What Do Men Want In A Relationship?

[Anonymouse]

Oh, it can, Mousy. It can. Come on, man. You're smart enough to follow this. My reason for the divorce rate makes perfect sense. Nothing has changed since the "times" that you're talking about, and the current times as far as quality of families. But back then, you kept your mouth shut and dealt with it. There was no plausible excuse to justify a divorce back then, even though the relationships were just as rocky as they are now. The only reason divorces have sky-rocketed over time is because it has been deemed more and more acceptable. Standards have changed as to what is and isn’t acceptable by society, not so much the actual consistency or make up of it. My parents are a perfect example. God awful marriage. My dad has literally knocked my mom's teeth, broken all her stuff, etc. My mom wasn't even allowed to get a driver's license. The typical, control freak Armenian father/husband. So, the husband and wife knew their rolls, like you would like to see, Mousy, yet the relationship was still volatile and horrendous. Why didn't she ask for a divorce? Because "you just don't do that the way we were raised". Brilliant! Now perhaps the severe abuse part is not super common in house holds, but the concept of "you just don't do that" used to be the staple people lived by when it came to divorce

You know, this may be a nice cut-to-the-cake explanation, and I'm sure you're scoring alot of brownie points here since the ladies no doubt will agree with you, but it has entirely missed the point, imho. You somehow start off with the assumption that men are a priori abusive and that divorce is unacceptible. Divorce was occuring back then, as it is today, and as you pointed out, the gender roles were not warped. However, the only difference is today it is 70% which means there is something certainly wrong. In an age of relativity where gender roles are blurred thanks to political correctness ( they are supposedly "socially constructed" since man and woman are equal, oh the horror if there were to be inequalities ), I don't see it far off. I was castigated for making "generalizations" yet you yourself are doing the exact same thing. What you then do is bring up your own personal example, and try to give it a holistic value. Now I do not dispute that this society post 1960s is a throw-away society, but I do dispute the reasons for it. You only give the explanation, but not the reasons. The reasons are clearly due to the changing roles in the sexes.

What I am pointing is exactly that which can be seen on a macro level from pre 1960s to the rapid shift post 1960s. By getting women to abandon their femininity and their role which comes naturally to them, and supplanting it with things like "socially constructed" ( much like the Matrix analogy you allude to below ), it creates a warped vision of what things are. So that women abandon their traditional roles and try to usurp the roles of males it drives a dagger into the natural heterosexual model of humanity ( which means there are inequalities ), and introduces fuzzy concepts such as "androgyny" ( or that the genders can be made equal if women somehow be more like men in everything ) and other social idiocies, and from then on it is no wonder that today, homosexual marriage is becoming tolerated as "normal". So according to this relativity philosophy, gender is not limited to male or female. Not by a longshot. And that, my prejudiced friend, is where things start getting phucked up.

Now you somehow imply that I am somehow supporting the notion that divorce is not an option. That is untrue. In the case of the example you gave, divorce is the only way. But there are many divorces which result because of what I said being a throw away society, and hedonism, and the overall change in the sexes. That sense of sacrifice, and selflessness no longer pervades. A woman is no longer dependent on a man, and he therefore undermines his role. A woman now makes money like a man, works like a man, and has the prolifice lifestyle of a man, and has a career of a man. She lives like a man, in other words. Therefore, she no longer needs that femininity and dependence on a man, that feminine altruism which is essential to marriage and family. She chooses a career over a family. There is nothing wrong with work, as long as it comes after marriage and family. But not in reality for most of the people and that is their choices.

My idea transcends time. You asked why we wouldn't know what we want. Are you kidding me?? That has been a problem mankind has dealt with since the beginning of existence; the feeling of loneliness and wondering "who are we"? "What are we doing here?" We were looking to something or someone for the answers from the start. Answers came in man forms. Religion, government, cultures forming societies which introduced norms, morals, ideals, etc. This is all part of the programming we have inherited generation upon generation. It has formed a prison we "can not see or taste or touch: A prison for the mind". We have bound ourselves to rules subconsciously. Those rules are what make up every aspect of our behavior. They make up the Matrix we are trapped in. As I said, marriage became part of those rules long ago. Out of that loneliness and need to comply with the norm, people are too quick to select the one they want to "settle down with", even more so now then ever. Couple that with the fact that divorce is far more acceptable now, and you have your answer as to why the divorce rate is so high. Sorry if some of this sounds confusing, but it's a complex philosophy to understand, and much harder to explain. You just sort of have to feel it. "Unfortunately, no one can be told what the matrix is: You have to see it for yourself".

