Men and Gift Giving 101
"If you want to know why men are skiddish about giving women presents, read this article," my husband said as he dropped the Allure magazine on the bed open to an article entitled, "Getting the Goods." Okay, I know, I should quit harping on and paying attention to these women's magazines, but seriously, what kind of trash is it to put an article in a magazine telling women how to "work the system" to get furs, jewels, and airplane tickets from the man in their life?
I glanced at the article, thinking that maybe there was something redeeming there, you know, where the woman finally learned to accept her husband, boyfriend, etc. for who he was or was finally glad that her guy wanted to give her a gift of some type, but no such luck. Instead, I learned that if your guy gives you a gaudy necklace worth $1200.00, it is fair game to scream at him in the heat of an argument, "It's obvious you don't know a single thing about me if you give me something that hideous." The guy gives the necklace to his mother, so you would think the woman would learn to be more tactful but no, the lesson from this anecdote, according to the magazine is, "Never let a man buy you jewelry, pick it out yourself." There are some rules and crummy advice for women to follow to see that their man gets them the best of everything, regardless of what it does to their relationship:
The husband refuses and the woman says she wants nothing, but naturally later he coughs up the diamonds. "He should have known better than to challenge me," this woman says, "because when he proposed, we were on the beach at night--and I didn't want to say yes until I took the diamond ring into the light to check it out." So much for the notion that women are "nurturing and caring."
And this poor sucker married her anyway? I guess he got what he deserved--but I wonder how much smouldering resentment this man must feel towards a woman who would use him in this way. Or maybe it's a turn-on. Whatever, but I can't help but feel that articles like this that are read by young women across the country are feeding a sense of entitlement in young women and harming, rather than helping equality and good relations between the sexes.
I glanced at the article, thinking that maybe there was something redeeming there, you know, where the woman finally learned to accept her husband, boyfriend, etc. for who he was or was finally glad that her guy wanted to give her a gift of some type, but no such luck. Instead, I learned that if your guy gives you a gaudy necklace worth $1200.00, it is fair game to scream at him in the heat of an argument, "It's obvious you don't know a single thing about me if you give me something that hideous." The guy gives the necklace to his mother, so you would think the woman would learn to be more tactful but no, the lesson from this anecdote, according to the magazine is, "Never let a man buy you jewelry, pick it out yourself." There are some rules and crummy advice for women to follow to see that their man gets them the best of everything, regardless of what it does to their relationship:
"Successful gift-getting also demands something deeper and more complicated than mere timing. A certainty about who you, the deserving recepient, are, and what you desire. A firmness of resolve. And--yes--even the ability to walk away from somethng (or someone) valuable. When an acquaintance was asked by her happy husband what she wanted as a gift after the birth of their daughter, she didn't hesitate" 'a pair of diamond baguettes to add to my engagement ring.'"
The husband refuses and the woman says she wants nothing, but naturally later he coughs up the diamonds. "He should have known better than to challenge me," this woman says, "because when he proposed, we were on the beach at night--and I didn't want to say yes until I took the diamond ring into the light to check it out." So much for the notion that women are "nurturing and caring."
And this poor sucker married her anyway? I guess he got what he deserved--but I wonder how much smouldering resentment this man must feel towards a woman who would use him in this way. Or maybe it's a turn-on. Whatever, but I can't help but feel that articles like this that are read by young women across the country are feeding a sense of entitlement in young women and harming, rather than helping equality and good relations between the sexes.
posted by Helen at 9:00 AM
56 Comments:
Sounds like a sure-fire way to unhappiness to me. I would be crushed if hubby rejected a gift with an argument instead of thanks.
I wonder what these women give to the men? Something to "improve" them, no doubt (as opposed to say sports tickets).
Never let a man buy you jewelry, pick it out yourself
So, she's going leave picking out gifts to his warped opinion? Look who he picked for a wife!*
*with apologies to Morey Amsterdam
I have a feeling that most of those relationships don't last - having been in when when I was young myself.
And we all know that the older a woman gets the harder it is to get into a relationship, maybe these women are paying the higher price.
"And this poor sucker married her anyway? I guess he got what he deserved...". Personally, I've never been happy with that line. Does he deserve the mistreatment this woman hands out simply because he gets in the way of it? As this article amply demonstrates, women are encouraged to misbehave, but men are also conditioned to accept it. I wouldn't say the former was right nor the latter deserved.
