Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    re .2:
    
    I believe the author of .1 was refering to HIS OWN reply as "flip."
    
    - M

    I read the initial question more as someone who is very upset
    rather than attacking. 

re .2

�    Kelly's question wasn't meant to be flip. 

     Maybe: but my immediate reaction was "here is another global condemnation
     of half of the race by a generalisation made by a member of the other
     half"
     
     My reaction given in my reply (.1) were the "free association" responses
     to the multiple questions and statements in .0
     
     If the author of .0 had used less emotionally charged wording I would
     have given a more considered responce (I still might, but considered
     responces take time).
     
     And yes .3 is right: it was *my* responce I was refering to as flip.
     I referred to the the base note in different terms.
     
     ====
     
     As a first pass responce to the base note at a more intellectual level.
     
     I for one do not believe that I behave as an "emotional chicken" or
     whatever the exact insult used was. However many men in our society
     today were raised in the "stiff upper lip" tradition that requires 
     them to not show emotion. Unfortunately circumstances may push them
     beyond the point where that is no longer viable. Unfortunately everything
     in their upbringing has now denied them the ability to emote. Hence
     the headless chicken.
     
     I certainly remember as a young boy getting the standard lecture before
     going to a family funeral ... it went something like "remember now,
     don't start crying like a little girl, you're a young man and must
     show some decorum" (incidentally the family followed the tradition
     of not allowing the female members of the family to attend either funeral
     or wake - they had their own gathering where they drank tea, ate
     sandwiches and if they wished they cried, but male children over 5
     years of age were expected to show restraint, and not display unseemly
     emotions)
     
     as for the rest of the base topic: I'll have to think a little more
     before I respond to that (and count to a thousand slowly before I say
     something unseemly rather than merely flip).
     
     /. Ian .\

    
    Well, I'm an emotional cripple due to certain experiences.  If you
    have your legs kicked out from under you often enough, you begin
    to walk a little funny.
    
    DFW

    sorry folks,i deleted the base note because i did not want anybody
    to take it as an "attack".
    my question was why do men shy away from sensitive subjects(usually
    in their personal lives),while women tend to face the problems and
    like to talk(cry??) things out????
    
    i do not mean to imply that all men are like that,it just seems
    that i meet an awful lot of men like that.
    
    in my experience(past) when i have had to deal with men one on one
    about the relationship or even money-standard reply"i dont want
    to talk about it".
    
    is it that they dont like to deal with possible pain or they think
    they are doing me a favor(trying not to hurt) by note being honest.
    
    i have also had the experience of telling people about certain painful
    events in my life and they get this look of pain on their face.
    it almost seems like men sometimes say "lean on me,i am strong-i
    am a man,but dont lean too hard,i dont want to deal with it".

    Re .9: Firstly, thanks for rephrasing the question.  In view of this 
    I have deleted my earlier reply (.1) as it is inappropriate, and was 
    in any case hasty and ill considered.

                                         
�   why  do  men  shy  away  from  sensitive  subjects(usually  in their 
�   personal lives),while women tend to face the problems  and  like  to 
�   talk(cry??) things out????
 
    As I said earlier often times we are raised to not display emotions. 
    Unfortunately not displaying them does not mean we do not feel them. 
    The simplest way to avoid pain is often to avoid the source of pain. 
    
    When  I  was 17 my Grandfather died: at the time I was studying hard 
    for my university entrance exams.  Igot  the  standard  message from 
    Father: "don't display any emotion, especially in front of the women 
    in the family".  I duly  attended  the  funeral  straight  faced and 
    didn't display the agony that was tearing me apart (my grand parents 
    actually raised me whilst my parents were travelling because  of  my 
    father's  career  -  but  that's another story).  I appeared to have 
    weathered the storm, but my school work suffered.  It looked  like I 
    would  fail my exams, and my career would be ruined.  Fortunately my 
    Form Master was an insightful man - he took me aside and gave me the 
    best advise I ever got: "some things hurt - and when you are hurting 
    you are allowed to show the pain".  We discussed matters for about 2 
    hours  and  then I started to cry - I cried for a couple more hours, 
    but after that I came to terms with things, my  work  recovered  and 
    the  story  has  a reasonably happy ending.  I also remember another 
    line from my Form Master: "if  the  other  boys  call  you  a  cissy 
    because  you  show emotion, remember that it often takes strength to 
    display human frailty,  and  not  showing  emotion  is  usually  the 
    cowards way out for those afraid to display  their  humanity".   The 
    relief  on  being able to admit "I'm sorry my Grandfather died.  I'm 
    sorry I wasn't there when he died.  I'm sorry that  I  couldn't show 
    how much I missed him when I paid my last respects" was immense. Yes 
    I cried, I admit it. I don't regret it.
 
