[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference turris::womannotes-v1

Title:ARCHIVE-- Topics of Interest to Women, Volume 1 --ARCHIVE
Notice:V1 is closed. TURRIS::WOMANNOTES-V5 is open.
Moderator:REGENT::BROOMHEAD
Created:Thu Jan 30 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 30 1995
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:873
Total number of notes:22329

89.0. "Closeness and Distance" by ULTRA::ZURKO (Security is not pretty) Mon Sep 22 1986 12:50

    The first reply to this note is the last mail message from a discussion
    I had with a colleague.  It started when I mentioned to her that my SO
    and I seemed pretty busy lately (read always).  That suits me fine, but
    my SO has a much slower style than I do.  This usually leads up to the
    point where either he goes somewhere with me because we're already
    committed, or he bows out, but seems to feel a little badly about it.
    It's OK with me if he bows out.  Since I'm usually the one who did the
    committing, I feel I'm the only one that's "got" to go.  He just has
    the "opportunity" to go.  But there's still some residual uckyness if
    he stayed home: I wasn't there, which has got to be OK with him because
    he's a saint (as Don S would say :-)), but still, there's so much to do
    around the house (new home owners), and he does enjoy my company.  I'm
    not looking for advice on this one (but if you've got to get it out, go
    to it).  I was just amused and heartened that others had stumbled
    through the same stuff.  It made me feel less of a freak.  I guess
    that's why Shakespeare is still popular today; the shared human
    condition. 
    	Mez 
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
89.1A more scholarly viewULTRA::ZURKOSecurity is not prettyMon Sep 22 1986 12:5246
He he he.  There is a wonderful discussion of this phenomenon in that
book I recommended to you, _Goddesses in Every Woman_.  The author
says that it's most noticable in children, but says that men do it as
well.  And what she says about it is this:

There are two major states of consiousness that we cultivate, a relational
one that is diffuse and unfocused (because we are being receptive to another
person) and a "working" one that is focused and shuts everything out but 
the task at hand.  She said that when her children were small, she could
do chores, knitting, etc., all activities that did not require much mental
focusing, and her children would happily play by themselves.  But as soon
as she decided to take advantage of their preoccupation to read a professional
journal, or write up a case history or something, within 5 minutes little
feet would come looking for her.  She believes somewhat in ESP between
those we are close to, in that they are capable of picking on the tiniest
of cues that signal our mental state.

So what does this mean?  To me it means that men, poor dears, have been
kept children by being "babied" in relationships too much.  Women have been
kept children in worldly matters; men have been kept children in "homely"
matters, and one of the nice things about a real marriage is that you really
can use it to grow out of your childhood.  This happens gradually; at first,
both partners seem to want to be "babied" in whatever fashion constitutes
babying for them.  I did my own version of this, as well as Dave.  He wanted
me to be like a mother listening for her children (which he never got much
of from his mother) and I wanted him to take care of all the practical
details of our life (and resented it terribly when I had to be the one to
make out checks for bills, and other such stuff).  The scene began to
change when Dave had his hideous job in Process Mfg, and the practical
details of our life that he was so meticulous about began to fall apart.
I woke up and said to myself, "You know, Self, it's about time you grew
up.  Started pulling your own weight, and all that."  And after I began
actively working at the practical aspects of life, I then felt free to
harass Butch about this forced relational state of consciousness.  And it
all worked out fine.

Now, none of this took place, we being the people we are, with dish-throwing,
screaming and swearing.  (Neither of us can stand that decibel level of
living.)  It was evolutionary.  Rather slow.  It's only looking back that
I can see how we've evloved.

Marcia

PS.  You can put this in WOMANOTES if you want.
    
89.2Clear as mud...RSTS32::TABERIf you can't bite, don't bark!Mon Sep 22 1986 14:0814
I'm going to admit an obtusity (a Taber-word) here that I don't understand
how .1 relates to .0, or vice versa....

MEZ, can you fill in the spots a little???

