Has gaslighting conditioned women into thinking they’re emotionally unstable? Yashar Ali thinks so.
You’re so sensitive. You’re so emotional. You’re defensive. You’re overreacting. Calm down. Relax. Stop freaking out! You’re crazy! I was just joking, don’t you have a sense of humor? You’re so dramatic. Just get over it already!
Sound familiar?
If you’re a woman, it probably does.
Do you ever hear any of these comments from your spouse, partner, boss, friends, colleagues, or relatives after you have expressed frustration, sadness, or anger about something they have done or said?
When someone says these things to you, it’s not an example of inconsiderate behavior. When your spouse shows up half an hour late to dinner without calling—that’s inconsiderate behavior. A remark intended to shut you down like, “Calm down, you’re overreacting,” after you just addressed someone else’s bad behavior, is emotional manipulation—pure and simple.
And this is the sort of emotional manipulation that feeds an epidemic in our country, an epidemic that defines women as crazy, irrational, overly sensitive, unhinged. This epidemic helps fuel the idea that women need only the slightest provocation to unleash their (crazy) emotions. It’s patently false and unfair.
I think it’s time to separate inconsiderate behavior from emotional manipulation and we need to use a word not in our normal vocabulary.
I want to introduce a helpful term to identify these reactions: gaslighting.
Gaslighting is a term, often used by mental health professionals (I am not one), to describe manipulative behavior used to confuse people into thinking their reactions are so far off base that they’re crazy.
The term comes from the 1944 MGM film, Gaslight, starring Ingrid Bergman. Bergman’s husband in the film, played by Charles Boyer, wants to get his hands on her jewelry. He realizes he can accomplish this by having her certified as insane and hauled off to a mental institution. To pull of this task, he intentionally sets the gaslights in their home to flicker off and on, and every time Bergman’s character reacts to it, he tells her she’s just seeing things. In this setting, a gaslighter is someone who presents false information to alter the victim’s perception of him or herself.
Today, when the term is referenced, it’s usually because the perpetrator says things like, “You’re so stupid” or “No one will ever want you” to the victim. This is an intentional, pre-meditated form of gaslighting, much like the actions of Charles Boyer’s character in Gaslight, where he strategically plots to confuse Ingrid Bergman’s character into believing herself unhinged.
The form of gaslighting I’m addressing is not always pre-mediated or intentional, which makes it worse, because it means all of us, especially women, have dealt with it at one time or another.
Those who engage in gaslighting create a reaction—whether it’s anger, frustration, sadness—in the person they are dealing with. Then, when that person reacts, the gaslighter makes them feel uncomfortable and insecure by behaving as if their feelings aren’t rational or normal.
♦◊♦
My friend Anna (all names changed to protect privacy) is married to a man who feels it necessary to make random and unprompted comments about her weight. Whenever she gets upset or frustrated with his insensitive comments, he responds in the same, defeating way, “You’re so sensitive. I’m just joking.”
My friend Abbie works for a man who finds a way, almost daily, to unnecessarily shoot her down and her work product. Comments like, “Can’t you do something right?” or “Why did I hire you?” are regular occurrences for her. Her boss has no problem firing people (he does it regularly), so you wouldn’t know that based on these comments, Abbie has worked for him for six years. But every time she stands up for herself and says “It doesn’t help me when you say these things,” she gets the same reaction: “Relax; you’re overreacting.”
Abbie thinks her boss is just being a jerk in these moments, but the truth is, he is making those comments to manipulate her into thinking her reactions are out of whack. And it’s exactly that kind manipulation that has left her feeling guilty about being sensitive, and as a result, she has not left her job.
But gaslighting can be as simple as someone smiling and saying something like, “You’re so sensitive,” to somebody else. Such a comment may seem innocuous enough, but in that moment, that person is making a judgment about how someone else should feel.
While dealing with gaslighting isn’t a universal truth for women, we all certainly know plenty of women who encounter it at work, home, or in personal relationships.
And the act of gaslighting does not simply affect women who are not quite sure of themselves. Even vocal, confident, assertive women are vulnerable to gaslighting.
Why?
Because women bare the brunt of our neurosis. It is much easier for us to place our emotional burdens on the shoulders of our wives, our female friends, our girlfriends, our female employees, our female colleagues, than for us to impose them on the shoulders of men.
It’s a whole lot easier to emotionally manipulate someone who has been conditioned by our society to accept it. We continue to burden women because they don’t refuse our burdens as easily. It’s the ultimate cowardice.
Whether gaslighting is conscious or not, it produces the same result: it renders some women emotionally mute.
These women aren’t able to clearly express to their spouses that what is said or done to them is hurtful. They can’t tell their boss that his behavior is disrespectful and prevents them from doing their best work. They can’t tell their parents that, when they are being critical, they are doing more harm than good.
When these women receive any sort of push back to their reactions, they often brush it off by saying, “Forget it, it’s okay.”
That “forget it” isn’t just about dismissing a thought, it is about self-dismissal. It’s heartbreaking.
No wonder some women are unconsciously passive aggressive when expressing anger, sadness, or frustration. For years, they have been subjected to so much gaslighting that they can no longer express themselves in a way that feels authentic to them.
They say, “I’m sorry” before giving their opinion. In an email or text message, they place a smiley face next to a serious question or concern, thereby reducing the impact of having to express their true feelings.
You know how it looks: “You’re late 
”
These are the same women who stay in relationships they don’t belong in, who don’t follow their dreams, who withdraw from the kind of life they want to live.
♦◊♦
Since I have embarked on this feminist self-exploration in my life and in the lives of the women I know, this concept of women as “crazy” has really emerged as a major issue in society at large and an equally major frustration for the women in my life, in general.
From the way women are portrayed on reality shows, to how we condition boys and girls to see women, we have come to accept the idea that women are unbalanced, irrational individuals, especially in times of anger and frustration.
Just the other day, on a flight from San Francisco to Los Angeles, a flight attendant who had come to recognize me from my many trips asked me what I did for a living. When I told her that I write mainly about women, she immediately laughed and asked, “Oh, about how crazy we are?”
Her gut reaction to my work made me really depressed. While she made her response in jest, her question nonetheless makes visible a pattern of sexist commentary that travels through all facets of society on how men view women, which also greatly impacts how women may view themselves.
As far as I am concerned, the epidemic of gaslighting is part of the struggle against the obstacles of inequality that women constantly face. Acts of gaslighting steal their most powerful tool: their voice. This is something we do to women every day, in many different ways.
I don’t think this idea that women are “crazy,” is based in some sort of massive conspiracy. Rather, I believe it’s connected to the slow and steady drumbeat of women being undermined and dismissed, on a daily basis. And gaslighting is one of many reasons why we are dealing with this public construction of women as “crazy”
I recognize that I’ve been guilty of gaslighting my women friends in the past (but never my male friends—surprise, surprise). It’s shameful, but I’m glad I realized that I did it on occasion and put a stop to it.
While I take total responsibility for my actions, I do believe that I, along with many men, am a byproduct of our conditioning. It’s about the general insight our conditioning gives us into admitting fault and exposing any emotion.