       
�   in  my  experience(past) when i have had to deal with men one on one 
�   about the relationship or even money-standard reply"i dont  want  to 
�   talk about it".
    
�   is  it  that they dont like to deal with possible pain or they think 
�   they are doing me a favor(trying not to hurt) by not  being honest.
                                                                
    No I don't think it is fair to say they "don't like"  to  deal  with 
    it, rather they don't know how to deal with it.

�   i have also had the  experience  of  telling  people  about  certain 
�   painful  events  in  my life and they get this look of pain on their 
�   face.  it almost seems like  men  sometimes  say  "lean  on  me,i am 
�   strong-i  am  a  man,but dont lean too hard,i dont want to deal with 
�   it".
                                                            
    
    A secondary  consideration  may be that in some cases the feeling is 
    "she has come to me for support: what she says is painful, but  if I 
    display  emotion I will be letting her down" Frankly however I think 
    that this is a euphemism, albeit a subconscious one, for saying  "if 
    I display  emotion  I'll  be showing I'm as week as she is, and that 
    she can't use me for support". 
    
    I think this is regrettable for  again  it  shows  an  inability  to 
    understand  the  process.   To quote another trite remark "a trouble 
    shared is a trouble halved", but if the person with whom you try  to 
    share your problems is as responsive as a granite wall, is it really 
    a trouble shared, or is the result to feel that it must  somehow  be 
    *your* fault you feel pain, and hence make the situation worse.
    
    Before I run on interminably let me make some concluding remarks:
    
    I have observed the same things. In some cases it is "sexist" in the 
    sense that at a very early age boy-children are taught to hide their 
    emotions,   whilst   girl-children  are  allowed  to  express  their 
    emotions. 
    
    It certainly isn't macho to cry or otherwise display emotion, but it 
    is human, it is natural, and it relieves the tension.
    
    Finally if one partner in a relationship is hurting  and  the  other 
    refuses   to  ackowledge  it  by  displaying  their  emotions,  then 
    implicitly they are (seen to be) rejecting the validity of the pain. 
    This  more than any other time perhaps is when there is a clear need 
    for open communication in a relationship.  If I were not be  able to 
    display  my  emotions  properly,  I  could  at least talk the matter 
    through and offer verbal support.
    
    /. Ian .\
    
    

    re.8    hope springs eternal,least for me it does.
    
    re.11  maybe it is the way men were brought up,it never occurred
    to me. i tend to take non-communication as a sign of rejection=
    i am not worth discussing it with.
    
    what is really ironic is that men are attracted to me for my
    independence,and"masculine traits".
    
    do men take a need for discussion and communication as a sign of
    weakness or dependancy??????

    additional question.
    
    Other than just cutting off the feeling at the roots, how does
    a woman deal with a man whom she is/was very fond of who
    acts in this fashion. Is it ever of any use to try and continue
    to persue the issue?

    
    
    My mother was admitted to the hospital yesterday. I found this out
    when I got home. My wife told me and when I asked about the usual
    info she said she didn't know. It seems my father came by the house
    to tell us and my wife says she nearly had to beat him to get any
    information out of him. Marie (my wife) was extremely frustrated
    by this and a little angry at my dad. I don't now if I can explain
    this but I do know my dad. It seems whenever something happens that
    he finds painful he shuts up.(very unusual for dad)
    I can remember many occasions when this has happened.
    Talking with Marie last night I realized that I sometimes do the
    same thing. Not to the degree my dad does but there are times
    when I do clam up in the midst of painfull situations.
    My dad never opens up about these things. I do, but it's ususlly
    a delayed reaction. For myself I think it's because I've been
    relied upon by family to always be able to handle bad situations. 
    You can't panic in the midst of these times. You can, however, 
    panic afterwards. I really don't know how to explain it except
    it seems (at first) easiest to ignore the pain. 
    
