Conference quark::mennotes-v1

Rick,

Thanks for entering that piece.  I think the key statement was

.0> We overburden sex, forcing it to meet needs that really aren't sexual.

How true this is...  So much energy is spent on sex (to the detriment of other
causes) that it seems to have become the "male security blanket".  Sexuality is
only one aspect of Love (debatable in this notes file, hmmm, maybe we should).

    Maybe that is why a lot of fathers are more involved in their kids (
    all those good things without sex ). If that statement is possibly true
    an awful lot of women don't get.




    			HAND
    			Wayne 

    Any book or article written by any PH.D. should be taken with a grain
    of salt.  They don't know all the answers.  Some aren't smart enough to
    come in out of the rain.  Many are mixed up creatures themselves.  I
    ain't impressed by their education, studies, clientele, or books
    they've written... and hope to sell, nevermind their titles.

.3> Any book or article written by any PH.D. should be taken with a grain
.3> of salt.

Really?

Thank you for that insight,
Jerry Beeler, PhD (Physics)

.3> I ain't impressed by their education, studies, clientele, or books
.3> they've written... and hope to sell, nevermind their titles.

Now *that* I agree with.  The title and/or publications tell me little
about the author.  When I read articles/books/publications - I really
like to see a "blurb" on the author (other than publications, degree,
and that stuff).

    <maybe that is why a lot of fathers are more involved in their kids>
    
    I don't know what you mean here, Wayne.
    
    do you mean more involved in their kids than they are with their wives
    do you mean more involved in their kids than their wives are?
    do you mean more involved in their kids than they are with something else?
    
    			herb

    <Any book or article written by any> body named Dwight <should be>
    <taken with a grain of salt.  They don't know all the answers.  Some>
    <aren't smart enough to come in out of the rain.  Many are mixed up>
    <creatures themselves.  I ain't impressed by their education, studies>

    
    				herb

    I think the article on men has a lot of very important things to say.
    At least it seems very relevant to me.
    
    In terms of feelings in general but in particular with respect to 
    things like intimacy, sadness, and uncertainty, I see a substantial
    difference between American men and women. That is to say that although
    women differ tremendously from each other and men differ tremendously
    from each other, with respect to these matters they differ from men
    much more than from each other.
    
    
    
    				herb

    re .5


    		I mean fathers show emotion toward their kids and are more
    open today. A man's children will love him unconditionally ( for the
    most part ) whereas a woman's love is conditional ( for the most 
    part ). More men are seeking custody of their kids today, as a point. 
    I find my relationship with my kids to be on a level different than 
    my wife, the bond is forever. It is not cluttered with the male female 
    needs psychology. The love is deeper and not complicated.



    			HAND
    			Wayne
    PS. This is difficult to put in words, the feelings of love I have for
    my kids.

    Wayne:
    
    I don't think the differences are between parents and children, men and
    women; you see, not all children love their parents unconditionally,
    not all parents love their kids unconditionally, and some men and women
    do love each other without conditions.
    
    Unconditional love works, regardless of who participates. Conditional
    love is (in my eyes) a contradiction in terms.

    re -1
    
    
    		Please read my reply again, " for the most part". Read
    before you disagree. Jeez people are so quick to disagree they don't
    read eveything.
    
    
    
    			HAND
    			Wayne

    I read it -- I disagree that a woman's love is conditional "for the
    most part." As far as unconditional love in families: I've also seen
    too much "conditional love" between parents and children to agree with
    you there, as well.  
    
    It depends on the woman -- and the children -- and the man.
    
    Unconditional love isn't a function os sex or age.  It's a manner of
    living that needs to be taught, and too few people -- men, women,
    children -- learn how to live in this manner. 
    
    How do you teach unconditional love?  By loving unconditionally.
    
    					andrew

Consider that men and women often times express 'feelings' differently.
Women in my life have been more verbal, ie they 'tell' you they love you
whereas I have been into the demonstration vein, ie 'showing' love.  How do
I demontrate love?  By really listening to what she is saying rather than
doing something else.  By staying with jobs that I hated (not this one Mr.
TFSO reader).  By waxing her car and putting lotion on her back.  By
letting her sleep while I drive home after a tiring ski weekend.  By fixing
her dinner and then doing the dishes.  By taking her to see 'Robin Hood' so
she can see Kevin Costners butt instead of Terminator 2.  By doing the
laundry, cleaning toilets, vacuuming, etc at least half the time.  By going
slow when I was soooooooooo H*rny I couldn't catch my breath.

What I found from all of this is that women did not see these things as
acts of love.  I could do all of the above plus more and they would ask
"Why don't you ever tell me you love me?"  I see it as different styles.

I understand Wayne.  Kids don't put the demands on your love that 'many'
women do.  They tend to accept your love as it is.  If you spend your day
off fixing their bike they don't say "Why don't you ever tell me you love
me?"

patrick

    Patrick,
    
    Given that many/most women like/need to hear the words, why is
    it such a big deal to say them?
    
    Bonnie

    re:  .12
    Patrick, you sound like a really good guy.  
    
    My husband does the sort of things you mentioned, but I never put them
    into the context of "love" before - now that I think about it I think 
    you're absolutely right that they are - so thank you for letting me see
    that "love" can be expressed in more ways than just saying the words and 
    buying expensive presents.
                     
    **Debs 

    re .12, .14
    
    
    
    			Y I P P E E  !
    thankyou both

>    Patrick,
    
>    Given that many/most women like/need to hear the words, why is
>    it such a big deal to say them?
    
>    Bonnie

Bonnie,

It's not that it's a big deal; it's just hollow for me.  I mean for me if
the words "I love you." fully express the way you feel about someone you
probably don't.

Saying "I love you" in lieu of demonstrating it is like buying someone a
gift certificate for Christmas instead of a well thought out present of
love; it's easier, less hassle and not entirely worthless but it seems
sooooooo shallow.  It simply does not even come close to expressing who I
am or what I feel.  In marriage (I've been married twice but am now a
single parent) it became one of those things you say as ritual before going
to sleep.

