10 ms·

> So framing it as "men floundering, women most affected" is disingenuous. My 2c as a gay man that has many women as friends. They aren’t looking for “status”

> So framing it as "men floundering, women most affected" is disingenuous. My 2c as a gay man that has many women as friends. They aren’t looking for “status” they are looking for someone who is emotionally intelligent. And thinking that gaining status is how to gain women is pretty much the opposite of that. Patriarchy hurts both sexes. By thinking of status and power as avenues to sex you stunt your ability to connect with others. And it sets up a negative dynamic because if gaining power is the goal then having an egalitarian relationship with your lover is not possible. > Maybe men use porn and play videogames not because they'd rather have that than a real relationship, but because modern relationships don't offer much more than that. If you think that lowly of women, why would they spend any time with you at all?

scarmig 3y ago
As a bi man, the dynamics of dating men and women are very different. It ranges from the very explicit (you must plan the date; you must pay for the date) to the comparatively subtle (you must be emotionally stoic and not show too much vulnerability; you must have a stable, well-paying job; you must be "confident"). These things aren't standards you would be subject to in a purely platonic relationship. It's not even so much those things making you "hot" but those being prerequisites to being considered a potential partner. Gay men are much less strict about demanding a performance of the male gender role (except for those elements of it relating to physique).
- timeagain 3y ago
  That’s true I might be biased by hanging with women who hang with gay men. It is also true that women perpetuate these dumb stereotypes of masculinity as well. The kicker for me is how these dynamics ruin the ability for men and women to become friends. Like you say, these wouldn’t be issues in a platonic relationship. But this cloud of expectation looms over any straight-platonic friendship between men and women. How the relationship would have to change if it became romantic. Makes me glad I’m gay.
  - scarmig 3y ago
    Straight folk have lots to learn from gay folk. Probably starting with how to do marriage right[0]. [0] https://www.advocate.com/people/2020/2/13/study-gay-people-have-happier-marriages-straight-people https://www.advocate.com/people/2020/2/13/study-gay-people-h...
    - lostmsu 3y ago
      The study can not be accessed without payment, but if they did not correctly control for kids, it is useless.
      - scarmig 3y ago
        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6731029/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6731029/ > Covariates. We control for covariates that are likely associated with both psychological distress and marital strain including respondent age, education, and employment status (Mirowsky & Ross, 2003), spouse health status (Kiecolt-Glaser & Wilson, 2017), relationship duration (Proulx et al., 2007), and children in household (Mirowsky & Schieman, 2008). So at least they attempted to account for obvious covariates.
        UncleMeat 3y ago
        This is my favorite kind of scientific criticism. People who can't even access a paper just saying "well I bet they didn't control for obvious thing X" and then moving on.
        lostmsu 3y ago
        This is my favorite kind of personal attacks. Never have I said "they did not control", but here you are.
        UncleMeat 3y ago
        Not a personal attack. A criticism of the content of your post.
friend_and_foe 3y ago
I said nothing "lowly" about women. I happen to have a very rewarding, honest and low stress relationship. It took me years to find anyone that I was willing to give my life to because, frankly, our culture nowadays is one where people want what they want but are willing only to give what they want to. This goes for both men and women. The give and take goes both ways, I self reflected for a long time and determined that I was willing to give of myself, and I expect the same from a partner, and people that have that insight are few and far between.
jiggawatts 3y ago
> They aren’t looking for “status” they are looking for someone who is emotionally intelligent. That’s what they say, and that’s what women’s magazines have told them. Reality is the opposite, and has been demonstrated over and over both a scientifically and informally. Or to put it another way: the reason even the hottest 1% of women complain about men’s poor EQ is because they’re not optimising for it when choosing a partner. They’re partnering with the matching top 1% of men based on social status and wealth, and every attribute unimportant to women has a random value. That’s why even attractive women with their pick of partners will complain about men’s EQ. They don’t care enough to choose a man with high EQ, but they care just enough to complain about it. It’s like someone buying a Tesla and then bitching about minor quibbles. If they cared about those issues they would have bought a Toyota.
- dahwolf 3y ago
  Not to mention that emotionally intelligent is somewhat of an insulting term. Men and women deal with and express emotions in radically different ways, that doesn't make one way more mature or intelligent.
  - itishappy 3y ago
    Some people recognize that fact, some don't. Surely that disparity is itself an aspect of emotional intelligence? I'm not sure I follow how that's insulting.
    - dahwolf 3y ago
      It's insulting in the sense that the stoicism of many men is considered unintelligent, primitive, underdeveloped. You can frame it how you want. It can also be projected as a strength (emotional control). Or men simply being less interested in exchanging emotions intensely as it's just not that important to them.
      - KptMarchewa 3y ago
        The "emotional control" that causes them to absolutely blow the fuck up? It's not unintelligent, primitive or underdeveloped, it's simply a meme, an idea that some people can even sincerely believe but at the end it's a pure lie.
dahwolf 3y ago
"They aren’t looking for “status” they are looking for someone who is emotionally intelligent." False. A lowly educated low earner male that is emotionally intelligent will not get selected. Every dating/marriage statistic confirms that women refuse to marry down. So they want both status/wealth and emotional intelligence.
- oh_sigh 3y ago
  A male friend of mine is 5'3" tall, no college education, and sells pottery for a living - and didn't make much money doing it, based on his apartment. He's also hilarious and kind. Anyway, he met and married a 5'10", attractive woman who is a principal at a PE firm and semi-professionally competes in salsa dancing competitions.
  - dahwolf 3y ago
    Happy for them, this should happen more. But an exception does not negate the broad pattern.
    - inglor_cz 3y ago
      Sense of humor cuts right through a lot of obstacles. Plenty of women will feel attracted to you if you can make them laugh often. But, of course, you have to meet up first, and the Tinder generation may not pass this first obstacle.
      - dahwolf 3y ago
        Wise words. When seeing a person in public they are so infinitely more rich compared to 3 filters in an app. But there doesn't seem to be any sign of this returning in big ways.
VirusNewbie 3y ago
>They aren’t looking for “status” Are you sure? Because multiple studies contradict that claim. I will point out that status can mean different things depending on the (sub)culture and context. Perhaps in some social circles, high EQ is high status. >and it sets up a negative dynamic because if gaining power is the goal then having an egalitarian relationship with your lover is not possible. Status is multifaceted. Women are attracted to status, but that doesn't mean women can't be high status as well. High status could be anything from being good at some niche hobby to making lots of money to being athletic.
mynonameaccount 3y ago
Complete BS. You're telling me they want emotional intelligence from a janitor, retail attendant?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
vpastore 3y ago
[dead]
revelio 3y ago
Vague phrases like emotional intelligence are often being used as a euphemism for other things unfortunately, for example, women are drastically less likely than men to be politically tolerant. So this can simply be women saying they only want to date very liberal men, but they don't want to phrase it like that because it sounds bad, so they decide that liberalism is the same thing as emotional intelligence (the liberal mindset seeing itself as more empathetic, in touch with other people's emotions). https://unherd.com/thepost/is-wokeness-killing-the-marriage-market/ https://unherd.com/thepost/is-wokeness-killing-the-marriage-... Two of the most important trends in American life are the increasing tendency for women to identify as liberal, and the increasing intolerance shown by liberals to their ideological opponents. These trends are no doubt related, since women are more ideologically intolerant than men. Put together, they spell trouble for the future of marriage in the US. [...] the 2020 American Perspectives Survey revealed that 79% of Democratic women and 48% of Republican men would be unwilling to date someone with a different view of Trump. No discussion of dating trends can be complete without this.
TheSpiceIsLife 3y ago
What patriachy? The idea only makes sense if you believe a matriarchy would be better. There has never been any anthropological record of a matriarchy, that is to say that any society that had a matriarchal structure was quickly overrun by those that didn’t. Some fate. Men and women are different, and what you call a patriachy is just the natural order of things, some variation between individuals not withstanding.