    Sorry, but I don't think I offered much here.
    And I gotta leave to see my mom. 
    (she's listed in good condition by the way)
    
    
    Rob Burton
    

    regarding this topic
    I am convinced that there lies an answer to this conference by
    merely considering that we have a name for how women complain/
    relate/hammer and there is no equivalant for men.
    Makes you wonder, doen't it.

oh we have them...  just that most of us are too polite to use
them!

;-)

gailann

When one partner won't talk about the problems or
negative emotions in a relationship, it's often very
tough to figure out whose "fault" it is.

Maybe all your partners share a common social deficit,
as some of the replies to this topic have suggested.
Maybe you could equally question your conversational
style in conflict situations: is it all "them" or is
it you?  If you are confrontational but don't allow
the other person a way of "saving face", if you use
loaded language and treat your feelings/perceptions
as if they were objective "facts", or if you cannot
listen without needing to "counterattack", then it may
be that your partners avoid discussions simply because
they have no way of gaining anything from them (to
compensate for the hurt/anger/confusion).

Unfortunately, people aren't born knowing how to argue
or talk about painful subjects.  Their behaviors turn
out (usually) to be either based on observing role models
or on the type of feedback they get from the other side
of such conversations.

    re -1:
    
    >..they have no way of gaining from them...
    
    This is exactly what a friend of mine told me when I couldn't
    get my SO to talk about a subject that I needed to discuss.  He
    liked the status quo, he had control, and talking about it would
    gain him nothing.  The heart of the matter may be control in the
    relationship.  By refusing to talk about a matter, he's controlling
    one aspect of your relationship.  Not pretty.
    
    	-Ellen

    I've been told many times by women that there are issues that
    men cannot understand. What it's like to be pregnant or give 
    birth for example. On the other hand those same women don't
    seem to want to concede that there are issues that a woman can
    not understand. How it feels for a man to receive a swift kick
    in the crotch comes to mind.
    
    There are also emotional issues that people of different sexes
    see differently. Some times because of culture (the way we were
    raised to see the issue) and sometimes for biological reasons.
    Men obviously can't look at abortion quite the same as a women
    does regardless of the side he takes.
    
    It is unrealistic to say that because a man will not share something
    with a women that he is weak or emotionally crippled. Perhaps he
    could and would share it with another man if there were a man he
    felt close enough to. The truth is that in the American culture,
    men are discouraged from an early age to share deep emotions with
    other men. They are taught to share such things with women (mommy,
    the girl friend, then SO). When they come up with something that
    they don't feel they can share with a women it's hard for them to
    find an alternate person.
    
    It is a sign of weakness to share a deep emotional issue with an
    inappropriate person. Whether that inappropriate person is a man
    who does not care or a women who does not understand is not the
    issue. In most cases, one opens themselves for more hurt then gain
    in such a case. It's better to either work it out another way
    (counseling for example) or hold it in until the right person can
    be found.
    
    		Alfred

    Women know EXACTLY what it feels like to get "kicked in the crotch"
    except with her it's a punch in the stomach.  A gonad is a gonad
    is a gonad and is exactly as sensitive in women as in men.  Worse
    actually.  A sneeze or a cough in the wrong position tenses the
    abdominal muscles and can be just like a quick, sharp grab to the 
    'nads.   YEOW!
    
    Men have no monopoly on this kind of pain.  Society just pays lots
    of attention to men's pain and that's why most men think it's
    exclusively theirs.

re: .18
>    liked the status quo, he had control, and talking about it would
>    gain him nothing.  The heart of the matter may be control in the
>    relationship.  By refusing to talk about a matter, he's controlling
>    one aspect of your relationship.  Not pretty.

That may be true sometimes, but I have a tough time believing that many
persons could like the status quo and be happy in a relationship where
their partner is manifestly unhappy.  Maybe I'm being naive.

I guess I feel like any discussion about grievances or imbalances in a
relationship should have a goal.  If all you want to do is blow off
steam and verbally abuse the other person, their reluctance to become
the butt of this is fairly understandable.  If there is a goal, though,
then it should be able to phrased as a gain for "Us", meaning for both
you and the Other.  Either that or the relationship is already at the
point of needing emergency care.  If the issue is control, why bother
being in a relationship?  You have the most control when you're on
your own.

