Conference quark::mennotes-v1

Oddly, whenever I've confronted a woman with the opinion that she seems
to be wanting to change something about me, and that I'm uncomfortable
with that, the response has always been that by asking her not to do so,
I'm guilty of the same thing.

I'm serious.

Go figure.

-Jack

    re .1
    I can relate to that. We, as men are supposed to change into something
    different than that which attracted a woman in the fist place. Go
    figure that one out.


    			Wayne

    maybe, just maybe, if you changed *you'd* be a more sensitive,
    aware, person....
    
    dunno,
    
    if someone tells me a lot of times that I'd be better if I 
    changed thus and so, I end to first resent them, second,
    listen to them, and third decide on the evidence.....
    
    just curious, how many guys in this file ascribe to the fairly
    common phenom, of telling the woman in their life that she
    needs to loose a few pounds? This is so common as to be a joke.
    and perhaps women telling a man to change and be more .......
    is another joke?
    
    dunno,
    
    bonnie
    

    Wayne ... boy .. has this hit close to home.

    Even though I'm now divorced I still love my (ex)wife ... we *rarely*
    had many disagreements.  She was fond of telling people that I didn't
    have many "classical" faults:  I didn't go out drinking at night, when
    traveling, I always called home, am a good father, good provider,
    didn't "cheat" (sexually) on her ....and on and on and on ... (all of
    which is/was true).

    My "hobby" is history ... I am fascinated by the world events which
    took place between 1930 and 1950 ... have a (quite nice) library ..
    liked to watch documentaries on that period .. etc ... but I used to
    CATCH PURE UNMITIGATED HELL TO *C*H*A*N*G*E* my hobby .. to read more
    poetry, to get involved in the "arts", to watch the arts_and_croissant
    crap on television and in the movies ... it used to drive me up the
    frikkin' wall .. with all the "good" that I was, there was still that
    element of change that she wanted ... I never understood it, and, to
    this day don't ... but .. if I'd just "change" my hobby .. why,
    everything would be ... perfect?

    Jerry

    Bonnie,
    
       Never told anyone they needed to lose pounds. In a relationship
    one always changes a little to meet the other partway, but to ask
    someone to change to suit your needs is totally out of the question.
    If they are not will to change on their own then trying to make them
    is no good..........

    
    I disagree.  Sometimes there are things which you find the other
    person doing which *drive you up the wall* or that you come to
    really dislike.  Its better to work on either getting yourself to
    deal with it better or try and have the other person minimize
    the annoying behaviour.  Beats being tense and upset whenever
    the undesirable behavior occurs.
    
    Jim

    Me and a vast majority of the women I know have all changed in one way
    or another for the men in their lives.  The men may not have requested
    it vocally, but the pressure was there, and the desire for the woman to
    change, so she/I/we did.
    
    I think it's important that women are vocalizing their needs, as that
    was done less in the past I feel.
    
    What men wish to do in response is their choice.  
    
    My initial response to men's sense of pressure is "oh, horrors, they
    feel pressure, I feel sorry for the women who make the requests because
    what if the men don't like them anymore."  My second gut reaction is
    "good, maybe the men will feel what the women have felt all along".  My
    final reaction is ahope that they can both talk about their needs
    sensistively by conveying them honestly and discovering what, if
    anything, needs to be changed in either person or the relationship
    itself to make it a comfortable, growing place for both of them.  
    
    A relationship is surely give and take.  
    
    -Jody
    

    I agree a relationship is give and take. I have changed over the years
    and am not the same as when I first got married. The problem is THERE
    IS ALWAYS ONE MORE DEMAND FOR CHANGE. Today, IMHO, women are trying to
    make men react as a woman would, ie: be more
    sensitive,nurturing,caring and so on, only as define by women. Men
    have had and do have all these traits but they are displayed in a male
    manner. I think it is time women except men as they are and stop trying
    to make them over in their own image. Maybe it's time men say "I am man
    here me roar".........


    			Wayne

    Sometimes it is helpful to have someone point out areas that they
    feel you should change. They might not always be right, but sometimes
    they are dead on target too. I think that when someone tells you
    to change the immediate response is defensive i.e. what makes you
    so perfect that you are telling me to change? Sometimes other people
    understand us better then we understand ourselves.
    
    			-Jim-

    You've missed the point entirely.  .0 is not talking about smoothing
    out the rough edges - he's talking about being molded to suit someone
    else's ideals instead of being accepted for who and what he is.

    RE: .7  Jody,
    
                   A  little "give and take" is one thing, but when some 
    women, the kind I attract, refuses to take no for an answer when
    confronted with the choice of accepting as is, then it gets somewhat 
    confusing for the man.  Some women don't go into a relationship
    honestly, they think "well, given time, he'll come around to my way of
    thinking".  And then they wonder what it was that caused the man to
    want a divorce.  I say "look in the mirror!".
    
    
    Dave

    
    I think that, sadly, because of a whole load of conditioning,
    all of us are brought up to project our expectations onto
    other people.
    Men project a role, full of what their own idea of womanness or
    femininity is, onto women and vice versa.
    
    Trying to make someone else change to fit your expectations is
    always crazy. And unhealthy, and manipulative - but it's hard
    work learning how to stop doing it.
    Women especially have been taught to communicate with men
    indirectly and "manupulatively" -
    
   > Some women don't go into a relationship
   > honestly, they think "well, given time, he'll come around to my way of
   > thinking". 
    
    - is absolutely right. Because we're made uncomfortable with
    voicing our own needs in a clear and open way (and men may be
    uncomfortable with us doing that) we learn to use indirect
    methods that are, long term, damaging to the relationship.
    
    The basenote, to me, shows a load of stereotyping.
    "Caring, nururing, sensitivy" are branded as "women's stuff".
    "Roaring" is branded as "men's stuff".
    Men who do "women's stuff" are being emasculated and "turned
    into women".....?????????
    I don't accept that.
    
    There are women who roar, and there are men who are caring.
    To keep a relationship going, sensitivity is needed on both sides.
    Both parners need to have the self-awareness and skills to 
    communicate effectively - some skills (maybe assertiveness, expression
    of anger) are more deeply buried in women becaue of role conditioning,
    and some skils (sensitivity, expression of feeling, nuturing)
    are maybe more deeply buried in men. But we both need all of them
    to function as healthy individuals, and a woman who encourages
    a man to explore his full range of feelings is not, IMO,
    emasculating him.
    
    Demanding that someone change their interests or hobbies is not
    the same thing. I think that's pretty crazy, and won't/shouldn't
    work. You cannot control another person, and that's not what
    relationships are about.
    
    'gail

        Two women talking over a cup of coffee...
        