Personally, I'm not sure why men continue to accept it. I wouldn't. But then again, I have no problem being single. Many men apparently do.
I can't help but feel that articles like this that are read by young women across the country are feeding a sense of entitlement in young women and harming, rather than helping equality and good relations between the sexes.
The influence isn't a good one, but pop-culture advice like this will probably only affect those young women who are inclined to value style and ephemera more highly than substance and commitment. Women who snicker at this stuff do exist, and for that I am thankful.
I wonder, sometimes, if those articles are written to be so over the top so that decent and caring women can laugh and say "...at least I'm not THAT shallow!"
Don't get me wrong: I'm sure that there are many women who say awful things and do awful things. Men, too. That is why a great spouse is so valuable.
My wife doesn't care for jewelry. But I wanted to do something special for her, anyway. So I gambled. Our wedding bands were handmade, and I had the goldsmith make a smaller band, set with two small diamonds and a small sapphire. It didn't cost THAT much money, friends---the stones weren't large, and the band is actually pretty modest. I just wanted it to match the wedding band.
Anyway, I told my wife that the diamonds were for our two sons, and the sapphire because it reminded me of the color of her eyes. Sounds sappy, but I meant it.
She sure does love it.
Buying gifts IS hard. I once heard that the Japanese have a ritual about this: never to open a gift in front of the giver.
Anyway, women's and men's magazines are really tawdry, in my opinion. So I am surprised by the tenor of that ALLURE article.
Thanks for listening.
I bet a big percentage of young women would recoil at an article like this. Do you thnk regional culture makes a difernece? Does the Southern Belle business favor this kind of high maintenance bitch behavior perhaps?
Lots of teenage girls opt completely out of this whole game. tehy slump around in sweatshirts through thier teenage years and can't wait for it to be over. And that's a shame; they should be able to enjoy those years without having to look like a coochie mamam in a rap video. But that option is not really open.
Some blame does go to a man who falls for this kind for a gold digger, or to whoever taught him what to expect from a woman. Why is it so surprising that a whore is going to actlike a whore? And it makes it all that much harder for decent men and decent women who are not manipulative users.
I think articles in these "women's" magazines are just written by fluffy freelance writers, with no real credentials in anything, who need to sell an article. If it startles, it sells. My idea of a women's magazine is Discover. I don't even know what to think of women who read crap like Allure, or Cosmopolitan, or Family Circle.
Regional differences are at least as important as any other.
Here in the bowels of the land of "Sex In The City" I find that single women as a category are the most gamey, infuriating, self-important, emotionally reckless people around; people who'll read that article, cheer outloud on the subway and take notes.
I'd love to be wrong, I really would. It's no fun being single. But I've no evidence to suggest the exceptions exist in more than trace quantities.
Most of the women I know would prefer an iPod to more bling. Which is nice because we have something in common, making it easier to pick out gifts.
That said, when I *do* offer them shiny trinkets instead of gadgets it seems to mean much more than it would to the greedy scumbags mentioned in this article.
Well, ahem . . . since I'm not a psychologist, I wouldnt know, but isnt it possible that some women reject gifts because they dont believe they deserve something so nice? They find it easier to be nasty to the gift giver than to examine their own feelings of un-worthiness.
"Regional differences are at least as important as any other.
Here in the bowels of the land of "Sex In The City" I find that single women as a category are the most gamey, infuriating, self-important, emotionally reckless people around; "
That does fit the stereotype of New Yorkers rahter than of women.
I think regioanl differneces were part of the communications disconnect we were having in that thread a while ago about the women who took a baseball bat to a gy who grabbed her butt. The New York area is populated by a lot people with a Mediterranean cultural background, in amongst everyone else, and that culture seems dominant there. But the find themseles in a larger culture that is Western European and mostly Celtic. The grammar of these cultures concerning gender issues are fundamentally different. People think they are talking to each other, because we are all Americans, right, so we all have the same common culture, right - but instead we talk past each other. there was a lot of that in that thread.
What's funny is that a lot of women are materialistic, but they seem to have this default attraction to socialism, redistibutionalism, and collectivism as economic systems. Some that eventually learn something about economics get away from this, but those that don't know much about economics tend to default towards socialism - I guess because it sounds "fair" and like it "cares" for the poor.(Even though it doesn't.)