Bonnie, I know it drives a lot of women nuts; I wish I had an answer that
would satisfy their needs without me seeming so phony.  I loved the movie
"Ghost" when Sam says "Ditto" when his girlfriend says "I love you".  He
loves her more than life itself but the words don't come that can even
express that.  He jeapordizes his soul to save her.  If that's not love
what is?

patrick

    Patrick,

    		Thanks for expressing what I wanted to say. When I think back
    on my Dad, I remember the things he did not the things he said. Actions
    stand the test of time. It seems that most men "show love" and a man's
    children except that unconditionally ( for the most part ).

    		I too have had my head stuck in toilets, sinks, dryers,
    ovens, garages, cars, and many other places and it was never enough. TV
    style romance was the demand not the kind of everyday love that lasts a
    lifetime. It was conditional love.


    			HAND
    			Wayne 

    I think before we start making value judgements about male vs female
    "expressions/declarations of love" we ought to at least understand that
    (if) there are such differences.
    It really doesn't do any good for me to say 
    "my wife shouldn't feel that way"
    
    well i guess it does do ONE bit of "good". It identifies the bad guy.

    For me, mowing the lawn, fixing a toilet, or any of the other
    maintenance activities I do, are not expressions of love.  I would do 
    them if I were living alone with the same amount of energy and
    enthusiasm (or, more correctly, lack thereof).  I just finished pine
    panelling my back porch.  It was a labor of love, but not love for my
    family, but love of the activity, the creativity, my relationship to
    my environment.  No, in fact, most of the guys I've known who did not
    love their wives, who were on the verge of divorce, continued to
    maintain their homes.  I express my love in less equivocal ways.  All the
    people whom I have ever loved have been told so directly and often.
    All have received gifts into which it was clear I had put a lot of
    thought.  All have had poems written for them by me, poems clearly
    crafted for them alone.  And none has ever doubted that I liked being
    with them or begrudged them the time I spent with them.  Is that soap
    opera love?  So be it.
    
    					- Vick

    <Any book or article written by any> body named herb <should be>
    <taken with a grain of salt.  They don't know all the answers.  Some>
    <aren't smart enough to come in out of the rain.  Many are mixed up>
    <creatures themselves.  I ain't impressed by their education, studies>

   

    Thanks Vick

    You put your finger on what was bothering me about the previous notes.
    I have a problem with equating fixing the toilet or mowing the
    lawn with a declaration of love. To me it is more like fixing dinner,
    paying the bills, doing the laundry, etc. the sort of things that
    one does as an adult to maintain ones household whether you are with
    someone you love or not.

    Recently I was talking to a man who was telling me about a friend of
    his whose wife had left him for another man. The only thing that she
    said about the new man was 'he tells me that he loves me'. I wonder
    how many women left perfectly good spouses because their needs to
    be cherished and told that someone truly cared were not met.

    Bonnie

    
    Interesting string ...
    
    I believe actions often speaker louder than words ...
    
    I do not think doing the basic chores ... mowing the lawn, washing my
    car, doing the laundry, etc speak of my love for Emmy.
    
    However, I think my taking night duty calming the baby to let Emmy
    sleep through the night, washing her car, doing laundry when it is her
    turn, giving her nightly foot rubs, etc are actions that show my love
    and concern for her. 
    
    BTW, I'm also big on expressing my feelings however I feel without
    actions behind the words they often ring hollow.
    
    Take care,
    Greg
                        
    
                                      
                                             

    The principal impact of .19, .21 on me is that of being strongly
    critical of males in their love relationships, with a secondary impact
    of scolding. I feel that any man whose wife leaves him simply because
    he didn't tell her he loves her, that man is much better off, because
    she is just as insensitive to his needs as she complains that he is to
    her's.
    To trivialize the responses of some of the men by equating expressions
    of love to mowing the lawn etc, is typical of the holier than thou
    patronizing that I have come to expect from so-called p.c. people.
    I would have hoped that one could expect the kind of sensitivity that
    would be reflecting an understanding that the response in .17 was
    primarily associating itself with .12, and .16 rather than stating that
    he expresses his love by putting his head in a toilet bowl.
    
    
    
    				herb

    Bonnie,
    
    		Most men ( and I mean most ) know perfectly well how to
    hustle a woman. A few of us are talking about a long, stable, and
    consistent relationship. If all it takes to make you happy is a poem
    every now and then, some flowers, and an occasional "I love you" so be
    it. Personally I want something that is there every day, for a life
    time. I'm not in my 20's so I refuse to hustle and women who require
    that are not in my realm of thought. All things I give are love,
    body, mind, emotion, and yes working on her car. If a women cannot see
    these things as a labor of love she needs more depth and seasoning.
    
    
    
    			In Peace
    			HAND
    			Wayne 

    and, Herb and Wayne, I think that for a man to refuse to give the
    flowers and poems, and the soft words, as part of the relationship
    if he knows that is something his wife needs, then he really doesn't
    love her.

    I agree!
    
    However, the verb for me is not _refuse_. That implies an _active_
    DECISION to not express love. That isn't true for me, I doubt it is
    true of most men who love their wives.
    
    
    

    Re. .21
    
    Bonnie, 
    
    A person who is so needy contradicts most of the "new woman" role
    models. I mean, if someone leaves a spouse solely because he didn't say
    "I love you" enough shows a very basic weakness that perhaps no man can
    fulfill. She may need counseling.
    
    I agree that we, men, need to learn to be more expressive with our
    feelings but a woman who cares manages to bring this out in a man
    little by little.
    
    The Houston Post had an article this morning saying that men who "hug,
    kiss, etc" must do that at their own risk. If they do it to a woman,
    they are labeled "lechers". If to a child, pedophiles. If to another
    man, "homos". It's a tough world out there!
    
    I came to live in this country 25 years ago. I was shocked the first
    time a person who brushed by me in a store said, "Excuse me". Nobody
    had ever said that to me before in Latin America. Physical contact is
    so much closer there. People touch all the time and nobody attaches
    sexual connotations to it. Sex is such an obsession in this society.

    In my opinion, the things Wayne described sound like a nice way to
    express love (as do the "I love yous" and the poems, etc.) - but the
    most important thing I see is the way people treat each other on a
    day to day basis.
    
    All the "doing" and "I love yous" in the world don't do much good if
    either of the people treats the other with constant (or repeated)
    impatience, irritation or hurtful sarcasm.
    
