I guess I'd like to have some support...

[Malaga]

I agree with this. I don't understand why some people feel such a need to make everything about equality. Men and women are not created equally and there are a ton of both physical, chemical, and scientific facts to prove so. Is one better than the other? NO, but we are different. We are fundamentally different in levels of body mass to hormones to yes, our reproductive systems which are btw are huge part of who we are and not just about genitals.

Study after study after study has shown it. If you have to go burn your bra and claim total equality go for it, but you are not equal , you will just be a women with no bra on.
https://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...g-8978248.html

The above link is about how our brains are hardwired differently, this has nothing to do with pee pees.

You know, in your posts on this subject you always seem to confuse 'equal' with 'identical'. What do physical and scientific facts, DNA or muscle mass have to do with this? You're just going off subject. Relax, no one is claiming men and women are *identical*. Hopefully one day they could be perceived as *equals*. Neither is anyone claiming your SO should be like you.

What I'm saying (and I suppose several other posters) is that it is wrong to stereotype men and women through their gender, especially using such shallow two-dimensional stereotypes like in TaraMarie's original posts. So many people do not fit the gender stereotypes, even when they're 100% straight. I never dated a guy who fit those stereotypes. Either they weren't men or those stereotypes must be limited to the experience of people who believe in them. But to impose such experience as a rule you pass on to others is just wrong and harmful. The problem with generalisations like "all women want the same thing" is if there's a woman who does not want the same thing, the premise is automatically incorrect. That's logic 101 to you.

People's personalities are so much more complex than just brain chemistry. But when you observe them through he prism of "he's a guy therefore his actions mean this or his thought process is that", that's when you reduce a human being to a charicature of stereotypes. If you want to really get to know and understand your partner, observe them with an open mind. You know, science.

[TaraMarie]

You know, in your posts on this subject you always seem to confuse 'equal' with 'identical'. What do physical and scientific facts, DNA or muscle mass have to do with this? You're just going off subject. Relax, no one is claiming men and women are *identical*. Hopefully one day they could be perceived as *equals*. Neither is anyone claiming your SO should be like you.

What I'm saying (and I suppose several other posters) is that it is wrong to stereotype men and women through their gender, especially using such shallow two-dimensional stereotypes like in TaraMarie's original posts. So many people do not fit the gender stereotypes, even when they're 100% straight. I never dated a guy who fit those stereotypes. Either they weren't men or those stereotypes must be limited to the experience of people who believe in them. But to impose such experience as a rule you pass on to others is just wrong and harmful. The problem with generalisations like "all women want the same thing" is if there's a woman who does not want the same thing, the premise is automatically incorrect. That's logic 101 to you.

People's personalities are so much more complex than just brain chemistry. But when you observe them through he prism of "he's a guy therefore his actions mean this or his thought process is that", that's when you reduce a human being to a charicature of stereotypes. If you want to really get to know and understand your partner, observe them with an open mind. You know, science.

Oh my goodness. Opinions are like belly buttons....everyone has them And no two are identical. Once again, OP asked for advice. I gave her MY OPINION, and stated that it was MY TAKE ON THE SUBJECT. Jues because it isn't YOURS that doesn't make it wrong. Move on, There is nothing else to see here.

[Hollandia]

You know, in your posts on this subject you always seem to confuse 'equal' with 'identical'. What do physical and scientific facts, DNA or muscle mass have to do with this? You're just going off subject. Relax, no one is claiming men and women are *identical*. Hopefully one day they could be perceived as *equals*. Neither is anyone claiming your SO should be like you.

What I'm saying (and I suppose several other posters) is that it is wrong to stereotype men and women through their gender, especially using such shallow two-dimensional stereotypes like in TaraMarie's original posts. So many people do not fit the gender stereotypes, even when they're 100% straight. I never dated a guy who fit those stereotypes. Either they weren't men or those stereotypes must be limited to the experience of people who believe in them. But to impose such experience as a rule you pass on to others is just wrong and harmful. The problem with generalisations like "all women want the same thing" is if there's a woman who does not want the same thing, the premise is automatically incorrect. That's logic 101 to you.

People's personalities are so much more complex than just brain chemistry. But when you observe them through he prism of "he's a guy therefore his actions mean this or his thought process is that", that's when you reduce a human being to a charicature of stereotypes. If you want to really get to know and understand your partner, observe them with an open mind. You know, science.

No, Equal means the same as and identical means the same as. I think you are splitting hairs. These stereotypes you like to use are created by centuries of men and women exhibiting these behaviors. We are hardwired differently in the brain and this is what causes us to have these tendencies that are built into us as women or as men. You can keep denying it but if you hand a barbie and a tank to a group of toddlers, the girls will gravitate towards the barbie and the boys will gravitate towards the tank. Are there exceptions to this rule? Sure. Those are exceptions and not the rule.