        W1: "Well, we've been married now for 20  years,  and thanks to
        my  encouragement, he's given up smoking, doesn't have  a  beer
        with his buddies on Friday nights any more, sold his pickup and
        his guns and stopped hunting those poor animals, washes all the
        dishes  and  sorts  the  laundry  before  he  puts  it into the
        machine."
        
        W2: "So why are you leaving him?"
        
        W1: "Oh, he's just not the man I married any more!"
        

    RE: .12  Gail,
    
                     Your right!  But here I am, 18 years into a marriage
    that should *NEVER* have happened and wouldn't have had honesty been
    the cornerstone of the relationship.  I know...I know...thats my
    problem to deal with but it might be *AN* answer to the long term
    marriages ending with such bitterness.  
    
    
    Dave

    Re -1
    
>but it might be *AN* answer to the long term
>    marriages ending with such bitterness.  
 
    Um...Dave...you've lost me a little here.
    Do you mean that honesty might be an answer?
    
    I guess if you didn't start off that way it would come as a bit
    of a shock - but then, growth ain't easy....
                        
    'gail    

    This sound like some sort of pet behavior problem. I can understand
    if a guy is pee-ing on top of the seat cover vs lifting the cover to
    go. But I have been told that I can get too over done with smiling! I
    mean whats wrong with smiling! I got a full set of teeth! I even brush
    them. It sounds like what the guy has to do sometimes is to attend dog
    obedient school? Gee! Next thing Im going to have to do is change the
    color of my tail to match my eyes.... Eyes are blood red, and tail is 
    lizard green.....:) Sorry ladies! I was born that way!:___)-   

    RE .15   Gail,
    
                    Sorry...I didn't make myself clear.  When expectations
    are set at the beginning (ie...he'll/she'll come around in time) may
    be some of the reasons for *SO* many of the "long" term marriages
    ending with a degree of bitterness.
    
    
    Dave

    RE: Men asking women to lose a few pounds. How often does it happen
    that a wife who weighs what she did when she was married is asked by
    her husband to lose a few pounds? I suspect not very often. More often
    it is a man's desire to have the same size woman he married. Many
    men don't like or want change so when their wife changes they want
    her to change back.

    I guess I'm pretty lucky in that my wife is only trying to smooth
    off some rough edges. She's changed a lot over the last 14 years but
    not at my request. It may be that women change more and more naturally
    then men. Perhaps they want men to change as much and as easily as
    well. I don't know but it sure seems that women are more changeable
    then most men. (That maybe why they live longer.)

    I also wonder if it could all be related to men being socialized to
    accept themselves but women being socialized to think, generally
    incorrectly, that they need "a few changes" to be "just right."

    			Alfred

 I sometimes wonder if it is a part of a woman's nature to attempt to change
men to be what they want. My whole life has been spent under pressure to change
what is me to please one female or another. First it was mother, "get your feet
off the wall," "don't mimic me, "wash your hands before you sit down at the 
table." Now it's the wife, "Oh God, ANOTHER ball game? "Are you having ANOTHER
beer?" "All you ever think think about is fishing, sports, and sex." In between,
there were girlfriends.

 

    
    I think in interpersonal relations many people tend to project their
    discomfort with another person's traits, even to the point of severe
    and repeated criticism.  In addition, sometimes criticism becomes a
    power play, and "who can change whom" becomes a battleground.  
    
    In addition, many people who constantly criticize their loved ones are
    projecting their OWN flaws onto the other person, magnifying them.  I
    have received such criticism.  I have tried to change.  I tried to
    please them.  I feared rejection if I did not comply with their wishes.
    
    If someone criticized me for who/what I was in what I felt waas a
    one-up way (putting me one-down, or insulting me) I think I'd ask
    myself why they were doing it, ask myself if I did anything to trigger
    it, and then explain to them gently that I don't deserve that tone of
    voice, and if they wish to discuss it in an uncharged, equals-relating
    way we can do it.
    
    There is no need in this life to be a doormat.  I don't doubt it
    happens on both sides, but I suppose the real heart of the matter is
    *how do you handle it when it does happen*.
    
    Succumb?  Fight?  Resent?  Blow off steam with friends?  Clam up? 
    Leave?  
    
    -Jody
    

Many of us as imperfect communicators.  And when you are buried in the
problem, its often very hard to step back and see the larger context.

After 4 1/2 years my ex and I gave up, basically over issues of change.
When we met I was an aviator.  Spent many years mastering pilot and
skydiving skills.  Have ALL of the character flaws of that sub-group.
Over the span of our time together, I spent more and more time at home
and less and less time at 10,000'.  And slowly, in a hard to detect
way, became less and less happy without being able to figure out why.
Didn't skydive at all for the last year and a half.  Eventually we threw
in the towel.  She couldn't articulate why I had to change, and I
couldn't explain why I couldn't.

I like to think that we both did our best and couldn't bridge the gap.

The FIRST time I stepped out of an airplane at 10,000' after we split,
I realized what I had missed and just how unhappy I had been.  Will never
try to change that way again.

The good news is that we are still friends.  And the lesson I think that
I learned is that people DON'T change, and if there is discomfort on either
side about who or what we are, try to jump on it early and decide if
you can live with whatever the issue is.

    >Succumb?  Fight?  Resent?  Blow off steam with friends?  Clam up? 
    >Leave?  
    
    
    	It depends on the issue.  I succumbed to putting the toilet lid down 
    (when done) and showering before bed (actually, now I find it hard to sleep
    if I don't shower first, so I'm hooked).  I almost never "fight"
    because I'm the strong silent all-American male who doesn't show his
    emotions.  When my wife belittles my hobbies (which is actually her
    way of requesting more time with me, which she thinks will make her
    happier) I resent and clam up.  I "leave" only in the sense of tuning
    out.  I've actually turned the tables on her recently and stopped doing
    most of my hobbies and started demanding time alone with her, long
    walks in particular, but anything that we can do or be together to have
    some fun and communicate.  Seems she's usually too busy or too tired, and 
    it doesn't seem to have made her any happier.  I think this is true of
    most people who try to change other people.  They do it because they
    are not happy with themselves.  If the other person changes, they still
    aren't happy.
    						- Vick
    

>I think this is true of
>    most people who try to change other people.  They do it because they
>    are not happy with themselves.  If the other person changes, they still
>    aren't happy.

 I definitely agree.

In a workshop on relationships, the facilitator said that one method 
of maintaining a healthy relationship was to approach it from the
point of view of "I will do whatever I can to make your life
wonderful, and you do whatever you can to make my life wonderful." Of
course, it's an ideal and not reality.  Also, it breaks down horribly
if one partner is more dedicated to the ideal than the other partner. 

In the process of discussing this idea, the facilitator made the point
that, in order to help your partner to have a wonderful life, you need
to figure out who the partner is at their very core, and you need to
know what makes them happy.   We also decided that this meant
"enthusiastic participation" in the other person's interests and life.