    BTW Ian, some women (this one for example) are raised to not show
    emotion, too.  When my great-uncle died (one of the male relatives
    I loved the most), I got a pretty long lecture about not crying
    in front of the family.
    
    But you're right; that is something more men are told than women.
    
    Lee

    To equate low incidence of intimate behavior with emotional cripple
    seems questionable to me.  It might be that a person with a high
    capacity for intimacy is limited to emotional experiences that can
    be shared.  I suspect a lot of stuff I see as "art" is a result
    of people expressing high levels of emotion - emotion that they
    cannot express within the framework of intimacy.  

In response to .9, I'd just like to say that _I_ find that I'm the one who's
more willing to talk and it's the other person who "shies away" from the
subject, more often than not!  There aren't many things I'm not willing to talk
about, either. But as someone once pointed out to me there are always things
which you won't tell to some people, even folks you really trust.  Some things
just aren't appropriate I guess.


Just goes to show that there's all types out here!


Brian

    re.25 I second that emotion.
    Men are afraid to be emotional around women cause women chew em
    up and spit em out in seconds.
    
    "A woman can destroy a man in twenty minutes that took his mother
    twenty years to build".

    re .25
>   Re .20: Who brought up nut kicking? I didn't. None of the other
>   gentlemen did. Just why is it that YOU have this enormous
>   chip on yo' shoulder?
    
    from .19
>    I've been told many times by women that there are issues that
>    men cannot understand. What it's like to be pregnant or give 
>    birth for example. On the other hand those same women don't
>    seem to want to concede that there are issues that a woman can
>    not understand. How it feels for a man to receive a swift kick
>    in the crotch comes to mind.
 
    That's where it came from.

    re 25-
    seems all you men know how to think with is your gonads
    
    not one of you was sensitive enough to realize re.20 was talking
    in tangents.
    
    						kelly

    Thanx for the support, Kelly, but I'd be careful about saying men
    think with their 'nads - they're very sensitive about that!
    
    Sorry, RANCHO::HOLT, for getting yo' nose outta joint, but it seems
    like something other than my 9 line tangent, (which I clearly marked
    as a tangent), that has gotten you riled up.  You say I don't know
    you or what you're like so what makes me such a damned expert on
    men anyway?  Well for one thing, it doesn't take knowing you to
    know "men" but in any case I'm no expert, damned or otherwise. 
    Thanx for the compliment though.
    
    And about your comment "Bitter women like you have made many men
    sorry they ever tried to open up or communicate..."  and one other
    noter's comment, "men are afraid to be emotional around women because
    women chew them up and spit them out..."  What a load of bat guano!
    
    This note does NOT represent the, (sarcasm here), gentle unfolding of 
    some shy man's psyche, and my tangent therefore does NOT represent the 
    cold trashing of such a fragile event - puleeze!!  Spare us the histri-
    onics.
     
    You guys aren't "opening up" here, the note asks why you don't and
    you are answering that question.
    
    No I don't know you or what you're like, but your tirade certainly
    gives me a good idea.  You sound basically sick of women, try as
    you might to be 'nice' about them here in notes, and my little tangent 
    comments finally set off those feelings.
    
    I don't know what "bitter women" chewed you up when, (if), you ever
    DID "open up" but I'm sure they're not worth your time and NOT worth
    the slow boil you are harboring.  Women "trash" you when they don't
    like you.  The right ones will protect your ego and nurture and en-
    courage your opening up.  Women will protect a man's ego sometimes at 
    the expense of their own so if you got "trashed" when you tried to 
    "open up" then you mis-judged your relationship not women.
    
    ps: what kind of man can be "destroyed" by words in twenty minutes
    anyway?  Come on, get real.

         ENOUGH!!  All of you people just tuck it back in your pants,
    and let's get on with the topic.  NO MO' FLAMIN' !!!
    
                                  Big Wally
    

    
    	Awwww, it was just gettin' fun. |^(
    
    	Todd

    told to me by an SO: i dont really need to hear your tales of woe,
    there is nothing i can really do...

    re:. -1 
    
    what else is there to say?
    

