Wednesday, July 21, 2004
Opining on relationships
Came across this opinion in an email forward. It gives a woman’s perspective - on sustaining the feeling of closeness in a relationship and how men and women approach it rather differently. Definite food for thought. I was unable to Google the author to credit her, although there are some other blogs that also mention this same post.
The way we women describe the intimacy we want is remarkably consistent: It’s that sense of oneness between two people that flows from an open, meaningful exchange of thoughts, feelings and affection. It’s about each one entering the other’s private world, not merely for a short visit, but to unpack and take up residence. As women, we often see intimacy as something that includes physical displays of affection and time spent talking and listening to each other. But far more than that, intimacy is what gives women the feeling that they’re no longer just a ‘me’ but also part of an ‘us’. In fact, it’s what defines the shared life. It’s the whole bundle of visible and invisible ways her man assures her (and keeps reassuring her) that he is the one person on this planet who knows and cherishes her for who she is. When something that precious is missing, we notice it!
The challenge is that while men value intimacy as much as women do, they differ dramatically in their view of what it takes to achieve and maintain it. We tend to pursue a close, profound relationship in a way that can be described as an upward spiral. Men value a generous and continuous exchange of information, demonstrations of affection (especially nonsexual ones) and consistent efforts to look out for their best interests. When these are present, the relationship feels as if it is progressing to a higher level, not unlike a steady trek to the top of a mountain.
For men, intimacy is a prize to be gained by getting in the finish line in strict sequential order and with minimal repetition. The linear progression goes something like this: (1) Express your interest. (2) Date to build trust. (3) Make a commitment: You’ve got each other now. Once a man has moved to the next level of closeness, he finds no practical value in maintaining the traditions associated with the previous level. Men see intimacy as a settled fact, an achieved goal that implies they no longer need to do what they have already done to gain it. Repeating earlier expressions of intimacy (’Why are you asking me if I love you when I told you a long time ago that I do?‘) suggests to him that the two of you really haven’t made it to the finish line. It’s like having to repeat a year in school.
Add to this the reality that intimacy is a completely subjective feeling of closeness. For women it often means ‘Don’t stop our traditions of showing me/telling me/holding me/hearing me, because that’s what reassures me that you love me‘. For men it often means ‘Keep finding new ways to accommodate my practical needs/admire me/assist me/applaud me‘. Neither way is any more or less loving than the other; they are simply two different roads that lead to the same destination. But unless both the man and the woman are willing to travel each of those two roads some of the time, one or the other may fail to experience the closeness he or she desires.
Agree or disagree, it makes you think..
Awesome, simply awesome. Totally agree with that Linear Progression thing for men. Have been so bugged by women and their need to keep getting reassurances. Brilliant post.
Am linking this one from my blog to urs. Pls?
Wednesday, July 21, 2004 @ 7:12 AM
Yeah, she says it well! Part of the bigger (and eternal) Mars vs Venus debate, I guess..
Link away! Don’t need to ask :)
Wednesday, July 21, 2004 @ 7:20 AM
Hey Megs,
You cldnt have come up with a better timing for the blog!
Am currently reading this book called “Why men dont listen and Women cant read maps”- Allan And Barbara Pease.
Great book coz it blends facts with humour and lotta data backed by logic and rational to the way men and women behave!
Some stuff amazes me –yet good insight if you can learn to read it with open mind!
Wednesday, July 21, 2004 @ 7:51 AM
Thought about it… this isnt nalways necessarily true.. so I disagree.
Nice blog though
pushkar
http://www.pushkar.net
Wednesday, July 21, 2004 @ 8:47 AM
Yes, it does cause one to think ! The part about women seeking reaffirmation, and men considering it redundant, is especially true. Slowly the mystery unravels …
Wednesday, July 21, 2004 @ 10:35 AM
You are basically making a simple point. Men want to
move on to other things whereas woman want to stay in a sentimentalist sappy past.
Yeah right…
Wednesday, July 21, 2004 @ 10:47 AM
Nice blog. I believe both men’s and women’s behaviour are in accordance with what they call in software terms “As Per Design”. Striking a balance(understanding each other’s needs) between men’s “what next” to Women’s “need for reassurances” is the way to a succesfull relationship. I believe men and women have to keep reminding themselves that they are two completely different spieces and to achieve a sense of success at relationship, they need to put up a “work in progress” sign all life. I think “The Design” objective is to keep engaged at each other all the while.”The perfect design by the Master Architect”. My 2 cents:-)
Wednesday, July 21, 2004 @ 11:52 AM
Well I totally agree. men and women normally (99% of the times) have different ways of looking at relationships. Well this article just reminded me of the song ” buy me a rose” by Kenny Rogers. Its pretty much true. Nice write up!