At first, this seemed bleak and most unfair.  Then, after thinking 
about it, I liked the idea.  I mean, if my partner was willing to 
stick by me with my whims and hobbies--even if he DIDN'T NATURALLY 
ENJOY it--then he's really my partner.  He's really committed.  He's 
really there for me, in all areas of my life.  

I like that idea.

For example, I really like basketball, and I'm currently getting 
interested in softball.  (At 6'5", I'm a social experiment; they are 
calling me the Tall Stop.)  I don't expect my partner to love 
basketball or softball, but it would be a little weird if he 
didn't show any interest in these sports, didn't talk to me about 
these sports, didn't watch me play, or grudgingly watched me play.  I 
mean, he's my partner, so I would expect him to be there for me in all 
areas of my life.  I mean, he wouldn't have to be as rabid as me or he
wouldn't have to come to all my games, but I'd want him there
semi-frequently.  (One of the most joyful moments of this past year
was when a group of my friends--some who don't like basketball--showed
up to every basketball playoff game I had this year; it was
heartwarming, and we won the championship.) 

As another example, my mother never liked sports.  Then, when her sons 
were old enough to play sports, she showed up at the games to support 
us.  Today, although basketball is not one of her "loves," she watches 
an occassional game, and she keeps track of how the Celtics are doing.
She learned to enjoy sports because the people she loves enjoy sports.

Often, I see people separate from their partners when they partake in 
activities that the other partner doesn't "like."  For instance, a man 
might go "out with the guys" to play ball or to watch a game or to 
drink (okay, okay, or to go to his Knitting Class).  This method 
probably works okay, but then the people involved have to accept that 
the partnership is limited (in that there are certain areas of your 
life in which you don't have the active support of your partner).

Another method is do the things that the other partner likes to do and 
get pissed off.  Depending on your personality, this might mean 
nagging, fighting, or just silently stewing over it.  With any of 
those methods, it makes for a miserable time, and it's more game 
playing than it is honesty and relationship.

So, how about this: strike a deal with your partner.  If she wants you 
to do more laundry and be more sensitive, then try it.  In return, ask 
her to come to a game with you or to go out drinking with you 
(whatever it is that you enjoy doing).  If she wants you to do more 
"womanly" things, then invite her to do more manly things.  

And don't just go through the motions, really get into it.  It's not 
that hard.  There aren't that many despicable activities in the world. 
And besides, no matter how unenjoyable the activity, wouldn't it be a 
high to support your partner once in a while?  To do something a 
little selfless?

Change is inevitable.  Why not make it work for your partnership?

							--Gerry

    I like your reply Gerry.
    
    It seems to me that the basenoter is saying that he feels his role
    as a male is being threatened or perhaps better word-condemned by
    his mate suggesting changes.  
    
    These times are changing and so is the American family, generally
    speaking.  Power and resources are changing between the couple and
    in so, nurturing is becoming very important to both.  Perhaps, it's
    always been wanted, the nurturing, but due to society's ideas of
    the male and female role within the couple relationship, the male
    was not "allowed" to express it without some hassle or ridicule.
    
    I would think that the male would enjoy to let his guard down every
    once in a while without his masculinity being threatened or questioned.
     Or that the female can ask for more emotion or sensitivity from
    her partner without being accused of being a nag or bitch.
    
    It seems that both sexes have to ask themselves at some point, what
    it means to be a man or woman.  In these times, the answers are
    more flexible, thus creating more confusion but also less restriction.
                                                                          
    Yes, I do enjoy the strong male type and I do enjoy dressing up
    to whatever occassion to please my guy, but a little of each sex
    type "traits" from both partners is what I feel compliments my lifestyle.
                                    
    Maybe, we can just plain and simple tell to our partner, that hey
    I'm a little envious of the time you spend doing whatever, can I
    get some of your time too, rather than trying to change his or her
    preoccupation.  Sharing promotes tolerance.

    This has turned into a good discussion. Males need to be and should be
    proud of what they are. The brow beating of both sexes demanding they
    change to suit another person is ridiculous. I am not a woman, I do not
    react as a woman but I can complement a woman with my maleness. Two
    halves of a whole. That would be ideal for me. I, you, and we.


    			Wayne

	I can't believe Weston put an entry in here about his
	marriage and skydiving.

	I watched this exact scenario acted out by many friends
	over my skydiving "career".

	I was determined never to marry after watching my
	skydiving buddies hook up with a girlfriend, eventually
	get married, then stop jumping.

	Two years later, they'd be back, divorced or separated,
	doing what they wanted to be doing.  It was very rare
	that there were husband/wife teams who both were skydivers,
	or where the wife didn't continually nag the husband about
	quitting the sport.

	Steve H

>    I am not a woman, I do not
>    react as a woman but I can complement a woman with my maleness. Two
>    halves of a whole. That would be ideal for me. I, you, and we.

But Wayne, you are not your role (Man), correct?  I'm not suggesting 
that you abandon your role or change it's main focus.  All I am saying 
is that a human being is a lot more than a role (Man, Woman, Engineer, 
Father, President, and so forth).

For example, if, for some reason, your wife/girlfriend was temporarily 
unable to use her "womanly" attributes to take care of a very 
important situation.  Let's say that dinner needs to be cooked or a 
child needs tender nurturing or something like that.  Wouldn't you say 
that it is a good idea for the male partner to temporarily put the 
male role aside just to get the job done?  (And the role can be picked 
right back up once the job is done.)

If what you are saying is true (two halves--men and women--make a 
whole), then no gay couples would survive (and they do).  I think that 
gay couples define roles that are a lot more flexible out of 
necessity; otherwise, we'd feel like two halves that didn't fit 
together, which isn't a very healthy way to conduct a relationship.

Anyway, I guess I was just asking if it's okay for the man--in a
heterosexual relationship--to put aside the male role once in a while
to get a job done.  I guess that would also mean that the woman would 
be able to pick up the male role once in a while to get the job done.

(I have this running joke with my friend Paula.  When we ask each 
other who wants to drive, one of us will say, "You drive, you be the 
man today."  The other will say, "No, no, *you* be the man.")


							--Gerry

    
    To me being a woman means writing and reading and dancing and dreaming
    and rock-climbing and soldering and welding and hammering and sawing
    and sweating when lifting weights and sometimes swearing and cussing
    and growing and loving and design electronic circuits and.....
    
    The boundary for me has always been gray.  Instead of hearing a demand
    to change as an insult, maybe try hearing it as a request to blur the
    boundary, and bring men and women closer to having shared experiences.
    
    I do not doubt that many people request change to create distance or
    force compliance or whatever and even compliance brings them no peace
    or satisfaction, but those are people with relationship problems of
    which the request to change is only one manifestation.
    
