Some researchers have pointed out that men do much better in carrying the emotional labor of relationships in the courting stage of the relationship. If this is true, it implies that men are capable, just not sufficiently motivated—which is pretty damning.
I've also come across studies that tested men's and women's affective empathy with and without a financial incentive present, and, surprise, surprise, the financial incentive levelled the performance of women and men.
I had hoped men, other than my gen had changed..seems not..I wonder if the 'hunter' in men is too strong for them to resist..they will give great energy and considerations in order to capture, but when gathered up the prize..they fall back into apathy
More and more research shows that women used to go hunting too, in hunter gatherer societies. So we’ve been fed a load of bullcr@p over the men are hunters, women are gatherers.
Yes! Over a third of neolithic women's skeletons showed the same repetitive use wear and tear on their right arms that indicate use of spears or other thrown weapons. And not all mens skeletons had them. Survival was the name of the game, any human work aptitude for a task that helped the group's survival, did that task. Men who were better at fine detail work, sewed. Women who were better at endurance tracking and hunting, did so. To create artificial gender roles that prevented members of the group from doing what they were best at, threatened the survival of the group.
I’ve started resisting this explanation because it seems to give men a pass based on biology. It’s not. Hunter-gatherer societies are the nurturing side of the nurture/nature equation. Men’s natures are not significantly different than women’s.
Outstanding synopsis of the emotional and mental labor shouldered by women in heterosexual relationships. As a physician specializing in maternal and child health, I can say from personal experience that all of this is true.
Part of the issue lies in the fact that men are disincentivized from forming intimate, communicative relationships with other men due to the fear of being labeled as “gay”. And they’re accused of emotional infidelity if they form close platonic relationships with women. This calculus leads to an inability to decipher and communicate their feelings.
A lot of the problem rests in very limiting social constructs of masculinity. And fear of being perceived as homosexual or unfaithful.
As a man, basically everything the comment above you says is a lie and something a women wrote assuming something about what it is like to be a man, which she has no experience being.
You all have no problem with the patriarchy when you need houses built, sewers cleaned, auto’s maintained, basically the entire infrastructure that allows you to sip your tea at your keyword writing your statement in comfort. Please. All I see on here are a lot of women with unresolved anger issues.
Bob, you are a carpenter, a mechanic, a landscaper, an engineer AND you clean the sewers? How can you do all of these jobs? Stop acting like you and all the other men are the only ones who can handle these things, it actually makes you look crazy. The patriarchy has nothing to do with people’s physical strength, ability, or willingness to do anything.
Wait...I thought it was Not All Men?! LoL yeah I know, not all men do it when it's bad, but it is all men that do it and deserve credit for it when it's good.
There's a 0% chance you've done any of those jobs and a 100% chance the only thing you've built was with Legos. Thanks for announcing you're in women's spaces getting yourself all hemotional and hysterical, though. It's very entertaining!
You are not a man and seem to have no understanding of the experiences of being one. if you really think that men don’t communicate their feelings and relationships that is absurd, and I feel most men would find it that way. Men communicate their feelings, at least in my experience very directly and very blatantly. Women do not communicate this directly in general, and this is what leads to this disconnect.
You need to live separated from your wife for few years and apart from your work you need to manage your home alone, raise your kids, who are studying in school, then only you are able to understand that what she has written is correct.
I realise it when I needed to live as single parent.
what does this even mean? It is a lie that men don’t form intimate communicative relationships. not sure how what you are saying is relevant. Men do succeed in raising families alone.
learn what? Men know how to communicate and form relationships. The idea we don’t is a lie to get us to become inauthentic for the convenience of society and women. The idea that Women are forced to do all the “deciphering” is egregious especially as we don’t even consider male forms of communication to be real, much less attempt to decipher them.
Just as you’re sharing your own anecdotal experience many women are relating to this article through their own anecdotal experience as well. If you don’t think this applies to you, you don’t have to take it personally or frame it as “lies”. Of course some men can form intimate communicative relationships to the same level as their partner, but some can’t or simply choose not to as well. Two things can be true at once, and an experience many women share doesn’t have to be dismissed or taken so personally. I’m happy for you if you are lucky enough to not be that way, and you are able to surround yourself with like minded people. It doesn’t negate from other people’s experiences though. It’s important to be able to engage with other perspectives with an open mind!
The comment I’m replying to directly said “men are disincentivized from forming intimate, communicative relationships with other men due to the fear of being labeled as “gay”. And they’re accused of emotional infidelity if they form close platonic relationships with women.”
this cannot be the experience “many women have”, as they are explicitly talking about something about the way men are.
Women cannot share an expirience about being men or what drives them. if they do so, and are incorrect, it is reasonable for me to point that out as a lie. This would just be the same as if I were to start relaying my opinion on period pain or childbirth as a man and then pass it off as an “anecdotal expirience”
if anything, you are dismissing the experiences of men, as I am a man, and I am telling you that what she is saying is not true when she is speaking about men, and you are saying that I need to accept it. I firmly believe as a man that men are quite well suited to (and in my experience, though this is definitely anecdotal, better) communication and forming communicative relationships, especially to female partners, who, in my experience, and in the experience of many men that have conveyed this to me, are often very uncommunicative and unclear. Even this article practically encourages women to be less communicative of their feelings.
This does negate women’s perspectives on this. my perspective as a man about what it is like to be a man does negate the woman’s perspective on what it is like to be a man and the things that drive them. It is OUR experience. You have no right to define it.
and sure, you can say it’s another perspective you can say to encounter it with an open mind, but I don’t care what the anecdotal experiences of women are regarding men’s feelings. I’m not gonna take Jeff Bezos word for it when he says that Amazon workers have the best working conditions in the world.
and by the way, this isn’t just a I’m lucky thing or a like-minded people thing or some men thing, this is the way that men are. I am sharing you that and there are tons of men in the comments who are agreeing with me. The post I was replying to, is a lie. It is about men, and women have no idea what they’re talking about in describing men’s lives because they’re not men.
I did realize whose you were replying to, but I also am referring to every other comment you’ve made on this thread. I can agree it’s harmful to frame a personal ideas/experience as an absolute claim like the commenter did that you responded to originally. I’m not meaning to dismiss the experience of men. I never said you have to accept what other people think, but rather everyone has different experiences and interpretations on why/how behaviors occur and it’s important to be open minded.
The comparison to childbirth is a false equivalence lol. Childbirth is a physical experience exclusive to women, while emotional expression and socialization are shaped by culture, which means people of all genders can observe, analyze, and discuss them. I won’t sit here and invalidate your firm beliefs and experience with men & women, because it is valid. You yourself claimed, “women do not communicate this directly in general- which leads to this disconnect”. How can you define the parameters of direct communication for women? How can you generalize a group based on your own personal experiences? You aren’t a woman are you? By your logic, I should call you a liar because you’re a man. My point is, it’s beneficial for people to speculate on these issues (just as you have) as it leads to conversations, and hopefully a more comprehensive understanding of one another.
I am not dismissing your experience as a man, and I never did. I never stated anyone was a liar, or the sole purveyor of truth. I never once said you need to accept how she feels, I simply stated people have different perspectives and framing a differing viewpoint as a lie discourages actual productive conversation. I do agree the way she framed her comment can come off as an absolute, which is not the correct way to frame a speculation.
I don’t know why you are saying I tried to define your experience as a man, I actually don’t think I ever did that. I never said you were wrong for your perspective, I said taking it as a personal attack and framing it as lies is counterproductive. (Hence: importance of open-mindedness & not dismissing the ideas of others based on gendered experience). Especially when there is no explanation given beyond “you’re not a man” it comes off as dismissive and again, discourages actual conversation.
My takeaway from the article was much different from yours, as it didn’t come off to me as “encouraging women to be less communicative about their feelings”. I understand where you’re coming from. For me, I felt that the article was sympathetic to both men and women. That due to social conditioning and expectations SOME men may feel less inclined to share the emotional burden, or to put the same effort into communication/understanding as women. And that women shouldn’t be expected to become “emotional containers” for men. With the studies that have been conducted on these dynamics, the way patriarchy has operated for hundreds of years, and the rise of the alt-right (toxic masculinity, etc) it’s paramount that women and men try to have these discussions without outwardly dismissing them. I don’t think these feelings/ideas should be invalidated (I will get into this) by your experience- especially when it’s so brazenly obvious that they do exist and have serious impact on women.
In regard to what you say about Bezos, this is such a bad faith argument. Comparing women discussing men’s emotional expression to Jeff Bezos lying about worker conditions is completely off-base. Bezos has a financial incentive to misrepresent the reality of his employees' experiences, whereas regular people speculating about social dynamics don’t have some hidden agenda. Here’s where we talk about you invalidating women. It seems you think they have some hidden agenda, considering your past comment, “the idea of men not being able to form relationships is a lie to get us to become inauthentic for the convenience of society and women”. Which actually reminds me a lot of that comment you originally replied to. You frame is as an absolute while also implying women’s intent + perspective on the issue. But you aren’t a woman right? How do you know that? And again, I think we can agree framing speculations as absolutes is harmful? Right? Should I start calling you a liar yet?