Its just ironic that people that are that materialistic are attracted to economic systems that are recipes for making everyone poorer and try to exercise totalitarian control over everyone. (Although the pathological control over people and violation of their rights does fit.)
To anon8:27
Women tend toward socialism, redistributionism, and collectivism only when it's SOMEONE ELSE's money they're giving away.
Well, for the most part...
Rusty
a lot of women "modern" women, only look upon men as walking wallets. i know from experience about 5 "southern" belles who are nothing but gold diggers and they use their kids as bargainning tools. a lot of women look down upon men, as the phrase they religiously spout, a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle. thats the attitude, they dont need men, they want his money.. just not him. and this attitude is world wide
Cadmus,
The South is basically a warrior society, or at least that is the underlying culture, like all cultures with an ultimately Celtic base. Strabo said "The whole race is madly fond of war" and nothing has changed in 2,300 years.
Warrior societies have to develop some way to socialize men into charging off to war. The essential requirement is to get men to so undervalue their lives that they will risk them over nothing. A cult of honor will do. This involves acult of macho miminization of any suffering a man might experience, and also requires some precious object to defend, to justify all this. Idolizing women as treasures to be protected will do nicely. This has side beneifts, because it provides a pretext for keeping the lower orders down, by targeted lynchings if necessary.
Now, for the method: how do you socialize boys into seeing themselves as completely expendable? By diorecting a steady stream of indoctrination at them from birth, that they are dirty, they are naughty, that they are hopeless animals without the civilizing control of a woman. In order to keep them from resisting, you have to hide the fact of women's power. This is another reason to portray women as frail, dainty, and defenseless without a man's protection. Any scrutiny of the situation defeats a man's manhood. The mechanism is perfectly circular.
Many warrior societies have been led by women. Examples are the Iroquois, the Comanches, ancient Sparta. A lot of early Celtic literature lays the system out in great detail. Women have to take charge in these societies, controlling property and child rearing, because the men have are expendable and therefore unavailable. Not only are societies run by women generally warlike, but other socieities where they do not normally exercise power often become more warlike or expansionistic when they do take power. England under E1 and Victoria, India under Indira Gandhi and Israel under Golda Meir are examples. This is not something these women orchestrated; it happens spontaneously under the conditions they arise out of.
My ex brought me flowers that were were 98% dead and being the blunt person that I am, I did state that they were dead. I never got flowers from that man again. New husband brought me flowers that were almost dead and my response was that the flowers were beautiful and thank you so much for the thought. I still get flowers from him. Lesson well learned. Never respond negativly to any gift regardless of what it is cause you just might not ever get a gift of any kind.
FPN,
I think that regardless of sex, we all like to think that our gifts mean something to the person we give them to--even if we bring almost dead flowers.
"...Never let a man buy you jewelry, pick it out yourself..."
But does it say in those articles that in return the woman should let the man choose when and how they are going to have sex?
Of course not , it is ALL about her her her.
Anon824 said,
"...isnt it possible that some women reject gifts because they dont believe they deserve something so nice? They find it easier to be nasty to the gift giver than to examine their own feelings of un-worthiness..."
You mean if a man works overtime for months and months to be able to afford a very expensive gift for his woman and then she cruelly throws it back in his face complaining she does not like it, you think maybe it is because the woman is a victim ?
wow...
Women are never accountable and always victims right?
One man I'd dated for a while was under the impression that I was a gold-digger. (He's a programmer in Boston, and we DO actually have quite a gold-digger culture here). Another man I'd dated (an artist with a pedigree and a trust fund, it must be admitted) was constantly berating me for the fact that I'd sold out (I have a fine arts degree and work in finance). So: have gotten it from both sides. Am currently with someone much older, much better off financially and much more comfortable with his financial status than I am. We have a deal: since I'm younger, in a different economic system, born poor and am working in a "helping field," I contribute to our outing and vacation fund based on what I make. It's hard for me, because I'd like to be truly 50/50, but it's not possible right now. Our gift-giving policy is simple: handmade or found in a thrift-store.
When I see stuff like that that you mentioned in the Allure article, it makes me sick. I've had to fight those sorts of stereotypes for so long; should I have focused my energies elsewhere?