    If it were my choice, I'd take good "day to day" treatment over 
    anything else.  The nice "doing" Wayne mentioned and the "I love yous"
    are icing on the cake.

    re .28
    
    Well pick me up off the floor and dust me off....We finally found
    something that Susan and I can agree on 8^).
    
    fred();

    metoo

    Perhaps the problem with some American men is that they can't 
    distinguish between "hustling" and expressing love.  And it may
    also be the case the the woman who said "he tells me that he loves
    me" didn't mean that he does that just in words.  I don't think
    there's much disagreement here that actions are more important.
    On a day to day basis I spend time talking to my wife, give her
    unsolicited hugs, go get the newspaper for her when it's cold outside,
    tell her I love her, etc.  But several times a year I also hustle
    her.  :^)
    					- Vick
    

    Why the hell do you have to couch such a fine response in terms of -what
    I read as- the snideness of the first sentence and the flipness of the
    last?
    
    
    				herb

    Being that this particular note seems to show that it's indeed women
    that want/need to be told "I love you" by thier husbands; I wonder if
    it also holds true for the reverse for some of our noting men?
    
    Or what is it that makes you feel appreciated and "loved warmly" by your
    wives?    
    
    Just something that I'll add for the heck of it:
    My mate told me one day that I seemed rather hostile toward a girl
    friend of mine.  I told him, that if I did, it was because he made up
    for it by how much "affection" he seemed to show to her.  He then told me
     that I was ridiculous.  I told him, that it seemed as if he was nicer to my
    friends than to me.  He told me, he never realized it, but that it was
    probably only because they were company and that he sees me everyday. 
    It's like, sometimes when my kids may think that I'm nicer to their
    friends when I offer them cookies.  Anyway, I felt better after our
    discussion, and we both saw how we sometime take each other for granted
    in some ways.
    
    I recall another episode of when I seemed to dress a little bit better
    than usual for some event we were both going to.  He thought that I was
    dressing for someone else rather than for him.  I guess I forgot or
    just hadn't realized that sometimes, he enjoyed it when I acted as if
    he was visiting instead of just living there. 

    re .-1
    thankyou

    This conversation brings to mind my parents' relationship.  They have
    been married for almost 36 years and are one of the happiest, most
    content couples I have ever seen.  They show affection for each other
    all the time and treat each other with respect and thoughtfulness. 
    Yet, in all their years together I bet my mother could count on two
    hands the number of times my dad has said "I love you" to her.  But, he
    shows her in so many different ways.  
    
    He is the same way with his children.  He will hug me, kiss me, spend
    time with me, listen when I need to talk, but I very seldom hear those
    words uttered from his lips.  It used to bother me a great deal but
    I've come to accept that it is just very difficult for him to express
    his love verbally.
    
    For me personally, there needs to be a combination of showing love and
    hearing it, but everyone needs are different.  If my mother felt as I
    do, I don't think their marriage would have lasted this long.  It's up
    to each couple to work out a solution that will make both partners
    happy.
    
    Diane (who is very expressive with those she loves)
    

>
>    that want/need to be told "I love you" by thier husbands; I wonder if
>    it also holds true for the reverse for some of our noting men?
>
    
    Emmy and I are "backwards" ... I express my feelings more often while
    wanting Emmy to express hers through words and touch more often   
    
    Greg
                    

    As people may recall from another discussion, I consider myself to be
    very happily married and have been for 24 years...
    
    These questions have caused me to realize that the only time my wife
    
    	tells me she loves me is in response to me telling her I love her.
    	gives me a hug is in response to me giving her a hug.
    	participates in sex with me is when I initiate it.
    
    				mmmm
    To the women:
    	When was the last time you _initiated_ any of the above?

    5:35 this morning.  This should be unbeleivable, as he woke me up to
    keep me from being late (the alarm usually goes off at 4:30) and I'm not
    the best human before the first cup of tea.
    
    Meg

    about 7.00 this morning...
    
    I find it kind of sad that speaking out about some women's need
    for particular ways of expressing love is regarded as nagging or
    scolding..
    
    hugs to all of you..
    
    Bonnie

    good for you!
    
    For two of the three I think yesterday. As for the third, :-)
    
    p.s.
    my questions were not intended as challenges, hope nobody read them
    that way. Genuine curiosity as to whether many women initiate 
    
    	verbal or physical affection
    
    and if you one did, why did you stop?

.33> Or what is it that makes you feel appreciated and "loved warmly" by your
.33> wives?    
    
Strangely enough, the fact that my wife tries to be the best mother possible to
our two children makes me feel "loved warmly".  Not only does she make sure we
keep up with the baby books and photo albums but she also started a journal 
after our first son was born - what a wonderful gift to give a child...  When 
climbing into a cold bed at night my wife doesn't resort to an electric blanket
to warm things up - she uses me!  She is usually the first to get to the 
magazines that come to our home and will initiate the discussion about any of 
the essays that have piqued her interest.  This helps me sort through much 
reading material as I find I don't have the time to be as thorough as I used to
be.  Our discussions are interesting in that we "brainstorm" with one another;
neither of us is right or wrong but WHAT insight we share...  Two of the most 
enjoyable books that I have read were recommended to me by my wife.  My wife 
lets me surprise her.  Some of my "covert operations" have required me to be 
out at night instead of being at home with her and the boys.

I think the words "I love you" must be taken in the context of the history
between the two people.  The "main thrusters" may be deeds but good 
"retro-rockets" are the occasional "I love you"s which help steady your 
course...

    I think we all can say that the majority of men here do say "I love
    you" and hug. It may not be at the level that a lot of women would
    prefer but never the less we do it. The point I and others are trying
    to make is that we as men do other things we consider acts of love.
    These things seem to be taken for granted and discounted. 



    			HAND
    			Wayne

    RE: .62  Wayne
    
    > The point I and others are trying to make is that we as men do other 
    > things we consider acts of love.  These things seem to be taken for 
    > granted and discounted. 
    
    Is it possible that the women in (some of) your lives don't realize
    that you do these things as acts of love?
    