And by the way, stating “this is the way men are” and then using your personal life and the couple dozen (at most) men in this comment section as evidence IS ANECDOTAL. That is quite literally anecdotal evidence! That is not a reflection of men as a whole. I don’t understand the hypocrisy and outward double standard here. Grouping together ANY group of people including the ones you belong to, and making blanket generalizations IS harmful. Not just to women, TO MEN! I took issue with the absolutes, I assumed that was your issue with the commenter you originally responded to as well. Considering if it was just a speculation you can’t frame it as a lie, because lies are intentionally deceptive NOT SPECULATIONS! So by your logic you’re either a liar or a hypocrite. Lol!
Last thing!
You admit you have no interest in listening to women’s perspectives on these issues, and you chalk it up to: because you aren’t men.
THIS IS SO IRONIC! You’re so quick to dismiss women’s observations about men struggling to express emotions to women. That’s the entire point! That some men don’t listen! LOL! If you don’t want to engage, fine! But acting like women’s insights on men are inherently invalid based on gendered identity alone or deceptive is just intellectually lazy.
Anyways, glad we could have that talk. I have work to do, so I’m done responding to you now. I wish you well in the future and hopefully… you can spot the irony/hypocrisy/double standards/etc./etc. in your claims as well. Bye bye!
I’m also not sure how you can really advocate for more open communication on this issue if you are going to shut the conversation down after this point, but ok.
>I did realize whose you were replying to, but I also am referring to every other comment you’ve made on this thread.
I do not mean to go anecdotal again, but I find it hilarious that you bring up my comments all over this thread, as it shows that when I had something to say, I was specific, and I communicated it in the specific ways that it was required, but you just responded to one of my comments and expected me to view it as replied to all of them. That is literally the epitome of the differences in how men and women communicate from my perspective.
>I’m not meaning to dismiss the experience of men.
Could’ve fooled me.
>The comparison to childbirth is a false equivalence lol. Childbirth is a physical experience exclusive to women,
and male socialization & male experience in the current world is unique to men… women can certainly observe, but I don’t understand how the experience is not exclusive to men
>You yourself claimed, “women do not communicate this directly in general- which leads to this disconnect”. How can you define the parameters of direct communication for women? How can you generalize a group based on your own personal experiences? You aren’t a woman are you? By your logic, I should call you a liar because you’re a man.
The words, “direct” and “communication” have well defined meanings that are established. I also didn’t generalize I said in general, I was very particular with my wording. And you’re right it was an observation, not a claim to understand.
but if I’m wrong, you should tell me that I am wrong, and a liar because you’re right I am not a woman. but I don’t think it’s fair to say this is the equivalent of what many of the women here are doing, as I am merely relaying my experience about the external result while many of them act as if they had an intricate understanding of the knowledge and reason, and also portrayed their ideas as objective fact.
>My point is, it’s beneficial for people to speculate on these issues (just as you have) as it leads to conversations, and hopefully a more comprehensive understanding of one another.
The people I am replying to are not speculating. If they were speculating, they should’ve phrased it as such. But you must admit there is a difference in the fact that when this was done to men by women in here, they psychoanalyzed and provided causes, provided the reasons all for the men, what I presumed was just an outcome that I could see.
> framing a differing viewpoint as a lie discourages actual productive conversation.
It was a lie. and maybe if this was something that we were both in an equal capacity to observe you would be right but this is something I do have a greater knowledge on.
>Especially when there is no explanation given beyond “you’re not a man” it comes off as dismissive and again, discourages actual conversation.
you know, when people make statements regarding my experience that they’ve never had I don’t really feel compelled to converse with them about my real experience when I’ve already had the experience of them invalidating me, prior to the conversation starting.
>For me, I felt that the article was sympathetic to both men and women. That due to social conditioning and expectations SOME men may feel less inclined to share the emotional burden, or to put the same effort into communication/understanding as women.
I don’t know how else to say it, but I don’t believe that’s the truth. I think it is a lie. I think it is a malicious one. And if it was written by a woman who has never experienced these social conditioning or expectations, how could she comment so strongly on the way it manifests? Never in any of my comments did I give such a resolute or universal analysis.
>And that women shouldn’t be expected to become “emotional containers” for men.
I don’t understand. If you’re saying the point men aren’t putting this effort into communicating, what is women having to contain?
>With the studies that have been conducted on these dynamics, the way patriarchy has operated for hundreds of years, and the rise of the alt-right (toxic masculinity, etc) it’s paramount that women and men try to have these discussions without outwardly dismissing them.
men are not dismissing them! You are dismissing them! The women in this comment section are dismissing them!
Toxic masculinity isn’t real. And the fact that you as a woman feel like you are able to speak on the subject of masculinity, and with such adjectives is another example of invalidating men, and is exactly the kind of invalidation in the discussion that is harmful. I also think men are even less likely to discuss this after articles that encourage men to put less of an emotional burden on women. how can you expect open communication about this when the literal point of the issue is that women are saying that less of the burden of communication needs to be on them.
>Comparing women discussing men’s emotional expression to Jeff Bezos lying about worker conditions is completely off-base. Bezos has a financial incentive to misrepresent the reality of his employees' experiences, whereas regular people speculating about social dynamics don’t have some hiddenagenda.
clearly, there is some intent to misrepresent social dynamics. there either is an incentive or she is just ignorant. I don’t like to presume people are ignorant.
>Here’s where we talk about you invalidating women. It seems you think they have some hidden agenda, considering your past comment, “the idea of men not being able to form relationships is a lie to get us to become inauthentic for the convenience of society and women”. Which actually reminds me a lot of that comment you originally replied to. You frame is as an absolute while also implying women’s intent + perspective on the issue. But you aren’t a woman right? How do you know that? And again, I think we can agree framing speculations as absolutes is harmful? Right? Should I start calling you a liar yet?
I did not imply anything about women’s intent or perspectives… I don’t ever imply anything unless it’s needed, and I find the idea of subtext to be inherently detrimental to communication. My words mean the meaning of the words that I say. Something that I feel is a trait more common in men. I also don’t think that women that have a hidden agenda, though I do think it’s not crazy to say they directly benefit from burdens of communication, not being placed on then, mostly.
>And by the way, stating “this is the way men are” and then using your personal life and the couple dozen (at most) men in this comment section as evidence IS ANECDOTAL. That is quite literally anecdotal evidence! That is not a reflection of men as a whole. I don’t understand the hypocrisy and outward double standard here. Grouping together ANY group of people including the ones you belong to, and making blanket generalizations IS harmful.
I guess…. I don’t think it’s so bad when it’s a group you’re part of. people don’t go around saying oh well you don’t have enough proof when women convey their experiences by using examples of themselves and others, I’m not sure why the same shouldnt be implied to men. I just have an issue with women doing it about men’s experiences.
>I assumed that was your issue with the commenter you originally responded to as well. Considering if it was just a speculation you can’t frame it as a lie, because lies are intentionally deceptive NOT SPECULATIONS! So by your logic you’re either a liar or a hypocrite. Lol!
it was not a speculation. I have no reason to believe she was speculating if she was speculating, she should’ve framed it as a speculation. she did not do that.
>You admit you have no interest in listening to women’s perspectives on these issues, and you chalk it up to: because you aren’t men.
THIS IS SO IRONIC! You’re so quick to dismiss women’s observations about men struggling to express emotions to women. That’s the entire point! That some men don’t listen! LOL!
Why would I want to listen to someone lie about my feelings?
I don’t think men struggle to express emotions to women, or if they do, it is a new phenomenon driven by women’s responses. I think women have a tendency to not receive male emotions well, I don’t think men struggle to express emotions to women. I think women have a tendency to not receive male emotions well, and I think that when women try to criticize men for expressing themselves authentically, men shouldn’t have to listen. that’s what I was saying about. Men being told to be an authentic for society and women.
>If you don’t want to engage, fine! But acting like women’s insights on men are inherently invalid based on gendered identity alone or deceptive is just intellectually lazy.
I am engaging. Telling people they are wrong is engaging and spreading my perspective. and yes, my perspective is more valid. And yes, when people say things that I know are wrong, I think there’s a possibility of deception.
again, I really don’t see how the pregnancy thing doesn’t apply… like sure I guess their perspectives matter some but the only real incentive I have one seeing them is to correct them because why should I take seriously something I know is so wrong?
if you really cared about not invalidating men’s perspective, you would not have an issue with men, including me, expressing their opinion on something that only can be truly understood by them. me saying that she is lying or wrong is not me invalidating her, it is me continuing to communicate with my greater knowledge of the situation. I don’t know why I should have to pay lip service to her idea when it is the most clear and direct for me to tell her how she’s wrong. Because that is how I feel as a man.
Ok, you got me. But I gotta set the record straight: I do advocate for open communication, and I’m not trying to dismiss anyone. My bad for not being clear earlier; when I referenced "this article," I meant all of your comments, related to this article. Not just the one you were responding to. It’s on me for not making that abundantly explicit. I guess men don’t read subtext? I never knew that! Every guy I’ve ever met does, but I guess since you said that not the case for men it just not be true!
I’m shutting down this conversation now for a few reasons…
Time & Energy: Honestly, I’m busy tonight. Genuinely. You can claim I’m lying though you’re really great at that! I’m annoyed that I feel obligated to respond. You baited me in with your first sentence.