When we are discouraged in our youth and early adulthood from expressing emotion, it causes many of us to remain steadfast in our refusal to express regret when we see someone in pain from our actions.
When I was writing this piece, I was reminded of one of my favorite Gloria Steinem quotes, “The first problem for all of us, men and women, is not to learn, but to unlearn.”
So for many of us, it’s first about unlearning how to flicker those gaslights and learning how to acknowledge and understand the feelings, opinions, and positions of the women in our lives.
But isn’t the issue of gaslighting ultimately about whether we are conditioned to believe that women’s opinions don’t hold as much weight as ours? That what women have to say, what they feel, isn’t quite as legitimate?
—
|
Yashar will be soon releasing his first short e-book, entitled, A Message To Women From A Man: You Are Not Crazy — How We Teach Men That Women Are Crazy and How We Convince Women To Ignore Their Instincts. If you are interested and want to be notified when the book is released, please click here to sign-up.
|
—
This post originally appeared on The Current Conscience.
—Photo lempicki.maciek/Flickr
***
Read Mark Greene’s response:
About Yashar Ali
It’s an interesting article. People in the comments are laser focusing on personal relationships, but if we look at societies it becomes much clearer who’s emotions are more acceptable. Men get mad and start wars. They go kill millions of other men, women and children but that some how this isn’t considered irrational. Alexander the Great was not great. He was a cold blooded killer, but he’s call great. How on earth is that rational?
Now if a woman cries, OMG, the world is ending and she’s being emotionally abusive.
So yeah, gaslighting women, real thing.
So when you get in an argument with your husband do you accuse him of all the worlds atrocities or do you just cry to make him feel bad? The best answer to crying is…grow up, your not a child, talk to me as an adult or GTFO. Now that might be a bit harsh, but that’s how I like to deal with gaslighting.
I would like to apologize for my rudeness. What I meant to say was:
The best answer to crying is…grow up, you’re not a child, talk to me as an adult or please leave.
Are you crying for attention here? Do you need some Ritalin?
are you saying that crying is something only a child should be expected to do? is it your view that emotions are not acceptable as an adult? i just want to clarify.
YES, crying is typically a childish response and children can not have a healthy relationship with an adult.
That’s not to say that all crying is wrong for adults but for the majority of male-female disagreements, crying is childish.
But, people (both men and women) cry for all kinds of reasons, in all kinds of arguments. Generally when they are upset.
Why do you specifically think that when a woman cries its to somehow manipulate you? That’s a very self-centric argument and view point regarding personal relationships.
If you believe that crying is never anything but emotional manipulation you must be dead inside and never have any emotions., I would feel sorry for any person you have a relationship with because you are not capable of love as love is an emotion and you believe that emotions are childish.
Crying over little things, or crying as the only way to get what you want – that’s counter-gaslighting. Exaggeration is another gaslight. My mother did this and I’m quite sensitive to it. The expression can quickly spiral and soon the Man is responsible for everything unfortunate that ever went wrong and will continue to perpetuate the cycle of bad. The antidote is a male-only tactic: treat women’s expressions as a current-barometric-pressure reading, understand they can change, and be patient ont he good road until they do.
But, as The Bad Man sayeth, manipulative women can GTFO.
The difficult part is the many men are not developed enough to tell the difference between manipulation and ‘passing-overreaction.’
Please read the article before leaving childish scathing comments. Thank you.
Please read the online site called derailing for dummies, then remind yourself of it as you read the posted comments made by MEN on an ostensibly MENS site. They have as much right or more to air their opinions here as we do. Its their site. If you don’t like the opinions that’s fine. But at least consider their point of view.
Grow up, I’m not your child that you can command.
I’m a big girl…last I checked, I don’t faint because of a little uncouth language. But thanks anyways!
Have you had a lot of bad experiences, or is it frustration with not being heard?
Let’s get one thing straight. Crying is for babies and children. there comes a time in ones life that you MUST stop crying. Being an adult means staying up late, paying a mortgage or rent, and NOT CRYING. Ever. Face it. No one wants to be around someone who cries, or has feelings of anger or sadness. No one likes a cry baby. Crying means you haven’t fully developed into a mature adult, worthy of anyone’s time or effort. I guess what I’m trying to say is that emotions are stupid and pointless and if you disagree, then you are a stupid doo doo head. ROCK ON BAD MAN! FOREVER LIVE YOUR LIFE PHILOSOPHIES!!!!
p.s.
jk, and you are a dick head badman
Honestly? People can’t even cry if a loved one dies? This comment just makes it clear that you were shamed for your emotions as a child.
I guess you missed the jk.
jk= just kidding
that was all a rip on “The bad man”
please note the heavy sarcasm….
Aaron, emotions are a part of every humans existence. Growing up isn’t about denying and suppressing them. Its about learning how to use them productively, in ways that create contentment in life and maintain healthy and respectful relationships.
Oops! Sorry Aaron! I did miss the jk. Geez…can someone point me to a crack in the floor?
Great insights Valerie. Good angle, never thought to look at it from that macro perspective…very true points you’ve made.
I agree that is a “great” macro perspective point. Crying is often how the brain releases chemicals when under distress. If a person can’t assert, they have to come out somehow. It’s also a natural instinct to call for help and it’s not exclusive to humans. For example, dogs, “man’s best friend” will cry when they are stuck somewhere and can’t get out of their predicament.
This is well written, thoughtful, and really explains a lot. Gaslighting isn’t something I have heard of before, but it is for sure something I had experienced. And, like the Abbie you mentioned, I too feel “guilty” for taking things too hard.
This is something, I think, that everyone in the world should read, even just to have another viewpoint on their own actions and into the mind of those that are not themselves.
Thank you.
I personally didn’t know about gaslighting before reading this article, but it made me realize how often I put myself down, and I always called it ‘being truthful’ when in all actuality, I was just taking the things that I did in a negative manner. I’m not saying that all women are emotionally stable, there are many out there who need medication or therapy…sometimes both, but the number of women who are falsely accused of being crazy or emotionally unstable because they show their emotions is astounding. I personally believe that anyone who can show their emotions is an extremely powerful person because I’ve conditioned myself to not show a number of emotions to other people because it would always be thrown in my face or used against me. I’m learning over time to show my emotions and express myself in a healthier manner that also lets people know that I’m not willing to take their shit.
@The Bad Man- So, a woman cries and you’re pissed off, but people getting their limbs blown off by road side bombs doesn’t even merit a comment by you? Got it. Thanks for proving my point.
You’re totally off topic which is a very typical gaslighting response to keep changing the goalpost.
Best way to deal with it is to ignore the irrelevance.
Badman i think you feel the way you so because you are an asshole who continuously hurts the feeling of the females you know then get pissed off at them when their feeling are hurt because how dare they make you feel guilty for treating them like shit.
How typical of tgmp. Woman emotionally abusive = the mans fault.
Feminists are overgrown children.
and the repression of a person for having emotions isn’t emotionally abusive?
and the support of abuse in the name of ‘figuring myself out’?