Re:  .33


	I think .32 was saying that when she had a problem and wanted to talk
to someone about it, that person wasn't really sensitive enough to realize
that she needed a friendly ear.  It's true, a lot of times the other person
_can't_ help in any direct manner, but that's not what you're looking for --
you're looking for someone who'll really _listen_, sympathize, and do what
they can to help.  At least, those are my feelings and I guess I shouldn't
be putting words into other people's mouths!  So if I'm way off base, .32,
then feel free to yell!  ;-)


	I often find that just talking about a problem will help immensely;
often, the problem doesn't seem so bad, or ( if I'm lucky ) talking about
it has made me consider the problem more deeply and I've found a solution to
my problem.  Friendly ears are such an easy thing to provide but often so
hard to find!



Brian

    
                         Well said, my son!!
    

    re.34 & 35
    thanks   :-)
    
    this is sort of funny, but i just read these quotes in a magazine
    which i picked up after i started the note. sums up what i really
    meant to say.
    
    most couples find themselves in the classic position- with the woman
    more able to be compassionate,to give support,to yeild the stage,to
    be there.
    
    because of the way we've been raised,men often have less access
    to their feelings than women,which means that the female partner
    is usually the one who reaches out to make emotional contact.
    
    
    
    				kelly

       Ok I've had it!!!!   if you don't like being told off please
    hit , thank you
    
    flame on! I'm sick and tired of reading a group os 4 people spill
    their problems over womennotes,human_relations and now in here.
    Can't you people work out your stupid problems between yourselve
    and not over the notesfiles. I've talked to other people and we
    agree on this. Moderators have been hiding notes because of it.
    Can't you people work out your differences with out dragging this
    notesfile into it.
    
                      REK
    
    In other words
    
    GET YOUR SHIT TOGETHER!
    
    Flame off......

	Thank you, REK

Bahama Mama

	Now look here King, just cos you're a man, and this is mennotes,
	who the hell do you think you are eh? Jesus H Christ, you'd think
	you owned this file or something. The record is by Boris Gardener
	and its still in the charts, still want it?

Love and kisses

Richard.

    re. 37
    rek,please be more specific and try to stick to mennotes.
    i dont feel that i have written anything in this file to be
    griped about.
    					kelly

    Re: .37
    
    Calm down.  Please leave the grousing on which notes belong and 
    which don't to the moderators.  I'm more than half tempted to 
    hide YOUR note!
    
    Back to the discussion already in progress.
    
    				Steve (co-moderator)

    RKE: Yup, I still want it! And I don't want to read about people
    airing out their dirty laundry in Womennotes,human_relations and
    mennotes.
    
    Kelly, if you don't know what's going on I'm not going to awaken
    you!
    
    finally Mr. Lionel,it wouldn't surprise me one bit if you hide the
    note. A lot (read 7) people have sent me mail saying its about time
    someone said something.
    
                        REK

    re .37:
    
    So who's forcing you to read MENNOTES?

	Oh no he's not......

Richard.

     re: 44 gugel, I am*not* the only one who complained. I was however
    the first one to see openly about it.
    
                        REK
    PS So who forcing you to read mennotes?

    
    	Blood, I want blood! 
    
    	Todd

    re .46:
    
    No one is forcing me to read MENNOTES, but I'm not the one complaining!

    Please let's stop this childishness.  I have had extended conversations
    with the two people whose notes I had to hide recently in
    HUMAN_RELATIONS.  I am confident that they both understand why
    the notes were hidden and that they will take care not to instigate
    similar actions in the future.
    
    I did not see anything wrong in Kelly's replies to this topic. 
    If you do, please let me or one of the other moderators know by
    MAIL.  Thank you.
    					Steve

    If you don't like the drift or content of a topic, simply do a 
    NEXT UNSEEN.  This will skip all subsequent replies to that topic
    and go on to the next topic.  I do that with the topic on dancing.
    Since I don't care about the subject, I skip it.  

>    "A woman can destroy a man in twenty minutes that took his mother
>    twenty years to build".

If this is true, then mother (what happened to "father"?) didn't do
too good a job.  The product is defective.


						--Gerry

If anyone is still interested in the topic, how can there be topics 
that you will not discuss with your SO?  I don't understand this.  My
boyfriend has things that he CANNOT discuss with me (too painful; he
needs to work it out on his own before he can tell me), but there is
nothing that he does not want to share with me.  I feel the same.

If you are secure in what you are, how can any topic be so threatening 
that you cannot eventually discuss it with your SO?  Isn't that where 
we get the "crippled" from?  "Not able to" discuss something that 
needs to be discussed in order to be resolved?