    As mentioned earlier, I regard such acts as "icing on the cake" (in
    the sense that they go well above and beyond the "day to day" good
    treatment that I consider to be most important in "Love") - is it
    possible that the women in (some of) your lives see these acts as
    signs of your own good character rather than a personal expression
    of affection?

insult to intelligence

re: .0, and heated replies

Friends,

Pl forgive me for being new to this conf. Personally I can claim to know
just one* of you. I read this note because it has so much exchange on the
subject of male sexuality. I enjoyed the exchanges better than the article.
In any case, here are my comments:
(* Vick Bennison)
1. The text in .0 is probably ok. There are many now who claim to know
why men and women behave the way they do. Let us suppose for a moment 
that they are right. That is, we are conditioned by our upbringing,
by the society's expectation, .. in the manner described. 

2. Now, knowing 1, like an idiot we refuse to adapt ! And, if only, we
acted with the wisdom (as in the article), men and women will communicate
a lot better. Right?

3. In a mathematical sense, both men and women lie. That is, deliberately
say something which one knows to be untrue. It really would not matter,
if we had the ability to discern in real time. And, in fact we do, as
pointed out by some replies. Who really believes an upset woman when she
says, " I am NOT upset. Nothing is the matter. Honey, I am just fine."?
Similarly for men. 

4. An Australian friend of mine was seriously injured in an auto accident
in Spain. His condition in the hospital kept on deteriorating for days
until a British doctor showed up. In minutes, the doctor sized up the 
situation and pronounced, " My dear fellow, your upbringing has done you a 
dis-service as you can't scream like a native Spaniard ! You are in
too great a pain, aren't you?" My friend nodded with tears rolling down
and with the joy of being in good hands now.

Next time that he is hurt in Spain (God forbid), I can assure you he will
scream louder than the native Spaniards.

5. In the process of evolution, the birds and the bees and the entire animal
kingdom learned to adapt -- not only to each other but to the surroundings
as well. But the poor two footed ones refused to learn, to adapt? Right?

6. If the ability to act rightly could be captured then we would find
it soon in our DNA, RNA. Else, we would know just how to repair it thru
genetics research or augment it thru artificial intelligence. 

Cheers,
Neil
PS: Here is the real reason as per a Hindu classic: "... often a nearing
trouble dulls the (sharp) mind of men." Sorry, women! 

    I must be 1/2 bubble off center to get envolved with this one, but...
    
    The death of many a relationship is the attempt to change the *other*
    or to blame the other and use that excuse to justify our own actions
    ( he/she does/doesn't _______ therfore I _____ ).  In this case, if
    it isn't one excuse it will be another.  Anyone looking for and excuse
    to have_an_affair/get_a_divorce/throw_a_royal_tantrum will likely 
    find one.  
    
    To go into any relationship with the attituted that "he/she will
    change" is a guarantee of failure.  The attitude that "I can change
    him/her" is the height of conceit.  
    
    I know--sometimes people do change--for the better and for the worse.
    However, I have usually found that that change is caused by forces
    within themselves rather than by outside pressure.
    
    I'm trying ( but not always succeeding ) to follow an old saying
    "never trying to teach a pig to sing.  It wastes your time and annoys 
    the pig".  I think this applies to notes files as well as relationships.
    
    In the end, the only people we can really change are ourselves.  
    
    fred();

    re.-1
    
    well, maybe.

.0> The point is simple and frightening:  the socialization of
.0> males provides very little that is of value in the formation of
.0> intimate relationships...Everyone suffers as a result of this.

"frightening" ... "very little" ... "everyone suffers" ...

I've really avoided reading/responding to this note but the above extract
has really stuck in my craw.  Why?  I'm reminded of an interview with
Dolly Parton.  She came from (what in Texas is called) a dirt poor family.
However, she recalls that she had a perfectly happy, loving and close
family life.  She really didn't know that they were poor and underprivileged
until some "city slicker" told that they were.

Similarly here.  I really didn't know that things were so frightening and
that I was suffering so much, in fact that "everyone" was suffering so
very much ... because I'm a man.

Now, thanks to the text in the base note ... I can really see just how
bad off I am and how much I and everyone else is suffering ... and all
this time I thought things were just supercalifragilisticexpialidochus.

Tis' a puzzlement that we have all survived ... isn't it?

Bubba

    re .40
    
    I see that my comments in .41ff were deleted.
    I do not regret expressing my anger. I do regret expressing my anger in
    a way that caused my reaction to become the issue rather that what I
    was reacting to. 
    I hope that this reply gets the message out in a way that focuses
    attention where I feel it belongs.
    I resent the characterization as sad my statement that Bonnie was
    scolding men. I further resent the juxstaposition of that statement
    with sending out hugs to everybody.
    
    I consider it rude and inappropriate and underhanded, to offer in one
    hand the 'carrot' of a hug while at the same time in the other hand
    brandishing the 'stick' of her criticism of my statement(me) as sad. To
    'magnanimously' send out hugs while at the same time cuffing me up
    side the head. That is how I react to it.
    
    It makes me very angry. I see it as being a stereotypically
    female-ish action of sending out a double message. With the built in
    safety valve that allows a future: (eyes aflutter) "Who me?"

    Herb
    
    Once again you have totally misunderstood my comments and my intent.
    My remarks were in no way intended as scolding. 
    
    Bonnie

.70> Once again you have totally misunderstood my comments and my intent.
    
    Seems to be a lot of that going around these days ...
    
    Bubba

My opinion:

If I travel to Mexico I don't ask the people there to speak English as that
is not the language they communicate in.  I speak Spanish.  I don't bad
mouth them for expressing themselves in a manner that is natural for them.
I try my best to speak in their language but since it was not my first
language I struggle.  I have found Hispanic people to be most gracious and
forgiving when I cannot find the 'correct' words.  They appreciate my
attempts and my courage to speak a new language.  They do not expect me to
speak as glibly as they do.

patrick

    This is a serious question. 
    
    Why must men always be the ones that have to change? 
    
    
    			HAND
    			Wayne

    Patrick:
    
    By speaking in "I" terms and talking about yourself and the Mexicans
    you are able to avoid offending anybody (of course, there may be no
    offense in your message in any case so the manner of presentation may
    not be necessary)
    In any case, one of the risks associated with that style of
    speaking/writing is that it misses the intended audience.
    If I was the intended audience you missed me. In addition, I don't know
    what your message is independant of the recipient you had in mind.
    
    
    				herb

    
    
    
    >>Why must men always be the ones that have to change? 
    