HAH. Where does it say that it is men’s fault if a women is emotionally abusive? It doesn’t. It states that the act of gaslighting – of diminishing someone’s valid response to something – is emotionally manipulative and abusive. Read the article before you make an uneducated, misinformed comment Ron.
Chris
The article implies that gaslighting is gendered. All male on female, its an absurdity. And on average women are more emotionally manipulative than men.
I would like to see the study that found women to be more emotionally manipulative than men. I’ve seen it often going both ways on both sides. Gaslighting is a very specific form of emotional manipulation and does not refer to the many other forms. I will agree that the author does not offer any examples of how it happens between other genders (I’ve seen male-on-male, for example).
I have an ex who is now incarcerated for plunging a knife into her boyfriend’s chest, killing him. This is no more wrong had she been on the other side of the blade. Accusing or absolving any individual of their behavior based on intrinsic qualities–like gender–is not just facile, it’s dangerously irresponsible.
JFB
Every time an article is posted here, there’s a group that acts like the article is against all men everywhere. Nowhere in the article did it say that women can never overreact or that they’re always right. Nowhere did it say that all men gaslight all the time. It was merely focusing on a trend that may or may not exist. Feel free to disagree, but don’t put words in the author’s mouth.
I feel that something is missing from the article, though. For men who are socialized to repress all feelings (i won’t name the names of some of the posters here…), anything – even a valid emotion reaction – would seem like overkill. When you’re taught to avoid emotion at all costs, any mention of it could seem out of place. I think that that’s the root of this problem. The more in-touch a guy is with his own emotions, the less likely he’ll be to dismiss yours. If he’s used to dismissing his own emotions, why wouldn’t he do the same to you?
I agree with this comment so much, I just had to comment and say so.
“Nowhere in the article did it say that women can never overreact or that they’re always right.”
Yes, the article didn’t say these things, but it also didn’t say the opposite either. It didn’t ,mention that sometimes people do let their emotions run their lives and cloud their thinking. While it’s important to be attuned to your emotions, it’s also important to realize they aren’t concrete. I’ll respect your emotions, but they’re not sacred either.
The article does generalize men as the gaslighters and women as the gaslightees.
I am grateful that anyone could write with such clarity about the social dominance of women through shame, which stifles their voices. I think it’s time for a new phase in human evolution whereby women’s emotional intelligence is honored and treated as sacred. I am not speaking of emotional manipulation, which is a common side-effect of oppression but, of the beauty, clarity, and purity that can come forth from women’s emotion, when honored. I believe that honoring this form of intelligence can harmonize us as a people if allowed, fostered, and loved.
I think men have a huge fear of emotional expression as, they’ve been evolved to think of it as weak and fear for their survival should they become aligned with it. Emotion is information; a kind of intelligence, to be understood, honored, respected, and used for a better world. It does not matter what it means any more that we’ve been shutting down our access to women’s extraordinary access emotional intelligence as much as it is important to begin to open to the ACT of fostering an allowance of such expression, which will grow into better understanding of what this intelligence can afford us as a people.
“I think it’s time for a new phase in human evolution whereby women’s emotional intelligence is honored and treated as sacred”
You want women to be worshiped, objectified as moral objects of perfection?
What about the emotionally unstable ones you know, women that are emotionally toxic towards anyone that comes close to them, should we worship them too on the basis of their genetic code?
Are you suggesting something ridiculous because your emotional intelligence told you it was correct, because it feels right?
OMG, you can’t even comprehend the sentence you QUOTED.
It doesn’t say WOMEN should “be worshiped, objectified as moral objects of perfection”.
It says “emotional intelligence” should be “honored and treated as sacred”.
HELLO!
Omg, like, HELLO.
This is what she said …
““I think it’s time for a new phase in human evolution whereby women’s emotional intelligence is honored and treated as sacred””
Here is the definition of sacred
“sa·cred (skrd)
adj.
1. Dedicated to or set apart for the worship of a deity.
2. Worthy of religious veneration: the sacred teachings of the Buddha.
3. Made or declared holy: sacred bread and wine.
4. Dedicated or devoted exclusively to a single use, purpose, or person: sacred to the memory of her sister; a private office sacred to the President.
5. Worthy of respect; venerable.
6. Of or relating to religious objects, rites, or practices.”
Here is Honor
“1. High respect, as that shown for special merit; esteem: the honor shown to a Nobel laureate.
2.
a. Good name; reputation.
b. A source or cause of credit: was an honor to the profession.
3.
a. Glory or recognition; distinction.
b. A mark, token, or gesture of respect or distinction: the place of honor at the table.
c. A military decoration.
d. A title conferred for achievement.
4. High rank.
5. The dignity accorded to position: awed by the honor of his office.
6. Great privilege: I have the honor to present the governor.
7. Honor Used with His, Her, or Your as a title and form of address for certain officials, such as judges and mayors: Her Honor the Mayor.”
And have bent the truth and changed the meaning of what she said and the then suggested that I am the one who has misinterpreted it, can you see the irony there.
Like, omg, HELLO”
You know, Ron… the commenter above didn’t use the term “like” in the fashion you do to make fun of her and your arrogance is really offensive in providing dictionary entries. You think anyone here doesn’t know what honor or sacred mean? Well, other than you anyway? It really is quite obtuse to provide definitions which include meanings for sacred and honor which include “worthy of respect” and “high respect”… yet you chose to perceive the word sacred as synonymous with “Holy” or “Superior” rather than just “worthy of respect”. I have no problem with saying emotional intelligence (whether it be a man’s or a woman’s) is worthy of high respect. Perhaps, MK could have used a different word to draw less fire from some of the men here… then again, maybe she just used her EI to cause an emotional reaction in the men who would never, ever be emotional or over-react to say a comment on the internet. I mean we are far too logical and rational for that, right?
The only irony I see here is how little emotional tact you display and how you over-react to such a small thing as comments on a blog by attacking those you don’t agree with personally. It’s really quite telling how you dismiss these ideas while making fun of a person for using an acronym you don’t employ… Do you think you are superior or somehow deserving of more respect than anyone who doesn’t agree with you or talks/writes in a manner different than you? FFS… HELLO!!!!
lol @ omg Hello!
You didn’t find it funny that she was trying to gaslight me, you think I shouldn’t dismiss the idea of starting an organised religion based around worshiping women’s emotional intelligence?
Go look up the word respect, then think about how you could apply it to this situation. Treating someone like a school child? Are you looking to back up this article by providing an immediate example?
What about cases where a woman has lower EI than a man, should that man still worship her as his sacred emotional superior?
I’m going to go ahead and guess that MK meant “the emotional intelligence that is most frequently associated with being a woman” rather than “women’s emotional intelligence.” Men are fully capable of being emotional, too, but most are discouraged from this. If EI was valued as a trait, men would be more likely to develop it. The reason that most women are more “emotional’ then men is simply because they’re allowed to be. There are no social barriers for women like there are for men. The negative stereotypes about emotion (that it’s for kids and weak people) are keeping some men from developing the type of skills that they want. If more people valued emotional skills and interactions, these stereotypes would be much more easily fought.
Lindsey
So you feel her words mean something other than what she said?
Is that you using your superior emotional intelligence?