scarmig 3y ago

As a bi man, the dynamics of dating men and women are very different. It ranges from the very explicit (you must plan the date; you must pay for the date) to the comparatively subtle (you must be emotionally stoic and not show too much vulnerability; you must have a stable, well-paying job; you must be "confident"). These things aren't standards you would be subject to in a purely platonic relationship. It's not even so much those things making you "hot" but those being prerequisites to being considered a potential partner. Gay men are much less strict about demanding a performance of the male gender role (except for those elements of it relating to physique).

timeagain 3y ago
That’s true I might be biased by hanging with women who hang with gay men. It is also true that women perpetuate these dumb stereotypes of masculinity as well. The kicker for me is how these dynamics ruin the ability for men and women to become friends. Like you say, these wouldn’t be issues in a platonic relationship. But this cloud of expectation looms over any straight-platonic friendship between men and women. How the relationship would have to change if it became romantic. Makes me glad I’m gay.
- scarmig 3y ago
  Straight folk have lots to learn from gay folk. Probably starting with how to do marriage right[0]. [0] https://www.advocate.com/people/2020/2/13/study-gay-people-have-happier-marriages-straight-people https://www.advocate.com/people/2020/2/13/study-gay-people-h...
  - lostmsu 3y ago
    The study can not be accessed without payment, but if they did not correctly control for kids, it is useless.
    - scarmig 3y ago
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6731029/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6731029/ > Covariates. We control for covariates that are likely associated with both psychological distress and marital strain including respondent age, education, and employment status (Mirowsky & Ross, 2003), spouse health status (Kiecolt-Glaser & Wilson, 2017), relationship duration (Proulx et al., 2007), and children in household (Mirowsky & Schieman, 2008). So at least they attempted to account for obvious covariates.
      - UncleMeat 3y ago
        This is my favorite kind of scientific criticism. People who can't even access a paper just saying "well I bet they didn't control for obvious thing X" and then moving on.
        lostmsu 3y ago
        This is my favorite kind of personal attacks. Never have I said "they did not control", but here you are.
        UncleMeat 3y ago
        Not a personal attack. A criticism of the content of your post.

