Human beings fight with one another because, largely, it’s in our nature, Valter Pahlad writes.
Men and women argue with each other. They quarrel and bicker and fight. We notice it all around us (and in our homes as well), and we read it in the comment section here at The Good Men Project. But, especially when it’s about sex, or other “hot” topics (abuse, violence, discrimination), it often goes from discussion to assault.
Like many others, I pondered about the reasons, and I have identified several issues at the root of this ancient phenomenon. Below is a list compiled with nine of those issues.
♦◊♦
Beforehand, I’d like to state some basic assumptions:
- There’s no “better” or “worse” gender, no “good” or “bad” sex: women and men are just different. It’s easy to say, harder to let go of all the prejudices against this.
- Any gender’s fault has some kind of equivalent in the other.
- You may like one better than the other, you may notice a gender is usually more skilled in some trade … but, on a global perspective, there’s no objective “best.” Again, it sounds obvious, but if it was obvious AND everybody believed it, there wouldn’t be so much arguing.
- Sexism, thinking one gender is “better” or “worse” than the other, is a sort of racism. It’s prejudice. And, like with any kind of racism, from the outside we know it’s just stupid but, when it’s us who has that kind of belief, we stick to it and we resist to question it.
- If we (theoretically) agree with the above, but we happen to utter a “Yes, but …,” usually that means we take something personal and we give it a global meaning (see “Confusing experience with reality” below). Obviously there are exceptions for everything, but the exception doesn’t change the average.
Therefore, everything I say now on will be equally valid for both genders.
♦◊♦
1. Lack of objectivity
First, we must be aware that everybody “distorts” reality somehow; our beliefs are always subject to personal perceptions and interpretations. Being fully objective and impartial is almost impossible, almost “inhuman.”
Ironically, the most objective person is the one admitting his or her own biases; those thinking “I have no bias!” are usually heavily biased.
2. Confusing experience with reality
Our personal experiences shape the way we see reality; our emotions shape our beliefs. The problem is that reality is so much wider and deeper than our limited experience. Alas, we instinctively believe our experience represents reality at large. And we cling to what our emotions tell us (“Women are liars!” “Men are cheaters!”), because we hope to avoid the same wounds from happening again.
In other words, we confuse the Personal with the Universal. But “my reality” is not reality; we should be able to tell one apart from the other.
3. Being different
Since men and women differ in countless aspects, this makes it harder to understand the opposite gender; what’s unfamiliar to us is more difficult to grasp.
Especially where genders have different takes on something (say sex, or porn), this difference easily creates conflicts; the other’s point of view is “alien” to us and seems unfathomable or absurd.
4. Favoring our kin
We instinctively have a positive bias towards who’s close or similar to us, or with whom we feel a belonging: our partners, children, friends, teams, fellow citizens, and, usually, on some level, those of our gender.
We’re much fonder of “We” (whatever we include within the “We”) than we are about “Them.”
5. Fighting reality
Some things are just the way they are, just facts of life (you know, rain, taxes … it’s inevitable). Fighting them is an exercise in futility. Yet, when we don’t like those facts, we often attack them, in the vain hope that our will could change reality.
Men want lots of sex (even for the sake of it); women are attracted by “alpha males”; everybody is fascinated by beauty. These are true for most people. Like it or not, that’s just plain old reality. Fighting reality is like Don Quixote fighting windmills.
6. Blaming
When we have a blaming attitude, we tend to deny our responsibility, and we put the blame on others no matter what.
Some people learn this blaming attitude from family, some develop it as a kind of shield, but one thing is for sure: blaming doesn’t solve anything. It’s kind of a childish way out where one sees oneself as “innocent.” Guilt is always out there in the world.
But in most problems, every party involved holds some responsibility. Only in acknowledging that responsibility do we become able to contribute to a solution.
On the other hand, when everybody blames others, there can be only pointless squabbling.