Jim, I find the idea that "warrior cultures" fight because they value passionately (if not particularly rationally) far more plausible and more supported by the writings and statements of those who promote and justify aggression than the idea that they fight because they are convinced of their own lack of value in deference to others' value.
Furthermore, having been born and raised in the South, I have plenty of empirical evidence to contradict your statements, and little to support it.
Lastly, with all due respect, it sounds like the kind of theory that would come out of a modern college in which the term, "value", has no nounal interpretation.
I do have to wonder how the husbands of women discussed were brought up. At risk of sounding a little snobbish, there's certain women you marry, and certain women you don't.
Rizzo said...
Personally, I'm not sure why men continue to accept it. I wouldn't. But then again, I have no problem being single. Many men apparently do.
Because they're mistaken by just what exactly it is that they are accepting. They assume a virtuous woman because she's conned him into believing it, and effortlessly at that. 2nd nature, she even believed it herself. But later they find that nothing could be further from the truth, and so they go on wasting their lives away in emotion, in suffering with a good day or evening here or there.
I have absolutely no problem with being independent either. Most people don't like this fact, but that's just too bad for them. Guys can't admit such a catastrophic error, and women need to use men because magazines etc. tell them they're actually entitled to everything, responsible for nothing, but try as they will:
I've never been "hitched" or "tied down", it just isn't my idea of living. Single and not looking you could say, I've seen enough. It's almost amazing how women can actually do the initiating under certain circumstances.
I do like to figure, roughly, how much better off I am every year because I'm single. Should I buy another vehicle? Nah, not even that turbo Porsche, the need has been met. Take a few months to travel wherever I please? Nah, in the future the stars are the limit. Another home? Nah, future. It's mostly for a laugh. I just end up passing on almost all unnecessary purchases and invest more, again, living well below my means as usual. And it's very enjoyable, no silly games and a fantastic life with an even better future.
It's just another wonderful time of the year.
Funny thing, a guy I used to work with went to a jewelry store with his girlfriend and looked at engagement rings. The salesman asked him how much he'd be willing to spend. My friend responded that he could probably afford about $4000 for a ring. Upon leaving the store the gf looked at him and said "I can't believe that's all you would spend on my engagement ring" and stomped off in a huff.
Lucky for him she left him for another man. Unlucky for him, he had already bought her the engagement ring.
For those wondering "why men continue to accept it", one answer is that we don't have a choice without becoming complete bastards.
Many of us married women who were charming and accepting of our quirks. A few kids later and suddenly we're clueless jerks who can't read minds. We put up with it because we love our kids (and in some cases we love our wives, even if we don't like them.)
So I don't sound too negative, if you persevere and don't become something you're not, some (many?) wives eventually return to accepting you for who you are.
Skiddish? I think that means unable to get traction. The correct word is skittish.
Anyway, my wee wifey not only picks out her jewelry, she pays for it herself. The only jewelry she wears, other that the braided silver wedding ring I made for her in a college art class, is earrings, and including the piercings to wear them in her collection costs no more than $100 per year.
When I got engaged I gave three absolutes;
I wouldn't wear a ring (I don't wear any jewelry; it really does drive me crazy.)
I would buy only one ring for cash for her (we were very poor and barely got by for years.)
I don't buy flowers (there's a senselessness to it that boggles my mind. Despite my anti-flower stance, I have occasionaly bought some, which makes it more fun since it really surprises her. Then I curse myself as I watch them sit in the middle of the table and die, stinking:-))
i buy silk or glass or wooden flowers, one for each year i have been married. i know a lot of women who only see men as money makers, as soon as they have kids, any problems would increase, then if there is a divorce, she gets more. yes i am cynical.
men seem to need more than they say, i know i love my wife without reservation, i need her contact. men appear to not need anyone but in fact i have found men are the ones in need of love more than most women. thats why they stick with women like that at least in my opinion
Friend of USA said...
Anon824 said,
"...isnt it possible that some women reject gifts because they dont believe they deserve something so nice? They find it easier to be nasty to the gift giver than to examine their own feelings of un-worthiness..."
You mean if a man works overtime for months and months to be able to afford a very expensive gift for his woman and then she cruelly throws it back in his face complaining she does not like it, you think maybe it is because the woman is a victim ?
Wow. You have to drink a lot of coffee to read that into what I wrote.