						--Gerry

re: .52
>		"Not able to" discuss something that 
>needs to be discussed in order to be resolved?

Why do you assume that discussing something will resolve it?

Aren't there many problems that CANNOT be resolved?  Even
of those that can, aren't there some which cannot be resolved
just by being "talked out"?

        .53: I'd say it's *especially* important to talk about the
        problems which *can't* be resolved.  Because if they can't
        be resolved, you need to live with them: and it's usually
        easier to do that if you can talk about it freely.
        
        Also, how do you know it's unsolvable (or even "unsolvable
        merely by talking about it") unless you've tried?  Maybe
        your SO would have a very different viewpoint on the problem,
        and you'd find out it's a lot simpler than you thought.
        
        	/dave

    
    Most men (at least DECcies) are so interested (and good) at
    problem-solving at work.  If the same mindset were transferred to
    the personal relationship side of things, we'd see a lot more creative
    solutions that couples could attain in working on their own problems.
    
    Whaddaya think?
    
    	-Ellen

    
    Well, sometimes in this situation, I think,
    
    	"Which is the bigger risk.  Internalizing this dilemma or finding
    someone to help me.  The former may mean it will take longer to
    solve it.  Thae latter may mean a quicker solution but may also
    open me to additional pain and anguish from people who don't
    understand."
    
    Most of the time, I find the latter a bigger risk.
    
    DFW

re: .54,.56

Talking about certain types of problems can make you and your SO
closer.  Maybe a lot of problems fall into that category.  But
talking about other types of problems, especially those that I
would call "unsolvable", can become very wearying ("oh god he's
going on about THAT again") and depressing.  It can drive your
SO away after a while.

    re.58
    it may get tiring and depressing,but not knowing and wondering what
    is going on inside their head MAKES ME CRAZY!
    for me ignorance is not bliss.

                                                        kelly

>    it may get tiring and depressing,but not knowing and wondering what
>    is going on inside their head MAKES ME CRAZY!
>    for me ignorance is not bliss.

Yes.  This is what I had in mind when I suggested that "you need to 
talk about something in order to resolve it."  

I guess that I misspoke.  To me, "resolving it" means "making the
problem known" to my SO.  Even if you think you can't figure out a
problem, your SO can use the knowledge to avoid aggravating the
issue.

As a simplistic example, suppose that you explode (completely lose it)
every time someone makes a harmless joke about you being stupid.  You
know that your anger is irrational, but you feel that something in
your childhood is causing this overreaction and that the problem is
"unsolvable." 

If you never mention this feeling of yours to your SO, you will
probably get into a fight every time your SO makes a crack about your
intelligence.  Your SO will be going crazy because she/he will be
confused as to what she/he is doing wrong.  If you don't talk about it
(even a LITTLE bit), you are asking your SO to be a mind reader and
that's not fair. That's like asking her/him to live in a field full of
land mines. 

My argument is that these fights are avoidable and to say to your SO
that you "can't talk about it" AT ALL is a poor excuse.  You don't
have to solve the problem but you can make your SO aware of the
problem. You can tell your SO to avoid making jokes like that. 
Finally, you can tell your SO that you don't know why you react like
that and that you don't feel comfortable talking about it.  In this
way, your SO can avoid making jokes about your intelligence.  This
kind of communication makes for a smoother relationship. 

Even in making the argument that I just did, I feel uncomfortable
about a few things.  First of all, if there is something going on in
your life, past or present, that is bothering you, I believe that
problems such as these are always "solvable."  You can always talk or
think it out and then follow that by some compromise or action. 

I don't believe in unsolvable problems.  If something got you into a
mess, something can get you out of it. I don't understand the people
who keep referring to these unsolvable problems.  I believe in people
(such as SOs) and things (such as jobs) being INCOMPATIBLE, but I
don't believe in any life situation that can't be compromised,
altered, or "solved" (you can do something about incompatibilities:
compromise, divorce, change jobs, and so forth). What are these
unsolvable problems about which you can't talk to your SO? Can you
give me a 'fer instance? 