Where do you stand on the whole women should be viewed as sacred thing, do you feel that’s correct to or do you feel that she meant something other than that?
I suspected that her writing may not have been clear based on the other items that she wrote. It’s called “context clues” – you may remember it from your elementary school days. It’s not EI as much as it is careful, thoughtful reading without a pre-formed prejudice.
MK writes “I believe that honoring this form of intelligence can harmonize us as a people if allowed, fostered, and loved.” MK speaks of honoring EI, not honoring women. Just because it’s commonly thought of as a woman’s trait doesn’t mean that that’s actually the case
Part of why women are more emotional is because they tend to have a larger corpus callossum than males, which increases communication between the two hemisphere of the brain, making it easier for women to express right brain information, which tends to be more emotion based.
Yes, I aware of thats.
Women on average are less able to use the systamtising (logic, spacial relations) part of their brains too.
There should not be a new religion based around the on average differences between the female brain and male brain in which the female is worshiped by the male.
That might FEEL correct to you, but its an absurdity.
“I am grateful that anyone could write with such clarity about the social dominance of women through shame, which stifles their voices. ”
Seriously? What kind of people do you associate with?
If the women you know are socially dominated through shame, I recommend a better class for associates. I don’t know or associate with any such people, and I know lots of and lots of people.
@ Eric M. You have no idea what you are talking about… and you are hateful to boot. I know lots and lots of people as well, and I’m pretty sure all of them would think your statement was assholish and offensive.
Many more would say that the statement ““I am grateful that anyone could write with such clarity about the social dominance of women through shame, which stifles their voices ” is hysterical, hyperbolic, dramatic and an attempt to manipulate by playing the victim and that the men that encourage and enable this behaviour in grown women, infantalise them.
Did you just call a perfectly acceptable point of view which was communicated in a rational manner (though obviously not in simple enough terms for you): “hysterical”… You do remember what this article was about to begin with don’t you? Now that is a much better of “Irony” than what you labeled as such earlier.
…example of “Irony”…. rather.
What’s truly hateful and offensive is name calling and hurling insults, as you have done here. Sorry that my disapproval of sexism troubles you so much.
Eric, I didn’t call anyone a name. I do apologize if my retort insulted you, but I found your statement toward a member of an oppressed class (above, when you told a woman she should find a better class of people to associate with) callous and worthy of challenge just as I think you would have if the comments were reversed against African American males. Our argument over which group is more oppressed (women on a global scale or black men in America) is really beside the point and I apologize for going down the road with you of that back and forth. I recognize both groups as having challenges and both groups as being on the wrong side of privilege within different classifications of people (white/black vs men/women), so I don’t mean to come off as antagonistic toward your stance… I am not. I actually replied to you again in that thread, but it came up out of order (the comment layout here leaves much to be desired), so here it is again if you missed it… I am sincere in my request for information or leads which will help me understand what you were trying to explain to me.
—–” Eric, I think some African females would disagree with your assessment, but I don’t pretend to have objectivity. I also don’t pretend to know what you go through as a black man… I am a privileged white man and I did grow up sheltered, but I’m trying to understand the plight of women and minorities and I speak up on behalf of both often. Your assumptions on my exposure, though, are a bit off. I don’t think I have to abandon black men to defend women or vice versa. I am also passionate about equality for minorities… being a feminist does not limit my activism to only their cause. In fact, I have only recently come to realize that their cause was deserving of my support as I already supported racial equality causes. If you would like to turn me on to a group where I can learn more, in particular, about the plight of black men I would be interested in learning more. The groups I follow and support in relation to racial inequality are not gender specific at this point, so I don’t doubt there is plenty for me to learn.
As for your statement that white women are not an oppressed class… I agree. Women are an oppressed class (vs. men), not white women (vs black men) in particular. The explanations I have gone through show the nuance and the overlap you speak of. I do not claim that a white woman has it worse than a black man…. I claim that women across the world, as a class of people, are more oppressed than men and that it is men (not all men) who do the oppressing through all levels of society across borders of race, nationality and religion. Nothing I have said is to detract from the very real oppression of black men. The feminist cause supports an egalitarian society… not just equality for women and certainly not dominance by women.”—–
Sorry for the repeat if you saw this before… it doesn’t “bother” me that you have an opposing view… I just don’t see that the situation is all or nothing when it comes to the points we are both making.
MK
““I think it’s time for a new phase in human evolution whereby women’s emotional intelligence is honored and treated as sacred”
So the new stage of human evolution should be an organised religion based around superstition?
Did your superior emotional intelligence tell you that?
““I think it’s time for a new phase in human evolution ““I think it’s time for a new phase in human evolution whereby women’s emotional intelligence is honored and treated as sacred”
Speechless ….(:-I)
MK feels an organised religion based on worshiping women is the way forward, Lindsey feels she can read MK’s mind …
but its not them being irrational, its us “gaslighting” them right?
I just got out of a bad relationship where I was CONSTANTLY “gaslighted”. I even checked into therapy, because the guy I was dating had convinced me that I needed it, in order for our relationship to function. If he gave me the silent treatment for anything, it was because “you need time to get your head together”. I freaking hated it. So glad to be done with that.
Rachael
You were likely in a relationship with someone with a personality disorder. Perhaps I should explain that because you were gaslighted by a male, its doesn’t mean women don’t gaslight, don’t have personality disorders, don’t gaslight men and that men aren’t gaslighted by women that have personality disprders.
Also, women on average are more likely to declare that because they FEEL something is correct, than its correct. Just look at MK, who FEELS that women should be treated as sacred, its a absurdity, but she believes it.
The hypothesis of this article is an absurdity.
…and perhaps you should look up the term “Mansplaining”, Ron…. since you were so offended by the gaslighting reference I’ll have to warn you it might cause your head to explode, but you are running around these comments bludgeoning women with your self-proclaimed superior understanding of the issue at hand. Let me explain something to you… just because someone says “hey that happened to me”, doesn’t mean they think women don’t do it. Calm down, Ron, you’re being hysterical and you are over-reacting to the existence of an article you disagree with and people who agree with it. Now I’m gaslighting you… how does it feel? More of that irony you like so much.
Mansplaining? lol
That’s a canard right out of the man-hating radical feminists book.
These are the types of women who throw around the term “WHAT ABOUT TEH MENZ??” when men bring up real problems for men in the modern age like men being 80% of suicides, 95% of workplace deaths, 90% the homeless, or 38% of college graduates, or getting shared/sole custody a whopping 20% of the time.
No wonder you’re cheering the author, and adding comments to every detractor who correctly calls the author on spreading misandric stereotypes of men.
At least it’s nice to no where you hail from.
Yeah mansplaining, the accusation is a rhetorical device that’s used by feminists to stifle debate and render an opinion worthless by virtue of the speakers genetic code.
Its rather hilarious when you reverse it to them and say fem-splaining or woman-splaining.
Reminds me of when Ricky tells Lucy she has “some ‘splaining to do.”
Sometimes I cry just to relieve some stress. Because I don’t want to keep it all bottled up and sometimes i feel calmer after a good cry.