    Maybe because we most always have been the ones in the wrong?  How,
    exactly, do you want women to change (their behavior)?
    
    	GJD

    re .75
    
    <Maybe because we most always have been the ones in the wrong?>
    
    do you have ANY idea whatsoever how LITTLE credibility such a sentence
    is going to have to the very people whe presumably are the focus of
    your remark?
    (unless, you are just showing off for other people who also feel that
    men are the bad guys, in which case the statement is likely to have a
    lot of credibility)
    

    Incredible.

    RE: .73  Wayne
    
    > Why must men always be the ones that have to change? 
    
    What makes you assume that this is the case?

    
>    Maybe because we most always have been the ones in the wrong?  How,
>    exactly, do you want women to change (their behavior)?
    
		This statement put my blood at the boiling point. You have
    no concept of reality. I don't want this reply deleted so I will just
    say you are a < fill in the blanks >.


    			DHAND
    			Wayne

re .69,

>    I consider it rude and inappropriate and underhanded, to offer in one
>    hand the 'carrot' of a hug while at the same time in the other hand
>    brandishing the 'stick' of her criticism of my statement(me) as sad. To
						 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>    'magnanimously' send out hugs while at the same time cuffing me up
>    side the head. That is how I react to it.

Why are you equating "my statement" and "me"?

Dan

    buzz off

Well, that was certainly an insightful response.

Dan

    stick that in your ear, too

Herb,

I will speak more clearly.

My opinion:

If I travel to Mexico I don't ask the people there to speak English as that
is not the language they communicate in.  I speak Spanish.

(If a woman doesn't like the way I communicate love she should realize that
I am trying to speak in her language but it is difficult)

I don't bad mouth them for expressing themselves in a manner that is
natural for them.
(I would appreciate it if women would cut me a little slack in this
area)

I try my best to speak in their language but since it was not my first
language I struggle.  I have found Hispanic people to be most gracious and
forgiving when I cannot find the 'correct' words.
(I know that women like to hear 'I love you' and other words of verbal
expressions that 'they' use to express love but the words are difficult for
me.  I would like them to acknowlege my difficulty.)

They appreciate my attempts and my courage to speak a new language.  They
do not expect me to speak as glibly as they do.
(I'm trying to meet their needs but its hard for me and I cannot do it as
glibly as they do.  Please accept my expressions of love and realize that I
feel attacked when women say "Why don't you say 'I love you' more often?"
because I know it is a weak spot in my character and they seem to attack
this vulnerability.)

patrick

    Well, talk about the free exchange of ideas......it doesn't seem to me
    as if this particular topic is being warranted the credit it should. 
    Where are the intelligent and respectful noters?
    
    I am more interested in hearing people's ideas or thoughts or
    arguements without the name calling which leads this topic to
    degradation.  That belongs in Soapbox!
    
    Cindy

    Thankyou for your clarification, Patrick
    
    The interpretations I was trying to attribute to your intent were way,
    way off. I see now that I TOTALLY misunderstood what you were talking
    about.
    
    				herb

Herb,

I think a lot of misunderstandings could be cleared up if people would ask
for clarification and not condemn others before they understood them.
Which is kind of what I have been saying all along in regard to men and
women.  Thanks for not practicing "Shoot first and ask questions later."

patrick

    in re .87
    
    Thankyou Patrick

    I don't shoot at you first, Patrick because I have learned to respect
    you.

    RE: Herb
    
    691.10> When we 'fight', she usually 'wins' at least in the sense that 
    691.10> I blow up so badly that my response becomes the issue rather 
    691.10> than what we were arguing about. I'm getting better.
    
    .69> I do not regret expressing my anger. I do regret expressing my anger 
    .69> in a way that caused my reaction to become the issue rather that what 
    .69> I was reacting to. 
    
    .81> buzz off
    
    .83> stick that in your ear, too
    
    Your work in this area isn't making much progress, Herb.

    thankyou, dear

    Don't mention it, sweatheart.

    You can toilet train a puppy by wiping his nose in it, training men you find
    offensive, requires somewhat more savoir faire

    You assume that "training" is the intent here.
    
    It isn't.

Herb,

While I have no idea what I said that gained your respect - you are
welcome.

Bonnie,

You are welcome also although again I don't know why you said thank you.

patrick

.79> >Maybe because we most always have been the ones in the wrong?  How,
.79> >exactly, do you want women to change (their behavior)?
    
.79> This statement put my blood at the boiling point.

"boiling point" is an understatement.  Back in another life, when I was
married, it never ceased to amaze me that *I* was the one who was expected
to change ... after the divorce ... she told me in no uncertain terms that
she *now* realized that I simply had different ways of expressing my love
than she wanted/expected/needed ... and that she was W-R-O-N-G in some
of the assumptions that S-H-E made ... the bottom line was that I was
GENUINELY and POSITIVELY expressing my love and SHE failed to recognize
it because she thought it should be done in different ways.

.79> You have no concept of reality.

There are times when I wonder what "reality" is.  In a very simplistic way
I tend to see some sort of a 'movement' to make men and women the same (even
to the emotional level)  with the single exception of (perhaps) their bodies
and if genetic engineering continues I wouldn't be surprised to see a unibody
human being ... it makes me sick to my stomach.  There are men in this world
and there are women in this world.  There's a certain 'diversity' in men and
women that makes this world a relatively nice place to live.  I'm not at ALL
sorry that my emotions and/or emotional make up is different that that of a
female.  Why in the name of <insert deity> should I be?  If anyone thinks
that I'm going to apologize for "almost always" being wrong with respect to
women, they'd best think again.  Not only that, but, my wife and daughters
would have a field day with that statement.

Good grief.

Bubba

    
    
    I made my statement coming from a very different perspective than
    really is intended in the context of the basenote.  I'll try to
    explain.
    
    Much of what I claim is "wrong" with men is historical and cultural
    (and, sometimes, even based on religious doctrine).  I don't think
    there are too many men that would deny that there exists a patriarchy
    in our society which has essentially placed women in a subserviant
    position in most all areas.  That, I think is "wrong".  
    