7. Expectations
We all have many expectations (often unstated). These expectations usually come from our “roots” (family, teachers, culture) and are largely never inquired: “Men should always be strong and tough,” “Women should be submissive,” “Men should make the first move,” “Women should clean the house,” and so on.
When someone disappoints our expectations, we have a strong reaction, because we believe it’s kind of contradicting what should be a given—the way the world is (or should be). Actually, an expectation is just a belief in our minds; it’s just a set of rules, and everybody has his or her own set.
We have expectations about the world and about our partners and about ourselves, but we seldom express them openly—and, often, the untold expectations are the strongest. “You will give me all the sex I need,” “You will make me happy forever.” Not questioning them, we don’t come to realize they’re often unrealistic.
When we become disappointed, there’s often a sense of betrayal: “But we should be …” or “You were supposed to …” Maybe the other broke a promise, but maybe he or she didn’t even know a promise existed (thus how some expectations reside in our minds).
8. Resentment
When we ferociously argue about something, or when we attack someone with no apparent or insufficient reason, maybe the real cause is not the matter at hand. Maybe all the fury and intensity come from some resentment underneath.
It might be resentment we accumulated with that person previously that’s now just spilling over. It might be something older, related to other people or events, that is “triggered” by the current situation. Maybe this event is reminding us about an old pain, maybe this person resembles one who harmed us.
Our own pain makes it difficult to clearly discern. It clouds the mind. When our wounds are very deep, we could even be resentful towards a whole category of people, be they men, women, an ethnic group, a nation. The pain can blind us and make us believe anybody resembling the offender is our “enemy.”
9. Idealization
Idealization means putting someone on the pedestal, thinking this person is perfect, or at least better than he or she really is. Think about sport fans and how they usually idealize their team(s). It seems to me that even the smart Hugo Schwyzer falls for it, when he idealizes women (and therefore blames men).
The problem with idealization is that it distorts reality, and it makes everything else look worse: if my team is the best, then the others must suck. Besides, when you idealize someone, you become oblivious to their faults: if women are flawless creatures, then every problem must be men’s fault. In a way, patriarchy has been about idealizing men, denying their weaknesses and thus often putting the blame on women (“Men are not lustful, it’s the women seducing and tempting them!”).
Another problem with idealization is when it crumbles (and it does, sooner or later, because nobody is perfect). When the “idol” falls, the idolizer feels deeply disappointed, bitter, even resentful.
♦◊♦
It’s you and me and everybody
I compiled this list focusing especially on men and women, but most of these issues can be present in every disagreement. It’s just human nature.
Even when we’re able to rationally acknowledge all the issues I pointed out, we still instinctively tend to cling to our beliefs and subjectivity. In a way, that’s what makes us human. Only a machine is capable of always being objective and detached. But this inherent subjectivity is a potential source of trouble as well.
If the reasons for fighting are many and understandable, why do we keep fighting? Why do we cling to these issues?
- Blaming is easy and comforting: it makes the blamer(s) feel more innocent.
- We are largely blind toward our own limits and biases. We’re immersed in our own beliefs and prejudices, and it’s difficult to notice them, recognize at them from “the outside” and become aware.
- Prejudice makes one feel “certain,” and avoiding uncertainty is comfortable. It’s frightening to think anybody can do anything because it implies a loss of control and an innate difficulty in predicting behavior.
♦◊♦
“It is harder to crack a prejudice than an atom.”
—Albert Einstein
♦◊♦
That human beings are not fully rational and objective means we can’t easily overcome all the issues above. In part, this makes life and relationships more interesting.
What we can do, is become aware of those issues in ourselves; the more we are aware of our biases, the less they will distort our perceptions.
I think being a “good man” means this, too: questioning myself, trying to drop my biases and prejudices, being less bickering and more understanding.
The main remedy, I think, is seeing others just as they are (instead of the way we’d like them to be), and then accepting them that way. Even when we don’t like it.
After all, we would like to be treated that way, wouldn’t we?
About Valter Viglietti
You forgot all the blatent sexual frustration going here…just saying’ ..
Oh, you’re so very much right!