Wednesday, July 21, 2004 @ 12:40 PM
I think the point in the last sentence of the article is well made.
The point being, to understand that we *are* different and recognize that expectations for a sustainable relationship are different on both sides.Then even though it is not in the natural nature to do so, to adjust sufficiently, to allow a smooth relationship.
Personally speaking, I *have* found that woman are pretty sensitive(duh) to whatever you say and do, so it pays not to think of her like one of your buddies, but to realize it IS a woman .. :)
Also I have a feeling that this is more like a rant from a woman. I think as mentioned in the post, none of the two “approaches” are necessarily right, it would be nice if woman took away something from this too and realize how men’s brain work.
Wednesday, July 21, 2004 @ 12:44 PM
Warning - long comment post ahead :)
Thank you for all the comments and opinions. I’ve blogged separately about my own thoughts on the whole ‘women need reassurances, men try to look at what’s next‘ topic. So onto comment responses. Here’s the link to the new blogpost.
[Jupe] I don’t agree with the broad generalization about ‘women and their need to keep getting reassurances’. More on this in my own blogpost :) Glad you liked the article, and thanks for linking it!
[Ekta] You are right about needing to have an open mind. There is rarely an absolute right and wrong, just different ways of looking at things. The key is to be willing to see it from more than just your own point of view, I guess. And it sure helps to have a sense of humor about it! :) Sounds like an interesting book, btw!
[Piper] I agree with ya on the not being entirely true part. Would like to hear your thoughts on why you disagree? Thanks for visiting!
[Gautham] I actually disagree with the author about attributing reaffirmation to women alone. More on this in the next blogpost :) Thank you for coming by!
[Ram] I don’t agree with your interpretation of what the author of the article is saying ‘cos I don’t think things are ever that black and white. But interpretations, much like opinions, can be different for each one of us. Thanks for your comments!
[gvenum] Well said! I especially liked the needing to put up a ‘work in progress’ sign part :) It all comes down to balance. No rights, no wrongs, just different ways of looking at things, and striking a balance between them is what we try to achieve. Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
[Chhotu] The Kenny Rogers song you mentioned does touch upon the practicality vs sentimentality argument rather nicely! Indeed, men and women do look at things very differently at most times. Thanks for writing!
[Anirudh] What you say is very true about realizing that the woman you are with is not one of your buddies, but is in fact, a woman! Well said! Think that also holds true for men. Realizing that the guy you are with is not one of your female friends and needs to be treated differently, is perhaps just as important.
But I disagree with you classifying this article as a ‘rant from a woman’. The author seems to view both approches rather balancedly, and I didn’t really detect her implying that either gender was more right than the other. Just that there are two ways of looking at things and one needs to be willing to put oneself in the other person’s shoes. Thanks for sharing your views on this!
Thursday, July 22, 2004 @ 8:03 AM
Men don’t necessarily forget the ‘rituals’ of the previous ’stage’ in a relationship. Remember the article on “nice Guys’ you linked to earlier (http://yumnyum.blogspot.com/2004/06/ode-to-nice-guys.html)? That is true (well atleast 10% of that is true) and that means that women and men don’t behave in a set pattern. Women like to be wild and men like to be studs. Then they grow up and things change (well most of the time ;-) ).
Intimacy is not a prize, its something everyone wants at a particular stage in their life. I think the part of the article I agree with is the deduction.. to make a relationship work, you need to work on the relationship. The arguments leading to this conclusion are something I think are very generic and not necessarily always true. I think there should be a disclaimer with such articles right?! :)
Saturday, July 24, 2004 @ 12:27 PM
[Piper] Men and women are inherently different people, and they are meant to be that way, in my opinion. There’s no reason for either to try to be like the other. Its that uniqueness they each bring to the table, that completes the picture.
Also, most opinions, such as this article, tend to generalize. For every man that i’ve known who behaves like this article claims, i’ve known twice as many who behave the exact opposite too. As for women, there’s just as many of them who don’t express affection, much the same way that this article claims men don’t.
Finally, each person behavior in a relationship is affected by their own past relationships. As as result the *same* person doesn’t function the same way in each relationship in his/her life, forget extending a generalization across multiple people.
Nobody, neither men nor women, behave in fixed patterns, I completely agree with you on that. The context, the person they are with, their reaction, past experiences, many many factors come into play. So generalizations about relationships (whether done from a man or woman’s point of view) do gross injustice to the way most of us are. Then why do we read about them, or in this case, blog about them, one might ask? Cos agree, disagree, or vehemently disagree, it does make you think. And that’s reason enough, I guess :)
Monday, July 26, 2004 @ 6:56 AM