Bad Faith: You’re not engaging in good faith. You’ve been dismissing perspectives you don’t like by labeling them “lies,” and I find it ironic, especially considering the subject of the article. How can you claim my perspective on the article itself is a malicious lie? If you're just going to shut down ideas you don’t agree with, what’s the point of continuing? Jfc it’s almost shocking how ironic this is. Although, entertaining to see a live example…
Dismissal of Experience: You've claimed I’ve dismissing men’s experiences multiple times. A simple "could’ve fooled me" and "mmmm" doesn’t do much to address it. You briefly address it by stating I shouldn’t have an issue with you expressing your opinion. I never said I did, I have an issue with you invalidating WOMEN’S opinions due to gendered experience alone. Isn’t this funny? I haven’t claimed you to dismiss women’s experiences yet you have done it more times than I can count. You said my opinion was a malicious lie, is that not dismissing women’s opinions? Is this more irony? I don’t know. You tell me. It’s hard to engage when there’s no effort toward understanding. I don’t care to speak to someone like this. Not because you’re a man, because you’re bullheaded and nonsensical.
Stubbornness: You’re set on your views, and I’m not interested in repeating myself. I already explained beyond reasonable measure why I think being open-minded is crucial in this conversation, yet you keep asking “Why should I care?” If men expect women to understand them, then why is it wrong for women to care about how men perceive their experiences? It’s the same logic.
As for the “direct communication” thing… it’s not black and white. Miscommunication happens all the time when people have different perspectives on things. Just because you say women don’t communicate directly doesn’t mean it’s universally true. You can’t speak for all women, and I’m not going to engage in this black-and-white thinking. Maybe you’re just ignorant, but either way, you’re being inconsistent.
Sensitivity: You’re clearly affected by this topic. I’ve seen your posts, (curiosity) and it's clear these ideas about women defining masculinity and “fixing men” are deeply ingrained in you. I can’t change that in a single conversation. You’ve even recently said you think women hate men. That’s a pretty strong belief to hold, and I don’t think I’m the right person to change your mind on it. That’ll take a lot of personal work buddy, it’s rough. Sorry about it. Wishing you luck!
Toxic Masculinity: I don’t have a problem talking about toxic masculinity. It exists, and I can speak on it because it affects me and people I care about. It’s more of a disservice to reject it for men than anyone else. And it’s not saying masculinity itself is inherently toxic. It’s about societal pressures, like the stigma around mental health that prevents men from getting the support they need. If you’re confused about that, or don’t believe in it, it’s fine, but I’ll continue to speak on it because it matters to me and the men in my life. You do you buddy.
Warped Logic: You’re operating under the assumption that the women on this post have some hidden agenda. And your own words contradict you, like when you say there's an intent to misrepresent social dynamics in one breath and then claim subtext isn’t important to men and it wasn’t your intent to in the next.
I don’t have a problem with men discussing women’s issues. In fact, it happens all the time:
“Women don’t know how hard it is for men to approach them,” or “Mothers get more credit for parenting than fathers.” But when it comes to discussing men’s issues, I’m told I have no right to speak on it? But even you manage to, “Women do not communicate directly in general- which leads to this disconnect”. Not sure if you understand but you are speaking for all women here?
You don’t speak for all men, and I don’t speak for all men. Same goes for women. But dismissing someone’s viewpoint as “wrong” or a “lie” simply because you disagree isn’t intellectual it’s arrogance and ignorance.
I’m done here. I’m not engaging with you when you twist my words and act like your opinion is the only valid one. Respectful disagreement is fine, but invalidating someone’s perspective is not how you have a real conversation. The way you go about it is weird and I really do not like conversing with you. Again, not because you’re a man, not because I’m bad with communication, because I do not like speaking to you for all the listed reasons. Imagine that! Again, bye bye.
I’m amazed you stuck with that windy thread. I scrolled right past that mountain of huff!
And yeah, since the beginning of civilization, we have been demeaned and exploited. Our achievements have been erased or stolen. That is just plain fact. One teeny weeny look at Women’s History would confirm that.
I agree with you so much. I always do my best in my relationship to communicate to the point of being told by my S.O. that “I am the chick in this relationship”. I also focus on my core belief, that I feel in my soul, that I am here to protect and secure my family and friends. I think men operate a lot more in the physical World and our contributions are minimized because things just “get done”. This has become a lot more common and has lead to a lot of despair in the male community (high suicide rates, depression, etc.), and I see it my male support group. Lots of good women out there, but many that just keep finding ways to make us look like “the problem” instead of listening to us and trying to understand our perspective. I think a lot of this is from the recent “movement” that men and women are equal and the same. They are NOT. We are vastly different and not in a bad way. We compliment each other IF given the chance. I think Dr Jordan Peterson has addressed a lot of this very well, but women just shame him as well.
All by design. Oh and indoctrination. The social aspect of being forced to conform is enormous. Men also benefit by upholding these patriarchal values. Until Men see some value for themselves personally they will continue to perpetrate misogyny.
The women here shaming men is really eye-opening. You all have no problem with our “masculinity” when it comes to providing, protecting, and building structures. You are able to pontificate from your keyboard job while we do all the heavy lifting. Just look at your headshots. Men focus on getting the hard physical things done so you don’t have to. It must be nice to have all the time and mind-cycles for what you do. The lack of introspection astounds me.
You just keep digging a deeper hole Bob. You’re sounding scary. Women are now the majority of college students, we are all over the workforce, we have taken on traditionally male careers…we are asking for help not having to do all the invisible labor in the home and relationship. Why does this make you angry?
The “entire infrastructure” huh? That is a big blind eye to what women have done for centuries.
“Unresolved anger issues” is not projecting? 🤔 men and women are different. But as women take up more roles outside the house etc, men need to evolve too. That’s all she/we are asking. Women have the original most dangerous job, childbirth. 🤷♀️
It is just my opinion. Don't take it personal, sorry if I offended you, that was not my intent.
Men are evolving and I am not discounting the massive work and commitment women put out in raising a family. In fact, I would state that is the #1 most important job in the World.
I am simply asking women to recognize that men WANT to do dangerous jobs and build/ maintain infrastructure to secure and project the Family. It is what we are wired for, just like women are wired to raise humans.
The differences between men and women should be celebrated, not berated.
"Men WANT to do dangerous jobs and build/ maintain infrastructure to secure and project the Family. It is what we are wired for"
Lol that's the biggest load of BS! In the US, 3 women are murdered by a current or ex husband/bf every single fkg day!! The #1 cause of death in pregnant women is homicide at the hands of their male partner. Men also most commonly start beating their wife/gf when she's pregnant. The men women share their home with are statically the biggest threat and danger to women. When men stop beating and killing women, we'll stop shaming men. Deal? Telling women men are hard wired to protect them is laughable and factually false.
But I'm sure you're going to read about these atrocities done to women by your fellow family "protectors" and still find a way to feel it's YOU being victimized, bc you and your desperate need to get women to give you undeserved credit is all you care about. Shameful and fkg embarrassing!!
Women live our lives having to be highly aware of men’s emotions and the threat that has on us. It’s the only way we survive. I’m not concerned if I offend a man when I call him scary.
Threat? You say that behind your keyboard sipping your tea in the comfort of your home. Just wait until chaos occurs; a natural disaster, War, or civil unrest. Men have the skills and fortitude to thrive in these environments. Best to understand that you can't have it all. You might want to think outside of your insulated World once in a while.
And why do you assume women don’t possess all of these skills you’re assuming men do? Most of the men I see in person and online wouldn’t survive in an apocalypse. They lack common sense, they are far too emotionally unstable, and they can’t take direction. I’ve dealt with an abusive man, and I see how fragile and stupid they actually are.
Shut up, Bob. I have a problem with the patriarchy ALWAYS. You’re whining. Funny how you have no idea who really holds infrastructure down, or what patriarchy means. You’re on here mad and insecure. Seek therapy.
Yes. Men do not understand how controlled they are by the white male gaze. A man looks to what other men might admire in their choice of women more than the actual love they have for that woman. Same with cars. Most men look to other men for approval and acceptance and also they are not allowed to perceive this. Therefore they can be rendered incapable of loving a woman more than they love the good opinion of other men. Also most men think they are the patriarchy. Unless they are the very elite 4% ,they are at the effect of the patriarchy as much as or maybe more than women. Very Homosocial environment. Most men are Not the patriarchy. They are played by the patriarchy to THINK they are a part of it. Yet they can never be a part of it. The illusion is that if they work hard enough they can reach that 4%. But by design this can Never be achieved. Like women trying to look like Barbie. Impossible standards by design
This is my experience when I became ill with an incurable, complex neurological disease. My partner of 20 years pursued his barista. He stupidly misread her banter skills with attraction and was rejected by her. Then came looking to be comforted by me when he confessed. The vile has been lifted.
I really appreciated this summary, and the part about how this emotional labor is both demanded of women and largely invisible. And, I would say there is an added feature which is that men's emotional lives and well-being are on the whole seen as more important and worthy of attention .Our expectations are adjusted downward, and no one really expects it to be otherwise. This is the part that gets internalized: a status quo where not only is our anger not welcome or allowed, but also the having our desires met is really, mostly, optional. Whose emotions matter and are given uptake is part of this equation.
The telling thing here is that women are allowed every emotion but anger. We can cry, laugh, do all the work to empathize with what men need and can't express, but we can't have anger. They keep that one for themselves.
This is such an important piece. I talked about it with my wife, am sharing it with friends, and most importantly: I'm going to discuss it with both my teen daughter and my teen son. Thank you for writing this. 🙏
Couldn't have been explained more eloquently. It reminds me of this one video I saw regarding a trending topic in China, where a father reached out to others to help with a serious topic he was struggling with.