But my goal was depicting some of the ways we distort communication and misunderstand others… not the many, many reasons we fight for.
This post is about the ways, not the topics.
For the topics, I think we’d need a whole book!
Great points. I’m particularly fond of point number two & this “The problem is that reality is so much wider and deeper than our limited experience.”
Yup. Reality is infinite – and our mind is not.
I find it intriguing that so many commenters and bloggers here have this hyper-complex, frustrated/contentious relationship with the opposite sex. I can’t, for the life of me, understand all the drama. I have liked and gotten along well with girls and women my whole. If anything, my problem was getting along too well, and therefore having girls and friends and girlfriends from pre-school on (no exaggeration). And, even after marriage, I’ve gotten a few icy stares from Mrs. Eric M. when she felt I was yucking it up just a little too much with another woman.
I enjoy the company of women, enjoy the differences in outlooks, love to laugh at those differences, and poke fun at both sides. The whole experience is fantastically wonderful and I cannot, to save my life, figure out why some here find it to be such back-breaking work.
O lucky man…
I seriously envy you.
On a more serious note, from investigating relationships in the last 30 years, it seems you’re more the exception than the rule. Alas.
Or… maybe you’re so damn hot and handsome and terrific, all the ladies couldn’t help loving you!
I very think it’s the company one keeps. I have not found that to be the case at all. Men and women are complementary by nature, not adversarial.
It is my observation that the feminist movement, in its efforts to right many wrongs against women and girls (whichm, to its credit, it has accomplished), has largely contributed to creating a very environment/scenario, pitting females against males, resuling in a whole host of relationship drama, problems, and dysfunction. The MRA movement was largely created in response to that, to fight back against resulting injustices suffered by males, resulting in a back and forth tug of war.
Wise, non-gender-biased, balanced people stay out of that fray and work to cooperate and enjoy the human experience, of which one of the best parts is enjoying the variety of humanity, the most basic and IMO most enjoyable variety being male and female.
@Eric. M: “Men and women are complementary by nature, not adversarial.”
Sure, but that doesn’t mean the get along happily all the time.
Maybe your positive experience make you somehow “blind” to all the rest…? (see Point 2).
The feminist movement fighted against millennia of male domination, subjugation and abuse over women: being “complementary by nature” didn’t avoid that from happening (and often still doesn’t).
I agree “Wise, non-gender-biased, balanced people” do exists (and I strive to be like that)… but they aren’t the majority yet. Far from it.
I think the core issue is men and women being different, and (many times) wanting different things. Hence the conflicts.
“Sure, but that doesn’t mean the get along happily all the time.
Even identical twins don’t get along happily all the time but if someone is constantly fighting with members of the opposite sex, the problem is theirs.
“The feminist movement fighted against millennia of male domination, subjugation and abuse over women: being “complementary by nature” didn’t avoid that from happening (and often still doesn’t).”
You may want to check your American history. White women have never been legally enslaved, bought, sold, beaten, raped, dismembered, and killed – and later lynched and legally dominated, abused, and humiliated. By the time, blacks could legally vote (via state and federal law) white women had the vote for over 40 years. Throughout the history of this country white women have had and continue to have more priviledge than any other group, with the exception of white men.
The feminist movement enabled white women to have equal rights to white men (a good thing), but also created and continues to sponsor gender animosity, division, and even hatred.
Men and women being different is a good thing. I have observed that those involved the feminist and MRA movements tend to have far more conflicts with members of the opposite sex than us regular folks who aren’t fighting a gender battle.
@Eric. M:” if someone is constantly fighting with members of the opposite sex, the problem is theirs.”
I agree. And my hope is that my article could help those people understand the reasons why they do it. The whole article is about personal responsibility.
@Eric. M: “You may want to check your American history.”
). I was talking about the whole world.
Eric, my point of view is global, not local. I always strive for having the widest possible vision (opposite to a “personal” one).
Having said “millennia”, obviously I wasn’t referring to just the USA (that are about three centuries old
I’m European, and we have at least 25 centuries to consider.