    My statement was ill-placed, in the context of the discussion of male
    sexuality.  For that, I apologize.
    
    Back to the discussion at hand.
    
    	GJD

Given that most of us realize that men and women have differing styles for
the most part, how do we close this gap:

1.  Never have another relationship with a person of the opposite sex.
(Not a viable option for most.)

2.  Join a gender-based hate group.  (It's working for Andrew Dice-Clay
and Andrea Dworkin but w-a-y too twisted for me.)

3.  Completly change your behavior to give the other person what they
desire.  (They will then tell you that you're not the person they married
and that they are running off with their physical therapist)

4.  Move to another planet.  (Transportation is unreliable)

5.  Vow never to watch:  Ophrah Winfrey, Donahue, Geraldo, Sally Jess. . .

6.  Realize that diversity is not a bad thing.

7.  Realize that there is no 'right' or 'wrong' position.

8.  Accept that others expressions of love, while they may not match yours,
are ok and to negate them is not going to help the relationship.

9.  Enjoy your mate for where he/she is right now, not where they might be
with 'a little work'.

10. Remember that change comes from within.  To try to change someone
against their will is naive.

patrick

    Please, will the people who are determined to spout the feminist party
    line take a hike. Let the men and women who are trying to talk and
    understand each other continue. 



    			HAND
    			Wayne

    
    
    >>Please, will the people who are determined to spout the feminist party
    >>line take a hike. Let the men and women who are trying to talk and
    >>understand each other continue. 
    
    	Please, Wayne, enlighten us all as to what the "feminist party
    line" is.  
    
    	GJD

    re .94
    in re training is not the intent

    when I said...
    
    <You can toilet train a puppy by wiping his nose in it, training men
    <you find offensive, requires somewhat more savoir faire

    There was a certain amount of poetic license intended in that
    statement. There was also a fairly strong metaphorical overtone.

    I was trying to say something like ... 

    "Pointing out my past statements like that embarrasses me.
    Pointing out my past statements in that particular fashion makes me
    feel rather like my nose is being wiped in shit.  Such coarse attempts
    to modify my writing style are not likely to be successful."

    It would help me to understand whether you believe that "training
    is not my intent" is responsive to what I was trying to say. 

    Or whether you believe that "training is not my intent" was used more
    as a debating parry in an attempt to simplify what I said to the point
    where you can disagree with it, and thereby make it seem as if I said
    nothing else.

    And if neither, just what was your intent with that statement.

    GJD,

    		I could never enlighten you, after all aren't you all ready
    enlightened. At least enlighten enough to point out how men are usually
    in the wrong and all men ( when it suits you ) perpetrate the
    patriarchy. Whenever the men here try and sort through their feelings
    you and some others love to point out what slugs we are. It reminds me
    of a bad restaurant that won't validate your parking ticket.


    			HAND
    			Wayne

    "enlighten us all as to what the "feminist party line" is.

    I do not see how there can be any sensible discussion in that context.
    I believe that reduces things to a debate. (which is where this
    conference is most of the time anyhow)

    Which I think is really what the issue is. There is no hope of people
    understanding each other in the poisoned atmosphere in this conference.
    And a very important reason why there is no hope, is that most
    everybody comes into this matter with very strong emotional
    preconvictions. Convictions that aren't the slightest bit amenable to
    'debate'
    In that context, I believe that Wayne's statement makes a lot of sense.
    I believe it is trying to say something like

    Dear Bonnie,
    Greg
    Steve
    .
    .
    .
    Doug
    Vic
    Andrew

    and all the others who we feel are fairly consistently spouting a line
    that is at odds with the way "we" feel.


    please leave us alone.

    				regards
    				us slugs
    p.s.
    (I don't think that "why" will be considered an appropriate response to
    that request, but I guess "no" will have to be considered such)
    
    				sluggo (aka herb)

.103> "enlighten us all as to what the "feminist party line" is.

Notes> OPEN/NONOTEBOOK IKE22::WOMANNOTES-V4

    
    
    
>>.103> "enlighten us all as to what the "feminist party line" is.
>>
>>Notes> OPEN/NONOTEBOOK IKE22::WOMANNOTES-V4
    
    To put it eloquently, BULLSHIT!  
    
    GJD -- a feminist, who doesn't necessarily toe the "party line" and
           who does believe that many men are "slugs" (as are many women)
    
    

RE Note 706.105                     Male Sexuality                       105 of 105
NITTY::DIERCKS "Be strong . . . be safe!"            13 lines  27-DEC-1991 17:27
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    
    
>>>.103> "enlighten us all as to what the "feminist party line" is.
>>>
>>>Notes> OPEN/NONOTEBOOK IKE22::WOMANNOTES-V4
    
>    To put it eloquently, BULLSHIT!  
>    
>    GJD -- a feminist, who doesn't necessarily toe the "party line" and
>           who does believe that many men are "slugs" (as are many women)
>    
>    
    One of the tenents of being a feminist is _believing_ that there is a
    patriachy (sp) and that it is systematic and solely for the purpose
    of exploiting women. That men have _inherent_ advantages etc...
    
    �Comprende?

    
    
    I believe their is a patriarchy.
    
    I believe that patriarchy is systematic, and has evolved for centuries.
    
    I believe, unfortunately, that being male DOES inherently provide
      advantages.
    
    Does believing these things, in 'box terminology, make me a feminazi? 
    If so, I'll wear the uniform proudly.
    
    	GJD

    <I'll wear the uniform proudly>
    
    And -one presumes- look for each and every opportunity to harass those
    who you view as tools of or dupes of this conspiracy.

    RE. .107
    
    Before you can wear any uniform proudly you need to learn to spell.
    
    Re. .96
    
    Perception IS reality

    So the masculinazis in the crowd can call anyone who disagrees with
    anything they say "feminists" (as if that were a dirty word) and aren't
    interested in defining what they mean.  Fundamentally what they want to
    do is stymie all debate and discussion.  After all, they are typical
    males who do not communicate to reach connection and understanding, but
    communicate to establish hierarchy (in their case usually dominance).
    In essence, they say they don't need to understand the other side, they
    already understand the other side, the evil empire of feminism.  So
    when female voices speak up, the masculinazis, with total lack of 
    decorum and common human courtesy, curse them and tell them to leave.
    And when men who have tried to achieve some understanding of the "other
    side" speak up, they too are rounded up and summarily executed as
    traitors.
    
