Gender role stress and dating

lorro

I read some research that reminded me of recent discussions here. It's findings are that men in stereotypically traditional masculine gender roles are more angry and anxious and their concerns focus on physical inadequacy, emotional inexpressiveness, subordination to women, intellectual inferiority, and performance failures involving work and sex.

http://bmo.sagepub.com/content/11/2/123.short

I wondered if these concerns may account for some of the difference in attitudes to dating between men and women and also between men and other men with less rigid gender identities. For instance if you are anxious about being subordinate to a woman and viewed as intellecually inferior, you are perhaps more likely to have a dating preference for women you perceive as less intelligent and in a less well paid job than you.

What do others think of this as a possible explanation for the divergence of views on this and similar subjects?

oddyogi

I can definitely see this being true in a lot of scenarios. My ex was always angry and tried to always do more than me (more repair jobs than I did housework, even more housework than I did) and then would get angry when I didn't tell him every day how much he had done for me. He also tried to say that he brought home more money than I did (he did by a couple hundred a month) but never admitted that he brought $1500 worth of bills more to the table.

I don't know if this relates to the study.. but he was an a-hole and stuff. He was always trying to tell everyone how much better he was at everything than everyone else.

jesusHchris

I think that you should be spending a little less time playing scientist and a bit more time cooking that roast.

Edit: I now feel angry and anxious. Point taken.

lorro

I think that you should be spending a little less time playing scientist and a bit more time cooking that roast.

Edit: I now feel angry and anxious. Point taken.

LMAO I rest my case

Who's playing? My specialist research area: Intolerance of Uncertainty. It's closely correlated with anxiety and one of it's effects is that people try and construct a false sense of certainty to manage their anxiety. Of couse it's self defeating as it has no basis in reality. How this may apply to dating, for instance, may be that the guy constructs a set of rules as to how the dating game should be "played" for him to retain a sense of power necessary for his to remain within the safe zone defined by his gender construct.

OK off to baste the roast now...

shammxo

I think that you should be spending a little less time playing scientist and a bit more time cooking that roast.

Edit: I now feel angry and anxious. Point taken.

LMAO I rest my case

Who's playing? My specialist research area: Intolerance of Uncertainty. It's closely correlated with anxiety and one of it's effects is that people try and construct a false sense of certainty to manage their anxiety. Of couse it's self defeating as it has no basis in reality. How this may apply to dating, for instance, may be that the guy constructs a set of rules as to how the dating game should be "played" for him to retain a sense of power necessary for his to remain within the safe zone defined by his gender construct.

OK off to baste the roast now...

Makes soooo much sense.

Well done!

lorro

I can definitely see this being true in a lot of scenarios. My ex was always angry and tried to always do more than me (more repair jobs than I did housework, even more housework than I did) and then would get angry when I didn't tell him every day how much he had done for me. He also tried to say that he brought home more money than I did (he did by a couple hundred a month) but never admitted that he brought $1500 worth of bills more to the table.

I don't know if this relates to the study.. but he was an a-hole and stuff. He was always trying to tell everyone how much better he was at everything than everyone else.

That sounds grim cupcake :frown: I'm so glad you are in a better relationship now :flowerforyou: .

I suppose there must be some cases where there's a good match, but I think the situation you were in is much more common. The human cost isn't just felt in relationship conflict. It's a huge psychological vulnerability that leads to ill health. But it's not all bad news. People have such an amazing capacity for change, even if it does takes a crisis to get them to the point where they will accept it.

pa_jorg

For instance if you are anxious about being subordinate to a woman and viewed as intellecually inferior, you are perhaps more likely to have a dating preference for women you perceive as less intelligent and in a less well paid job than you.

I'd like to present Exhibit A to the court:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/820223-why-am-i-so-turned-off-by-an-educated-woman
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

4themoney

I can definitely see this being true in a lot of scenarios. My ex was always angry and tried to always do more than me (more repair jobs than I did housework, even more housework than I did) and then would get angry when I didn't tell him every day how much he had done for me. He also tried to say that he brought home more money than I did (he did by a couple hundred a month) but never admitted that he brought $1500 worth of bills more to the table.