    If someone I was involved with actually wanted to at least learn about
    all the things I enjoy, that would be wonderful!  Even if I didn't want
    to participate with as much dedication or enthusiasm in everything they
    enjoyed (work AND hobby), I'd want to learn more about them by learning
    more about what they like, and seeing if I like part of it too.  It
    would help me see the pattern of the person.
    
    how can you weave with someone if you don't know their threads?
    
    a relationship is something you create together.  It's important to
    communicate your needs and hear theirs in a nonthreatening way.  It's
    also important to be able to say "I feel uncomfortable with your
    request, can we talk about it?"....
    
    -Jody

    I am not talking about a role, I am referring to an integrated
    relationship. The essence that is me is my faults, quirks, and good
    points. I don't want them changed, I don't want to alter anyone
    elses either. I think people should blend ie: water and flour make
    dough. You cannot find where one ends and the other begins. It is not
    black and white and is sure not about housework and role playing. It is
    about two halves making a whole. I am a half of natures equation and I
    would like to remain so. I am not to be molded in someone elses idea of
    me. I just think we should stop messing with other peoples nature. Love
    em for what they are.


    			Peace
    			Wayne

    
    
           This has to do with what was once said,about trying to change a
    person.If you love someone you should love them the way they are yes.But if
    somebody loves you.Then maybe they will take it as a
    sugestion.Compramise is part of the game. 

My experience is fairly common in the professional pilot and the skydiving
communities.  And after 20 years, aviation is to deeply embedded in me to stop.

The flaw in some of the insights here is that there are places that you can't
take your partner.  Even if they express an interest.  And if they can't
accept this then I guess you're done.  No amount of interest will allow
my ex to understand the unique joy of flying 20th into a free fall formation
at 5000', or what its like to roll your airplane inverted and pull down towards
the earth and then up towards the blue sky.  She has no earth-bound experiences
that allow her to begin to relate, and she unfortunately never aquired the
intestinal fortitude and peculiar character defects needed to desire and
gain the skills involved.  And in the end, she wanted the time that I spend
airborne, and I couldn't give it to her.  So we split up.

But the need to couple is pretty basic to the human animal, so despite the
frustrations and the odds, we keep looking...

The basenoter spoke of a few things (the male way of nuturing and being 
sensitive as opposed to the female way) that I'm not clear on.  Could you
give some examples or clarify?

>>>Ken

    To be fair to my wife, I decided that she was right, that I spent too
    much time collectively on my hobbies.  I further decided that I was
    doing it to avoid family issues, I was doing it in the exact same way
    that my father had ALWAYS been doing his work.  So I cut back
    drastically.  This was not a ploy to prove my wife wrong.  But as it
    turned out, having the time together was harder for her than she
    realized.  I could not be with her that much and allow her to
    continue to escape facing up to some of her own anti-relationship
    behaviors that I had been hiding from all along.  But I think we are
    slowly coming to grips with the issues and things are slowly getting
    better.  I am changing, and she is changing.  In her twenty years of
    asking me to change, she didn't realize that when the time came she
    would have to make changes too, some of them painful.  I am glad of
    the changes I have made so far, and I don't intend to go back.  I feel
    more in control of my life and happier with my marriage and family
    life.  There is still a lot of ground to cover.  The important thing
    is, *I DECIDED* to make the change.  I do not feel that I succumbed to
    my wife's decades of appealing/nagging.
    						- Vick

I was never *ASKED* to change anything...

Thru different 'vibes' though, one can sense when certain things
cause some friction..

Being a working musicain, I spent alot of time at rehersals, recording
sessions, and  working jobs at clubs, pubs, beer halls, weddings,
etc....  

Since the age of 8, I've played guitar,  since the age of 16, I've played
in working bands,,,  Even though my wife has enjoyed those times when
the lot of us would go to the clubs where we worked, it was obvious that
the time and energy that I had to commit to music, was time and energy
that I wasn't giving to my family...  Through it all, there were
very little in the lines of complaints.  for that, I was greatful..  I don't
know what turn our relationship would have taken had I been FORCED to
give up playing.  But from the first day we met, back in 1973, there wasn't
a question of my dedication to the instrument.  Maybe that's what kept things
between her, me and music, the way they were.
 
Last 10 years was spent in a band that worked quite a bit...  During that
10 years, something happened to me that to this day, I'm really not sure how.
One night, right in the middle of a hot set, I asked myself "WHAT on God's
green earth are you doing ???"  I wasn't having fun,,,,  I wanted, at the
second, to put a whole lota distance between me, and this scene.  I shrugged
it off, but night after night, it kept coming back till I just stopped ignoring
it.

I guess the only thing I can relate it to is I guess I got played out.  Not
from the instrument mind you,(I still play everyday) but from the routines, 
commitment, and work that is required to be an active, vital member of a band.

So, I've hungup the towel for now, it's been about a year. and for the first 
time since I was 15, I don't miss being in a band. 

This is/was a big change for me.  The change does please the wife....  We've 
got weekends, we've got time to do things that we just dind't have the time
for before.  We found a few more things to do,  and a few less things to stop
us from doing..  It does feel good..  Also, I've got real time to myself...
being very much into photography/developing I find the time comes in quite
handy..  Add to this, the house and yard work, and gee, where's the time go.

Rock and Rollin ?  Well, I suppose at somepoint, I'll miss it all, but
right now, the occasional jam session, or recording time at the studio
that's upstairs in my brother inlaws apartment, plus playing on my
_own_ terms, everday, has been suiting me fine -- thank you...

So even though I'm pretty sure,  no I'm positive, that on those Saturday
nights, when my wife would be home at 9:00 p.m., kids sleeping, me out
working, she wished upon the first star she saw that I'd stop, she never once
said "Ray, Please stop, come home"  rather, she was patient, and waited,
and eventually, _I_ changed on my own.  I think she's still pinching herself..


/ray

    
    Re .35
    
    Reminds me of that old saw...
    
    "Be carful what you ask for, for you may receive it"
    
     'gail 

    Well isn't this all very interesting.  Since when have men felt
    compelled to address pressure from women?  To Wayne, I'd say,
    *don't change a thing*, man!  What's the big deal?  Do what the Zombies
    say and "Tell her NO!"
    
    I think what you're really asking is how you can have a satisfying sex
    life with the woman, (women), you choose and still stay the way you
    are.  If so, to that I'd say you gotta do what you gotta do.  Women don't 
    get men without changing, (by wearing the clothes he likes, by 
    talking the way he likes, doing in bed what he likes, cooking what he
    likes, etc), and the same goes for you guys.  You don't have to do 
    anything you don't want to do.   But everyone, man and woman alike, has 
    a price attached to their attentions.  And if one woman's price is too 
    high for you, find one more in your price range.  There's nothing here to 
    wail about unless you're expecting women should be "free" for you,
    happily available to you with no "compensation" on your part.  If so, 
    your problem lies squarely with your expectations.  Although I'm sure
    if you look in the right places, you can find women willing to give
    without asking a thing.  But I suspect you're not interested in that
    level of humanity.  I wish Porsches were free, too.  But I have to
    drive what I can afford.  That's just the marketplace, man.  
                       