I’ve been in relationships that at somet point told me I was too emotional or that I as “bat shit crazy” or variations of that. I’m a rational human being AND I have strong emotions. That doesn’t mean I get to abuse that and act out on all my emotions. But if I am discussing an issue I have with the man I care about, and his response is to defame my emotions, it doesn’t help matters. It’s the kind of stuff that builds walls up between people. And I’ve had a number of men respond to me that way. I think part of the issue is men don’t process emotions the same way all the time. But that doesn’t make a woman “crazy”.
Hi Erin.
Why don’t you explain the issues, and then you can get male feed back and we can learn from your side.
Just one instance Ron? I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve been in a relationship with a man and my feelings were put down or called “irrational”. Sometimes I get so over whelmed with the emotion I would cry. But in *most* cases, I would do it privately. Now I am not saying that I am not sometimes sensitive. But that shouldn’t matter. If I was overly happy would someone tell me I was crazy? No. When I get silly happy and joking around, the guys I dated enjoyed it. But when I would get upset at something with them, usually my feelings were put down and I was told I was being “crazy”.
Erin
It could be a case of you being over emotional, the men not being sensitive enough or some combination of the two. I’m wondering if you could give some specific examples?
Ron, I get the impression that you want to be the judge of the situations I found myself in, within my relationships, where you could tell me the appriopate amount of feelings that was allowed in the given situation. I guess I don’t see how that solves anything. As a man, you’d be telling me how you *feel* as a man about what was an appriopate amount of feelings for me to display and as a woman, I could very well see it differently.
As I said, I never had a man call me “crazy” for being over the top silly and goofy and flirty with him. But I have had that thrown at me with the more negative feelings. Perhaps men don’t process negative feelings very well overall. And that isn’t really men’s fault because of how men are brought up. BUT, that doesn’t mean that men get to call women names for displaying negitive feelings either.
Erin:
I think the reason this is a thorn in many relationships is that it makes somebody else responsible for your happiness.
What would you do if you were between romantic entanglements and alone? Probably talk your feelings out with female family members or female friends. Maybe you should pick and choose which issues to bring to your significant other. The more minor issues you could talk to your friends with, and save the big ones for your S.O.
90% of altercations, political manueverings, or toadies getting the easy jobs, and other issues at work or with friends I DON’T bring home to my wife to talk about.
I remember reading that in a study of WWII vets who were now seniors those that entered into classic therapy to work out the painful memories actually suffered from greater depression and suicide then those that did nothing.
I know that whatever issues I have at work, I feel relieved at the end of the day when I can mentally “checkout” and leave those issues at work. I’m not going to pretend that this is the same for every man, but based upon the many articles I see in which woman are lambasting men for not talking about their day I’d guess that mentally “checking out” is very prevalent. I tend to set emotions aside and busy myself in leisure, and come back to a problem later.
Men and women really are different. Unless your S.O. is doing something specifically impolite (like failing to pick you up, blowing off dates, not calling back) or downright rude (like impuning and belittling you in front of people, etc..) he really may not be being insensitive, but just a standard guy.
Also remember that during relationship conflict men have much more adrenaline and other stress causing hormones elevated than women. I would try to remember that we really are different in the future when dealing with him, and maybe spread the emotional workload among multiple people.
John D – if I get mad or upset about a situation in my relationship, that doesn’t equate to making someone else responsible for my happiness. Problems arise in relationships. They need to be dealt with. I am a generally happy person. But that doesn’t mean I don’t experience very difficult issues in my everyday life. I also don’t talk about every little issue I’m having with boyfriends in the hopes that he’s there to kiss it and make it better (although affection from your man when you’re having a tough time is nice.)
I think women share things because through their sharing, they build a more intimate relationship with their man. She doesn’t need you to solve all her issues but if she feels open and vulnerable enough to be open about an issue, it’s probably more out of wanting to create an intimacy beyond sex then having the expectation that the man be responsible for her happiness.
However, I totally understand wanting to come home and not have to talk about work issues and “check-out” from work. I’ve totally been there myself! When I don’t want to talk about work and I just want to be in the moment with the person I love. Just making dinner or watching TV and being together. Because I know the next day, I will have to deal with the issue anyway.
And I do understand that men process information, feelings and issues differently. But that doesn’t give men the right to call women names because of that.
While I disagree with some of your comments, I do get the foundation of what you are saying and actually agree with it. I just dislike how men will write women’s feelings off. It’s the same when a wife or girlfriend stops having sex with her partner because she doesn’t want to anymore. He feels slighted (naturally so ) for it. He feels as if his needs are being brushed aside. The same thing can happen with women and their feelings.
Agreed. Name calling is just rude behavior and shouldn’t be tolerated.
I may have missed the mark on a lot, but I’m glad you agree with my main point that men and women are different.
I’m always astonished sometimes that when I am stressed over an issue, sometimes my wife gives me a hug w/out me asking. When I ask her why she gave me a hug she tells me that I looked like I needed one.
Of course I’ll frequently scratch her back, or rub her neck and shoulders w/out her having to ask.
Relationships are tough. It requires a lot of conversation and patience–no doubt.
Are you astonished that she could tell you were stressed and was perceptive about it? Does the hug help or not so much?
Actually, the hug helped a ton. I needed it and didn’t know that I needed it.
I am amazed that she was that perceptive.
I doubt I could be that perceptive with 500 hours of training.
However, three years ago when my mom died, I was pretty much a wreck for quite a while. I remember one day, after I had cried and my wife had comforted me, later that night she cried and said:”I’m just so exhausted! I’m so tired of being the strong one!” and I comforted her.
I don’t begrudge her for that or anything. But, it does make me wonder what would happen if her mother had died, and I had told her (no matter how delicately) “Comforting you is exhausting me”. I started thinking about this.
It may strike people as incredibly misogynistic, but I really believe that (regardless of what women say they want) many women want men who can be their solid oak tree they can hold onto for dear life as the hurricane of their emotions threaten to sweep them away.
When women say they want a more emotionally available man, I think they’re just pining away for the perfect man and trying to mold their husbands/bf to fit the bill. But I don’t think many women realize what they are stating when they say they want a more emotionally developed man.
If I were to bring every single story of being slighted or challenged or whatever to my wife every other day the way she does to me (not that I even really have a drive to, I more or less busy myself with leisure or hobbies as a coping mechanism, rather than talking it out) I am certain I would quickly use up all of her empathy. BTW, I consider my wife a gem of a person, and very well adjusted, so I’m not stating anything about her, but rather about relationships.
So…..when women say they want emotionally developed men, what they really mean is they want a man to be emotional when it suits the woman, and non-emotional when it doesn’t suit her for him to be emotional.
Remember, an emotionally developed man is going to have his OWN issues that are going to need to be discussed, gone over, shared and resolved with lots and lots of talking. I’d bet dollars to donuts that this is not what most women REALLY want.
Women want men to be emotionally developed when discussing HER issues, then be an insensitive pr1ck when dealing with repair contractors, customer service people, altercative family matters (in which the couple have a disgruntlement with another family member).
This isn’t realistic. Men have personality traits just as women do. In essence men have parameters to their behaviors just as women do.