I don't know if this relates to the study.. but he was an a-hole and stuff. He was always trying to tell everyone how much better he was at everything than everyone else.

my ex was like this too. he wanted a marriage just like his parents. dad worked outside the home, and did yard work and fixed things like cars, etc. dad was NOT involved in raising and rearing of children unless it was to hand out physical punishments. mom was either home or in a job where she could be at home ( like a teacher, his mom was a teacher). mom was responsible for all things inside the home ( except home repairs). so, cooking, cleaning, kids, house making, decorating, punishing of kids, homework, activities, etc.

my ex was and still is, an angry, miserable man. his parents marriage sucks and yet that was what he wanted. a sucky marriage with NO real relationship. he was constantly putting me in my place. and he was always battling those around him to prove that he was smarter, better, faster, etc. even now, he routinely pulls all nighters at work ( i hear from the wives of the husbands he works with, LOL). he had erectile issues. belittled everyone around him. when we lived together our neighbors were employed by places like the CIA, and yet my ex determined they were "red necks" and " not worth talking to or socializing with."

i got to know two of the families on our street really well, and neither of the husbands took the masculine male role. they were both more "equal opportunity" husbands and they do a lot for their wives and kids and families over all. both of those couples have great and amazing marriages and their families are really really happy!!!!

Carl01

Am I the only one noticing that all these "issues" being talked about regarding a masculine gender role fly in the face of what the vast majority of women here have said they are either attracted to or desire when it comes to dating?

IMO it all gets back to what I have said before about being cautious regarding romanticizing the process and not paying attention all that much to who the person is.

lorro

Am I the only one noticing that all these "issues" being talked about regarding a masculine gender role fly in the face of what the vast majority of women here have said they are either attracted to or desire when it comes to dating?

IMO it all gets back to what I have said before about being cautious regarding romanticizing the process and not paying attention all that much to who the person is.

I get what you are saying Carl, if you go with surface impressions and ignore the person you will end up being swept along with an idealised fairytale and have a rude awakening.

But I think there's more to it than that. Many of the women I have seen posting here like to occupy the stereotypical female gender role and have the guy do the same (with the masculine). But they don't wish to be constrained or defined by it. They have other constructs of femininity that define them too and they want to be free to express them as well and have guys also undertake a variety of roles. For me any very rigid pattern of thinking/behaving can cause problems in a person's life. It's flexibility that is more in tune with reality and leads to people being more free to find themselves and have positive, mutually rewarding relationships.

Carl01

Am I the only one noticing that all these "issues" being talked about regarding a masculine gender role fly in the face of what the vast majority of women here have said they are either attracted to or desire when it comes to dating?

IMO it all gets back to what I have said before about being cautious regarding romanticizing the process and not paying attention all that much to who the person is.

I get what you are saying Carl, if you go with surface impressions and ignore the person you will end up being swept along with an idealised fairytale and have a rude awakening.

But I think there's more to it than that. Many of the women I have seen posting here like to occupy the stereotypical female gender role and have the guy do the same (with the masculine). But they don't wish to be constrained or defined by it. They have other constructs of femininity that define them too and they want to be free to express them as well and have guys also undertake a variety of roles. For me any very rigid pattern of thinking/behaving can cause problems in a person's life. It's flexibility that is more in tune with reality and leads to people being more free to find themselves and have positive, mutually rewarding relationships.

I think that is a given for both and eventually becomes a water is wet type thing (no snarkiness intended) in which case then this study only applies to a very small percentage of men.

The key I still think is to look beyond the good initial behavior or being caught up in the whole "women want the romance of being pursued" as one lady put it on another thread thing.
It can have its place as far as some giddy and fun feelings but if the guy is a douche it will show itself soon and not in missing certain "musts" on a checklist of any sorts.

The same would go for a guy,very few divorced men say what awesome ladies there ex was/is.
They obviously missed a lot as well getting caught up in desires for sex or other.

I am not suggesting making relationship building a robotic,Mr Spock affair...just a balance from the start.

RunIntheMud

Am I the only one noticing that all these "issues" being talked about regarding a masculine gender role fly in the face of what the vast majority of women here have said they are either attracted to or desire when it comes to dating?

IMO it all gets back to what I have said before about being cautious regarding romanticizing the process and not paying attention all that much to who the person is.

I get what you are saying Carl, if you go with surface impressions and ignore the person you will end up being swept along with an idealised fairytale and have a rude awakening.

But I think there's more to it than that. Many of the women I have seen posting here like to occupy the stereotypical female gender role and have the guy do the same (with the masculine). But they don't wish to be constrained or defined by it. They have other constructs of femininity that define them too and they want to be free to express them as well and have guys also undertake a variety of roles. For me any very rigid pattern of thinking/behaving can cause problems in a person's life. It's flexibility that is more in tune with reality and leads to people being more free to find themselves and have positive, mutually rewarding relationships.