Many of us married women who were charming and accepting of our quirks. A few kids later and suddenly we're clueless jerks who can't read minds. We put up with it because we love our kids (and in some cases we love our wives, even if we don't like them.)
You just described me. I stay with her because I love my kids and want them to have both parents around. I also feel a sense of commitment to my marriage, though I wonder if that would be enough to make me stay if we didn't have kids. I daresay I still love her, though it's been many years since I've seen any evidence the feeling is mutual. I have been sleeping in an easy chair in the basement for several years now. She tells the kids that I snore, which is a dishonest truth.
In fairness to her, it came out after we were married, had a child, and stopped having sex (at her request) that she had been sexually abused by her teenaged older brother when she was six. In light of that, I'm not entirely comfortable with criticizing her for assuming all men are jerks. Certainly I have my faults and they have contributed to the situation. Perhaps a counsellor could find a tactful way of suggesting to her that hers is not a productive attitude, but the psychologist we went to bluntly told me that her attitude was probably incurable, and I could either like it or lump it. And that a real man wouldn't lump it. (Maybe we should have found a different psychologist, but my wife liked this one.)
Gift giving has become weird. She either tells me what to buy or asks for a gift card. She insists that I do the same. The gift/card is not necessarily expensive; in fact, she's thrifty enough that she usually wants less than I would be willing to give. So she's not exactly a gold digger. I think she would just rather I not put any thought into gifts than get the thought wrong.
I do still buy flowers. I pretend they're not for her ("Oh, I just thought it'd be nice to have some flowers around the house") and she pretends she's indifferent to them. I've stopped buying jewelry because she always complains about the cost. (Money is tight right now. I recently took a job that increased my pay by 30%, only to find that the cost of living in the area was 50% higher. She's having a hard time forgiving me for that.) She never liked chocolates.
Bitter? Yah.
Funny thing is, I still love her, even though I rather dislike her. If a better man came along, one she was capable of loving, I'd gladly let him take my place for her sake and my kids'. But what kind of good man would insinuate himself into a family like that? It's not like I could advertise for one.
So I don't sound too negative, if you persevere and don't become something you're not, some (many?) wives eventually return to accepting you for who you are.
No sign of this yet.
Anonymous 11:32:
What you have described sounds very sad indeed. People who are abused get help and are able to relate better as a result much of the time. Abuse is no excuse for a life time of misery. At least on your part; maybe your wife is content this way. Are you?
Wow that sounds like a very silfish immature person. While she isn't responsible for being molested, she is certainly responsible for her failure to seek proper treatment. She is also breaking her wedding vows by not loving and cherishing her husband, instead, she chooses to use her victimhood like a cocoon.
Sad history. Especially the part where she decided to not get help and remain a frightened victim. She could have been a brave survivor or a wise thriver. It happens every day! Brave men and women work through their abuse. Some use a book, some a friend, some a program, some a therapist or minister. What was done to her was not her fault. But how she deals with the trauma is only her responsibility.
Trey
i know people who have been abused my wife for one, but she has never let it stop her from having a life. we sleep together 99% of the time, i suffer from insomnia and its not fair on her for me to wake her up so i go to the spare room. then when my sleep pattern is back to normal we are together again.
How about you refer us to some of that 'early Celtic literature'?
"The oldest extant Irish and Welsh texts date from the sixth century." This was the tail of a 2.7 century history.
The texts date from the sixth century and record literature form much earlier. Tain Bo Cualigne is one example; it was written down in the 6th century, but there are no Christian references in it, nor is any of the worldview Christian. The rest of the Ulster Cycle is like that, as is the Finn McUmhal Cycle, and the Mythological Cycle. The scribes were monks, Christian, but they were the continuation of the learned class which had always been responsible for preserving and expanding the literary tradition.
The Welsh texts such as the Mabinogi are even younger, but are also likewise generally free of Christian elements.
"Led by women" - is my crude way of putting it - kingship passed through femlae lines, as in the one forestry of the Tain, in which Conchobar MacNeasa becomes king because he is Neas's sone. There is other evidence for this in law tracts which record laws from the same period. Royal descent was so often reckoned through the female line that Jesus was typically referred to as "mac Muire" 'the son of Mary', as a royal epithet - "Son of David" was a meaningless irrelevancy in the culture.