Such wisdom, although I think it is wasted on me ( since I've seen the movie a trillion times, read the books, studied the philosophy, etc. ) this part was totally unnecessary and revealed a rather unhealthy obsession with the Matrix, and perhaps Morpheus. I suppose you're the guy that's going to blow the lid off of this whole affair. If so, I think you're fairly trustworthy when it comes to matters concerning the fabric of our reality, even though there is absolutely no evidence that we live in the Matrix.

[Crimson Glow]

Mousy, mousy, mousy. First off, I don't care who this is scoring brownie points with. I have no alliances here, nor do I care if a bunch of girls I'm never going to meet are impressed by what I say. I hate people in general, so the last thing I'm interested in doing is pleasing them. Secondly, my obsession with the Matrix is only because of its incredible parallels to my thinking. These are views I've had for over a decade, now. I don't know if this is what the writers meant by this movie (there are MANY levels of understanding to the story), but this is the interpretation I walked away with more or less because I can EASILY make it fit MY ideas, not the other way around. These aren't new concepts (look at Plato's allegory of the cave). This movie just put some old philosophies into a new format.

I understand your point of view perfectly, and see why you think it's causing the downfall of marriage. What I'm getting at is that you're over simplifying the situation. The root of the problem goes MUCH deeper than "women are destroying marriages by trying to be equal to men". I don't see any reason why intelligent humans can't adapt to new situations so that, career women or not, a marriage should still be able to work. And if everything was going so smoothly, why did women want a change in the first place?

As for my personal example, I was just trying to show you how strong cultural imprisonment can be. If someone can be THAT abused, and still say "divorce isn't right/you can't do that", it merely displays how powerful social structure can be. The "I made my bed, and I'm lying in it" mentality was FAR more common pre-1960. Now-a-days, there is a LOT more of this "ehhh .... I made a mistake, I want someone else" way of thinking (or lack there of) going on.

And as I clarified, I was by no means saying all men physically abuse. I'm not sure how you got that from my last post. Now different types of abuse on the other hand, well....I think ALL relationships are abusive to one degree or another. From the men cheating on their wives (did you forget about this high occurrence, important little factor in the divorce rate?), to one partner not listening to the other's needs, to flat out being beaten black and blue, every relationship has some type of abuse issue.

Let's forget the personal example I gave for a second and try something else. The average income in the town I live in is $90,000 PER PERSON. Lots of men here are VPs, CEOs, etc. in big businesses in Chicago, and choose to live out here (30 min. SW of it). Because of this, approximately half the women in this town do not work, and make motherhood a full-time responsibility. Yet, the divorce rate in this town is VERY high. But why is that? These certainly aren't career women. In fact, a lot of them marry rich so they won't have to work. They know their roles, and are glad to do it to avoid working (Don't give me that "being a mother is the hardest job" crap, people. You know what I mean by working). Yet, I don't see very many solid, happy relationships. In fact, we've had a FEW instance of a wife going wacko and killing the husband and kids (the type of stuff that almost never makes it to national news from this town, because everything has to be kept hush-hush to uphold the image).

You know what I see everyday in the store I work in (and mind you, this is not that big of a store at all)? Mothers coming in and letting their kids run all over the place , moving bottles around, riping price tags off, climbing the cases of drinks on the floor, etc. In the mean time, mom is looking at fat burners, wanting to look more attractive, and I think it's pretty safe to say it's not to attract her husband all over again. And not to sound arrogant, but a good portion of these women are quite....flirty with me. I'm talking 30-40 year old MARRIED women, standing their WITH THEIR KIDS, trying to act all cute and sexy when asking for product recommendations. And when I'm ringing them up, I can just feel their rage building if I don't stare at their cleavage, or pay extra attention to them. Truly sad, pathetic people.