Very well said. I could't have said it any better.

will010574

For instance if you are anxious about being subordinate to a woman and viewed as intellecually inferior, you are perhaps more likely to have a dating preference for women you perceive as less intelligent and in a less well paid job than you.

I'd like to present Exhibit A to the court:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/820223-why-am-i-so-turned-off-by-an-educated-woman
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

You really need to let it go...should we dig up all the past posts where you were offended and repost them in a thread about how some ppl are too sensitive. you routinely bash Mike and DM and it is past the point of funny.

pa_jorg

For instance if you are anxious about being subordinate to a woman and viewed as intellecually inferior, you are perhaps more likely to have a dating preference for women you perceive as less intelligent and in a less well paid job than you.

I'd like to present Exhibit A to the court:
http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/820223-why-am-i-so-turned-off-by-an-educated-woman
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

You really need to let it go...should we dig up all the past posts where you were offended and repost them in a thread about how some ppl are too sensitive. you routinely bash Mike and DM and it is past the point of funny.

Geez, way to take a joke...
Oh and I don't think I'm the only one here who's sensitive to misogynistic comments and attitudes.:yawn:

flimflamfloz

My specialist research area: Intolerance of Uncertainty.
It's closely correlated with anxiety and one of it's effects is that people try and construct a false sense of certainty to manage their anxiety.
Of course it's self defeating as it has no basis in reality.
How this may apply to dating, for instance, may be that the guy constructs a set of rules as to how the dating game should be "played" for him to retain a sense of power necessary for his to remain within the safe zone defined by his gender construct.

I'm not sure I totally understand what you mean, so maybe my answer will completely miss the mark.

But here is what I'm thinking right now: humans are influenceable, bendable. So of course if someone was wishing that a stone would turn into a car, that would be self defeating, because it clearly has no basis in reality.

However, when talking about relationships and interactions with people, I found that your attitude/emotional state (which are reflected by body language for example) can actually influence the attitude and emotional state of people around you.
So in a relationship between two partners, it is the person who is stronger mentally who will often "influence" the other partner.
I think that creating a completely "manageable" frame (as the man does in your example, by remaining completely in the zone defined by his gender construct) will certainly make him stronger - at which point the woman is likely to bend to his will and accept this (his) frame as "normal".
You will probably find that in many cases, the women will let herself be "reframed" by a (dominant) man especially when love is in the air (you become more "tolerant").

Note that this doesn't contradict your question in the original post:
"For instance if you are anxious about being subordinate to a woman and viewed as intellectually inferior, you are perhaps more likely to have a dating preference for women you perceive as less intelligent and in a less well paid job than you."
I would agree with this.

Also, I read that men are more "competitive" by their nature.
"their concerns focus on physical inadequacy, emotional inexpressiveness, subordination to women, intellectual inferiority, and performance failures involving work and sex"
These are probably concerns which many men share, I know I feel concerned about some of these things sometimes.

These are difficult times for the traditional "male role" so I can easily understand that someone who would be more "traditional" would struggle to find their place in society, and would definitely try to recreate this feeling of "superiority" in a smaller sphere (i.e. the couple).

RosscoBoscko

Personally I struggle with/am against many gender roles, but have to admit I do I guess stand by others.

I couldn't care less whether my partner earned more or less than me, the money is irrelevant I wouldn't be with them for their wallet. Intelligence wise, without sounding like I think i'm a genius (cos I definitely don't), for me she would have to be my intellectual equal or superior, for me part of a relationship is stimulating each others minds as much as anything else! But then again in my way of thinking I don't see why one person has to be the alpha of the relationship, it's a partnership, sure each of you may be dominant in differing areas but to me shouldn't be to the point where the other has to take a lesser/subordinate role.

Having said that I do have still certain gender roles that I guess I conform to, I do have a protective instinct I guess is the way to describe it, kind of personified by the fact that if I have any kind of type, it is that she is shorter than me, I like to be able to wrap my arms around her with her head below my chin if I'm hugging her, which is like I say I guess a protective instinct, and likewise mostly subconsciously will try to put myself between her and "risks" of danger, walking on traffic side, blocking objects (ie rugby ball etc) or people that might hit or bump into her, where possible. Whilst I would avoid hitting another man where possible, there is never any circumstance where hitting a woman is acceptable.

With regards to the anxiety I don't know how it correlates, I was diagnosed last year with severe anxiety, but I don't seem to correspond to any of the factors that your research seems to suggest would create anxiety in men.

lorro

I'm not sure I totally understand what you mean, so maybe my answer will completely miss the mark.

But here is what I'm thinking right now: humans are influenceable, bendable. So of course if someone was wishing that a stone would turn into a car, that would be self defeating, because it clearly has no basis in reality.