friend_and_foe 3y ago

I said nothing "lowly" about women. I happen to have a very rewarding, honest and low stress relationship. It took me years to find anyone that I was willing to give my life to because, frankly, our culture nowadays is one where people want what they want but are willing only to give what they want to. This goes for both men and women. The give and take goes both ways, I self reflected for a long time and determined that I was willing to give of myself, and I expect the same from a partner, and people that have that insight are few and far between.

jiggawatts 3y ago

> They aren’t looking for “status” they are looking for someone who is emotionally intelligent. That’s what they say, and that’s what women’s magazines have told them. Reality is the opposite, and has been demonstrated over and over both a scientifically and informally. Or to put it another way: the reason even the hottest 1% of women complain about men’s poor EQ is because they’re not optimising for it when choosing a partner. They’re partnering with the matching top 1% of men based on social status and wealth, and every attribute unimportant to women has a random value. That’s why even attractive women with their pick of partners will complain about men’s EQ. They don’t care enough to choose a man with high EQ, but they care just enough to complain about it. It’s like someone buying a Tesla and then bitching about minor quibbles. If they cared about those issues they would have bought a Toyota.

dahwolf 3y ago
Not to mention that emotionally intelligent is somewhat of an insulting term. Men and women deal with and express emotions in radically different ways, that doesn't make one way more mature or intelligent.
- itishappy 3y ago
  Some people recognize that fact, some don't. Surely that disparity is itself an aspect of emotional intelligence? I'm not sure I follow how that's insulting.
  - dahwolf 3y ago
    It's insulting in the sense that the stoicism of many men is considered unintelligent, primitive, underdeveloped. You can frame it how you want. It can also be projected as a strength (emotional control). Or men simply being less interested in exchanging emotions intensely as it's just not that important to them.
    - KptMarchewa 3y ago
      The "emotional control" that causes them to absolutely blow the fuck up? It's not unintelligent, primitive or underdeveloped, it's simply a meme, an idea that some people can even sincerely believe but at the end it's a pure lie.

dahwolf 3y ago

"They aren’t looking for “status” they are looking for someone who is emotionally intelligent." False. A lowly educated low earner male that is emotionally intelligent will not get selected. Every dating/marriage statistic confirms that women refuse to marry down. So they want both status/wealth and emotional intelligence.

oh_sigh 3y ago
A male friend of mine is 5'3" tall, no college education, and sells pottery for a living - and didn't make much money doing it, based on his apartment. He's also hilarious and kind. Anyway, he met and married a 5'10", attractive woman who is a principal at a PE firm and semi-professionally competes in salsa dancing competitions.
- dahwolf 3y ago
  Happy for them, this should happen more. But an exception does not negate the broad pattern.
  - inglor_cz 3y ago
    Sense of humor cuts right through a lot of obstacles. Plenty of women will feel attracted to you if you can make them laugh often. But, of course, you have to meet up first, and the Tinder generation may not pass this first obstacle.
    - dahwolf 3y ago
      Wise words. When seeing a person in public they are so infinitely more rich compared to 3 filters in an app. But there doesn't seem to be any sign of this returning in big ways.

VirusNewbie 3y ago

>They aren’t looking for “status” Are you sure? Because multiple studies contradict that claim. I will point out that status can mean different things depending on the (sub)culture and context. Perhaps in some social circles, high EQ is high status. >and it sets up a negative dynamic because if gaining power is the goal then having an egalitarian relationship with your lover is not possible. Status is multifaceted. Women are attracted to status, but that doesn't mean women can't be high status as well. High status could be anything from being good at some niche hobby to making lots of money to being athletic.

mynonameaccount 3y ago

Complete BS. You're telling me they want emotional intelligence from a janitor, retail attendant?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

vpastore 3y ago

[dead]

revelio 3y ago

Vague phrases like emotional intelligence are often being used as a euphemism for other things unfortunately, for example, women are drastically less likely than men to be politically tolerant. So this can simply be women saying they only want to date very liberal men, but they don't want to phrase it like that because it sounds bad, so they decide that liberalism is the same thing as emotional intelligence (the liberal mindset seeing itself as more empathetic, in touch with other people's emotions). https://unherd.com/thepost/is-wokeness-killing-the-marriage-market/ https://unherd.com/thepost/is-wokeness-killing-the-marriage-... Two of the most important trends in American life are the increasing tendency for women to identify as liberal, and the increasing intolerance shown by liberals to their ideological opponents. These trends are no doubt related, since women are more ideologically intolerant than men. Put together, they spell trouble for the future of marriage in the US. [...] the 2020 American Perspectives Survey revealed that 79% of Democratic women and 48% of Republican men would be unwilling to date someone with a different view of Trump. No discussion of dating trends can be complete without this.

TheSpiceIsLife 3y ago

What patriachy? The idea only makes sense if you believe a matriarchy would be better. There has never been any anthropological record of a matriarchy, that is to say that any society that had a matriarchal structure was quickly overrun by those that didn’t. Some fate. Men and women are different, and what you call a patriachy is just the natural order of things, some variation between individuals not withstanding.