Saturday, 23 November 2013

Male/Female Relationships

I don't think it is just me who is experiencing problems when it comes to having a satisfying relationship with a man. That conclusion comes from talking to hundreds of women and hearing about all of the problems in their relationships. When I talk to men, I hear the same thing - problems, problems, problems.

So why is it so difficult for men and women to get along? I mean you would think that given the fact that we are here to procreate and keep the planet populated, then it seems logical that we (men and women) should be better able to get along and live in peace and harmony... and dare I say it? In love.

Which leads me back to my question of why the sexes don't seem to get along very well. Even couples who are together have issues and there is much philandering going on (on both sides). That is why a website geared to people having "discreet relationships" (read: affairs)  is doing so well. Okay, I am sure some couples are getting along but they seem to be the minority, to be sure.


I think the problem has to do with the changing makeup of today's families. Since the 1960's sexual revolution, there has been a role reversal, with more men staying at home and looking after the children and more women being the sole breadwinner for the family. With this change, a host of new problems between the sexes has emerged.

Previous to the sexual revolution, women were pretty much relegated to living lives of domestic servitude, unless they were wealthy and then they could have servants and nannies to look after their children. But there are always more poor people than rich people, then as now. Couples had big families in general (because the Pill hadn't been invented yet) so someone had to stay home and do the job of nurturing all the children and keeping house.

With the invention of the Pill, women could control their destinies more, in the sense that they could now plan to have many children or fewer children or no children at all, and, if they chose the latter two, they were now freed up to become career women and didn't have to be "stay-at-home moms" anymore.

Many women, before the dawn of the Pill, yearned to have professional lives outside of the home. Unfortunately, those dreams could never be realized because the society they lived in was very patriarchal and rigid. If a woman even mentioned wanting to work outside the home, it would have been laughed at and viewed as a ridiculous thought. So things remained in their structured order and each sex knew their place. The men were the breadwinners and were the heads of the household and the women were the homemakers and nurturers. Women were definitely under men in terms of importance in the house and importance in society. But sometimes, this "knowing one's place" is better and can be very reassuring because there is less friction between the sexes when each knows his/her place in society. Today nobody seems to know what their place is. Today there is much confusion about what one's role is exactly.

Now don't get me wrong, male readers: I am not saying that this was right or wrong or criticizing men for having created that type of society.  Societal structures develop over centuries and I don't believe that any of it was intentionally sexist. Women are naturally good at nurturing so in a lot of ways it made sense for women to stay home with the children. The down side of patriarchal society was disrespect for what women did at home and the feeling (for women) of being in a prison of servitude for life. This was especially true for the women who had talents other than nurturing that went unfulfilled their entire life. (I'm sure many women dreamed of being opera singers or mathematicians or any number of professions that were closed to them)

It reminds me of that Pink Floyd line in the song Time: "hanging on in quiet desperation is the English way" But it wasn't only the English way. That was how life was for many women back in the Edwardian, Victorian eras and up to the post war era.

Back then, men were more masculine and rugged than they are today (Again - male readers please do not take offence - in a lot of ways women have created the lack of masculinity and ruggedness in men today, so I am not faulting anyone here) Men had to work hard to bring home the bacon. Often they worked in physical jobs (unlike today where a great majority of men work at a desk in front of a computer all day)

Case in point: Where are the rugged heroes for today's young men? There are no John Wayne's or Gary Cooper's anymore. Who do men look up to as role models today? Who displays "True Grit" in the style of John Wayne? You would be hard pressed to find anybody. Today's male role models are androgynous, bisexual, effeminate males like: Justin Timberlake or Justin Bieber. Who is rough and tough out there and being hailed for being rough and tough? Nobody! The only men who display any rugged true grit are superheroes and they aren't real!

There was a time when men worked hard on the farms or in factories. Going back even further, they worked the land and were cowboys, cattle rustlers and herders. This took a lot of physical strength and endurance. Those are not traits that are required of men in order for them to do their jobs today. (I'm talking in general here. There are still some manual jobs for men but those kinds of jobs are fewer than the administrative, financial/clerical type of jobs that seem to predominate the workforce of 2013)

So when women joined the workforce in the 1960's, I'm pretty sure most women thought "Hurray! Finally, freedom from domestic oppression!" Well we got our freedom alright, but at a huge price.

I believe that the sexual revolution has caused the demasculinization of men and the over-aggression of women. As a result, many men don't really know how to be with a woman anymore. I think many men are probably even afraid of women because some are so aggressive in their behaviour.

It's almost as if we now have the reverse of the patriarchal society and it has now become a matriarchal society where women have the power and are at the top of the heirarchy and men are below women. I don't think that doing the polar opposite of what was the established order is necessarily the best solution. Either way, one of the sexes ends up being oppressed and discriminated against. It's like reverse discrimination. Discrimination is never good, whether it be against women or against men. (I just hope the pendulum swings back to a place more in the middle rather than always at one extreme or the other.)

There was a time when a woman wanted a man to protect her from wild animals (think frontier days, pioneer times) and bring home wild game that he hunted for the family. Today, what does a woman want from a man? Do women even know anymore?

With women gainfully employed and often, earning just as much, if not more than a man, what do we honestly need from a man? (Again, dear male reader, do not take offence, I am merely posing the question for all of us to think about). Men don't have to hunt animals for us anymore. Men don't have to protect us from wolves, bears, Native Indians, highwaymen. There are not too many of those around anymore, especially in the big cities where most of us live. Anything a woman wants she can go out and buy for herself. If she needs protection, she can get an alarm system. Sadly, men have kind of lost their purpose, other than to help us to procreate. But what is the point of procreating, having these children and then the battle of the sexes invariably happens and the children end up being raised in single parent households and broken families?

That is why there is so much "hooking up" going on in the modern world. Men are offering sex to women because that is all that seems to be left for them to offer us. Many women also have no problem with being serial "one-night standers" themselves. Many women don't seem to want to be committed to just one man (the way things used to be) as women become more and more like men because of society's role reversal. (It used to be that men were the ones who didn't want commitment, now it is the reverse)

The more women behave in this aggressive, non-commitment type of way, the more men will also continue to merely look for sex from a woman and not look for any deep, meaningful relationship. In previous decades and centuries, both parties were looking for a deep, meaningful relationship that would last for a long time and often forever. Men are hard-wired to want sex so if they are being encouraged by women to behave merely as sex providers, then men will become more animalistic as time goes on. And women too for that matter.

The other down side of all of this promiscuity is that sex is no longer the sacred act it used to be. Sex can either be sacred or profane. When it is done in the way I described above it becomes merely a profane act and loses its beauty and magic. It is reduced to a very animalistic level.

Back in the frontier days, men were probably sublimating a lot of their sex drive by pure physical labour so that they were not always looking for the next "lay" (sorry to be so blunt...) Now, men are not physically tired at the end of the day since tapping on a keyboard is not exactly going to exhaust a person physically. So they need more sexual gratification when they get home from work as a result.

I even believe that this is the reason we are seeing more gay men in society. It is all part and parcel of the feminization (or demasculinization) of the male species.

I really don't know where all of this is going to lead us as a society and I have to say that I am often afraid when I think of the future. I think we are going to see more and more divorce, more broken families and more people in psych wards desperate for help. And more messed-up children: a by-product of all the conflict between the sexes.

No comments:

Post a Comment