    Sandy Ciccolini

    If you're already involved, married, etc, and are unhappy, you probably
    didn't take enough time to find out about the other person or didn't
    honestly communicate to the other person about yourself and the areas
    in which you cannot compromise and still be happy.
    
    I'm glad I'm single and I and men can be whatever we wanna be.
    
    S.

    I guess this discussion punched a couple of buttons Sandy. Attacking me
    will get you nowhere. Why is it whenever men have a heated discussion a
    woman throws water on it. Maybe another note.
    
    
    		Wayne

    Maybe Sandy's just on a counter-attack mission in retaliation for some
    of the male strafing that goes on over in Womannotes.  :^)  As I
    recall, women's view are not officially discouraged here.  Your notes,
    Sandy, seemed like very personal attacks, however.  You seem very
    angry.
    					- Vick

 re: last two

 She's not angry; she just holds strong opinions (no kidding!) and has a very
forthright manner of presenting them. It's just the way Sandy writes. Don't
take it personally; if you can manage to not be put off by her style, you'll
find you can really cover some ground with her. 

 re: sandy

>  Since when have men felt compelled to address pressure from women? 

 Since men were required to live on a daily basis with the women they married.
Since men lacked plumage and had to somehow attract a mate.

>    I think what you're really asking is how you can have a satisfying sex
>    life with the woman, (women), you choose and still stay the way you
>    are. 

 Not really. I think this is more along the lines of being married to someone
who either gradually changes her expectations of you or gradually reveals
what her real expectations of you are (after having kept them concealed in order
to get you to sign on the dotted line.)

 My take on this is that we are mostly talking about long term relationships
as opposed to what you have to do in order to pick someone up, take them home,
and "sleep" with them.

 The Doctah

    I'll take your word for it, but in electronic media it's sometimes very
    hard to distinguish between "forthright" and "insensitive".
    
    					- Vick

Sometimes there isn't much difference at all.:-)

RE: 597.40 by Wayne "re Sandy"

>    I guess this discussion punched a couple of buttons Sandy. Attacking me
>    will get you nowhere. Why is it whenever men have a heated discussion a
>    woman throws water on it. Maybe another note.
 
   For what  it's  worth Wayne, I didn't see Sandy's note as an attack on you,
   nor did I see it throwing water on the discussion.  I thought it was a good
   reply dealing with the topic of change.

   I might  as  well  add  that I never really understood what you meant to be
   saying  in  this  note; is it about two people changing for each other in a
   relationship,  or  specifically  the things many women would like to see in
   men, or that we men don't request changes in women, etc, etc.

   What changes  do  you  feel  as  a man that the vague category of women are
   making  you  progress  to  (in  their  eyes)?  Do  you  put the same subtle
   pressures  for  change  on  your  female  SO's  (ie,  would  you put subtle
   pressures  on her if she wanted to stop shaving her legs, wear non-feminine
   clothing,  show up at a family gathering with an ultra-short haircut, etc)?

   Personally I think one's partner is never 100% of the way we'd like them to
   be,  and  there will always be subtle pressure to change our partner to the
   way  we'd  like  best  (even  if as subtle as not being completely thrilled
   about something like a hair cut/etc).          

   There are many flavors of women out there, some who even still like to have
   'machismo'  men/etc.   If  you  like them and they like you and everyone is
   happy,  then  why  change,  and  what's the beef? [often male feminists get
   "those  men  are  ruining  it  for the rest of us, they're getting the best
   babes"  and "you're just saying those feminist things to get women to sleep
   with  you" (yeah, right); however that's not what you're alluding to here I
   don't think, is it?]

   -Erik

   

    Why not just let the person go, if it drives you up a wall. Why should
    anyone have to change to suit someone else??
    
    I am that I am....

    re. 45

    	What the h?ll are you talking about. So far Sandy brought having
    sex into this discussion, I didn't. Now you have some how got me
    attacking male feminists(what ever the h?ll that means). I really don't
    care how you get women in bed (whatever floats your boat). I resent
    having what I said being distorted to suit your agenda. I think I was
    very clear on what I meant but I will try one more time. 

    		I have been married for 23 years and have grown and changed
    over that period of time ( all on my own ). The problem is during those
    years my wife has always had something new for me to change and she
    still does. Now when is enough enough. Why do women do that. That is
    all I said. I said nothing about having sex nor was there mention of
    male feminists. Lets drop back down to earth from the ozone.


    		Wayne

    Re .47: Sounds like she wants you to change <x-characteristic> and you
    want her to change <always wanting you to change something>. I don't
    suppose she'd consider an even swap? ;-)
    
    As for "why do women do that" - depends on the woman, I imagine. I
    don't know why your wife does it. [Come to think of it, since we've
    only heard your side of the story, and only in vague terms, I don't
    even know *if* your wife does it.] I could guess at some reasons, but I
    can't see how that would be of much help to you.
    
    Question: given that some things that people do are bound to irritate
    other people, isn't it reasonable for people who live in close
    proximity to make some attempt to minimize the irritation? If so, seems
    to me that the problem becomes one of *how* to address the situation.
    What would you prefer: That she say nothing, no matter how unhappy she
    is? That she mention it once and, if it's something you don't want to
    change, she drops the subject? That you discuss things more completely,
    being open about exactly what's bothering who and how important it is
    to them?
    
    (Or was this a case of your wanting to vent your own frustration at
    this trait of your wife's, without necessarily wanting any suggested
    solutions? If so, my apologies - vent away!)
    
    -b

    Why they do it?
    
    I've noticed that in a lot of relationships that I've seen it goes 
    something like:
    
    W is unhappy.  W don't know why she's unhappy so looks about for 
    something to blame her unhappiness one.  Finally decides she's 
    unhappy because M does x, and "if M would only stop doing x", then
    W would be happy.  W proceeds to nag M and make his life miserable
    because M won't stop doing x to make W happy.  M finally stops doing
    x and guess what--W still isn't happy.  So W decides that the problem
    must really have been that M is doing y, and the circle starts again.
    Fact is that W will never likely be happy no matter what M does.
    
    I have a brother whose wife hen pecked him into exactly what she
    wanted, then she couldn't stand him and dumped him for a man 15 
    years younger than herself.

    Anecdotal evidence alert:
    
    In our marriage of almost 25 years, I have often wished my husband
    would change some behaviors, to wit:  I wished he would attend church
    with the children and me, I wish he would quit smoking*, I wished he
    would spend more time with me and our offspring.
    