Now what's more fitting, here? Your opinion that marriages fail due to women being more like men/chasing careers, or my idea that people marry to check off another item on their "to do" list for life because of social pressure/subconscious programming? If your philosophy holds water, this town should have a VERY low divorce rate. Instead, it's right up there with the rest of the nation.

Fire: Several good points, but one thing I had to comment on: Your reference to animals in nature. Those animals also don't shiit only in designated places, are naked 24/7, and don't bathe for long periods of time. Humans have defied a lot of nature, so falling back on "it's natural" as in argument doesn't do much for me. And I'm not saying starting a family is wrong. I'm saying that since there is so much pressure on people to do it, we rush into marrying people we have no business holding a relationship with.

And you're right, there's WAY too much bashing here. I try to avoid this unless something sounds flat out ridiculous. Problem is, ridiculous happens on these forums far too often.

[loseyourname]

Perhaps the short attention span is to blame. No one used to switch careers either. People didn't relocate as much. Instability is the norm in near every aspect of American life, not just marriage. This has little to do with gender roles.

I wouldn't be so quick to blame such a huge societal ill on this one little pet-peeve of yours. I wouldn't be so quick to blame it all on the women, either. Remember that both marriage and divorce involve both a male and a female. If a given male prefers a stay-at-home mother, but marries, then later divorces, a career woman, that is as much his fault as it is hers, and the reason for the divorce is that these two were dumbasses that failed to take into consideration their own incompatibility, not the fact that the woman had a career. It is unfair to expect your wife to conform to your expectations of what a woman should be. The onus is on you to find a wife that already shares your view. You can't just blame a career woman for not giving enough time to her family when the husband knew upon marrying her that she would not be able to.

[Anonymouse]

I understand your point of view perfectly, and see why you think it's causing the downfall of marriage. What I'm getting at is that you're over simplifying the situation. The root of the problem goes MUCH deeper than "women are destroying marriages by trying to be equal to men". I don't see any reason why intelligent humans can't adapt to new situations so that, career women or not, a marriage should still be able to work. And if everything was going so smoothly, why did women want a change in the first place?

But you see, they can't be something other than what they are. A woman is a woman, a man is a man, their genders are hardwired and their overall being is determined by their gender. When they try to be something other than what they are, you will have unintended consequences. That I see womens changing roles and not mens, is because I am a male and view this from a male perspective. Males are just as much to blame, imho for not being man enough. But then again, you ask why did women want a change? Well, that was the 1960s, "sexual revolution" or "feminism" or whatever you wanna call it. Essentially it goes back to your Matrix allegory how people are meant to think a certain way. I don't want to get too philosophical witht his discussion, which you seem to like, since I think your Matrix input has no point here aside from "society being a prison", if you want to look at it that way.

As for my personal example, I was just trying to show you how strong cultural imprisonment can be. If someone can be THAT abused, and still say "divorce isn't right/you can't do that", it merely displays how powerful social structure can be. The "I made my bed, and I'm lying in it" mentality was FAR more common pre-1960. Now-a-days, there is a LOT more of this "ehhh .... I made a mistake, I want someone else" way of thinking (or lack there of) going on.

Basically there is more selfishness, is what you're saying. Hypothetically, a husband and wife with two children, that were in a rocky marriage, will nowadays divorce because of their self-gratification and hedonism, as opposed to putting that aisde for the needs of their children, as in sacrificing their personal wants for the sake of their kids. Modern relativists argue "it's better for children to not be in a family like that", is just horsepucky, since divorce is one of the worst things on impressionable minds, and why, just like the divorce rate, 70% of kids from divorced homes have a divorce themselves.

And as I clarified, I was by no means saying all men physically abuse. I'm not sure how you got that from my last post. Now different types of abuse on the other hand, well....I think ALL relationships are abusive to one degree or another. From the men cheating on their wives (did you forget about this high occurrence, important little factor in the divorce rate?), to one partner not listening to the other's needs, to flat out being beaten black and blue, every relationship has some type of abuse issue.