Get this, the topic was his wife asking him to help out more around the house. What's worse, all the responses and top-liked comment were giving their own advice on what they did, which was to pretend to not know how to do something or do something purposefully wrong so the wife could stop asking.
This just goes to show that, yes men are capable, they just chose not to.
Ugh, all these responses are essentially encouraging him to use weaponised incompetence to get out of doing his fair share around the house. Disgusting.
If the man you are with is causing you to pay the price for caring and understanding him, leave. He’s not worth all the effort. Find a person who doesn’t exhaust you, and spend your emotional energy building a healthy relationship with them. It’s pretty simple really. Don’t date a man, or anyone, who makes you pay a price for caring about them.
Agree 100%. Although I have sadly met women who would rather keep carrying out all this labour year anyway, out of fear of being single or because they are genuinely convinced it's their 'god-given duty' or both.
The problem is that men don’t fear losing that woman…if they did, they would increase care, attention, help, emotional support, etc the sum of which is love…just naturally…just to be there for their wife and have her back…
Yes, and...freedom can be very expensive, especially when there are children in the mix. The social costs are why women are financially worse off after divorce, in general. Not everyone can afford scorched earth freedom.
Katie, I'm gonna push back against your response. "schleeter" would have us believe this is our fault, we should just leave the "bad" men who do this to us. But because it's such a widespread and endemic problem, if we went out seeking better, how long would it take to actually find the man who could provide us equal emotional labor and care? He essentially just blamed women for the problem because we stay instead of acknowledging the systemic problem at all.
Many women in this situation have been trained from birth to be, well, subservient. They don’t even realise it, bc it’s all they’ve ever known (eldest daughters)
I’m glad my parents (more dad than mom, even!) insisted I be self-sufficient so I didn’t have to depend on a man, and could easily leave a bad relationship. They also taught me that relationships aren’t perfect and to have realistic expectations.
Good God I was just thinking about writing a post about this. How many minutes and hours of my life I have WASTED OF MY LIFE listening to fragile men. Or replying to their texts/DMs etc. And listening more. It was not reciprocated. And it was my time they took. Because admit is, as I heard on a Glennon Doyle podcast, “women’s time is sand, and men’s time is diamonds.”
"We had to adapt to a world that, historically, gave us less power and autonomy and that tied our worth with the success of our romantic relationships." This is something I think about all the time since my first sociology course some years back. It's something I am forced to examine over and over again in the context of my personal life and in my writing. Thank you for this ❤
Thanks for this! My son showed me Anderson’s paper over 2 years ago when he was 17-before it was even published. We did a show on it. I was so proud to say I learned of it from my son (woot woot!) What a brilliant piece of work! (She’s a young philosophy professor at Pomona College who has an awesome philosophy podcast, “Overthink”, for anyone who doesn’t know…)
Come to think of it, I would also like the T-shirt and the membership card for the "decentering men" movement. Maybe also the tote bag...
FYI: I consider myself genderfluid and almost always get along best with cis men out of all other categories of gender and being. However, I think part of this has to do with the fact that so many women see other women either as "competition" or as accessories to their chosen station in life (moms hang out with other moms, couples hang out with other couples, etc).
I think part of the problem may also be money, and childcare.
Married women may feel guilty or selfish spending "the family budget" on going out with their friends. Even more so if they have to pay for a sitter, or ask dad (who may be working late or working a double shift) to watch the kids.
One of the nice things about being friends with somebody who is divorced (this only applies if they have children and share custody) is that they almost always time for making plans with friends.
There is so much truth in what you’ve written. Women have been “socially assigned” to be the emotion handler. In Thai culture, it is ingrained into us that the wives should never “outshine” their husbands in social settings. We are, as the saying goes, “the elephant’s hind legs”. So for the “emotional” stuff, the women must never bother the men with it.
I kid you not - my father in law once praised his own dad, my husband’s grandfather, that he is so good at resolving issues in life. Said that his method is just to “avoid everything”. My father in law basically complimented his dad for being able to compartmentalise so well, we don’t ever need to talk about feelings. I looked straight into his eyes and said “oh, so he doesn’t actually solve anything”.
I feel like I’m living in a dystopian world where not being emotionally matured is actually praised.
Thank you for this. It can be crazy-making to experience the emotional caretaking in a relationship but not have the language to express why it's exhausting. Your article helped give me that language.
What exactly would happen if women stopped doing all of this all too often Sisyphean mental, emotional, and hermeneutic labor in regards to men? Would the whole world literally unravel or something? Many women seem to fear that. But rest assured, it won't unravel. Look at what Icelandic women did in 1975. So go ahead and go on strike. It doesn't need to even be a full Lysistrata-style strike. Simply following the "let them theory" would go a long way.
How to win a tug-of-war against a much stronger opponent? Simply let go of the rope, and let them fall on their behind.
“What exactly would happen if women stopped doing all of this all too often Sisyphean mental, emotional, and hermeneutic labor in regards to men?”
I’ve often wondered this too. Is all the extra effort largely driven by fear of not being needed? I’ve commented this before, but the peace, energy, time and self-confidence I’ve regained since stopping dating has *floored* me. I look back and think “what was I doing to myself? X
I am wondering this myself because while I can easily see that most women do this, it isn't actually necessary. I've never done it. And I'm married and have had plenty of long term boyfriends and...it's fine. they all did more of the emotional care, not me. Not that I need much.
But I guess I'm wondering why so many women feel like they need to do this? Because I really don't think they do. Is it that if they didn't, they would have no interactions or conversations at all? Like what's the worst thing that would happen exactly? It's a little mystifying to me. If what would happen is that you would end up having zero conversations, or he would be in a bad mood all the time or something, then why would you want to be with him in the first place?
My stepmother is like this with my dad. Constantly fluttering around him, interpreting for him, making sure he's okay with everything, fetching him things. I really don't understand why she does it and it looks exhausting. If she stopped, he'd probably pout for a few weeks and then get over it and stop being such a self centered baby. I've often thought that she must secretly look forward to the day she's a widow and can have a more enjoyable and fun life without him. But I don't understand why she acts like that in the first place.
Or he wouldn't even notice. I feel a lot of stuff women act like they do for their husband's is at best "nice to have" and possibly leading them to miss doing things that they're husband's actually desire.
I don't really know what to think of this, but maybe because my experience is different? In my current relationship, the labor is split 50-50. Maybe 70--30. I do a lot of the physical work (chores, shopping, working, etc) and my fiance does more of the mental work. Both are taxing. And even both people working *and* doing mental labor on top is even *more* exhausting. Sometimes I'm curious about needs; with the hierarchy and all that--what takes precedence? Physical needs like warmth and food and whatnot *and* emotional needs?
I'm someone who, if I'm too overworked, just cannot be emotionally available. Same with my parents, who are not in my life anymore. Granted this goes with my autism (which is an explanation, not an excuse). There are times where my fiance is driven up the wall by me being a wall and just not communicative--which doesn't mean I don't care, but *cannot* care. I can still listen and be available to hear, but just...can't give. It's hard. And I'm hard to live with and love but they keep doing it for whatever reason.
Indeed, that is a very important nuance, Mitch. Too many people don't do nuance, it seems. In our overworked, superhumanly fast-paced society, something often has to give, unfortunately. The problem is systemic.
This is an excellent piece. As a formerly married woman, it rings very true with personal experience. I’m a single parent now and I often feel like I have less emotional work to do now than I did when married to a man. The incentive to date again is almost nonexistent…
The idea of hermeneutical labor is completely new to me and I love it. Tho I’ve been through much worse, this is the cause of emotional exhaustion that’s not worth it. TY.
Some researchers have pointed out that men do much better in carrying the emotional labor of relationships in the courting stage of the relationship. If this is true, it implies that men are capable, just not sufficiently motivated—which is pretty damning.
I've also come across studies that tested men's and women's affective empathy with and without a financial incentive present, and, surprise, surprise, the financial incentive levelled the performance of women and men.
oooooooooooooop
😧
That’s a really interesting point. If that’s the case it’s very similar to love bombing and manipulation tactics.
I had hoped men, other than my gen had changed..seems not..I wonder if the 'hunter' in men is too strong for them to resist..they will give great energy and considerations in order to capture, but when gathered up the prize..they fall back into apathy
More and more research shows that women used to go hunting too, in hunter gatherer societies. So we’ve been fed a load of bullcr@p over the men are hunters, women are gatherers.
Yes! Over a third of neolithic women's skeletons showed the same repetitive use wear and tear on their right arms that indicate use of spears or other thrown weapons. And not all mens skeletons had them. Survival was the name of the game, any human work aptitude for a task that helped the group's survival, did that task. Men who were better at fine detail work, sewed. Women who were better at endurance tracking and hunting, did so. To create artificial gender roles that prevented members of the group from doing what they were best at, threatened the survival of the group.
I’ve started resisting this explanation because it seems to give men a pass based on biology. It’s not. Hunter-gatherer societies are the nurturing side of the nurture/nature equation. Men’s natures are not significantly different than women’s.
I wonder to what extent it falls under weaponized incompetence, out of a shift in priorities, once the mate is reeled in and secured.
Dan gets it
WE ALL NEED A DAN
Supremely damming.
Outstanding synopsis of the emotional and mental labor shouldered by women in heterosexual relationships. As a physician specializing in maternal and child health, I can say from personal experience that all of this is true.
