Twilight Zone settled that one a long time ago...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHp9q3QTmVQ&feature

she can hardly live without it.

Why do you say that?

A man can.

I can't. I really can't--I know I need women around me to feel happy. Even without having a relationship with them. I've worked in an all boys school.

I also at one time worked in two different all girl schools. To be fair: I don't personally feel a microcosm like school should ever segregate the students--I think it ought to simulate real life.

And her hair is very important to her as well as how she looks in clothes. I mean she wants to attract a man and her hair and how she looks is a crucial component to that strategy.

Maybe you only notice that because you like women's hair? I like women's hair. Still I don't recall any women ever trying to "woo" me by seductive use of her hair. Frankly, it sounds tricky. That might even be comical.

That might be the equivalent of me doing some sort of impromptu "gun show"-esque flexing, or ridiculous pelvis shaking (which is sure to get me slapped and laughed at, I'm almost certain). For further reference, I would check out that "Pompostic Dancing" Thread we once started. Good times.

 

[jackmell]

I'm curious what you think the difference is between men and women that a relation is less vital to men and they can live without it, whereas women cannot. I'm not saying I agree with you, necessarily. I'm just curious how you reason that this difference is caused if it in fact exists.

Hum . . . men want sex, women want strong mates to father their children. Women though usually take care of the children which for H.sapiens is quite a job considering he takes so long to grow up. And the child needs nurturing over those years. She provides that intimate, personal care that helps the child develop traits which are useful in the culture/society they grow up in. And she'd like help and often needs help with that job so she seeks relationships with men who offer a different yet synergistic set of traits which together, man and woman, are more successful than the individuals. And he is imbued with the hunter-survivor instinct: to acquire possessions, to effect dominance over other men, to hunt and provide and to survive, and compete in challenges for the women, to be strong, and sexually active. So I think we have the nurturing, caring, loving traits provided by the women and compels her to seek relationships, and the contrasting traits of the hunter-warrior that is man. He can live alone but much more difficult for the female to do so I think.

 

[JaredJames]

Hum . . . men want sex, women want strong mates to father their children. Women though usually take care of the children which for H.sapiens is quite a job considering he takes so long to grow up. And the child needs nurturing over those years. She provides that intimate, personal care that helps the child develop traits which are useful in the culture/society they grow up in. And she'd like help and often needs help with that job so she seeks relationships with men who offer a different yet synergistic set of traits which together, man and woman, are more successful than the individuals. And he is imbued with the hunter-survivor instinct: to acquire possessions, to effect dominance over other men, to hunt and provide and to survive, and compete in challenges for the women, to be strong, and sexually active. So I think we have the nurturing, caring, loving traits provided by the women and compels her to seek relationships, and the contrasting traits of the hunter-warrior that is man. He can live alone but much more difficult for the female to do so I think.

What about males who look after the kids whilst the women work?

What about women (or men) in violent relationships? Are they "stronger as one" or better off apart?

Do women not want sex?

Can fathers not be just as nuturing as a mother?

You have a really skewed view of the reality of things. It's like listening to someone back in the 1950's. This doesn't reflect reality (at least the majority case).

I agree a child needs a mother and a father (figures in their lives), but this is not a requirement and you are making some really erroneous statements which don't hold true these days.

 

[JaredJames]

...

You're trolling now. This discussion is worthless.

 

[FrancisZ]

Hum . . . men want sex, women want strong mates to father their children. Women though usually take care of the children which for H.sapiens is quite a job considering he takes so long to grow up. And the child needs nurturing over those years. She provides that intimate, personal care that helps the child develop traits which are useful in the culture/society they grow up in. And she'd like help and often needs help with that job so she seeks relationships with men who offer a different yet synergistic set of traits which together, man and woman, are more successful than the individuals. And he is imbued with the hunter-survivor instinct: to acquire possessions, to effect dominance over other men, to hunt and provide and to survive, and compete in challenges for the women, to be strong, and sexually active. So I think we have the nurturing, caring, loving traits provided by the women and compels her to seek relationships, and the contrasting traits of the hunter-warrior that is man. He can live alone but much more difficult for the female to do so I think.

That sounds very...robotic. Are we really all programmed to behave a certain way; and we can't deviate from that if we want to?

Perhaps we do have gender predispositions to behave a certain way--PERHAPS under basic survival conditions--but those rolls are something that could also be reinforced by a society's biased expectations of us (rather than a person's actual desire to fulfill them).

And beside that: how often do any of us, living in this day and age, really need to go out a club a yak (or a mate)? The closest most people (living in civilization) get to clubbing anywhere, is on a dance floor with square lights in it.

What about women (or men) in violent relationships? Are they "stronger as one" or better off apart?

Is a good point.

Do women not want sex?

Hmmm...well, we could ask. They do moderate here after all. It's not like we have to travel to Venus to solve this mystery.

S'cuse me...*doing his best Woody Allen impression* I guess shouldn't be talking anyway--I do live on another planet myself, after all.

But seriously: I don't imagine it would be worth it if you didn't love someone. As George Carlin once said: "Have you ever [engaged in intercourse] with someone reading a comic book?"

 

[JaredJames]

I wouldn't feed him Francis.

 

[Math Is Hard]

The original topic seems to be long gone. Trollapalooza is now closed.