Well, with that grim view of the world we might as well not be in any relationship, never marry, and don't bother, since there may potentially be abuse, and since all relationships are abusive to a degree. So there is nothing that is not abusive. There are many reasons for divorce, that is not the point, the point is that something happened why there exists a divorce rate so staggering that warps everything prior to it.

Let's forget the personal example I gave for a second and try something else. The average income in the town I live in is $90,000 PER PERSON. Lots of men here are VPs, CEOs, etc. in big businesses in Chicago, and choose to live out here (30 min. SW of it). Because of this, approximately half the women in this town do not work, and make motherhood a full-time responsibility. Yet, the divorce rate in this town is VERY high. But why is that? These certainly aren't career women. In fact, a lot of them marry rich so they won't have to work. They know their roles, and are glad to do it to avoid working (Don't give me that "being a mother is the hardest job" crap, people. You know what I mean by working). Yet, I don't see very many solid, happy relationships. In fact, we've had a FEW instance of a wife going wacko and killing the husband and kids (the type of stuff that almost never makes it to national news from this town, because everything has to be kept hush-hush to uphold the image).

There has always been divorce and there have always been people killing each other, even in the 1930s, where a wife might have chopped off her husband while he was sleeping and it never made the news, that is not the point. Now as far as that it is very higha divorce certainly is unsubstantiated. Granted you live there and might see examples close to you, it doesn't account for it. Perhaps you'd want to source that. How is it high? Compared to what? And that there exists divorce post 1960s in families where the husband works and the wife doesn't, simply means that there is divorce no matter what. I would like to see what that divorce rate is compared to, such as families where both spouses work. Until we have that, these statistics would mean nothing, because remember you seem to think I said there was no divorce in the 1950s. That is untrue. However, it was not 70% like today.

You know what I see everyday in the store I work in (and mind you, this is not that big of a store at all)? Mothers coming in and letting their kids run all over the place , moving bottles around, riping price tags off, climbing the cases of drinks on the floor, etc. In the mean time, mom is looking at fat burners, wanting to look more attractive, and I think it's pretty safe to say it's not to attract her husband all over again. And not to sound arrogant, but a good portion of these women are quite....flirty with me. I'm talking 30-40 year old MARRIED women, standing their WITH THEIR KIDS, trying to act all cute and sexy when asking for product recommendations. And when I'm ringing them up, I can just feel their rage building if I don't stare at their cleavage, or pay extra attention to them. Truly sad, pathetic people.

Your post has gradually gone into personal examples of different instances of this or that, which has no bearing on the discussion, nor the divorce rate, nor the rapid shift pre sex revolution and after.

Now what's more fitting, here? Your opinion that marriages fail due to women being more like men/chasing careers, or my idea that people marry to check off another item on their "to do" list for life because of social pressure/subconscious programming? If your philosophy holds water, this town should have a VERY low divorce rate. Instead, it's right up there with the rest of the nation.

First of all, it is not my opinion that marriages fail due to not only women but also men, having their roles reversed. That I only mention women is because I have a male bias. Second of all, you try to discredit my argument and uphold yours by bringing up a shady personal example that cannot in anyway be verified.

[anileve]

....

Brilliant post, an exceptional way to interpret things and I couldn't agree with you more. And yes, I will throw an age card in this post. Time and growth do play a significant roles in understanding many issues. My views have greatly changed since I was 21, and I do expect them to change as I get older, so no you can't beat time when it comes to "social" intelligence. Certain things can be attributed to the academic intelligence and education, others come from a personal reflection and time. Although some never get there anyway. You have a great grasp on life, so I applaud you for that.

Debating with Anon is impossible, although he understands you it is unlikely that he will change his views simply because of his stubborn principle. Also his views are based on his personal experiences, although he criticizes others for using theirs as a premises for their theories.

Anon, we've agreed that most of our observations are mostly subjective. There is no absolute objectivity, otherwise we would stripped of our individuality. You are basing all of your views from a bias perspective. And if you say no then I recommend that you examine your post where you clearly state that. You believe that the divorce is on the uprise due to the role switch which is rooted in a woman's aspiration to change, thus affecting and destabilizing men. Fine, if those are your thoughts, no one can prove it otherwise, because you are principally devoted to the accuracy of such observations. However, no one has a factual or a scientific answer to that question. It is still a matter of subjectivity and various, cultural, time oriented factors. So maintain your perspective, but do not claim that it's the ultimate truth. You are not far from bruin in having pessimistic and unbendable views.