—– SIDE STORY —–
I remember watching a lifetime movie with my wife. This family had a great life:
Dad was an engineer, mom was happy and successful, teenage daughter was happy. Then a guy the daughter went on 1 date with became a stalker.
What struck me about this is the dad seemed a slightly meek egghead (and I use that term affectionately as I consider myself a nerd). Suddenly the mom wanted the dad to be rambo and go toe to toe with this huge much younger (and crazy) teen.
I thought to myself that this wasn’t very fair of the mom. She married the guy for his brain, not his muscle or bravado.
—– END SIDE STORY —–
It seems to me a lot of women won’t accept the limitations of personality in men. And (a good portion of) women can be very two-faced as regards their expectations of men.
If a woman settles down with a sensitive man, I would bet she quickly becomes over-burdened with his over-sized emotional needs, she wants his emotional abilities to be only beneficial, not burdensome.
If a woman settles down with an in-your-face insensitive guy, she wants to make him more emotional to support HER NEEDS, but to continue to be in-your-face to everybody outside the home.
Neither of these are realistic. The perfect man doesn’t exist, just as the perfect woman doesn’t exist.
I rarely see an equivalent wide-spread need in men to refuse to accept women for their (lack of) capabilities, and to try to modify them.
Women need to accept their man’s nature, with the exception of insensitive, rude, or violent behavior. I would also throw in the caveat about child-like behavior (like playing video games all the time, or having guys night out 3 days a week).
Lastly, unless there are children involved, if the guy doesn’t measure up to your standards, then just leave.
A lot of this is simply my beliefs. I’m just throwing things out. You can glean from it what you will.
Good luck to you and your mate. I hope you find happiness.
This reminds me of one time I was channel flipping and saw a Dane Cook (I think that’s his name) concert.
This guy said something like: “have you ever been crying and didn’t want to stop crying, so you thought of more sad sh*t to cry about?”
This looked like a sold out concert of 40,000 or so. The multitude were clapping. I was watching this concert and thinking what the hell is he talking about?
I don’t think I’ve ever “searched” for a cry in me, or tried to extend a cry. I don’t even know how you could make yourself cry (other than watching a sad movie).
Considering the thunderous response Dane Cook got from his overwhelmingly female audience I would say this action is at least significantly spread in women (over 20% I’d guess). I think this is a central difference between men and women (in general, there are always exceptions). Men (as far as I know) don’t seek out ways to make themselves cry.
If a great many of women can cry on demand, are we to assume (since we know all women are noble and pure and NEVER EVER manipulative) that no women has ever cried as manipulation?
Why do you continue to make statements that no has claimed… as example of how those opposed to you are wrong. I don’t know how you could know we are wrong when you have yet to grasp what we are saying. It’s been real though… thanks for the talk.
So in other words when you declare that I am wrong because I declare everybody else is wrong, you’re not doing what you accuse me of?
The author is wrong, because he states that men use a smear on women “you’re being emotional”.
So women having relationship problems are going to look at this and say EVERY time a man says this it is a manipulation tool.
To say that men are wrong for stating their loved one is being overly emotional is a blanket declaration for the sameness of men and women. It disallows the concept that she IS being overly emotional.
I am embracing gender differences. The author and many of his cheerleaders are denying them.
You didn’t even address my comment except to tell me that I am wrong.
So who is declaring people to be wrong, and who is not listening? Hint: look in the mirror.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVrW3zat2To
The part where I came in on tv was at the 4minute mark. Admittedly, he does in the beginning talk about himself or other men crying. However, I think a person would have to be really denying reality to refuse that this is specifically targeted at women. And that it really seems to strike a CHORD of truth with the women in the audience.
Denying gender differences does a disservice to us all.
John… I declared you are wrong due to your straw man fallacy. Not because you think other people are wrong… I would consider myself wrong if I believed or put forth half of what you keep repeating. You continually attack a less defensible position than the one actually being put forth.
The position put forth by the author was that this phenomena is damaging to women and men use the tactic frequently which is particularly damaging to women given the preexisting stereotype that women are too emotional, crazy or prone to over-reaction. He does not say that every man does this, that every woman is a victim of this nor that all men do this with aforethought and malice. He does not say men are never a victim of this nor that it is not hurtful to men when it happens. No one claimed a woman has never used crocodile tears to manipulate another person. I don’t think anyone denied there are gender differences either. In fact, the author and some of the other “deniers” here are indicating it is because of gender differences this is occurring and that the effect on the recipient differs…. if a person calls you crazy it doesn’t have the same effect it would on a person who is told repeatedly by many sources that their gender is prone to crazy.
As for your comment which I didn’t address… in reference to the comedy skit in which you made judgments based on complete subjectivity about who related to the joke. You came to conclusions about women’s feelings toward crying based on your own statistical “guesses” regarding the crowd in attendance at male comedian. I assume this was based on your gift to determine the number of people in a crowd shot and the ratio of men to women in that crowd and then to further draw inferences about gender affinity to a particular joke based on the quantity/quality of applause and laughter. I did not mean to overlook this important addition to the debate.
I reconsidered it since you took offense… With a little google search I learned this comedy special was filmed at the TD Garden which has a capacity of about 20,000 so you’re only off by half on that part of your guess. Here’s a picture of the crowd around the stage, I was unable to see that the crowd was majority females as you did: http://www.flickr.com/photos/baratunde/135716335/lightbox/ … I did hear plenty of women applauding the joke though, in fact it appeared everyone was enjoying it. Except for one guy… he doesn’t even know how a person could make themselves cry… must be a woman thing. I have an idea, perhaps you could count the fans on Dane Cook’s facebook page and get back to us with some statistics because if most of his fans are female, then you have really solved the puzzle for us.
You are welcome to your opinion about the underlying social truths revealed by Dane Cook; however, I don’t seen any reason to continue a debate with you if this is your idea of meaningful data.
In reverse order:
And where would that meaningful data come from? Who could ever get a grant for a study to establish that women are emotional based? Where is your data that women are the same in emotional processing? If I’m making a leap of faith, so are you. (is that simple enough for you?)
Let’s not forget that feminists THEMSELVES consistently TRUMPET that women are more caring nurturing and emotional.
My point is simply this: DON’T THROW OUT this sh*t if you don’t have thick enough skins to also accept that this could have negative consequences in some scenarios for women.
I’m embracing gender differences without making value judgements about them. Feminists on the other hand like to believe that the only gender differences that exist are the ones that prove women superior.
You are correct, the author did not say that only men gaslight women. But he did say the following:
1) “. . . makes visible a pattern of sexist commentary that travels through all facets of society on how men (MEN, not “some” men) view women”
2) “This is something we (MEN, not “some” men) do to women every day, in many different ways.”
3) You’re so dramatic. Just get over it already! Sound familiar? If you’re a woman, it probably does.
4) While dealing with gaslighting isn’t a universal truth for women, we all certainly know plenty of women who encounter it
5) And the act of gaslighting does not simply affect women who are not quite sure of themselves. Even vocal, confident, assertive women are vulnerable to gaslighting.
6) Because women bare the brunt of our neurosis.
7) Whether gaslighting is conscious or not, it produces the same result: it renders some women emotionally mute.