Once again, your position seems indicating a “personal”, limited viewpoint.
It’s a bit like somone saying “Oh, the crisis is not so bad!”, having a Ferrari parked outside his villa.
We have to look way beyond our “backyard”.
@Eric. M: “White women have never been legally enslaved…”
Are you implying you care just about white women?
BTW, even white women in your country got the right to vote less than a century ago. And they have often been treated as “inferior” even after that.
@Eric. M: “Men and women being different is a good thing.”
I agree. I’m all for difference. I’ve been labeled “different” all my life.
Yet, differences often creates friction.
“Eric, my point of view is global, not local. I always strive for having the widest possible vision (opposite to a “personal” one).”
Actually, your point of view is not really limited; it’s simply wrong in how it is expressed. Perhaps you meant something different?
Your claim is that men dominated and subjugated women (in general). The African slave scenario is an extreme example of that not being even close to factual. White women were part of the subjugation, domination, torture, killing, and other ill-treatment of black men, not vice-versa. A correct statement would be that the over-class dominated the under-class, both of which included both men and women.
“@Eric. M: “White women have never been legally enslaved…” Are you implying you care just about white women? ”
Not at all; simply that white women have been (and continue to be) part of the dominant class in the west for centuries. Thus, all women weren’t dominated/subjugated, etc. by all men.
“BTW, even white women in your country got the right to vote less than a century ago. And they have often been treated as “inferior” even after that.”
After that white women were still treated as far superior to black men. Black men (and women) didn’t get the vote until 43 years after white women. White women were never hosed down and treated like animals.
“Yet, differences often creates friction.”
My right and left hands are different – opposites in fact, but still highly complementary. They do largely the same thing but from a different perspective. That’s the healthy and normal (IMO) way to view men and women.
Ciao Valter
“Alas, we instinctively believe our experience represents reality at large.”
We all live in our own valleys, and for me the art of dialogue and communication is travel – be that travel to another country or across the landscape of a subject. Some communicate from Small Town and others with the experience of the Bright Lights – Big City. National boundaries get in the way and we even argue with global institutions.
I always wonder how well the human race would do in a first encounter from outer space? If we are so bad at dealing with the alien on planet earth, I wonder if visitors have arrived looked about and decided it’s not worth talking to us!
Ciao!
@MediaHound: “I wonder if visitors have arrived looked about and decided it’s not worth talking to us!”
Yeah, I thought the same many times…
Especially if they saw humans with that attitude “Shoot first, ask questions later”.
“Shoot first, ask questions later”.
Us humans are lucky that we haven’t met aliens with that attitude – yet!
Well said
Lovely piece. How do you square #5 (Reality) with number #7 (Expecations). You say, These expectations usually come from our “roots” (family, teachers, culture) and are largely never inquired:
Yet some of the examples of your “Reality” might well be expectations. “All women like alpha males.”
Is this a fact? Like gravity? Or is it a cultural belief? I”m not actually arguing that particular point, only that much of what we consider “reality” might be a deeper structure connected to those cultural expectations that we can only see after say, decades or centuries of change.
Like how blacks were considered to be sub human and that was taken as fact during slavery based on all kinds of cultural justification. I don’t think most of us could accept that as a “reality” nowadays.
Just wondering your thoughts on that.
Your objection is good (“Take nothing for granted”), but some points are just proven: we have plenty of proof, and we know why it works that way.
OTOH, there has never been real proof for, let’s say, “inferiority of blacks”.
We have plenty of proof that, e.g. “Women are attracted by ‘alpha males’”, and we know it’s written into our (your
) biological programming. It’s evolutionary. It’s a bit like survival istinct.
I agree sometimes it’s difficult tell apart innate from cultural, reality from beliefs. It’s been a debate in science and philosophy for a long time.
But some things are just… well, facts.
When something happens to (almost) everybody, and it happens everywhere, and it has always happened (regardless of different age and cultures), and we know the reasons behind it… I think it’s proof enough.
