| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 388.2 | | APEHUB::STHILAIRE | She's no feminist | Fri Jul 10 1987 16:41 | 5 |
| Re .0, no, the problem is not that women are not spontaneous enough,
but rather that men are not dependable enough.
Lorna
|
| 388.3 | | BANDIT::MARSHALL | hunting the snark | Fri Jul 10 1987 17:09 | 15 |
| re .0:
I have heard that most often it is the MAN who is most hurt by
the breakup of a long term relationship. That while men may like
to believe in the macho fantasy of love-em-and-leave-em, that they
are actually much more dependant and clingy than women are.
As for spontenaity, I've never noticed any difference between the
sexes in that regard.
/
( ___
) ///
/
|
| 388.4 | an example | BANDIT::MARSHALL | hunting the snark | Fri Jul 10 1987 17:11 | 10 |
| re .2:
That's a cheap shot. And an example of why people think you are
a "man-hater".
/
( ___
) ///
/
|
| 388.5 | some truth to this one.... | NOVA::RANDALL | I'm no lady | Fri Jul 10 1987 17:19 | 21 |
| I can't speak for any other women, but for myself --
When I'm in charge of a party or inviting more than one or two very
close friends over, I get scared when I don't have any plans. I feel
like there are so many things that could go wrong that I won't be able
to handle, so if I plan for any eventuality, maybe I have a chance.
I write up detailed shopping memos, I plan out the cooking schedule,
I go totally nonlinear.
I suppose in part it's because I don't really think I can handle the
consequences of having a potlock at which 20 people show up with
desserts and nobody brings a main dish.
Note that this only happens to me in relation to social events, which
are supposedly women's strong suit (hah, so much for socialization; I
was 18 before I learned that men are "supposed" to open doors for
women). In DEC-work or my own work, or with my children, I feel
perfectly capable of handling whatever comes up on a more flexible
basis, without planning every eventuality.
--bonnie
|
| 388.7 | two kinds of planning | NOVA::RANDALL | I'm no lady | Fri Jul 10 1987 17:34 | 36 |
| re: .6 --
But you're also talking about two different kinds of planning, bob.
One is the intelligent kind of planning that gets you to goals -- if
you want to be, shall we say, the best architect in America, you aren't
going to get it spontenously; you have to go out and get a degree in
architecture, experience with other top architects, the qualificiations
to get yourself into a top firm, etc.
The other is the over-planning of every detail, and the unwillingness
to change, that I assume Kerry is talking about. You decide on
something that you want to do at X date in the future, and then you do
it just because it's planned -- sometimes you can't bear to admit you
were wrong, you don't want to see all that work wasted, you're just
used to thinking of it so you do it from habit, any of a million
reasons -- no matter how much the circumstances have changed.
The two don't have anything to do with each other. Many people are
overplanners in one aspect of their lives and perfectly reasonable in
other aspects of their lives.
As I suggested in my previous note, uncertainty is probably a big
component of it. You compensate for your fear by trying to control
everything you're afraid of. Pure speculation here, but I'll bet
your previous wife was afraid that if you did what you wanted to
do, she'd lose control of you and then lose you.
It doesn't work, though. All control does is make the person being
controlled struggle for freedom . . .
I am rambling here . . . it must be Friday afternoon.
Hey, I've got an idea. Let's have a PARTY!
--bonnie
|
| 388.8 | :-) | ULTRA::GUGEL | Spring is for rock-climbing | Fri Jul 10 1987 18:35 | 10 |
| re .4:
*I* didn't get the impression that Lorna's a "man-hater" (whatever
*that* means!) from that one comment, maybe just a bit forgetful of
the :-).
(Is that what you meant, Lorna, or am I putting words on your terminal
screen?)
-Ellen
|
| 388.9 | Base note for later if the need arises... | TORA::KLEINBERGER | MAXCIMize your efforts | Fri Jul 10 1987 23:29 | 27 |
|
<<< RAINBO::$2$DUA11:[NOTES$LIBRARY]WOMANNOTES.NOTE;1 >>>
-< Topics of Interest to Women >-
================================================================================
Note 388.0 spontaniety 8 replies
CEODEV::FAULKNER "and those who can't note" 19 lines 10-JUL-1987 15:04
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does it hurt women more when a long term relationship breaks up
because women tend to be much more socially oriented than men are.
What is being said here is, women plan their social lives way in
advance of the current time sphere, wether it be a month or a year
most guys I know might make a long rang goal for a business trip
or perhaps a vacation....but for day to day stuff they tend to go
with the flow.
Are women propping themselves up for a big fall by saying well next
year me an my S(insert barf here)O and I are going to Madrid.
I have seen many of these types of remarks made here followed by
a, well i can't believe it but my S(ibh)O and I are now parted and
I have this agenda, and noone to go with.
perhaps women aren't spontaneous enough.
Look at the party over-planning as an example.
|
| 388.10 | SO what | 38082::CHABOT | May these events not involve Thy servant | Mon Jul 13 1987 19:06 | 21 |
| re .4
I agree with .8 ... Furthermore, if .2 can be taken as grounds for
accusal of man-hating, than surely .0 can be for woman-hating. Has anybody
done that?
Madrid sounds like fun ... but the day to day flow of taking my
car to my mechanic might eat into my budget. At least I can leave
both of them in MA, which makes planning or _especially_ not-planning
easier.
I had a roommate (male) who refused to do *anything* without three
days notice. We (a female friend and I) thought this a bit
inflexible, especially considering the unpredictability of New England
weather (so that it's hard to know three days in advance if the
weather will be fine for the beach). Not to mention,
"Let's go out for ice cream."
However, I didn't hate him.
The party was wonderful except that someone brought too many friendly
mosquitos to go around.
|
| 388.11 | | BANDIT::MARSHALL | hunting the snark | Tue Jul 14 1987 10:18 | 26 |
| re .10:
> Furthermore, if .2 can be taken as grounds for
> accusal of man-hating, than surely .0 can be for woman-hating.
> Has anybody done that?
Not yet, but thanks for reminding me. If I were to try to "prove"
that Kerry is a woman-hater, 388.0 would certainly be in the stack
of "evidence".
Now...
Lorna,
I had just read a note of yours wondering why people think
you are a "man-hater". All I was saying was that it is comments
like .2 that may be giving some people that impression. I do not
believe that you are, nor am I accusing you of being one. Sarcasm
is hard to convey in NOTES (those gawdawful smileys just don't do
it).
/
( ___
) ///
/
|
| 388.12 | Talk about it... | SONATA::HICKOX | Stow Vice | Fri Jul 17 1987 20:52 | 30 |
|
I think I and a lot of other people have said this over and over
again and it doesn't seem to stick.
It also appears we have multiple topics in this note.
C O M M U N I C A T I O N
If one person feels another person needs to plan more or less
they should discuss this between each other, not complain about
it.
As far as who gets hurt more, that depends on the way each and
every person communicated with their SO. If there was good
communication, perhaps there wouldn't have been a break-up or
at least things would have been discussed so much that it may
have been easier to part company.
Its seems that when one person holds back on the other and
a break-up occurs, then the unknowing person is hurt.
Let's start and keep our relationships through good
communication (I know it isn't easy for everyone, sometimes its
easier to chuck it, rather than discuss it).
Mark
|