So, I can assume that since you hate stereotypes you never let a man hold open a door for you, give you seat on a train or expect him to put the seat down for you. If you do you are feeding into the mentality of chivalry and this would go against your concept. I don't see anything wrong with embracing a man for being a man or a woman from being a women, for the record if there was no difference then why would I be only attracted to men and not women? I have never in my life had an ounce of attraction to any female and it was not because of the person they are but simply because they were are women. I have been attracted to men that were not good people and that was not because of the person they were but because they were a man. It is a fundamental difference from the way our brains are wired, to the way our bodies are structured to the chemicals that flow through our bodies. Men have male tendencies and traits and women have female ones, and that is not a stereotype that is a fact.

[silvermoonfairy3]

Let's just compromise and say that EVERYBODY is different.

There. Discussion is over.

lol.. exactly.

Personally, I find that if I go into a situation believing that men and women think sooo differently, and moreover, "guys think X" I'm then looking for it and expecting it. And since no one, of either gender, ever really conforms to all the things we're societally taught are "guy things" or "girl things" it leads to confusion, to sometimes being upset, etc.

My relationships got significantly better once I started working on training myself not to "expect" that I couldn't understand men/my man, and he couldn't understand women/me.
It's absolutely possible to understand, with communication and trust, and a willingness to put aside the belief that you can't understand. Self-fulfilling prophecy and all that.

A huge one that illustrates the dangers of that thinking for me - women in general are often conditioned to believe that men want sex, all the time, whenever. It's in women's mags, on TV, it's the word of caution you hear from mothers and aunts, it's the irritation you hear from a friend who thinks her boyfriend doesn't care and just wants sex.

Obviously, this comes from *somewhere*.. that guys like sex, etc. (Though, so do women, and that's not remotely publicized as much, because women, "should be" demure and everything.)

So, being conditioned to think that guys always want sex means that if there's a reason that a guy I'm with doesn't want sex, it's obviously a rejection. If he really thought I was sexy and desireable, it wouldn't matter that he's stressed or anything else, because guys always want sex! Therefore, it must be me. Not the circumstances, or anything else.

But, simply, that's not necessarily the case. Guys get stressed and lose interest in sex for awhile.. guys get tired. Guys deal with depression. Guys sometimes just aren't in the mood. But every woman I've ever known that mentioned a dry spell or any type of issue with her guy not wanting sex boiled down to her saying something about how maybe she's gained a little weight, or he doesn't find her attractive anymore or something else because, "If he did, he'd want sex.. guys always want sex."

Additionally, I feel it's sometimes dangerous because it encourages us to continue things as they are.. to shrug off jealousy or crying as a "woman thing" or to shrug off possessiveness/aggression as a "guy thing." It hinders understanding.

Men and women are different, but they are not incomprehensibly different, and moreover, women are different than other women, and men are different than other men. Gay couples don't just have smooth sailing because they totally get each other, all the time because they're the same gender. They have disagreements and misunderstandings and different sensitivities and uncertainties and jealousies and whatever else.

Because *people* are different, and it's limiting to try to peg it to a gender. There are patterns sometimes, and things that are generally true for a lot of people in a gender, but that still means there are exceptions. And as long as there are exceptions, I think it's a little silly to chalk things up to "that's what men/women do." Because, imagine if you're the exception. Do you want to be lumped there?

But yeah.
I think we're all mostly in agreement, that there are biological differences, that there are distinctions. I think we just disagree that we can't understand those differences.

[silvermoonfairy3]

So, I can assume that since you hate stereotypes you never let a man hold open a door for you, give you seat on a train or expect him to put the seat down for you. If you do you are feeding into the mentality of chivalry and this would go against your concept.

What does chivalry have to do with stereotypes?
There isn't really a stereotype of men as chivalrous, I would say.. at least not around here? Not sure where you live.

Also, these days, women hold doors open. Women give up seats on trains for elderly people, pregnant people, children, injured people..

As for putting the seat down, I assume you mean toilet seat? Not sure what that has to do with chivalry, either, but no, I don't expect that. He has to put it up if I was in there last, who cares if I have to take 1.5 seconds to put it back down?

I don't see anything wrong with embracing a man for being a man or a woman from being a women

Neither do I, though the danger here is the implication that if a man or woman doesn't conform to the pre-set notions of what manliness or womanliness is, they're somehow less of a man or woman.
It comes up in the ways that men are 'sissies' if they cry, and women are bitches if they're in positions of power or put career first.

I have been attracted to men that were not good people and that was not because of the person they were but because they were a man.

I assume you are not attracted to every man on the face of the earth. If you aren't, then there is something besides him just being a man.

It is a fundamental difference from the way our brains are wired, to the way our bodies are structured to the chemicals that flow through our bodies. Men have male tendencies and traits and women have female ones, and that is not a stereotype that is a fact.