Part of the issue lies in the fact that men are disincentivized from forming intimate, communicative relationships with other men due to the fear of being labeled as “gay”. And they’re accused of emotional infidelity if they form close platonic relationships with women. This calculus leads to an inability to decipher and communicate their feelings.
A lot of the problem rests in very limiting social constructs of masculinity. And fear of being perceived as homosexual or unfaithful.
Thank you! Yes, and that’s precisely why expanding these masculine scripts of behaviour would really benefit men.
As a man, basically everything the comment above you says is a lie and something a women wrote assuming something about what it is like to be a man, which she has no experience being.
😂
don’t know what to laugh at. She’s talking about expiriences she’s never had and being wrong:
I watched that dinner party scene and thought of friends who like to “play house” and nag their bf’s back when we were in uni.
The same friends who when we went on girl trips said they “had to” prep meals for their other half otherwise they’d eat take-out (so let them?).
I watched that scene and yeah she says, “they’re hosting the dinner party” but let’s be honest, was he ever really consulted.
what do you mean dinner party
Hmmm, have you even read the article?!
when I made the comment, you are replying to months ago yes
Love this comment so much.
it’s all lies but ok
It’s absolutely predicated on the concept of patriarchy.
Oh ffs...you haven't even a clue what that means.
You all have no problem with the patriarchy when you need houses built, sewers cleaned, auto’s maintained, basically the entire infrastructure that allows you to sip your tea at your keyword writing your statement in comfort. Please. All I see on here are a lot of women with unresolved anger issues.
Bob, you are a carpenter, a mechanic, a landscaper, an engineer AND you clean the sewers? How can you do all of these jobs? Stop acting like you and all the other men are the only ones who can handle these things, it actually makes you look crazy. The patriarchy has nothing to do with people’s physical strength, ability, or willingness to do anything.
my my my, triggered by a sense of ingratitude from others? yeah, we know how that feels. all. the. time.
Bob care to elaborate on the unresolved anger issues? What might be their sources my friend? Also how are you feeling?
Wait...I thought it was Not All Men?! LoL yeah I know, not all men do it when it's bad, but it is all men that do it and deserve credit for it when it's good.
There's a 0% chance you've done any of those jobs and a 100% chance the only thing you've built was with Legos. Thanks for announcing you're in women's spaces getting yourself all hemotional and hysterical, though. It's very entertaining!
You are not a man and seem to have no understanding of the experiences of being one. if you really think that men don’t communicate their feelings and relationships that is absurd, and I feel most men would find it that way. Men communicate their feelings, at least in my experience very directly and very blatantly. Women do not communicate this directly in general, and this is what leads to this disconnect.
You need to live separated from your wife for few years and apart from your work you need to manage your home alone, raise your kids, who are studying in school, then only you are able to understand that what she has written is correct.
I realise it when I needed to live as single parent.
what does this even mean? It is a lie that men don’t form intimate communicative relationships. not sure how what you are saying is relevant. Men do succeed in raising families alone.
I raised my kids alone. So I know it very well. We need to learn.
learn what? Men know how to communicate and form relationships. The idea we don’t is a lie to get us to become inauthentic for the convenience of society and women. The idea that Women are forced to do all the “deciphering” is egregious especially as we don’t even consider male forms of communication to be real, much less attempt to decipher them.
Thank you.
Just as you’re sharing your own anecdotal experience many women are relating to this article through their own anecdotal experience as well. If you don’t think this applies to you, you don’t have to take it personally or frame it as “lies”. Of course some men can form intimate communicative relationships to the same level as their partner, but some can’t or simply choose not to as well. Two things can be true at once, and an experience many women share doesn’t have to be dismissed or taken so personally. I’m happy for you if you are lucky enough to not be that way, and you are able to surround yourself with like minded people. It doesn’t negate from other people’s experiences though. It’s important to be able to engage with other perspectives with an open mind!
The comment I’m replying to directly said “men are disincentivized from forming intimate, communicative relationships with other men due to the fear of being labeled as “gay”. And they’re accused of emotional infidelity if they form close platonic relationships with women.”
this cannot be the experience “many women have”, as they are explicitly talking about something about the way men are.
Women cannot share an expirience about being men or what drives them. if they do so, and are incorrect, it is reasonable for me to point that out as a lie. This would just be the same as if I were to start relaying my opinion on period pain or childbirth as a man and then pass it off as an “anecdotal expirience”
if anything, you are dismissing the experiences of men, as I am a man, and I am telling you that what she is saying is not true when she is speaking about men, and you are saying that I need to accept it. I firmly believe as a man that men are quite well suited to (and in my experience, though this is definitely anecdotal, better) communication and forming communicative relationships, especially to female partners, who, in my experience, and in the experience of many men that have conveyed this to me, are often very uncommunicative and unclear. Even this article practically encourages women to be less communicative of their feelings.
This does negate women’s perspectives on this. my perspective as a man about what it is like to be a man does negate the woman’s perspective on what it is like to be a man and the things that drive them. It is OUR experience. You have no right to define it.
and sure, you can say it’s another perspective you can say to encounter it with an open mind, but I don’t care what the anecdotal experiences of women are regarding men’s feelings. I’m not gonna take Jeff Bezos word for it when he says that Amazon workers have the best working conditions in the world.
and by the way, this isn’t just a I’m lucky thing or a like-minded people thing or some men thing, this is the way that men are. I am sharing you that and there are tons of men in the comments who are agreeing with me. The post I was replying to, is a lie. It is about men, and women have no idea what they’re talking about in describing men’s lives because they’re not men.
I did realize whose you were replying to, but I also am referring to every other comment you’ve made on this thread. I can agree it’s harmful to frame a personal ideas/experience as an absolute claim like the commenter did that you responded to originally. I’m not meaning to dismiss the experience of men. I never said you have to accept what other people think, but rather everyone has different experiences and interpretations on why/how behaviors occur and it’s important to be open minded.
The comparison to childbirth is a false equivalence lol. Childbirth is a physical experience exclusive to women, while emotional expression and socialization are shaped by culture, which means people of all genders can observe, analyze, and discuss them. I won’t sit here and invalidate your firm beliefs and experience with men & women, because it is valid. You yourself claimed, “women do not communicate this directly in general- which leads to this disconnect”. How can you define the parameters of direct communication for women? How can you generalize a group based on your own personal experiences? You aren’t a woman are you? By your logic, I should call you a liar because you’re a man. My point is, it’s beneficial for people to speculate on these issues (just as you have) as it leads to conversations, and hopefully a more comprehensive understanding of one another.
I am not dismissing your experience as a man, and I never did. I never stated anyone was a liar, or the sole purveyor of truth. I never once said you need to accept how she feels, I simply stated people have different perspectives and framing a differing viewpoint as a lie discourages actual productive conversation. I do agree the way she framed her comment can come off as an absolute, which is not the correct way to frame a speculation.
I don’t know why you are saying I tried to define your experience as a man, I actually don’t think I ever did that. I never said you were wrong for your perspective, I said taking it as a personal attack and framing it as lies is counterproductive. (Hence: importance of open-mindedness & not dismissing the ideas of others based on gendered experience). Especially when there is no explanation given beyond “you’re not a man” it comes off as dismissive and again, discourages actual conversation.
My takeaway from the article was much different from yours, as it didn’t come off to me as “encouraging women to be less communicative about their feelings”. I understand where you’re coming from. For me, I felt that the article was sympathetic to both men and women. That due to social conditioning and expectations SOME men may feel less inclined to share the emotional burden, or to put the same effort into communication/understanding as women. And that women shouldn’t be expected to become “emotional containers” for men. With the studies that have been conducted on these dynamics, the way patriarchy has operated for hundreds of years, and the rise of the alt-right (toxic masculinity, etc) it’s paramount that women and men try to have these discussions without outwardly dismissing them. I don’t think these feelings/ideas should be invalidated (I will get into this) by your experience- especially when it’s so brazenly obvious that they do exist and have serious impact on women.
In regard to what you say about Bezos, this is such a bad faith argument. Comparing women discussing men’s emotional expression to Jeff Bezos lying about worker conditions is completely off-base. Bezos has a financial incentive to misrepresent the reality of his employees' experiences, whereas regular people speculating about social dynamics don’t have some hidden agenda. Here’s where we talk about you invalidating women. It seems you think they have some hidden agenda, considering your past comment, “the idea of men not being able to form relationships is a lie to get us to become inauthentic for the convenience of society and women”. Which actually reminds me a lot of that comment you originally replied to. You frame is as an absolute while also implying women’s intent + perspective on the issue. But you aren’t a woman right? How do you know that? And again, I think we can agree framing speculations as absolutes is harmful? Right? Should I start calling you a liar yet?
And by the way, stating “this is the way men are” and then using your personal life and the couple dozen (at most) men in this comment section as evidence IS ANECDOTAL. That is quite literally anecdotal evidence! That is not a reflection of men as a whole. I don’t understand the hypocrisy and outward double standard here. Grouping together ANY group of people including the ones you belong to, and making blanket generalizations IS harmful. Not just to women, TO MEN! I took issue with the absolutes, I assumed that was your issue with the commenter you originally responded to as well. Considering if it was just a speculation you can’t frame it as a lie, because lies are intentionally deceptive NOT SPECULATIONS! So by your logic you’re either a liar or a hypocrite. Lol!
Last thing!