However, when talking about relationships and interactions with people, I found that your attitude/emotional state (which are reflected by body language for example) can actually influence the attitude and emotional state of people around you.
So in a relationship between two partners, it is the person who is stronger mentally who will often "influence" the other partner.
I think that creating a completely "manageable" frame (as the man does in your example, by remaining completely in the zone defined by his gender construct) will certainly make him stronger - at which point the woman is likely to bend to his will and accept this (his) frame as "normal".
You will probably find that in many cases, the women will let herself be "reframed" by a (dominant) man especially when love is in the air (you become more "tolerant").

Note that this doesn't contradict your question in the original post:
"For instance if you are anxious about being subordinate to a woman and viewed as intellectually inferior, you are perhaps more likely to have a dating preference for women you perceive as less intelligent and in a less well paid job than you."
I would agree with this.

Also, I read that men are more "competitive" by their nature.
"their concerns focus on physical inadequacy, emotional inexpressiveness, subordination to women, intellectual inferiority, and performance failures involving work and sex"
These are probably concerns which many men share, I know I feel concerned about some of these things sometimes.

These are difficult times for the traditional "male role" so I can easily understand that someone who would be more "traditional" would struggle to find their place in society, and would definitely try to recreate this feeling of "superiority" in a smaller sphere (i.e. the couple).

Flimflam, I hoped you'd reply to this thread :bigsmile:

I agree, such anxieties are quite common.

Yes it is possible to influence the emotional state of others, however I wouldn't define the ability to do so as a strength. Perhaps it's a strength in terms of the power balance in the couple. I was talking about psychological strength in a wider sense. The man who needs to stay within a rigid gender construct may feel safer therefore stronger, but my point is that his need to stay within it to feel safe is not a sign of psychological strength, regardless of how others perceive it.

Take an example outside dating. Being a new parent is a scary time. Some new parents simply can not tolerate the uncertainties about how they should look after their baby, given the myriad of conflicting advice, options and lifestyle choices out there. Some react to this by latching on to one approach, one set of rules (let's call it the new parent bible) and advocating it as the answer very loudly to all who will listen. When others have a different approach, this is likely to cause some anxiety and possibly negative judgement and condemnation. The parent feels stronger having a set of rules, but because there is no basis in reality for this rigid approach they are likely to keep coming into conflict with others, with contradictory evidence, with situations which don't fit. These reminders of the uncertainties of life make them cling tighter to the rules, to ward off the anxiety they create. They have reacted to uncertainty (which no one likes) by creating a false sense of certainty which reduces anxiety short term, but maintains it longer term, as does anything that prevents you from facing your fears.

lorro

Personally I struggle with/am against many gender roles, but have to admit I do I guess stand by others.

I couldn't care less whether my partner earned more or less than me, the money is irrelevant I wouldn't be with them for their wallet. Intelligence wise, without sounding like I think i'm a genius (cos I definitely don't), for me she would have to be my intellectual equal or superior, for me part of a relationship is stimulating each others minds as much as anything else! But then again in my way of thinking I don't see why one person has to be the alpha of the relationship, it's a partnership, sure each of you may be dominant in differing areas but to me shouldn't be to the point where the other has to take a lesser/subordinate role.

Having said that I do have still certain gender roles that I guess I conform to, I do have a protective instinct I guess is the way to describe it, kind of personified by the fact that if I have any kind of type, it is that she is shorter than me, I like to be able to wrap my arms around her with her head below my chin if I'm hugging her, which is like I say I guess a protective instinct, and likewise mostly subconsciously will try to put myself between her and "risks" of danger, walking on traffic side, blocking objects (ie rugby ball etc) or people that might hit or bump into her, where possible. Whilst I would avoid hitting another man where possible, there is never any circumstance where hitting a woman is acceptable.

With regards to the anxiety I don't know how it correlates, I was diagnosed last year with severe anxiety, but I don't seem to correspond to any of the factors that your research seems to suggest would create anxiety in men.

Rossco, I don't think there's anything wrong with gender roles. In fact, I quite like them :drinker: It's when others expect me to stay within their set expectations that I dislike them. Not that this happens often, much less so as I get older, in fact.

From what you've written I would say you have a fairly flexible view of yourself as a man. You define this in relation to your desire to protect your mate (few women that I know would complain about this). But you're less bothered about being dominant outside of the bedroom (income, intelligence etc) - precisely the areas that would be more likely to cause problems in a relationship. So from what you posted, I'm assuming your anxiety doesn't have anything to do with your role as a man.