The examples I cited are “universal”, also because they are rooted well “below” the cultural level, in our biology. We are born with it.
Having said that, we could always make mistakes and discover – one day – that some “reality” was actually just a belief.
First point of my list: the risk of subjectivity is always present.
There’s no “better” or “worse” gender, no “good” or “bad” sex: women and men are just different. It’s easy to say, harder to let go of all the prejudices against this.
I think this one can be a Conversation Killer if its not heeded.
For example the very term sexism itself.
I’m sure most of you folks reading this have come across people (online or in real life) that literally think sexism can only be male against female right? I think what’s happening there is actually the opposite of the last point in that list.
If we (theoretically) agree with the above, but we happen to utter a “Yes, but …,” usually that means we take something personal and we give it a global meaning (see “Confusing experience with reality” below). Obviously there are exceptions for everything, but the exception doesn’t change the average.
Its not a matter of trying of one trying to take something personal and give it global meaning but actually a case of trying to take something that is global (but probably directly harmful to someone other than themselves) and reduce it to something personal or thinking that the two realities at hand cannot coexist (as if “men have power” somehow translates into “there is no such thing as female against male sexism”).
(And I think what makes it that extra bit hurtful is that “Yes, but…” method of delivery. As in “Yes that is terrible but it doesn’t compare to ______”. And while the people who do this try to say they aren’t claiming that one is worse than the other what they don’t notice is that by trying to apply that reduction I describe above that is exactly what they are doing, claiming that one has it worse than the other.)
Once this happens all that’s left is a downward spiral for the conversation.
@Danny: “I think this one can be a Conversation Killer if its not heeded.”
Well, I wasn’t suggesting going around and telling people: “Let me list the 9 reasons why you’re mistaken”…!
@Danny: “As in “Yes that is terrible but it doesn’t compare to ______”"
Not what I had in mind.
What I meant was someone saying: “Yes, it’s true that there’s no best or worst gender, but… men are more egoist”, or “… women are more manipulative”.
In other words, people using their experience to deny the general assumption (meaning they don’t really believe the egalitarian assumption itself, despite what they say).
It’s like someone saying “I’m not racist… but [color of your choice] people are often criminals”. It’s another case of having a bias but not acknowledging it.
Well, I wasn’t suggesting going around and telling people: “Let me list the 9 reasons why you’re mistaken”…!
Not sure what you mean here.
Not what I had in mind.
Fair enough and I have to admit that I did take that in a different direction.
@Danny: “Not sure what you mean here.”
You wrote about “a Conversation Killer” and I made a joke; reminding my post was mainly focused on self-inquiring, not blaming people for doing what I listed.
Rationality is wonderful to be sure, but irrationality is not its opposite. Rationality does have some costs. Sometimes it’s like bringing a rocket launcher to an arm wrestling match – it can be overkill, and it can be exhausting.
A more heuristic approach would, by practice, be less rational, more irrational, more proficient and more relevant. The brain’s capacity for irrationality is what provides that different level of awareness and intelligence. The brain itself may very well be the most amazing thing in the universe, but then again, look at who is telling us that!
I think the point is not being rational OR emotional; as you say, both have their pros and cons.
The problem is when someone goes over-emotional, or over-rational: both can be destructive, and they lead to lousy communication.
Anyway, what I was suggesting was awareness (about our fallacies), not rationality.
They might look similar, but they are definitely not.
@Eric: “I find it intriguing that so many commenters and bloggers here have this hyper-complex, frustrated/contentious relationship with the opposite sex.”
Yes!! I’ve always had wonderful relationships with males, as well. Wonderful boyfriends, great friends, etc… It’s really awful to see how many people actually have a bitter attitude against the opposite sex, even if they can’t back it up.