    * the quit smoking one is, for me, particularly aggravating because we
    both agreed to quit almost 21 years ago, and I haven't had a cigarette
    in 20 years.  At first the aggravation was caused by his triggering an
    intense desire to smoke in me when he lit up ;), now its because
    (especially since Digital became smoke-free) the smell makes me feel
    sick.
    
    * Now that I think of it, we agreed we would take the children to church
    together too, though as they arrived he said "I didn't mean that
    church!" (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints)  I even, in
    what must surely have been a moment of aberration, offered to bring ye
    offspring and accompany him to the church of his choice, but he
    declined, suggesting instead that he pick a church and that I take 
    the children to it.  My moment wasn't quite that aberrant.
    
    What's interesting to me is that he is often the one who wants change, 
    but at the same time doesn't.  He accuses me of having changed (I
    married him at 18, 110 pounds, no wrinkles, no gray hair, so he's
    right, sigh, I've certainly changed) but at least equally often says
    "if you would only change [this or that], you'd be happy and I'd be
    happy."   When I was younger I really bought into that, and in fact
    some of the changes he suggested [and I made] did make me happier, but 
    not him as far as I can tell.
    
    I don't often mention change to him, because frankly my dear...  No,
    that's too strong, and inaccurate to boot.  I do care about him, but no
    longer want the togetherness and communication I once thought we could have
    if we shared more time.  (I still wish he'd quit smoking though, and not
    only because it makes me queasy.  We buried his mother earlier this
    year.  She died of lung cancer.)
    
    I've rambled, but to a purpose and here it is at last (imagine your
    relief).  I'm wondering if, in most relationships, each partner
    exaggerates the other one's impulse to cause her/his partner to change,
    while minimizing her/his own similar impulses.  Let me try again.  I'm
    wondering if, in most relationships, the man exaggerates the woman's
    impulse to change him and minimizes his own impulse to change her.  And
    vice versa, of course.
    
    aq

    1)  Hey, Sandy, thanks for livening up this note ;-)
    
    2)  People that marry other people expecting them to change are living
        under very destructive delusions...  (Oh, I love h/im/er, and once I 
        marry h/im/er, and get h/im/er to change these 3 things, everything
        will be great...)
      
        MOST people do not like to change.  Take the whole package or none  
        at all.
    
    3)  Everybody does something that irritates the other; a much more
        productive change is for YOU to change your REACTION to that action, 
        in most cases...   (much easier).  Now, in some cases, a little   
        compromise works wonders, but I don't think you'll find many cases
        where someone changes their behavior to exactly meet your ideal.
    
    4)  Some people in this world are NEVER happy.  (I married one ;-) - 
        Actually, let me rephrase that: some people are never happy unless
        they're UNHAPPY...  In other words, they will FIND something to be
        unhappy, or worry about - then they can continue their lives
        complaining or worrying...
    
        This is in response to the comment about the 'cycle'  (change A,
        now B bugs them...)    For these people, I've found that if you 
        can find something that bugs them enough for them to be 'happy',
        (an easy target, if you will), then they'll ignore the other things
        that they'd complain about if you fix the original thing...
      
        Follow that?? ;-)   My mother tends to be a worrier/complainer...
        I don't get enough sleep, I don't eat right, and I don't wear my
        seat belt... :-)   So, I eat a good meal at her house, wear my 
        seat belt when I leave, and leave early, so I can get a good
        night's sleep! :-)  She's happy that she gave me a good meal, and 
        that maybe I'll get some sleep and wear my seat belt now, and I'm
        happy because I had a good meal and am leaving in time to watch 
        the game at home. :-)   
    
        These are the things that I've learned are enough to make her 
        'happy' complaining about, and she won't bug me about driving too 
        fast, my messy house, and (IHO) drinking too much (things which are 
        tougher for me to change ;-)
        
        Dave

>    2)  People that marry other people expecting them to change are living
>        under very destructive delusions...  (Oh, I love h/im/er, and once I 
>        marry h/im/er, and get h/im/er to change these 3 things, everything
>        will be great...)
>      
>        MOST people do not like to change.  Take the whole package or none  
>        at all.
    
What about the situation in which both partners are really happy with 
each other and don't want to change each other.  But something happens 
in which one partner changes (pregnancy, accident, illness, career 
change, and so forth).  

When one partner changes--sometimes by accident, it throws the balance 
out of whack.  Is it that unreasonable to expect the other partner to 
change to restore the balance to the relationship?

What about the cases in which "Change Happens," even if they didn't 
want it to?  What if one partner takes the "take me as I am or leave 
me" hard-line stance?  Is that good partnership?


							--Gerry

Gerry,
    
    Please re-read this line:

>    2)  People that marry other people expecting them to change are living
                ================================================
    
    I am referring to the situation where a 'defect' (as seen through the
    eyes of the person desiring the change) is ALREADY apparent, and you
    ALREADY KNOW you want that behavior to change.
    
    I certainly believe that people do change over time, and flexibility
    and adaptability and communication and compromise are critical to a
    lasting relationship; but that is not what I was referring to... so,
                                                                   
>When one partner changes--sometimes by accident, it throws the balance 
>out of whack.  Is it that unreasonable to expect the other partner to 
>change to restore the balance to the relationship?

    No, of course not...
    
>What about the cases in which "Change Happens," even if they didn't 
>want it to?  What if one partner takes the "take me as I am or leave 
>me" hard-line stance?  Is that good partnership?

    No, of course not...   
    
    Again, in the above statement, I was simply referring to those with
    pre-conceived notions of changing another's behaviour...  NOT with the
    adaptation that all couples must continually make to achieve harmony.
    
    In the remainder of the note, I was referring to those that NEED to be
    unhappy, and a way of adapting to that trait.
    
    Dave

> be yourself, live with who it attracts, what's the beef?

 Ok, so you do that. And you decide to (gasp!) take the plunge. (Of course it's
insanity.) But you think you've found the perfect mate, and so you get married.
And the honeymoon is great. And then, as they say, the honeymoon's over.

 Now she says "I want you to stop drinking 'so much.'" And I don't want you
to do this anymore. And please don't go fishing this weekend, I want us to
do something <wicked boring>. Etc.

 So you go along with things, you change. You drink half as much as before. You
fish 25% or less than what you used to do. You keep trying to be a good husband.
And as fast as you change, she finds another facet to "polish." Somewhere 
along the line you have kids. By the time you have finally had it, you've got a
family, debt, and a whole host of responsibilities. You can't just decide
"I don't want to play anymore" without serious and perhaps severe repercussions.

 You sound incredibly flip in .45. I know that's because you're single and 
haven't clue 1 about what it's like to be in a lifetime committment. Hey, if
Suzie works out, fine, If not, there are plenty of other fish in the sea. It
works great when you are playing house. It just doesn't work the same way when
legal, financial and moral entanglements are large.