The second thing that bothers me is the notion that someone won't talk 
to their SO about something.  I understand not being ABLE to talk 
about an issue IN DETAIL (for instance, something so traumatic that 
you need to use therapy, such a being a survivor of child abuse). but
I don't understand an issue that is so taboo that you can't share it
with your SO.  The idea of withholding these things from your SO, for
an extended period of time, is very strange to me, and it seems as if
it is a sign of insecurity.  What could be so horrible and threatening
that you can't discuss it AT ALL with your SO (remember, we aren't
talking about just anyone, we're talking about your wife/husband/SO)? 
I don't understand this; can you give me an example of an issue that 
cannot be discussed with an SO? 


						--Gerry

    
    re. rek, rke...the significant 7 and...the notes around 30-50 or
    so...
    
    	seems to be, in my humble opinion, evidence that these men
    (people?) fall privy to the emotional cripple category....?
    
    a few people go through an emotional crisis and talk about...
    (that's what it's all about, right?...talking about it so we
    can all understand better how we feel and think?)
    
    and what do these people do?
    
    "shut up!...we don't want to hear it!"
    
    yup, very sensitive people, these....
    
    

>    re. rek, rke...the significant 7 and...the notes around 30-50 or
>    so...
 
	The gun is pointed.....
   
>   	seems to be, in my humble opinion, evidence that these men
>    (people?) fall privy to the emotional cripple category....?

	The gun is loaded.....
    
>    a few people go through an emotional crisis and talk about...
>    (that's what it's all about, right?...talking about it so we
>    can all understand better how we feel and think?)
>    and what do these people do?
    
>    "shut up!...we don't want to hear it!"

	The justification for....
    
>    yup, very sensitive people, these....
    
	Character assasination.    

    It's pretty hard to reply to an empty base note or to understand
    where most of the replies are coming from. Obviously those early
    readers got to read the note, I didn't.
    
    This has been the case in many previous notes, however I either
    didn't care or was able to figure out the gist of it. In this case,
    I think the exact base note is required to understand the woman's
    problem/question/frustration without her being mis-represented.
    In fact I'm sure.
    
    Did I guess right, the noter is a woman?
    
    
    Signed, an interested but not wanting to stick my nose in when I
    don't know what I'm talking about reader.
    
    Les

    re.63
    read .9
    i wrote the basenote but deleted it after i realized that it was
    not worded right and came out sounding like an all out attack on
    men.
    
    i resent that remark that it must have been written by a woman.
    
    kelly

Re: .55

>    Most men (at least DECcies) are so interested (and good) at
>    problem-solving at work.  If the same mindset were transferred to
>    the personal relationship side of things, we'd see a lot more creative
>    solutions that couples could attain in working on their own problems.
    
 
I have some recent experience with this.  Yes, I consider myself a "problem
solver".  Unfortunately, I'm learning that problem solving behavior is MOST
of the time inappropriate in personal relationships (quite a big adjustment
for me!).  When someone is sharing a problem with you, they are looking for
understanding, empathy, and maybe sympathy.  I've been told recently that 
"trying to help someone solve their problem" has made me appear, well, 
less than friendly (dare I say "cold"?).  

I'd be interested in hearing if anyone else has had the same experience...

>I've been told recently that 
>"trying to help someone solve their problem" has made me appear, well, 
>less than friendly (dare I say "cold"?).  
>
>I'd be interested in hearing if anyone else has had the same experience...

Hi.  I had an experience a couple of weeks ago.

I was telling a story, after a particularly grueling day with my boss, to my SO 
and a friend of his (ours, but his first) was in the room.  I wanted just to be 
listened to.  I didn't particularly feel like advice.  I just needed to vent. 
Not only did my SO tell me to quiet down because he thought I was getting too 
intense in front of his friend, but he also tried to make it sound as if I was 
at fault for one particular problem that was caused, so I defended myself by 
putting in some of the left-out details (I hadn't really wanted to get that 
long-winded).  I'm sure my SO was trying to help me see from all sides of the 
situation, but #1 I was exasperated BEFORE I told the story; #2, his telling me 
to quiet down, especially in front of his/our friend was embarrassing; #3, my 
ego was shot to hell when he made it sound like this thing was my fault in 
front of his/our friend.  I assume he was just trying to show his Objectivist 
friend what a good Objectivist he can be while at the same time trying to 
"help" me be more Objective as well.

sometimes, yes; listening is all that is needed.  Emotions/egos throw an 
entirely new element in to the picture of Problem-Solving.