The rite of coronation was called the "banfheis rigi" "wife-feast (wedding) of kingship' because kingship was seen as a marriage between the king and the kingdom in the person of the queen, often in the form of a horse (Intricate mythology and mental world). There is a particulary lurid account of one of these coronations in Giraldus Cambrensis.
Back to your point about "This was the tail of a 2.7 century history."
If you mean that some incident occurred in the second century while the texts date from centries later, that is quite true, and also quite common around the world - the Bible, the Vedas, core Chinese texts, all were typically written down centuries after then events they describe. But there are external, independent ways to check the texts; in the Irish tecxst there are referneces to Niall Naoigheallach, a 2nd century king and the supposed ancestors of the O'neills and other tribes, and recently someone did genetic assays on various men with surnames linked to this lineage and found that yes indeed, the lines met back around the second century.
re: golddiggers... You can see them by the score here in Dallas (though the south is NOT the only home of the gold-digger, Houston and Dallas are chock-full of them). And maybe I'm just a cold-hearted bastard, but I love watching other men fall for these women. I used to hang out at the Cafe Brazil near SMU and a couple of the wine bars on lower Greenville and just sit there watching the disasters unfold as each of these sad saps tried desperately to out-cool and out-money the next guy in order to increase the chances of the (intelligent, ruthless operators who would then suddenly turn into smiley flakes the minute the men showed up) going home with him.
"Got what he deserved" is exactly right.
(PS, the new blogger stuff doesn't seem to be playing nicely with Mozilla)
I wonder how much smouldering resentment this man must feel towards a woman who would use him in this way. Or maybe it's a turn-on.
What do these women look like?
I spent hundreds of evenings in my 20s listening to men go on and on about how they bought stuff and did stuff and they STILL weren't good enough for these pretty princesses they were chasing, while they completely refused to consider dating not-so-pretty women who thought they were amazing just how they were.
So my observations lead me to believe there's some sort of turn-on there--whether it's a physical response, or the enhancement of the man's social status when he lands a trophy.
Too bad there's no way to corral all the gold-diggers and trophy-seekers together to find each other!
At least on your part; maybe your wife is content this way. Are you?
Turns out her mother was abused by an older brother. (Almost sounds like a weird family tradition, but most likely just a coincidence.) I like my father-in-law quite a lot; I am correct with my mother-in-law when I am unable to avoid having to deal with her. My father-in-law is flamboyant, fun-loving, hard-working, and the type specimen of the male chauvinist. The combination of a woman who has never resolved a past abuse and a man who believes it's his wife's duty to meet his sexual needs has not made for great chemistry, and my father-in-law is a somewhat bitter man.
I am introspective, have a Ph.D. in one of the physical sciences from a Top Ten graduate school, like to unwind in my own way (hint: usually involves an electronic computer), and in almost every other way am the opposite of my father-in-law. Even though I have unmet sexual needs, the thought of insisting that my wife meet those needs, as a matter of duty, is a bit repulsive to me. Nevertheless, my wife treats me the way her mother treats her father, squared. She's living what she grew up with, and I see no indication that she wants anything in our relationship to change.
I have lost my cool and threatened to leave a few times over the years. She's always called my bluff.
No, I'm not happy with this. I don't see how any red-blooded male could be. But I recognize that I am not entirely blaemeless -- I was a very clumsy husband at the beginning of our marriage -- and I have no illusions that I would have done any better with anyone else. The choice seems to be between coming home to a house with family in it, including an attractive adult woman who is fairly courteous to me most of the time (even if she literally keeps me at arm's length), or coming home to the small, empty apartment that is all I would be able to afford after making the required payments to support children to whom I would largely be a stranger.
Sometimes all the options are poor. But some are clearly poorer than others.
The heck of it is that the brother responsible for the abuse appears to have genuinely changed. (A very rare thing, I'm told, but he was a young teenager at the time he abused my wife, so he wasn't an entirely typical pedophile.) He is a pillar of his community, has a wife and kids and a grandkid, and agreed to meet with my wife and the counsellor to try to resolve things. He even volunteered to pay for some of costs of counselling. I am sufficiently satisfied of his sincerity that I am not terribly uncomfortable around him, and he and my wife are now on reasonable speaking terms,
If she can forgive him, then why can't she forgive me? Or is that the wrong question to ask?
As near as I can tell, she likes men ... to stay several feet away. She likes me best when I stay away from her and take care of the house and kids instead.