 You sound like you're telling the guy with 23 years of marriage under his belt
to simply abandon the relationship and try to find a better one. It's just
not that easy, ok?

 The Doctah

>        <<< Note 597.54 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "Now THAT was a privilege" >>>

        ...
>And as fast as you change, she finds another facet to "polish." Somewhere 
                ...
        
        That line says it all - good note.
        
        Andy
        

> It's just the way Sandy writes.

Thanks, Doctah.  I know I'm an acquired taste!  :^>

> Since men were required to live on a daily basis with the women they married.

You don't have to marry them, tho!  And certainly if they're as horrible
as Wayne makes them out to be, (and they may be, I don't know.  I've never
been "in love" with one), why the heck would anyone *want* to marry them?

But to marry and then moan - wait a minute - isn't that just what you were
saying, Wayne?  That women marry men and then moan?  Hmmmm.  Now that's just
as ridiculous to me.  I guess, then, I'd have to applaud a guy's attempt to
turn the noise down and keep the marriage together.  Because I'd be the
first one out the door.  Wait a minute - I *was*!  ;-)

Seems to me that all you need is a showdown because the unwritten rules
of your original "contract", (and every relationship has one), are being
changed.  Perhaps you otta sit the spouse down and say "Now look.  I'm
going to age.  You decide if you can handle that".  Or, "I think I'm going
to have 6 beers for breakfast every Saturday and Sunday.  You decide if you
can accept that".

And won't that take care of it?  I guess it's the on-going push/pull I 
can't understand.  I'd just get it over with once and for all and get on
with being in love or looking elsewhere for it.  But then that's my forthright 
style.  I not only write that way, I live that way, too.  A person who loves 
me has to love *me* and if they don't, well that's fine, too.  But they're 
not going to stick around and try to turn me into what they want, they've
gotta *find* what they want, just as I do, and realize that since they'll
never find everything they want, they need to settle for someone who gives
them the most with the least amount of negative.  To assume there'll be no 
negative at all is kind of naive.

I would ask these complaining mates if they've fallen out of love with *me*
or if they perhaps didn't know who *I* was when they thought they were
falling in love.  And if it's the latter, then the responsibility is on
them to decide if they've made a mistake or not.  Now I'm not talking about
someone who hid a physically abusive tendency until after marriage,
although I couldn't easily be convinced that such a person *could* hide
those kinds of things.  I'd be more inclined to think the "abusee" saw the
signs and ignored them in yet another instance of hope triumphing over
reason.  But the everyday little quirks that make us all up are what make
us unique.  And when we say we love someone, I like to think it means we
first know who they are!

But idealism aside, I know that instead of loving a person, many people 
"secure an enhancement" to their own personalities.  And when that's the 
case, your "infractions" reflect badly on them since you have been selected 
specifically for your ability to enhance your partner's sense of self-esteem 
and image in the world.  Love is acceptance.  It really is.  My man can
pick his nose if he wants to, if he has so much of all the wonderful things
I need and want in my life that I've fallen in love with him.  I might 
wince or look the other way, but I would have made the decision when I fell
in love with him that I know who and what he is and that I want to love him
*anyway*!  The choice will have always been mine.

>...or gradually reveals what her real expectations of you are (after having 
> kept them concealed in order to get you to sign on the dotted line.)

Well then one of you has to suffer.  If you weren't the dishonest one, it
shouldn't be you.  Pop that top.

> I resent having what I said being distorted to suit your agenda. I think
> I was very clear on what I meant but I will try one more time. 

Try and stay calm.  I was talking about the "long term" aspect too, rather
than the quick "getting them in bed" scene.  The long term aspect is just
as sexually driven.  People don't generally marry just to have a roommate,
you know.  If there was no sexual aspect to marriage, do you think it would
still be the norm?  Hardly.  What I was getting at was perhaps you're 
afraid of losing this person by standing up and saying, "I yam what I yam, 
etc".  And you may.  But that's a choice *you* have to make based on how much 
you really do resent being asked to change.  We're back to, "is she worth
her asking price".

>Now when is enough enough.

Everyone's threshold is different.  You appear to be reaching yours.  Mine
is *much* lower!

> Why do women do that.

Um, for the same reason a dog licks his balls?

You have to fairly assess what you need in life and what you're prepared to 
give in order to get it.  You have to communicate that in a non-judgemental
way and then stand firm when the going gets rough.  And you just might come 
up with a relationship based on mutual respect and genuine love rather than
on how much nose picking or weight gaining is going on.

Sandy
    

RE: .47 Wayne

> I think I was very clear on what I meant but I will try one more time. 
>
>    		I have been married for 23 years and have grown and changed
>    over that period of time ( all on my own ). The problem is during those
>    years my wife has always had something new for me to change and she
>    still does. Now when is enough enough. Why do women do that.

	OK buddy,  now  I  have  you.   It might have just been me but I didn't
	catch that you were specifically referring to your wife before.

	So it's  not  "Why  do  women  do  that"  but  "why  do  partners  in a
	relationship  do that"...  that's what threw me off when you limited it
	to just "women".

	People do  that.   I  think  it's natural.  I also think a good deal of
	being  in a relationship involves continual compromise on both sides...
	whether 2 years into it or 20 years into it. 

	-Erik

RE: .54 
    
> You sound like you're telling the guy with 23 years of marriage under his belt
>to simply abandon the relationship and try to find a better one. It's just
>not that easy, ok?
    
	I agree with you Mark, it is not easy. I do not have 23 years under
    	my belt but...
    
> You sound incredibly flip in .45. I know that's because you're single and 
>haven't clue 1 about what it's like to be in a lifetime committment. Hey, if
>Suzie works out, fine, If not, there are plenty of other fish in the sea.
    
        I'm not single either. Just wanted to get that straight... :-)
    
    	Whether a marraige is different from
    	any other longterm, committed relationship I don't know. The
    	longest relationship I've been in so far has been 5 years. But in
    	talking with older married couples I know who share some of the
    	secrets of their long-lasting relationship, I feel that I have
    	experienced much of it in mine so far too. I feel that a lot of it
    	involves compromise. If she can't live with something, and he can't
    	live withou it and there's no compromise between them, I dunno,
    	sounds like the relationship (being a happy one anyway) is heading
    	for the rocks. If she can't compromise, what else is there to do?
    	There are only few major un-comprises I have, but if I lose them, 
    	I'd be very unhappy. It's her move too, if she doesn't like it 
    	*that* much the ball is in her court too.
    
    	-Erik
    	
           

>        I'm not single either. Just wanted to get that straight... :-)

 Excuse me. I should have said "unmarried" to be more precise.