You admit you have no interest in listening to women’s perspectives on these issues, and you chalk it up to: because you aren’t men.
THIS IS SO IRONIC! You’re so quick to dismiss women’s observations about men struggling to express emotions to women. That’s the entire point! That some men don’t listen! LOL! If you don’t want to engage, fine! But acting like women’s insights on men are inherently invalid based on gendered identity alone or deceptive is just intellectually lazy.
Anyways, glad we could have that talk. I have work to do, so I’m done responding to you now. I wish you well in the future and hopefully… you can spot the irony/hypocrisy/double standards/etc./etc. in your claims as well. Bye bye!
I’m also not sure how you can really advocate for more open communication on this issue if you are going to shut the conversation down after this point, but ok.
>I did realize whose you were replying to, but I also am referring to every other comment you’ve made on this thread.
I do not mean to go anecdotal again, but I find it hilarious that you bring up my comments all over this thread, as it shows that when I had something to say, I was specific, and I communicated it in the specific ways that it was required, but you just responded to one of my comments and expected me to view it as replied to all of them. That is literally the epitome of the differences in how men and women communicate from my perspective.
>I’m not meaning to dismiss the experience of men.
Could’ve fooled me.
>The comparison to childbirth is a false equivalence lol. Childbirth is a physical experience exclusive to women,
and male socialization & male experience in the current world is unique to men… women can certainly observe, but I don’t understand how the experience is not exclusive to men
>You yourself claimed, “women do not communicate this directly in general- which leads to this disconnect”. How can you define the parameters of direct communication for women? How can you generalize a group based on your own personal experiences? You aren’t a woman are you? By your logic, I should call you a liar because you’re a man.
The words, “direct” and “communication” have well defined meanings that are established. I also didn’t generalize I said in general, I was very particular with my wording. And you’re right it was an observation, not a claim to understand.
but if I’m wrong, you should tell me that I am wrong, and a liar because you’re right I am not a woman. but I don’t think it’s fair to say this is the equivalent of what many of the women here are doing, as I am merely relaying my experience about the external result while many of them act as if they had an intricate understanding of the knowledge and reason, and also portrayed their ideas as objective fact.
>My point is, it’s beneficial for people to speculate on these issues (just as you have) as it leads to conversations, and hopefully a more comprehensive understanding of one another.
The people I am replying to are not speculating. If they were speculating, they should’ve phrased it as such. But you must admit there is a difference in the fact that when this was done to men by women in here, they psychoanalyzed and provided causes, provided the reasons all for the men, what I presumed was just an outcome that I could see.
> framing a differing viewpoint as a lie discourages actual productive conversation.
It was a lie. and maybe if this was something that we were both in an equal capacity to observe you would be right but this is something I do have a greater knowledge on.
>Especially when there is no explanation given beyond “you’re not a man” it comes off as dismissive and again, discourages actual conversation.
you know, when people make statements regarding my experience that they’ve never had I don’t really feel compelled to converse with them about my real experience when I’ve already had the experience of them invalidating me, prior to the conversation starting.
>For me, I felt that the article was sympathetic to both men and women. That due to social conditioning and expectations SOME men may feel less inclined to share the emotional burden, or to put the same effort into communication/understanding as women.
I don’t know how else to say it, but I don’t believe that’s the truth. I think it is a lie. I think it is a malicious one. And if it was written by a woman who has never experienced these social conditioning or expectations, how could she comment so strongly on the way it manifests? Never in any of my comments did I give such a resolute or universal analysis.
>And that women shouldn’t be expected to become “emotional containers” for men.
I don’t understand. If you’re saying the point men aren’t putting this effort into communicating, what is women having to contain?
>With the studies that have been conducted on these dynamics, the way patriarchy has operated for hundreds of years, and the rise of the alt-right (toxic masculinity, etc) it’s paramount that women and men try to have these discussions without outwardly dismissing them.
men are not dismissing them! You are dismissing them! The women in this comment section are dismissing them!
Toxic masculinity isn’t real. And the fact that you as a woman feel like you are able to speak on the subject of masculinity, and with such adjectives is another example of invalidating men, and is exactly the kind of invalidation in the discussion that is harmful. I also think men are even less likely to discuss this after articles that encourage men to put less of an emotional burden on women. how can you expect open communication about this when the literal point of the issue is that women are saying that less of the burden of communication needs to be on them.
>Comparing women discussing men’s emotional expression to Jeff Bezos lying about worker conditions is completely off-base. Bezos has a financial incentive to misrepresent the reality of his employees' experiences, whereas regular people speculating about social dynamics don’t have some hiddenagenda.
clearly, there is some intent to misrepresent social dynamics. there either is an incentive or she is just ignorant. I don’t like to presume people are ignorant.
>Here’s where we talk about you invalidating women. It seems you think they have some hidden agenda, considering your past comment, “the idea of men not being able to form relationships is a lie to get us to become inauthentic for the convenience of society and women”. Which actually reminds me a lot of that comment you originally replied to. You frame is as an absolute while also implying women’s intent + perspective on the issue. But you aren’t a woman right? How do you know that? And again, I think we can agree framing speculations as absolutes is harmful? Right? Should I start calling you a liar yet?
I did not imply anything about women’s intent or perspectives… I don’t ever imply anything unless it’s needed, and I find the idea of subtext to be inherently detrimental to communication. My words mean the meaning of the words that I say. Something that I feel is a trait more common in men. I also don’t think that women that have a hidden agenda, though I do think it’s not crazy to say they directly benefit from burdens of communication, not being placed on then, mostly.
>And by the way, stating “this is the way men are” and then using your personal life and the couple dozen (at most) men in this comment section as evidence IS ANECDOTAL. That is quite literally anecdotal evidence! That is not a reflection of men as a whole. I don’t understand the hypocrisy and outward double standard here. Grouping together ANY group of people including the ones you belong to, and making blanket generalizations IS harmful.
I guess…. I don’t think it’s so bad when it’s a group you’re part of. people don’t go around saying oh well you don’t have enough proof when women convey their experiences by using examples of themselves and others, I’m not sure why the same shouldnt be implied to men. I just have an issue with women doing it about men’s experiences.
>I assumed that was your issue with the commenter you originally responded to as well. Considering if it was just a speculation you can’t frame it as a lie, because lies are intentionally deceptive NOT SPECULATIONS! So by your logic you’re either a liar or a hypocrite. Lol!
it was not a speculation. I have no reason to believe she was speculating if she was speculating, she should’ve framed it as a speculation. she did not do that.
>You admit you have no interest in listening to women’s perspectives on these issues, and you chalk it up to: because you aren’t men.
THIS IS SO IRONIC! You’re so quick to dismiss women’s observations about men struggling to express emotions to women. That’s the entire point! That some men don’t listen! LOL!
Why would I want to listen to someone lie about my feelings?
I don’t think men struggle to express emotions to women, or if they do, it is a new phenomenon driven by women’s responses. I think women have a tendency to not receive male emotions well, I don’t think men struggle to express emotions to women. I think women have a tendency to not receive male emotions well, and I think that when women try to criticize men for expressing themselves authentically, men shouldn’t have to listen. that’s what I was saying about. Men being told to be an authentic for society and women.
>If you don’t want to engage, fine! But acting like women’s insights on men are inherently invalid based on gendered identity alone or deceptive is just intellectually lazy.
I am engaging. Telling people they are wrong is engaging and spreading my perspective. and yes, my perspective is more valid. And yes, when people say things that I know are wrong, I think there’s a possibility of deception.
again, I really don’t see how the pregnancy thing doesn’t apply… like sure I guess their perspectives matter some but the only real incentive I have one seeing them is to correct them because why should I take seriously something I know is so wrong?
if you really cared about not invalidating men’s perspective, you would not have an issue with men, including me, expressing their opinion on something that only can be truly understood by them. me saying that she is lying or wrong is not me invalidating her, it is me continuing to communicate with my greater knowledge of the situation. I don’t know why I should have to pay lip service to her idea when it is the most clear and direct for me to tell her how she’s wrong. Because that is how I feel as a man.
Ok, you got me. But I gotta set the record straight: I do advocate for open communication, and I’m not trying to dismiss anyone. My bad for not being clear earlier; when I referenced "this article," I meant all of your comments, related to this article. Not just the one you were responding to. It’s on me for not making that abundantly explicit. I guess men don’t read subtext? I never knew that! Every guy I’ve ever met does, but I guess since you said that not the case for men it just not be true!
I’m shutting down this conversation now for a few reasons…
Time & Energy: Honestly, I’m busy tonight. Genuinely. You can claim I’m lying though you’re really great at that! I’m annoyed that I feel obligated to respond. You baited me in with your first sentence.
Bad Faith: You’re not engaging in good faith. You’ve been dismissing perspectives you don’t like by labeling them “lies,” and I find it ironic, especially considering the subject of the article. How can you claim my perspective on the article itself is a malicious lie? If you're just going to shut down ideas you don’t agree with, what’s the point of continuing? Jfc it’s almost shocking how ironic this is. Although, entertaining to see a live example…
Dismissal of Experience: You've claimed I’ve dismissing men’s experiences multiple times. A simple "could’ve fooled me" and "mmmm" doesn’t do much to address it. You briefly address it by stating I shouldn’t have an issue with you expressing your opinion. I never said I did, I have an issue with you invalidating WOMEN’S opinions due to gendered experience alone. Isn’t this funny? I haven’t claimed you to dismiss women’s experiences yet you have done it more times than I can count. You said my opinion was a malicious lie, is that not dismissing women’s opinions? Is this more irony? I don’t know. You tell me. It’s hard to engage when there’s no effort toward understanding. I don’t care to speak to someone like this. Not because you’re a man, because you’re bullheaded and nonsensical.