I, too, have issues with my husband where if I make plans and he doesn't
want to go when they happen, there is guilt over staying home and
unclear issues in which I don't understand where *I* stand and where
*he* stands and I usually just interpret it as difficulty on his
part....  definitely an issue in our family that I could use help with!

Bugsy

89.3Here's the middleULTRA::ZURKOSecurity is not prettyMon Sep 22 1986 14:4623
I guess I just gave the beginning and the end of the conversation, and left
out the middle.  Just trying to get a handle on the problem, I began thinking
about other relationships I know about.  Unfortunately, most of those are
in small-home-town, and I definately don't want to emulate them.  Even though
my SO is trying to be open-minded, and live-and-let-live about who goes
where when, the feeling I get is the same as when I see husbands in my home
town demand that their wives be home *when they are home*.  This makes
retirement something truly to be dreaded.  These same fathers demand that
their children be home when they are home, until they can't demand it anymore.
Usually it's under the guise of "keeping the family together".  

Marcia also talked a little about how her SO would sort of wander after
when she had left the room because they weren't interacting.  I get that
feeling too; even when I'm not talking to my SO, its a real pleasure to
be around him when, for instance, we're both reading (or, as much as I hate
to admit it, watching the tube).

So, the book _Goddesses_in_Every_Woman_ talks about this need in people
to be around the people we care for, and for them to be receptive, even
though there's no immediate or "logical" need for that closeness.

Does that help?
	Mez
89.4It works the other way tooULTRA::GUGELJust a gutsy lady...Mon Sep 22 1986 16:1117
re .3
>...the feeling I get is the same as when I see husbands in my home
>town demand that their wives be home *when they are home*... Usually
>it's under the guise of "keeping the family together".  

    I've seen this occur much more often in the opposite way.  The female
    SO demands that her male partner stay home and not do the things
    he likes to do.  Two friends of mine are going through it now. 
    Tim has taken up scuba diving and wants to dive one day each weekend.
    Joni (as far as I can tell) likes to stay home and watch TV and
    wishes Tim would stay home and do the same, the way he used to do
    before he got to be a somewhat more interesting person.  It'll be
    interesting to see how/if they resolve it.  I saw another marriage
    breakup over the same thing (only the sport was different).
   
	-Ellen G.
        
89.5Make agreements ahead of timeHBO::HENDRICKSHolly HendricksMon Sep 22 1986 17:0645
    One technique I have observed to work around going out and whether
    one person goes or both go is to make some clear agreements AHEAD
    OF TIME.
    
    One of the following situations is usually the case:
    
    1. I don't want to make the commitment unless you (the SO) agree
    to go, too.  I'd rather not go than go alone. <--has to be said without
    guilt for this to work!
    
    2. I want to go, and I'll make the commitment, and you can join
    in if you like when the time comes.
             
    3. I need to make a definite commitment as to the number of people
    from our family who will be attending, so you need to choose now
    whether you will go or not.
                           
    4. Neither one of us is sure exactly what we will want to do when
    the time comes, so let's try to leave it open, and check in with
    the other people involved closer to the event. 
               
    5. I'm not willing to make a definite commitment, but if you'd like
    to say you will attend, I'll join you if that's OK.
    
    6. I don't want to do that, but it sounds like you really do.  It
    also sounds like you wouldn't feel very comfortable unless I was
    with you.  Let's discuss this further and see if we can come up
    with a compromise.
          
    7. etc, etc...but these are the basic scenarios in my life...
    
    I find that making clear agreements *ahead of time* makes a huge
    difference for me.  I hate last minute surprises (someone letting
    me down) but can usually handle things quite well if I know the
    score from the beginning.  The ground rules here are that you have
    to be honest about what you want from the beginning, and if you
    agree to attend something, you follow through unless you are extremely
    ill.  (Btw, those ground rules work pretty well for me in lots of
    other situations!)
    
    Hope this helps.  I'll be interested to hear what *my* SO thinks about
    what I've written here when I get home tonight! :-)
                                                       
    
    Holly