@Crescendo: Wonderful article. You correctly address a lot of issues about the comments in this forum. But…oh, the ‘alpha male’ thing again. What makes an alpha male in today’s society? Is it a jock? Many, many females either prefer ‘nerd’ types or mostly date them. Is it being famous and rich? Well, then, this goes for males too. Otherwise, why the obsession with some actresses who, while pretty, might be passed over if they weren’t well known and well made up? And how the hell does Tori Spelling have such a hot husband? So it goes for everyone, not just one sex. Is it being popular and confident? Once again, this goes for both sexes. The same way that a guy doesn’t necessarily want a girl who’s always complaining about how she’s fat, demonizes men because of a bad past lover, or just sits awkwardly in a corner–a girl doesn’t want a guy who is so bitter from rejection (or supposed rejection) that he’s always complaining about alpha males and can’t hold a conversation with a real woman. Maybe they’re good for casual sex, to make someone jealous, or in a just friends situation, but not for a long term romantic partner. Is it about how physically attractive a man is? Does that make him alpha? Maybe we all need to broaden our horizons of what attractive is, for both sexes. Is it about how good of a leader a man is? In today’s world, being a good leader and successful might come with trade-offs and/or irritating idiosyncrasies that might be detrimental to a relationship.
Dear Aya,
regarding the “alpha male thing”: I got together some examples that are true for most people, with all the limits of generalization and simplification. I didn’t mean people live by them.
I said “Women are attracted to”, not “they want, choose or marry” them. It’s about the first istinctive reaction. People don’t live by their istinctive reactions… but they experience them nevertheless.
It’s like the “beauty” issue: we don’t choose partners or cars or stuff just because their beauty, of course… but the effect of beauty on us is hardly negligible.
IMHO, denying our istincts is one of the ways we try to see ourselves better than we really are.
Regarding all the whys and hows of attraction and relationships and love, there’s lots of stuff to share; there will be future posts about them, I hope.
That’s still not an really answer to what the heck an ‘alpha male’ is in our modern, everyday lives. Of course we shouldn’t ignore the instincts of who we’re attracted to (though we should know when it’s inappropriate to act on them), but I don’t know that women are always initially attracted to some pack leader nowadays–and once again, is it determined by money, popularity, swagger, physical appearance, smarts, or jerkiness? For me, initial chemistry has always simply been about…initial chemistry. It’s tended to correlate a lot more with the touches, smells, cute teases, and lead-up flirtation with a person than it has to do some perceived ‘alphaness.’ Hence, my partners and lovers having spanned the field of types of men. I’m not all women, of course, but that’s also seemed to be the impression I’ve gotten from the female bloggers and commenters on this site. If ‘initial attraction’ really is about powerful, rich jerks, then you would sort of be contradicting yourself. I don’t know too many women in this world who would be instinctively attracted to Donald Trump, much less fantasize about him or masturbate to thoughts of him (I’m pretty sure another commenter made this point in the past). The gorgeous women who’ve married him to be his arm candy and status symbols might very well have weighed the pros and cons of being with someone who could get them ahead–and sacrificed actual attraction for it. As you say…the whys and hows of attraction would be great stuff to discuss.
@Aya: “That’s still not an really answer to what the heck an ‘alpha male’ is in our modern, everyday lives.”
You’re right, the matter is complex and subtle, I couldn’t explain myself in just a comment.
I won’t try to define what an “alpha male” is, but I can say it has to do with power, status, charisma, leadership, physical prowess, high testosterone (in both animal and human world). In a hierarchy, is the one at (or around) the top.
And, in human terms, money, fame and genius come into play. Yet is difficult to define, and it doesn’t work 100% of the time, because we humans are complex creatures.
Besides, many people don’t acknowledge when they fall into stereotypes, because they aren’t aware of it (or they don’t like to admit).
Anyway, it doesn’t matter. It was just an example; I could have said “Women are attracted by tall men”. Again, it’s innate and evolutionary, it’s just a fact of life.
You may reply that women love and marry short men also, and I totally agree. I wasn’t talking about behaviours, I was citing something that – like it or not – it just happens.
The sun goes down at night, leaves fall in autumn: what’s the point in fighting it?