    "Whenever the men here try and sort through their feelings
        you and some others love to point out what slugs we are. "
    
    Greg is a man trying to sort through his feelings, and so am I.  Yet 
    every time we speak, you trash us.  You in no way represent all men.
    Nor do you represent the ideal to which all men should aspire.  Nor
    are you the keeper of the torch of masculinity.  So why become
    defensive, offensive, unmannerly, foul-mouthed, and unpleasant just 
    because someone puts forward the possibility that men have usually
    been in the wrong?  I don't agree with that either, but it did not make
    me angry, nor did it cause me to abdicate the civility my father taught 
    me.
    					- Vick

.107> I believe, unfortunately, that being male DOES inherently provide
.107> advantages.

Just gotta' reapond to this ....

I was talking to my oldest daughter while I was scanning through notes
... read her this one ... asked her if I had any "inherent" advantages.

	"Daddy, as far as I'm concerned, God gave you one
	and only one advantage ...

				   you can stand up to pee!"

Now ... anyone want to argue with my daughter?  Go for it!

Bubba

This reply may make things worse but here goes:

When a woman says:  "You never express your feelings.  You never tell me
you love me.  I want you to express yourself like I do."  Many men get
defensive just like the men in this notes conference.  They see these types
of statements as absurd and they don't know how to respond so they get
angry.  What I have found is that few women really understand what they are
asking when they ask a man whose style of expression is non-verbal to be
verbal.  What they feel is a very simple thing to do is based on their
lifetime of being female where they were rewarded for expressing themselves
this way.  Whereas a male would be punished for expressing themselves as a
female would.  There are a lot of reasons that many men don't have the same
style as women.  To change one's style suddenly is no easy task.

Most women I've known have expressed in one way or another that they would
like the men in their life to be more verbal about their feelings.  What I
haven't heard from them is HOW.  If I want my 16 year old daughter to be
able to ski double black diamonds with me I don't start by saying "You
never ski with me.  You need to be just like me." and then take her to the
top of of butt kicking bowl and push her off. . .   I coach her after
getting her agreement that she wants to do this.  I don't hear women saying
"Look, I know this is hard for you.  I know that your entire life to this
point has not taught you how to do this.  I will be your coach if you want
to take this tremendous risk and I won't desert you when you get in
trouble."  What I do hear is "Would it KILL you to tell me you love you
more often?"

If you want to change this type of behavior you'll have to give a guy some
sort of reason to change because it's not like most guys are withholding
their feelings just to piss you off.

patrick

    RE: .115
    
    Patrick,
    
    I can speak only from the experience of my relationship with the woman
    that I was married to ... but it sounds as if you know her.  You hit
    the nail PRECISELY on the head!!!!!
    
    Bubba
    
    PS - As I said earlier ... it was only *after* the divorce that she
         "changed her tune", so to speak.

re 706.95

<While I have no idea what I said that gained your respect ...>

    c.f 906.115

>>    re .115
    
>>  Patrick,
>>  I really like your note.  Now, I have said exactly that to a man I
>>  know.  He went bug-eyed with fear and the conversation stopped
>>  immediately.  I was left wondering what I said that was so wrong and
>>  then realized that he didn't know WHAT to do with it.  It really scared
>>  the bejesus outta him.  So what's the next step?  :-)
    
>>  Karen

Karen,
Without knowing this man or you the next step would be difficult but my
guess is:

1.  Ask yourself why it's important to you.  Be honest.  Tell him.

2.  Ask yourself how it would benefit him if he changed his behavior.  Be
honest.  Tell him.

If one is involved in an activity of any kind that they think someone else
would benefit in, they first have to 'sell' the other person on the
benefits of that activity.  If that person doesn't see any reason to change
then you've reached an impasse.  "Change because it will be better for
you." isn't enough.

patrick

    Karen,

I'm sure all these discussions have pegged both of your stress meters -
sorry!

If he looks at all this and doesn't see that the effort he will have to put
forth is worth what he will get in return, you should back off.  If he
doesn't understand what he can expect to get out of it personally then
maybe you can try to explain it in a different way.  I am curious what
benefits you tell him he can expect.

patrick

    Vick and others,


    		One last response to the feminine tirade. This is MENNOTES
    not WOMENNOTES. This conference is about male interests. It certainly
    does not preclude women but it is not about them. Please cut the name
    calling or I will respond in kind. I am a kind and, for the most part,
    gentle person but I identify with males not females. I love females
    but I don't want to be one and I do not want to act like one. I like
    the difference not your generic approach.




    			HAND
    			Wayne

    Wayne,  I like the difference too.  Hell, I love the difference!
    That's why when women come here and express their feelings and ideas
    about men I don't call them names and tell them to leave.  As for
    name calling - the only name I called you in my last note was
    a "masculinazi".  Kind of a silly term, but I just get so tired of
    your calling me a "feminazi".  I am no such thing.  Wayne you say
    you are a kind person, but for anyone to believe you you have to 
    ACT kindly to people.  And you are not kind to the women who come
    into this conference if they disagree with you.  You are mean, rude,
    and insensitive.  The fact that this conference is not about women
    doesn't mean that women are not allowed to express their opinions about
    men in this conference.  THEY ARE, THEY ARE, THEY ARE.  They are
    welcome to come here and express their opinions that differ from yours
    or mine.  Try to get used to that fact.  How many times do the moderators 
    have to tell you that that is the case?  When Suzanne says the some of
    the statements in the "confused" topic are preposterous, she is dealing
    with a men's issue in the MENNOTES conference.  She is not dealing with
    a women's issue.  So her opinion is welcome and appropriate to the
    conference.  This conference is not a men's support group (we had a 
    topic dealing with that and the vote, including my own negative, was 
    overwhelming that this conference is not a men's support group).  So we do 
    not expect everyone who participates in this conference to be positive 
    about all things masculine.  
    