Stubbornness: You’re set on your views, and I’m not interested in repeating myself. I already explained beyond reasonable measure why I think being open-minded is crucial in this conversation, yet you keep asking “Why should I care?” If men expect women to understand them, then why is it wrong for women to care about how men perceive their experiences? It’s the same logic.
As for the “direct communication” thing… it’s not black and white. Miscommunication happens all the time when people have different perspectives on things. Just because you say women don’t communicate directly doesn’t mean it’s universally true. You can’t speak for all women, and I’m not going to engage in this black-and-white thinking. Maybe you’re just ignorant, but either way, you’re being inconsistent.
Sensitivity: You’re clearly affected by this topic. I’ve seen your posts, (curiosity) and it's clear these ideas about women defining masculinity and “fixing men” are deeply ingrained in you. I can’t change that in a single conversation. You’ve even recently said you think women hate men. That’s a pretty strong belief to hold, and I don’t think I’m the right person to change your mind on it. That’ll take a lot of personal work buddy, it’s rough. Sorry about it. Wishing you luck!
Toxic Masculinity: I don’t have a problem talking about toxic masculinity. It exists, and I can speak on it because it affects me and people I care about. It’s more of a disservice to reject it for men than anyone else. And it’s not saying masculinity itself is inherently toxic. It’s about societal pressures, like the stigma around mental health that prevents men from getting the support they need. If you’re confused about that, or don’t believe in it, it’s fine, but I’ll continue to speak on it because it matters to me and the men in my life. You do you buddy.
Warped Logic: You’re operating under the assumption that the women on this post have some hidden agenda. And your own words contradict you, like when you say there's an intent to misrepresent social dynamics in one breath and then claim subtext isn’t important to men and it wasn’t your intent to in the next.
I don’t have a problem with men discussing women’s issues. In fact, it happens all the time:
“Women don’t know how hard it is for men to approach them,” or “Mothers get more credit for parenting than fathers.” But when it comes to discussing men’s issues, I’m told I have no right to speak on it? But even you manage to, “Women do not communicate directly in general- which leads to this disconnect”. Not sure if you understand but you are speaking for all women here?
You don’t speak for all men, and I don’t speak for all men. Same goes for women. But dismissing someone’s viewpoint as “wrong” or a “lie” simply because you disagree isn’t intellectual it’s arrogance and ignorance.
I’m done here. I’m not engaging with you when you twist my words and act like your opinion is the only valid one. Respectful disagreement is fine, but invalidating someone’s perspective is not how you have a real conversation. The way you go about it is weird and I really do not like conversing with you. Again, not because you’re a man, not because I’m bad with communication, because I do not like speaking to you for all the listed reasons. Imagine that! Again, bye bye.
“You have no right to define it”…you mean like the patriarchy that has defined women and oppressed them since the beginning of civilization?
I’m amazed you stuck with that windy thread. I scrolled right past that mountain of huff!
And yeah, since the beginning of civilization, we have been demeaned and exploited. Our achievements have been erased or stolen. That is just plain fact. One teeny weeny look at Women’s History would confirm that.
I agree with you so much. I always do my best in my relationship to communicate to the point of being told by my S.O. that “I am the chick in this relationship”. I also focus on my core belief, that I feel in my soul, that I am here to protect and secure my family and friends. I think men operate a lot more in the physical World and our contributions are minimized because things just “get done”. This has become a lot more common and has lead to a lot of despair in the male community (high suicide rates, depression, etc.), and I see it my male support group. Lots of good women out there, but many that just keep finding ways to make us look like “the problem” instead of listening to us and trying to understand our perspective. I think a lot of this is from the recent “movement” that men and women are equal and the same. They are NOT. We are vastly different and not in a bad way. We compliment each other IF given the chance. I think Dr Jordan Peterson has addressed a lot of this very well, but women just shame him as well.
I provide, protect and build my own structures… oh, and the contractor. I hired to help me with my kitchen is a female….grow up and quit pouting…
All by design. Oh and indoctrination. The social aspect of being forced to conform is enormous. Men also benefit by upholding these patriarchal values. Until Men see some value for themselves personally they will continue to perpetrate misogyny.
The women here shaming men is really eye-opening. You all have no problem with our “masculinity” when it comes to providing, protecting, and building structures. You are able to pontificate from your keyboard job while we do all the heavy lifting. Just look at your headshots. Men focus on getting the hard physical things done so you don’t have to. It must be nice to have all the time and mind-cycles for what you do. The lack of introspection astounds me.
You just keep digging a deeper hole Bob. You’re sounding scary. Women are now the majority of college students, we are all over the workforce, we have taken on traditionally male careers…we are asking for help not having to do all the invisible labor in the home and relationship. Why does this make you angry?
The “entire infrastructure” huh? That is a big blind eye to what women have done for centuries.
"You sound scary" means you are projecting your fears on myself.
You did not hear a thing I said, rather you just discounted and tried to silence me.
I did not ever discount the work done in the home by women.
I stated previously that men and women are different and we should embrace rather than fight it.
More college degrees and jobs in soft sciences does not address anything else I said as well.
Men continue in massive majority to do the dangerous jobs.
I am just looking for you and others in this thread to acknowledge that, not to discount but to understand that fact.
“Unresolved anger issues” is not projecting? 🤔 men and women are different. But as women take up more roles outside the house etc, men need to evolve too. That’s all she/we are asking. Women have the original most dangerous job, childbirth. 🤷♀️
It is just my opinion. Don't take it personal, sorry if I offended you, that was not my intent.
Men are evolving and I am not discounting the massive work and commitment women put out in raising a family. In fact, I would state that is the #1 most important job in the World.
I am simply asking women to recognize that men WANT to do dangerous jobs and build/ maintain infrastructure to secure and project the Family. It is what we are wired for, just like women are wired to raise humans.
The differences between men and women should be celebrated, not berated.
We are all in this together.
Stop shaming men. Thanks in advance.
"Men WANT to do dangerous jobs and build/ maintain infrastructure to secure and project the Family. It is what we are wired for"
Lol that's the biggest load of BS! In the US, 3 women are murdered by a current or ex husband/bf every single fkg day!! The #1 cause of death in pregnant women is homicide at the hands of their male partner. Men also most commonly start beating their wife/gf when she's pregnant. The men women share their home with are statically the biggest threat and danger to women. When men stop beating and killing women, we'll stop shaming men. Deal? Telling women men are hard wired to protect them is laughable and factually false.
But I'm sure you're going to read about these atrocities done to women by your fellow family "protectors" and still find a way to feel it's YOU being victimized, bc you and your desperate need to get women to give you undeserved credit is all you care about. Shameful and fkg embarrassing!!
Women live our lives having to be highly aware of men’s emotions and the threat that has on us. It’s the only way we survive. I’m not concerned if I offend a man when I call him scary.
Threat? You say that behind your keyboard sipping your tea in the comfort of your home. Just wait until chaos occurs; a natural disaster, War, or civil unrest. Men have the skills and fortitude to thrive in these environments. Best to understand that you can't have it all. You might want to think outside of your insulated World once in a while.
People like you love to throw that “protection” word around as if it paints men in a good light. Protection from whom? MEN. Because men are the issue.
And why do you assume women don’t possess all of these skills you’re assuming men do? Most of the men I see in person and online wouldn’t survive in an apocalypse. They lack common sense, they are far too emotionally unstable, and they can’t take direction. I’ve dealt with an abusive man, and I see how fragile and stupid they actually are.
Shut up, Bob. I have a problem with the patriarchy ALWAYS. You’re whining. Funny how you have no idea who really holds infrastructure down, or what patriarchy means. You’re on here mad and insecure. Seek therapy.
Yes. Men do not understand how controlled they are by the white male gaze. A man looks to what other men might admire in their choice of women more than the actual love they have for that woman. Same with cars. Most men look to other men for approval and acceptance and also they are not allowed to perceive this. Therefore they can be rendered incapable of loving a woman more than they love the good opinion of other men. Also most men think they are the patriarchy. Unless they are the very elite 4% ,they are at the effect of the patriarchy as much as or maybe more than women. Very Homosocial environment. Most men are Not the patriarchy. They are played by the patriarchy to THINK they are a part of it. Yet they can never be a part of it. The illusion is that if they work hard enough they can reach that 4%. But by design this can Never be achieved. Like women trying to look like Barbie. Impossible standards by design
The movie challengers offers a solution
This is my experience when I became ill with an incurable, complex neurological disease. My partner of 20 years pursued his barista. He stupidly misread her banter skills with attraction and was rejected by her. Then came looking to be comforted by me when he confessed. The vile has been lifted.
I really appreciated this summary, and the part about how this emotional labor is both demanded of women and largely invisible. And, I would say there is an added feature which is that men's emotional lives and well-being are on the whole seen as more important and worthy of attention .Our expectations are adjusted downward, and no one really expects it to be otherwise. This is the part that gets internalized: a status quo where not only is our anger not welcome or allowed, but also the having our desires met is really, mostly, optional. Whose emotions matter and are given uptake is part of this equation.