    Either Ann or Abby said something to the effect that one should keep
    both eyes wide open before marriage and one of them forever closed,
    afterward.  Unfortunately, most unions are just the reverse.  Romance
    first, (idealizing the partner - that oh-so-sugary "vision of love"), 
    and then the cold reality of wide open eyes afterward.  I wish our culture 
    could de-emphasize that pointless and obviously empty romantic ideal.  It 
    would save a lot of heartache when real life takes its place, (and it 
    always does, sooner or later), and this topic would surely not exist.
    
    S.

    
    
    The single most common complaints in marriages are:
    
    Woman:  You don't spend enough time with me (or we don't communicate
    	    enough).
    
    Man:    We don't have enough sex.
    
    One of the most difficult things to hang onto in a marriage is romantic
    love, i.e. being in love with your spouse.  Romantic love is based on a
    lot of blindness to the other's true nature.  It is generally very
    sexually charged.  The two year mark is a typical time for partners to
    realize that the romantic love is largely gone.  Many marriages end
    then (like my first).  The problem is not loving someone as they are,
    but knowing what they are to begin with.  Most people don't show their
    true colors while they are courting.  And most people are not highly
    critical or observant of the one with whom they are infatuated.  If all
    marriages ended when the initial "in love" stage ended, then there
    would be very few marriages more than a couple of years old.  Is it
    better, then, to jump from romantic relationship to romantic relationship
    every couple of months or years?  Maybe for some people.  But there is
    a lot more to marriage than romance.  There is a lot of love that isn't
    romantic love.  A 22 year old caring relationship, a 22 year old
    friendship, is not something you discard lightly just because the
    partner doesn't have stars in his/her eyes every time they see you,
    or just because there are some things you'd really like to change about
    that other person.  
    
    Now, over in the womannotes conference, I've been recommending a book 
    called "Get the Love You Want", by Harville Hendrix.  I know the title
    is maybe a little unfortunate.  Sounds like something you'd pick up
    in the check-out line at a grocery store along with the National
    Enquirer.  But it was recommended to me by a therapist, and it is truly
    excellent, in my opinion.  It is for couples, or for anyone who wants
    to be half of a couple.  It contains a lot of exercises for improving
    a relationship, all of which can be done without the assistance of a
    counselor or mediator.  
    
    Now the most common complaint my wife hears from me lately is:
    
    Man:  When are you going to read that damn book????
    
    :^)
    
    						- Vick
    
    

>    Again, in the above statement, I was simply referring to those with
>    pre-conceived notions of changing another's behaviour...  NOT with the
>    adaptation that all couples must continually make to achieve harmony.
    
Okay, then maybe this should have been my question: do you really 
believe that most people enter into a marriage with the idea that, 
over time, they will significantly bend their partner into changing 
for them?

That hasn't been my experience.  My experience has been that most 
people, at the time of marriage, feel that they have a compatible 
partnership.  I think that the "change over time" scenario plays out 
far, far more often than someone who schemes about changing someone at 
the time of the marriage.

Let's take the sky-diving example.  Don't you think that the woman 
might have been able to compromise about sky-diving early in the 
marriage but "changed" as the couple took on more debts, had children, 
grew older, and so forth?  Or did she plan on weening him off 
sky-diving from the very beginning?

Or maybe I'm wrong.  What have other people seen?



							--Gerry

RE -.1

I'll take that whole note back.

I can think of lots of instances in which a partner planned on the 
other partner changing.  It is often linked to "s/he will mature...."

I'll switch opinions on this one.


							--Gerry

    Re .63, and expectations in general: another thing that I've seen
    happen (never mind how closely I got to observe this one!) is that
    one's expectations of one's own ability to cope are sometimes wrong.
    That is, "I don't really like <characteristic X>, but it's such a silly
    thing to get upset about - I can put up with it." But as time passes,
    it may turn out to be something that s/he couldn't put up with after
    all. [Yeah, it's a little bit funny, someone discovering his/her own
    inability to change - and then reacting by requesting or demanding
    change from the other person.]
    
    Theme song: "I didn't think it would be like this; I didn't think it
    would get this bad/be this hard/make me this angry. So now what do I
    do?"
    
    -b

    How can you expect to go through life without changing?  The idea I see
    over and over again, and yes, this is particularly true with men in my
    experience, is that one goes through the first 18 to 20 years grwoing
    and making radical changes in both mind and body, reaches a level of
    "maturity", and then freezes, never to change again.  And be proud of
    it too!
    
    God forbid.  I am proud of the fact that I change as time moves on.  If
    someone I respect gives me a nudge from time to time (my husband) about
    some change, I'll examine it and decide for myself whether it's a
    problem worth adressing.
    
    Furthermore, I get really incensed at the word nag (and nagging).  In
    my opinion, if people would be more attentive to attempts at
    communicating, nagging would dissappear.  Maybe a real conversation
    would take place.  Maybe a change would happen, maybe the request for a
    change would go away.  But it will only happen if you talk.
    
    Another thing -- many traits only appear with time.  I realized things
    annoy me only after they are repeated 50 times, and I speak up about
    it.  If it takes me speaking up 50 times, yes I am accused of nagging. 
    But if I were able to engage in a real conversation the first time
    about what was annoying me, it wouldn't take nagging now would it?
    
    People change.  That's an inevitable fact of life.  If a relationship
    can't bend with the changes, it breaks.
    

    re: .65
    
    If you constantly remind me of something and it annoys me that you keep
    doing so, then by definition you are nagging me (I looked it up in the
    American Heritage Dictionary).  That leaves unanswered the question of 
    whether or not I deserved to be nagged.  :^)
    
    I guarantee you, there are people out there of both sexes who are 
    chronic naggers.  No matter what you do, they will always find
    something else you are doing that they don't like and will let you
    know about it.  Usually it means that they are unhappy, and they
    are going to try to make you unhappy until they are finally happy.
    
    Sure everyone changes.  Change is unavoidable.  But what deity of
    goodness and light grants any other person the right to tell ME the
    ways in which I should change?  If I ask for suggestions, that's one
    thing, but to have someone take it as their goal in life to improve me
    to the point of acceptability to society, that's quite another.  I have
    little regard for the self-assigned keepers of public morality and 
    ettiquette.
    
    As it is, the fact that you are incensed by the notion of nagging and
    see the problem as the naggee's unwillingness to communicate, makes you 
    a highly suspect person :^) :^)
    
    						- Vick

>How can you expect to go through life without changing?

 I don't believe that anyone has so stated.

 The key here is the rate of change and the substance of change. Whose pace do
you change at, and who decides which things about you MUST change? If you're
lucky, you get to change at your own pace and to grow in such a manner that
the change happens seemlessly and without undue stress. If you make the decision
youself, it is not only easier to change but change is more welcome. When 
someone continually nags at you, you (read: I) tend to dig heels and resist
the change.

>Furthermore, I get really incensed at the word nag (and nagging).

 I have to agree with Vick here. :-)

 The Doctah