    And one more thing you should note Wayne is that as much as I disagree
    with some of your positions and certainly with your attempts at
    silencing dissent from your views, I've never suggested that you "go
    away".  In fact, when you came back after leaving for awhile, I
    welcomed you back.  
    							- Vick

>>.103> "enlighten us all as to what the "feminist party line" is.
>>
>>Notes> OPEN/NONOTEBOOK IKE22::WOMANNOTES-V4
    
.105> To put it eloquently, BULLSHIT!

From WOMANNOTES-V4:

                           Topics of Interest to Women
Created: 11-OCT-1991 14:52         188 topics         Updated: 31-DEC-1991 18:58

 Topic  Author               Date         Repl  Title
    36   ULTRA::ZURKO        11-OCT-1991    24  Feminist Humor - *READ AT YOUR
    43   ULTRA::ZURKO        11-OCT-1991    30  Feminism and the Feminist Agenda
>  157   CSC32::S_HALL       10-DEC-1991    20  An analysis of Feminist thought

I thought about looking in various conferences, like ETHERNET, SALES_TRAINING,
etc... for feminist party line, thought, humor, etc ... but .. just for the heck
of it decided to try, on an offbeat chance, WOMANNOTES.  Lookie what I found!

Your mileage may vary.

Bubba

    Well, the third note in that directory you listed was written by
    a male, and, from what I've seen, not one who would consider himself
    a feminist.
    
    So, is the "masculinist party line" found in MENNOTES?
    
    				Steve

    .125> So, is the "masculinist party line" found in MENNOTES?
    
    Notes>OPEN/NONOTEBOOK SNOWY::$DISK1:[HEDRICK]TEXAS
    
    :-)
    Bubba

    Vick,

    		You are missing my point. I am here to deal with men's
    issues not women's issues. 

    		Suzanne is not here to learn about men, she is here to keep
    us in line, I know it and so do other men here. I am not insensitive
    about women's issues, but there is a conference about those issues.
    This conference is about men's issues. 

    		I am very capable of saying incredible things, and I will
    explain if asked, but if attacked I will respond in kind. After all I
    am a man.


    			HAND
    			Wayne

    It is not required that women who participate here have the agenda
    to "learn about men".  It is sufficient that they wish to discuss
    topics pertaining to men.
    
    Wayne, if you have a personal battle with someone, please keep it
    out of this notes conference.
    
    			Steve

    Steve,


    		Show me the battle I am having. I was answering Vick's
    questions. Could it be you and others would be more comfortable if I
    weren't here. If that is the case please rethink. I have as much right
    here as anyone and I can voice my opinion. I won't be as nasty as some
    here because I don't have protection, but I will state what I think and
    feel.


    			HAND
    			Wayne

    When I have tried to open my mouth in the V4 version of Womennotes I
    have been insulted and I have seen clear evidence of a pro-censorship
    "list" in their membership, so I tend to be sympathetic to Wayne.

    	Geez, sometimes I'm sympathetic to Wayne too.

    	Brian,

    		Please explain "pro-enslavement contingent". You have
    piqued my curiosity.


    			HAND
    			Wayne

    RE -1
    IF YOU CAN'T EVEN SPELL IT I GUESS YOU'VE NEVER EVEN TRIED IT, RIGHT?
    

    RE: .127  Wayne
    
    > I am very capable of saying incredible things, and I will
    > explain if asked, but if attacked I will respond in kind. After all 
    > I am a man.
    
    We have the same capabilities (at least) in this, and I respond when
    I'm attacked, too.
    
    After all, I am a woman.

    As mentioned in topic 709.*...
    
    ... I'll happily bow out of Mennotes now.  I don't wish to create
    a disturbance here by debating my views (and God only knows that I do
    have strong political views about a number of subjects.)
    
    Take care, all.

    
    you really think you're capable of causing a disturbance, eh Suzzaane? 

    Hey guys:
    
    Let it be (please!)
    
    
    				herb
    in fact, I urge you to delete those entries (just in case)
    				h
    

RE:  Note 706.135 GORE::CONLON 


>    After all, I am a woman.

That says it all.... or nothing.

    re:. 130
    
    I agree, and that has been that way for years.
    
    However, that is no reason to expect women who note here to be 
    subjected to the same censorship, hassles and exclusionary rules
    (eg: For Women Only notes) as men who note there.

    
    
    ...800  unseens, after  a  week of vacation  and  two weeks of "revenue
    generating".
    
    Those of  "you"  who think WOMANNOTES is ONLY the forum for the
    "feminazi's" haven't, in my opinion,  really  READ the conference.  The
    opinions expressed there are  just as  diverse as  those  expressed in
    this   conference.   Perhaps  a  reality check  is in order,  perhaps.
    
    GJD

    
    >>It's just that they seem to shout the loudest and longest.
    
       Kind of like some of the more vocal members of this conference who
    are on the "right" side of things "politically" and "male-wise", huh?
    
    	GJD

    
    yep, they be the evyl rightwing whytemyn ..

    hmm,
    
    i dunno, my workstation has very quiet key clicks. they don't shout,
    and they're not shrill either.
    
    

    Well I'll have to admit I haven't been in this file in a while and am
    just catching up on it. For the life of me I can't see the connection
    between the last 30 replies to this note and the note's title. Maybe I
    missed something but this is one of the reasons it has "BEEN A WHILE"
    since I was in this notes file.
    Harvey
    

    <can't see the connection between the last 30 replies to this note and
    <the note's title
    
    if one views each topic unto itself then i don't see a connection either
    
    if one views each topic as another potential skirmish in the battle
    being waged here over and over (and over) then the apparent irrelevance
    of some entries becomes explainable as something other than irrelevance.
    
    
    				herb

    RE: 706.147
    Harvey,

         I agree with your observation. As author of the base note I was
    hopeful that it would lead to a much more serious discussion on the
    dynamics of male/female relationships. There were some good inputs.
    Unfortunately, like many other topics in MENNOTES, the subject started 
    down the rathole after a couple of entries leading to the all too
    common attack, defense, and counterattack entries that end up having
    nothing to to with the topic. It's the main reason I've gone from
    being an occasional contributor to (mostly) read only, to read only
    only once in a while. NEXT UNSEEN gets used in MENNOTES, WOMANNOTES
    and HUMAN_RELATIONS more than any of the other conferences I follow
    because of ratholing.    :-(

    Rick