Also I would like to address the domestic violence. It is amazing that 9 out of 10 Armenian families have experienced that on one time or another. I hear of such cases almost every day, some woman braking down and revealing that she's been beaten by her husband but is not willing to leave him due to her commitment to the family and a fear of being ostracized by her community. Basically the reason being that they do not have a strong support group. I personally don't believe in the constitution of such marriage, it is based on violence and false views of what love is supposed to represent. I would not be able to live in such torment, as long as I am classified as an individual and a human not a mule you can abuse and order around.

I've also noticed that most complaints about role changes are coming from males of very machismo dominated cultures. And I will throw in a minor stereotype, men are generally very stable and focused. Learning from an early age to be brave, reliable, right and emotionally reserved. This "rigidness" has an effect on their personality later on. When they enter this country of "liberty" they go into shock because women have something to compare themselves to. In other sheltered countries, such behavior is acceptable because they don't know any better. When women come hear they see that an alternative style is available. As a result they gravitate towards change. Men on the other hand have a very hard time changing, hence the silly joke "Women marry hoping their husband will change; men get married hoping their wife doesn't." So essentially women are better at adapting quicker than men, conflict arises. When one moves and the other stays in the same place it's very difficult to find an understanding. Both people must grow together to solidify their matrimony. That lack of harmony is the root of the divorce, even the most primitive person realizes that. However, harmony requires work from both individuals not just one, some people become too used to their comfort and stability and refuse to change, that's where problems begin.

[Anonymouse]

Anon, we've agreed that most of our observations are mostly subjective. There is no absolute objectivity, otherwise we would stripped of our individuality.

I don't want to get into a whole philosophy rant, but this statement is plain silly. I am to guess you are the same person that repeats the post-modern dictum of "all things are relative". I don't have to explain how that is silly.

You are basing all of your views from a bias perspective. And if you say no then I recommend that you examine your post where you clearly state that.

Biased? I was stating my views regarding women from my vantage point, that of a male, it does not mean that somehow the divorce rate is something I made up or there reasons for it as well. Please, don't make silly assertions.

You believe that the divorce is on the uprise due to the role switch which is rooted in a woman's aspiration to change, thus affecting and destabilizing men.

That is what has been happening and mind you, for sake of "fairness" and "equality", men have also been undergoing that change.

Fine, if those are your thoughts, no one can prove it otherwise, because you are principally devoted to the accuracy of such observations. However, no one has a factual or a scientific answer to that question. It is still a matter of subjectivity and various, cultural, time oriented factors. So maintain your perspective, but do not claim that it's the ultimate truth. You are not far from bruin in having pessimistic and unbendable views.

This is another silly statement, in which you somehow try to be psychic and interpret what you think I think, in otherwords you somehow think my views are pessimistic because you don't agree with them. I never said they are pessimistic, nor do I consider it as such. It is simply a pattern, regardless of what modifier you want to assign it.

As far as the rest of your views, I don't think anyone supports violence or abuse, and those are hardly grounds for blowing out of proportion to somehow encompass all over Armenian society.

[PASAMONSTER]

I believe that this particular subject should be decided by the woman in the given relationship because each man wants different things in each relationship.

[hyebruin]

each man wants different things in each relationship.

YA HA!!! alll rightie then!

[Sip]

Do you know 99,9% of men? How were YOU able to arrive to such a conclusion?

In Bruin's defense, statistical techniques are used all the time to extrapolate from a "random sampling" of a population to arrive at a conclusion about the entire population with certain confidence intervals.

However, I doubt bruin has been going around dating random guys.

[xBaron Dants]

In Bruin's defense, statistical techniques are used all the time to extrapolate from a "random sampling" of a population to arrive at a conclusion about the entire population with certain confidence intervals.

However, I doubt bruin has been going around dating random guys.

Akh, you're reminding me of my quantitative methods courses. Please stop.

No, there are no researches behind hyebruin's statistics....she's just a bitter bitter little lady.