8) These women aren’t able to clearly express to their spouses that what is said or done to them is hurtful.
9) When these women receive any sort of push back to their reactions, they often brush it off by saying, “Forget it, it’s okay.”
10) No wonder some women are unconsciously passive aggressive
11) These are the same women who stay in relationships they don’t belong in
12) this concept of women as “crazy” has really emerged as a major issue in society
13) From the way women are portrayed on reality shows
14) I recognize that I’ve been guilty of gaslighting my women friends in the past (but never my male friends—surprise, surprise).
15) So for many of us, it’s first about unlearning how to flicker those gaslights and learning how to acknowledge and understand the feelings, opinions, and positions of the women in our lives.
Against this litany of worries for women, he only includes 1 brief disclaimer that women are also gaslighted.
Let’s not forget: The reason that men so vastly outnumber women at the bottom of the power pyramid is that male stories of oppression, disenfranchisement, victimhood are OMITTED (with strong pushing from feminists to keep men off the victimhood stage). Just as this author omits male victims or female emotional abusers from his story.
If you’re annoyed, that’s too damn bad. I will oppose this kind of immature gender scape-goating when and where I find it.
Good day to you sir!
One last point:
I think it’s a pretty piss-poor value judgement upon you to say that no matter how low men are on the totem pole of power, the woman married to him staying home to take care of the kids actually ranks lower.
I happen to think that raising kids one of the most important jobs. You are raising future generations. How you could come to such a conclusion, I have no idea.
However, while I think it’s very important I am also wise enough to recognize that staying home (full time) to raise your own kids is easier and more fulfilling than about 90% of paid work. Women are 20% of suicides, 10% of the homeless, 20% of victims of violent crime, and 5% of on-the-job deaths.
You can maintain and quote some imaginary ranking, but when it comes to real metrics of oppression and disenfranchisement men VASTLY dominate the bottom of the power pyramind. Your stupid argument that “housewives still rank lower” is just absurd, next to the cold hard facts that society is running on the blood, sweat, tears and bones of impoverished and minority men.
Even the creator of TGMP had this to say:
“To somehow say that there is an epidemic of men who are manipulating women by making them feel crazy when they are not seems far too broad to be helpful. I know plenty of men who feel that their wives are manipulating them. If I were to try to generalize, which is dangerous, I would say that we have a communication problem between the genders not a one way emotional black mail thing going on. Making broad statements about men as bad actors in this regard is just as demeaning as the behavior you are supposedly pointing out.”
Good god, is it not possible for adult men and women to discuss an article civilly and without sticking their heads in their butts? This isn’t elementary school anymore, girls and boys have to live with each other when they grow up so, might as well make peace with one another.
Mel the problem is the incendiary nature of the article. The author states gaslighting as OVERWHELMINGLY an activity that men do to women.
It also ignores the facts of biological/sociological differences in men & women. It would be entirely possible for the woman to be overly emotional (from the man’s view), and for the man to be insensitive to her feelings (from the woman’s view).
To deny that women process and resolve emotions differently is to deny reality. But in the author’s example, anytime a man says a woman is being overly emotional it’s always the man’s fault, rather than her actually being overly emotional, or the reality being somewhere in between her being emotional and him being insensitive (i.e. they’re both at fault).
Men are getting sick of tired of the feminist mantra that men are to blame for all of women’s woes on a site DEDICATED TO HELPING MEN.
To Dad on the run and Chris:
You haven’t debunked anything.
In addition to the citations provided earlier here are a couple more.
ht tp://www.michaelmetzphd.com/includes/Relationship_Conflict_Research_Findings.pdf
Excerpt:
“found that individuals (particularly wives) who made
negative attributions about their partners’ intentions and responsibility for negative
behavior engaged in less supportive and more negative behavior, as well as more
negative reciprocation of their partners’ negative acts, during problem-solving discussions
with their partners.”
5. In distressed relationships, there tends to be a gender difference in the ways
that partners deal with relationship conflict: women more commonly engage their
partners with verbally demanding behavior when conflict occurs, whereas men more
commonly avoid their partners or withdraw when conflict occurs (Christensen & Shenk,
1991; Gottman & Krokoff, 1989; Gottman, 1993a, 1993b; Heavey, Christensen, &
Malamuth, 1995; Metz & Dwyer, 1993)
ht tp://www.apa.org/monitor/may06/conflicts.aspx
My point is very simple. Feminists LOVE LOVE LOVE pointing out that women are the more caring nurturing emotionally intelligent gender with “Woman’s ways of knowing” and that if we adopted female-styled power structures the world would be a eutopia.
My point is you can’t through around sh*t like “women have greater empathy and emotional range”, without also acknowledging that there may be areas where this would be dentrimental or less valuable to have in women.
But, it seems feminists want to claim women have ONLY upsides to their biological differences. That being the high emotional ranged, emotionally intelligent (and possessing connected-ways-of-knowing) never represents a detriment EVER.
It would seem that based on the evidence I have linked (should they CHOOSE to do so) women in relationships with men would be in very powerful position to emotionally manipulate men (or even emotionally abuse them).
If you bothered to read any of the links I provided it is typically the girls who fit the “good girl” model (pretty, polite, good student, lots of friends) who practice relational aggression. In other words just as many physically abusive men are charming until after the relationship is well underway, it stands to reason many emotionally abusive women will be very good at hiding their abusive behavior until the relationship has cemented.
Considering all the evidence for women’s greater practice of relational aggression (and), women’s greater emotional range, women’s less raising of adrenaline and other stress causing hormones during relationship conflict it seems many women could very easily manipulate the man in their lives. In fact, I would say many women would have a lot larger emotional disparity to exploit (if they so chose) than the strength disparity men could exploit. Strength can be mitigated with the use of weapons. No such equalizers, exist for men with emotional abuse.
Are you really so enamored with the concept of the angelic nature of women that you don’t believe some women abuse men with their greater emotional abilities just as men abuse women with their greater physical strength? Many men who abuse don’t even think they are abusive.
It wouldn’t surprise me to find that many of the women who emotionally abuse also don’t think they are abusive.
Kudo’s to the author for showing that words can have a destructive impact. But, why only this concern for the impact to women?
Considering that men are 80% of suicides, and that evidence shows that girls relational aggression is AT LEAST as prevalent as male physical bullying (but far less likely to be caught, punished and shamed and therefore much more likely to continue into adult-hood) I think maybe it’s time for the author and some of the denialist commenters here to start wondering how women are using the harmful impact of words to damage the men and children in their lives.
Just because you choose not to see it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
I have descended from on high to present you with a sacred text.
Its called “The Good Man’s Prayer”. Its to be memorized and repeated five times a day by males.
“Our Women, Who are infllible
Hallowed be Thy Emotional Intellegence;
Thy kingdom come,
Thy will be done,
In all thy dealings with men
Give us this day your sacred wisdom,
and forgive us our trespasses,
as we know you never trespass against us;
and all faults are with us,
only we can be evil.
Awomyn.
There’s a Good Boy.
That’s not really that imaginative.