That's a really important point. I've sadly seen this exact dynamic play out in my family.
The telling thing here is that women are allowed every emotion but anger. We can cry, laugh, do all the work to empathize with what men need and can't express, but we can't have anger. They keep that one for themselves.
This is such an important piece. I talked about it with my wife, am sharing it with friends, and most importantly: I'm going to discuss it with both my teen daughter and my teen son. Thank you for writing this. 🙏
Thank you for reading and sharing it with others! So glad it resonated with you.
Couldn't have been explained more eloquently. It reminds me of this one video I saw regarding a trending topic in China, where a father reached out to others to help with a serious topic he was struggling with.
Get this, the topic was his wife asking him to help out more around the house. What's worse, all the responses and top-liked comment were giving their own advice on what they did, which was to pretend to not know how to do something or do something purposefully wrong so the wife could stop asking.
This just goes to show that, yes men are capable, they just chose not to.
Ugh, all these responses are essentially encouraging him to use weaponised incompetence to get out of doing his fair share around the house. Disgusting.
Sodding sheer laziness evidently been accepted by adults in childhood !
Can’t be it if you don’t see it!
Yet typical.
If the man you are with is causing you to pay the price for caring and understanding him, leave. He’s not worth all the effort. Find a person who doesn’t exhaust you, and spend your emotional energy building a healthy relationship with them. It’s pretty simple really. Don’t date a man, or anyone, who makes you pay a price for caring about them.
Agree 100%. Although I have sadly met women who would rather keep carrying out all this labour year anyway, out of fear of being single or because they are genuinely convinced it's their 'god-given duty' or both.
The problem is that men don’t fear losing that woman…if they did, they would increase care, attention, help, emotional support, etc the sum of which is love…just naturally…just to be there for their wife and have her back…
Observing the world around us, a lot of men rely on financial control and the high cost - social and financial and energy - of leaving.
Unfortunately…I hope women understand that freedom is priceless…
Yes, and...freedom can be very expensive, especially when there are children in the mix. The social costs are why women are financially worse off after divorce, in general. Not everyone can afford scorched earth freedom.
It’s really sad…
Katie, I'm gonna push back against your response. "schleeter" would have us believe this is our fault, we should just leave the "bad" men who do this to us. But because it's such a widespread and endemic problem, if we went out seeking better, how long would it take to actually find the man who could provide us equal emotional labor and care? He essentially just blamed women for the problem because we stay instead of acknowledging the systemic problem at all.
Many women in this situation have been trained from birth to be, well, subservient. They don’t even realise it, bc it’s all they’ve ever known (eldest daughters)
I’m glad my parents (more dad than mom, even!) insisted I be self-sufficient so I didn’t have to depend on a man, and could easily leave a bad relationship. They also taught me that relationships aren’t perfect and to have realistic expectations.
Good God I was just thinking about writing a post about this. How many minutes and hours of my life I have WASTED OF MY LIFE listening to fragile men. Or replying to their texts/DMs etc. And listening more. It was not reciprocated. And it was my time they took. Because admit is, as I heard on a Glennon Doyle podcast, “women’s time is sand, and men’s time is diamonds.”
Ditto. Reciprocation rarely. Have spent waaay too much time, energy and smarts chasing dirty bunnies. (Glennon - amazing!)
"We had to adapt to a world that, historically, gave us less power and autonomy and that tied our worth with the success of our romantic relationships." This is something I think about all the time since my first sociology course some years back. It's something I am forced to examine over and over again in the context of my personal life and in my writing. Thank you for this ❤
Thanks for this! My son showed me Anderson’s paper over 2 years ago when he was 17-before it was even published. We did a show on it. I was so proud to say I learned of it from my son (woot woot!) What a brilliant piece of work! (She’s a young philosophy professor at Pomona College who has an awesome philosophy podcast, “Overthink”, for anyone who doesn’t know…)
Wow, you raised quite an impressive young man!
Come to think of it, I would also like the T-shirt and the membership card for the "decentering men" movement. Maybe also the tote bag...
FYI: I consider myself genderfluid and almost always get along best with cis men out of all other categories of gender and being. However, I think part of this has to do with the fact that so many women see other women either as "competition" or as accessories to their chosen station in life (moms hang out with other moms, couples hang out with other couples, etc).
i’ve never heard of “accessories to their chosen station in life” and it’s so so real
It is true about women hanging out with other women and similar stages of their lives.
This does not build healthy community.
It’s very sad as a divorced woman to see how my friends that are married don’t want to hang out with me.
My mom said the same thing years ago when she got divorced, and I honestly honestly didn’t believe her until now.
I think part of the problem may also be money, and childcare.
Married women may feel guilty or selfish spending "the family budget" on going out with their friends. Even more so if they have to pay for a sitter, or ask dad (who may be working late or working a double shift) to watch the kids.
One of the nice things about being friends with somebody who is divorced (this only applies if they have children and share custody) is that they almost always time for making plans with friends.
At least until they start dating again...
Then it's back to the same old, same old. 🤔
There is so much truth in what you’ve written. Women have been “socially assigned” to be the emotion handler. In Thai culture, it is ingrained into us that the wives should never “outshine” their husbands in social settings. We are, as the saying goes, “the elephant’s hind legs”. So for the “emotional” stuff, the women must never bother the men with it.
I kid you not - my father in law once praised his own dad, my husband’s grandfather, that he is so good at resolving issues in life. Said that his method is just to “avoid everything”. My father in law basically complimented his dad for being able to compartmentalise so well, we don’t ever need to talk about feelings. I looked straight into his eyes and said “oh, so he doesn’t actually solve anything”.
I feel like I’m living in a dystopian world where not being emotionally matured is actually praised.
Ya THINK?? Have you seen who millions of male voters put in the White House in 2025?
Thank you for this. It can be crazy-making to experience the emotional caretaking in a relationship but not have the language to express why it's exhausting. Your article helped give me that language.
What exactly would happen if women stopped doing all of this all too often Sisyphean mental, emotional, and hermeneutic labor in regards to men? Would the whole world literally unravel or something? Many women seem to fear that. But rest assured, it won't unravel. Look at what Icelandic women did in 1975. So go ahead and go on strike. It doesn't need to even be a full Lysistrata-style strike. Simply following the "let them theory" would go a long way.
How to win a tug-of-war against a much stronger opponent? Simply let go of the rope, and let them fall on their behind.
“What exactly would happen if women stopped doing all of this all too often Sisyphean mental, emotional, and hermeneutic labor in regards to men?”
I’ve often wondered this too. Is all the extra effort largely driven by fear of not being needed? I’ve commented this before, but the peace, energy, time and self-confidence I’ve regained since stopping dating has *floored* me. I look back and think “what was I doing to myself? X
Most likely.
I am wondering this myself because while I can easily see that most women do this, it isn't actually necessary. I've never done it. And I'm married and have had plenty of long term boyfriends and...it's fine. they all did more of the emotional care, not me. Not that I need much.
But I guess I'm wondering why so many women feel like they need to do this? Because I really don't think they do. Is it that if they didn't, they would have no interactions or conversations at all? Like what's the worst thing that would happen exactly? It's a little mystifying to me. If what would happen is that you would end up having zero conversations, or he would be in a bad mood all the time or something, then why would you want to be with him in the first place?
My stepmother is like this with my dad. Constantly fluttering around him, interpreting for him, making sure he's okay with everything, fetching him things. I really don't understand why she does it and it looks exhausting. If she stopped, he'd probably pout for a few weeks and then get over it and stop being such a self centered baby. I've often thought that she must secretly look forward to the day she's a widow and can have a more enjoyable and fun life without him. But I don't understand why she acts like that in the first place.
Or he wouldn't even notice. I feel a lot of stuff women act like they do for their husband's is at best "nice to have" and possibly leading them to miss doing things that they're husband's actually desire.
Well-said
I don't really know what to think of this, but maybe because my experience is different? In my current relationship, the labor is split 50-50. Maybe 70--30. I do a lot of the physical work (chores, shopping, working, etc) and my fiance does more of the mental work. Both are taxing. And even both people working *and* doing mental labor on top is even *more* exhausting. Sometimes I'm curious about needs; with the hierarchy and all that--what takes precedence? Physical needs like warmth and food and whatnot *and* emotional needs?
I'm someone who, if I'm too overworked, just cannot be emotionally available. Same with my parents, who are not in my life anymore. Granted this goes with my autism (which is an explanation, not an excuse). There are times where my fiance is driven up the wall by me being a wall and just not communicative--which doesn't mean I don't care, but *cannot* care. I can still listen and be available to hear, but just...can't give. It's hard. And I'm hard to live with and love but they keep doing it for whatever reason.
Indeed, that is a very important nuance, Mitch. Too many people don't do nuance, it seems. In our overworked, superhumanly fast-paced society, something often has to give, unfortunately. The problem is systemic.
Thank you 👍
Women have been stopping and this is the greatest backlash of all time.
Thank you for this. I feel seen and heard. Now I can forward this to “him” as proof that it’s not just me!
I'm sorry you relate to this. Far too many women do.
This is an excellent piece. As a formerly married woman, it rings very true with personal experience. I’m a single parent now and I often feel like I have less emotional work to do now than I did when married to a man. The incentive to date again is almost nonexistent…
The idea of hermeneutical labor is completely new to me and I love it. Tho I’ve been through much worse, this is the cause of emotional exhaustion that’s not worth it. TY.