There are a couple of other complicating factors, but I've risked giving too much identifying information already.
Thanks for letting me blow off some steam here.
Hello Anon. 7:15 p.m.
Interesting situations like the one you describe seem to pop up all the time among the various people I have encountered. This is one of the main reasons I never married nor do I live with a woman. It's too risky and certainly not worth the headaches.
The overwhelming majority of men I am friends with and know of are either divorced, (and screwed over in divorce court), or are miserable in their marriages. Not for me.
I turned 40 a couple of years ago and when I come home, it's to a nice clean, peaceful house which I can pay off anytime I want. I also do what I want without any queen-b**** causing headaches.
It's pretty easy to get laid in my age group because women start to outnumber men at 35 in the USA, so gettng free sex isn't a problem. (Not that I am really concerned about that very much anymore).
For relationships, I have friends, family and a dog, just not a wife, thank God.
You should have stayed single.
fwiw, happily married for going on 13 years, two kids, frequent sex, and I picked out the engagement ring.
Anonymous 7:15:
Sorry you are going through all of this; I hope you will take care of yourself and find some peace with your marriage in whatever decision you make. Sometimes individual therapy can help with some of these issues--a good therapist can help you answer some of the questions and concerns you have written here today--get a friend you trust to recommend someone they have gone to and been helped by--and who works well with men. If you come to understand what has transpired in your marriage that has brought you to this point, you will be better equipped to make decisions that will improve your life and your future happiness.
You should have stayed single.
Most of the marriages I see are fairly happy. Not perfect, but I think on balance the majority are happier than they would be single.
My own parents had a happy marriage (not without occasional fireworks) and my siblings have done pretty well, so I grew up knowing what a marriage is supposed to be. I can't bring myself to reject marriage as an institution and a setting for raising children.
Having said that, I also am inclined to think that there are those who just shouldn't marry or have children. So maybe you're right.
I'm gonna quit now; I've taken up too much bandwidth already, and I'd be mortified, or worse, if someone close to me chanced upon this and recognized me. (Not terribly likely but you never know.)
One last comment for Helen -- I have a clergyman who is aware of my situation and is quite supportive. I'm not facing this entirely alone.
I was hit by a bus when I was 6.
I'm not kidding I was.
I'm now 47 and I am not afraid of buses, was only afraid of them for a few months then I was ok.
I will sound cold and I'll probably get some women very angry at me, but getting hit by a bus is much less natural than having sex, I'm not saying having sex with you own brother is natural and I'm certainly not aproving of the brother that abuses his 6 year old sister, but sex is natural and can even feel good ( even with the wrong person, some women who have been abused admit it felt good, this is well documented ).
Getting hit by a bus is definitely not natural.
but I got over it,
why can't a woman get over incestuous sex that happened decades ago when she was 6?
Why should she keep those bad memories alive by talking about them every week with a professional?
Why can't she forget it and move on?
The way I see it she seems to NOT want to forget, I think she gets something out of staying a victim forever.
The problem is, she is destroying the lifes of people around her, especially her husband's life...
Say what you want, I think there is something wrong with that woman , and it has nothing to do with the sexual abuse that happened a long time ago.
I think she found a way to manipulate everyone around her.
Some women are experts at being victims forever and in this day and age, everything and everyone from University professors to Oprah is encouraging them to remain victims forever.
Although the abuse was real, it was so long ago that now those women are more hypocondriacs than victims.
Ok shoot the venom at me now, I'm a man I can take it.
Hmmm. Sounds like plain old bad manners. Any fella who would want to be with such a bad mannered woman is not right in the head.
I agree with radish. Men will chase materialistic bitches and ignore plainer, wonderful non bitch women who would make such better life partners. Even guys who really aren't in the same league as the "princesses!" Ah well. C'est la vie.
Most married people I know are happy and don't act the way described in the article.
There's too many broken homes since the divorce wave of the 70s, and people--men and women--are ragingly insecure deep inside from not seeing happy, loving parents. Then they resort to games and manipulation to try to assuage their feelings of panic. Wild guess on my part.
Don't be single because you're angry at golddiggers. Be single because that's what you want for your life and that is your chosen, happiest way of being in the world. (Like me!)