Infidel
Grin
Just on a practical note, gaslighting your partner is not a good long-term practice. If the goal is to keep conversations from getting overly emotional, then it will inevitably backfire. It just builds resentment in the person who feels dismissed, the feelings never get addressed, and it just makes the emotional side of things even more intense. Paradoxical as it sounds, usually the more you recognize your partner’s feelings, the less likely that person is to be overwhelmed by feelings.
I’ve also learned the hard way that when your partner is upset with you, it does not automatically mean it’s a criticism. It does not mean you are being ordered to fix everything. Often when someone else’s emotions feel overwhelming and I’m tempted to say anything to make them stop, it’s because I’ve jumped into “now it’s my problem mode.” If you expect that every time your partner is upset it means there’s something you have to fix, then you’re in for a lot of misery.
Probably the smartest thing I’ve read in the comments. Good advice. It’s certainly very hard to avoid feeling of needing to fix something when your partner is upset. Feelings happen to different people for different reasons and we shouldn’t assume it is always our fault if our partner is upset, nor should we discount their feelings just because we (or others we know) would not react with the same emotion to a given situation.
Thank you thank you! You are a gem for realizing that.
I’d just like to throw out there for all the guys who get pissed (emotion tut tut) that while men express their anger by keeping busy, yelling ect…women frequently express their frustration through tears. Sometimes those tears aren’t help me help me…they are an expression of frustration or rage. I think you’d rather have a few tears than having your balls ripped off.
Its a two way street, men’s emotions are invalidated, look at this article and how the women here view men or practically anything that Hugo writes here.
If a man is hurting, he’s told to man up while women are allowed to be emotional.
I’d say there is more cultural gaslighting and invalidating of male emotion than there is female. This article is a case in point .
So who gets to take up the torch for an article detailing how men are invalidated? I saw a good example of this just today. And my does it start young!
Fours years old is too young to ignore a boy looking for comfort after taking a bad tumble. And both parents simply carried on despite that boy holding out his little hands to ask for help. How long would it have taken to examine his injuries, to acknowledge that the fall had shocked him and it hurt. To let him know that he was all right?
WOW!
Lively thread here. Been missing all the good stuff by talking about sex elsewhere. Jeez! Gotta go back and enjoy all the gooders in here!
Rock on dudes and dudettes!
I learned pretty young that I wanted to avoid that sort of thing. I didn’t really identify as a girl, and I realized I couldn’t be taken seriously if I permitted myself any emotional display at all. So, now I just smile or assume a mask-like expression rather than undermining myself. Emotions don’t matter to me at all.
@ The Bad Man- I wasn’t off topic. War is the most irrational act that there is, but women get labeled with being “irrational” just for crying. Men get to kill people, start wars for profit, start wars for any old reason, plant land mines and basically just do what ever you want without being labeled “irrational”. I’m calling bullshit on that. And who created religion? Is that rational? Some angry mountain god, does that sound rational to you?
Valerie,
Nations make war not men. It has been shown that female leaders make war just as often as male leaders do.
Hilary Clinton voted to invade Iraq. Margaret Thatcher invaded the Faulkand Islands, and Mahatma Gandhi did her fair share too.
Queen Mary had protestants executed by fire.
But, when the time came to do the dying it was routinely men who did so. Men have historically been the cannon fodder of nations, and still are today (in fact any student of history will know that our great nation is built upon the bones of poor, minority and migrant men).
Also, if you’re going to look at the negative aspects of nations and attribute them to men, are you willing to do the same for positive aspects of society?
Do men like Henry Ford, Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, Marconi get any credit from you?
What about Jonas Salk, and Alexander Fleming? They are the fathers of immunization, and antibiotics. Combined they have saved hundreds of millions of lives–far more than all the wars in the last 100 years.
I’ll tell you this: By twisting a point about personal relationships and trying to make some kind of analogy to war, you’re really taking the mantra of “the personal is political” into the stratosphere.
Your point is so tortured and illogical, it’s almost funny if it wasn’t so tragic to get a windo into how some women are so anti-male.
Things won’t change until radical feminists put down their swords (or castrating scissors) and end the battle of the sexes.
Uh, John. I can see your point but traditionally the women die later. They die as slaves, of famine, exposure and disease as their home communities are completely destroyed. Men on a battle field died terrible, but often quicker, deaths. And if the men of the community put up a particularly long fight the women were treated to even greater savagery by the invading force. This was something noted by Julius Caesar.
Pillow,
Discounting Caesar, because I don’t feel the need to defend my gender 2000 years back I will say this:
The difference is that (at least in most of the 20th century I have read and know about) the harming of non-combat woman of occupied nations was strictly forbidden in the chain of command of almost every nations war machine. I’m not saying abuses of women didn’t happen, but when they were found by commanders they were punished.
I even remember a quote from (either Patton or MacArthur I forget which) in which he states: “Any soldier charged with rape will be court-martialed and shot”. It sounds like their was no doubt that the court-martial would come up guilty.
That’s a BIG distinction: Harm a women–get shot. Refuse to fight in a war (and harm men) get thrown in military prison for 7-10 years. You get punished for harming women, and punished for refusing to harm men. The other issue is that when a force occupies a territory, they would often round up the civilian men as they were suspected of being insurgents.
In fact in bosnia, the serb strategy of killing every civilian man has now been dubbed the term gendercide:
ht tp://www.gendercide.org/case_bosnia.ht ml
Only men were conscripted or socialized to offer up their bodies at great risk.
In fact, you may be interested in reading this (to see how deep among women the shaming went of men who refused to fight):
ht tp://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2038997/In-Downton-Abbey-male-servants-taunted-feathers-women-going-war-So-whats-truth-cowards-tormentors-Feather-Girls.ht ml
If you look at history it can almost EXCLUSIVELY be shown that where women had it bad, men had it worse (with the exception of natural disasters of course)
Pillow, I thank you for keeping an open mind. I know I have been all over these boards banging away on my drum with seeming little affect.
I remember you asking for links to references on specifically male issues, and I am happy that you have an interest.
Here is a video which is rather eye opening.
ht tp://www.youtube.com/user/manwomanmyth#p/u/0/6ZAuqkqxk9A
After you watch it, watch any news program and you will see that when men are imperiled or killed or do something heroic their gender will be deliberately hidden behind gender-neutral job titles. But, when women are imperiled or harmed or do something heroic, they are specifically called women.
As the video says, you can’t appreciate how misandrist our society is, until you take a step back.
Men’s lives are cheap. Many men are getting fed up (and feminist organizations do NOTHING to help, in fact they do much to hinder making visible and helping oppressed and vulnerable men), and there are a lot of good women standing up for men in a big way.
Especially at fathersandfamilies.org
Half of the members of the shared parenting movement is female. Most are 2nd wives, paternal grandmothers and other concerned female family members who see the disastrous harm is befalling our society as courts turn a blind eye to mothers (post-divorce) keeping the kids from their fathers.
I started crying while reading this. In so many ways, this hit home. And the saddest part is, so much of it has been from *other women*. I can’t count all the times other women have told me I am overly sensitive, they were just kidding when they said something hurtful. Because they probably learned it when someone said it to them.