Golddiggers can work both ways; there are male golddiggers out there. It doesn't take long for them to show their true colors. As J Lo sang..."My love don't cost a thing," but it doesn't PAY either. LOL
yes there has been studies about post traumatic stress disorders, for some people regurgitating the same facts keeps the problem in the fore front of the mind, so talking about it only increases the stresses,
whereas some people can forget, i have had family who have been and seen horrible things, and yet they have said right.. thats it i am not going to let this ruin my life, and forget it.. it works for some.
i think your wife 7.15 is content with her life, she can have everything, kids, money, and not have you around to bother her.
as i said my wife was abused when she was young, but she hasnt let that turn her into a neurotic basketcase. she has moved past it, i dont think you wife will ever change she seems to revel in the pain and uses it to get her own way
From my limited knowledge and understanding, it seems to me that a very easy way to spot whether or not a woman is "trouble" is to look at her parents--most especially at her mother. It's an old saw (fairly true) that you can look at the mother and see what the young woman's going to look like in 20-30 years... but you can do the same to an extent with personality problems, relational difficulties, etc...
Anon 7:15, and Helen-
Take a look at Dr. Laura's book, I think it's titled "Bad Childhood, Good Life". I can't stand the sort of idiot psychologist that your wife apparently has, who thinks that victims need to wallow in their victimhood. I really don't see the point in obsessing on a horrible past or feeling some need for "closure" or other such psychobabble. It's bad enough letting presently evil people run your life--why let ghosts of evil from decades ago run your life?
Good luck.
Brian,
Thanks for the book suggestion.
Olig,
I see what you menat now. Yes - there is nothing very distinct before Greek observations. And of course there was inheritance in the paternal line. Traditions varried simply because the Celtic cultuire wsn't one culture, it was a range of cultures that shared some important common features. Even in th area of language not a lot is very clear. Roman miltary observers recorded areas as Celtic when in fact that may have only referred to a ruling elite, while the common people spoke Germanic languages - this was peobably the case in Bavaria, and now there is even speculation that this was true in southeastern Britain for some time. Within Britain and the rest of western Europe people may have been speaking a whole bunch of unrelated or distantly related languages. The region around Bordeaux was still speaking Basque when the Romans showed up. - BTW, the Basques also have patterns of female inheritance, and the traditional expalnantion wa sthat thenmen were so often gone at sea or at war for so long that it was just more practical - again, an adjustment to a need for disposable men.
On top opf that, the whole model of a wave of Indo-Europeans swamping Europe and covering it with a new and presumably swamping pre-existing cultyres is shwoing cracks, and in India the equivalent theory is being taken apart limb by limb. Basically the linguistic evidence is ambivalent archeological evidence is lacking for such a theory. Cultural changes, including language, can seep into societies without toppling everything.
So in Europe for instance, that leaves room to interpret the evidence for lots of North African influence, probably Berber. The megalithic structures are a possible connection, for instance. Threre is a lot of genetic evidence. There is some linguistic material in the surviving (insular) Celtic lanagues, and in English for that matter, as well as other traits. In fact, it turns that there was some sense in Egypt, which is farther afield, that frmale ancestry played a role in claims to the throne. I saw a reference in a scholarly source to the efect that Egyptians were a lot more careful who they married their princesses to than their princes for that reason.
Back to your basic point - the periosd around 1,000-2,000 BC is real shadowy. There was a brilliant Bronze Age civilization in Northern Europe and in the west and central part of the continent as well, but a lot is missing.
And your point about oral traditions is well taken. It really also applies to written stuff, conmsidering the perishability of the materials things get written on. Thinbk of how much Clasical stuff was lost through failure to copy it.
If anyone is still wondering why Tom Leykis is getting such an audience, now you know.
No, "all people" do not. Many people live by principles other than pragmatic hedonism. Civilization exists where the best of those other principles are dominant. It is harmed, or falls, when those like the pragmatic hedonists become a significant influence.
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
85x1x成人影院85x1x成人影院85x1x成人影院一葉晴貼影片區546視訊聊天室一葉晴貼影片區一葉晴貼影片區一葉晴貼影片區聊天室ilover99聊天室ilover99聊天室ilover99聊天室ilover99聊天室ilover99聊天室13060免費聊天室13060免費ut13077視訊聊天聊天室13060免費聊天室13060免費聊天室13060免費聊天室入口聊天室入口聊天室入口聊天室入口聊天室入口
Post a Comment
<< Home