It's definitely a fact that there are differences. However, the conclusions people sometimes make from those differences, and the ways that we're ready to leap to "it's a guy/girl thing" as an excuse and them claim scientific justification is the problem. It's the nature vs. nurture argument. Some things are innate. Some are learned. We confused the learned with the innate, sometimes.

[Malaga]

No, Equal means the same as and identical means the same as. I think you are splitting hairs.

Equality in the context of gender equality discussed here means equal opportunities. It means that nobody can tell you what you should or shouldn't be doing just because you're male or female. It means nobody should expect you to fit into an image of what a man or a woman is supposed to be like, or consider you a failure if you don't. I think you know that too, but I suppose you have your reasons for not acknowledging it. We talk about racial, religious or sexual equality in the very same context, but somehow only gender equality gets people to link studies to prove we're not supposed to be considered equals after all.

Yes I like it when men open the door for me. I like it when women do it too. I open the door for men and women, and give them seats on the train if they need it more than I do. I don't see what my sex has to do with being a considerate human being. I like everything people do with good will and respect. What I don't like is when I'm being patronised or when 'chivalry' has ulterior motives. The reason I keep saying gender stereotypes are harmful is because they're used to excuse a lot of bad behaviour, to put people down or to make them feel bad for not conforming to them.

You talk about embracing men for being men, well, what does 'being a man' mean? How can you answer that question without excluding hundreds of millions of men? I get the feeling you think the fight for equality is an attempt to change people's fundamental nature. It's actually an attempt to acknowledge people, male and female, in all their diversity, to let them stake the same claim at being men or women respectively. You say there are exceptions to every rule. What do these exceptions mean in the context of human beings? If there are men who don't fit the image of 'being a man', does it mean they're not men? Or are they deformed, wrongly wired men? Or are there more ways of 'being a man'?

And sexual attraction really has nothing to do with this.

[CynicalQuixotic]

Equality in the context of gender equality discussed here means equal opportunities. It means that nobody can tell you what you should or shouldn't be doing just because you're male or female. It means nobody should expect you to fit into an image of what a man or a woman is supposed to be like, or consider you a failure if you don't. I think you know that too, but I suppose you have your reasons for not acknowledging it. We talk about racial, religious or sexual equality in the very same context, but somehow only gender equality gets people to link studies to prove we're not supposed to be considered equals after all.

Yes I like it when men open the door for me. I like it when women do it too. I open the door for men and women, and give them seats on the train if they need it more than I do. I don't see what my sex has to do with being a considerate human being. I like everything people do with good will and respect. What I don't like is when I'm being patronised or when 'chivalry' has ulterior motives. The reason I keep saying gender stereotypes are harmful is because they're used to excuse a lot of bad behaviour, to put people down or to make them feel bad for not conforming to them.

You talk about embracing men for being men, well, what does 'being a man' mean? How can you answer that question without excluding hundreds of millions of men? I get the feeling you think the fight for equality is an attempt to change people's fundamental nature. It's actually an attempt to acknowledge people, male and female, in all their diversity, to let them stake the same claim at being men or women respectively. You say there are exceptions to every rule. What do these exceptions mean in the context of human beings? If there are men who don't fit the image of 'being a man', does it mean they're not men? Or are they deformed, wrongly wired men? Or are there more ways of 'being a man'?

And sexual attraction really has nothing to do with this.

The forum isn't letting me give you karma, but I just want to say that you say everything I want to say so much more eloquently than I ever could. Thank you.

[silvermoonfairy3]

The forum isn't letting me give you karma, but I just want to say that you say everything I want to say so much more eloquently than I ever could. Thank you.

Seconded, although it let me give karma.
Excellent explained post.

[Hollandia]

This is not about stereotypes, you use that word. This is about men and women being built differently and having their brains, their chemicals, their bodies and everything else being fundamentally different tendencies and traits. In your explanation you keep overlooking this. Is a man more likely to think this way than a woman is not a stereotype it is based on that fact that our brains are hardwired differently and we have different levels of chemicals and hormones running our bodies and our brains.

Chivalry is very much based on the statement that a woman is treated a certain way by a man because she is a woman and he recognizes it and chooses to treat her as such. According to your words, this would make him a stereotypical male treating her as a stereotypical female.

How are they wired differently? I gave you a link with an example for that. What makes a man a man and a women a women, well men have much levels higher levels of the "male" hormone of testosterone and women have much higher levels of the "female" hormone estrogen, I highly doubt you need me to explain what these entail but they do affect they way we think and act.

A little girl can choose to play with a tank instead of a barbie, but most will still have those tendencies to want the barbie and will still have feminine traits regardless of how she choose to act. Only identical twins are identical so really you are comparing apples to oranges. Women are not equivalent to men. Men are not equivalent to women. We are of a different sex and created this way just as wild and domestic animals continue to exhibit these traits and tendencies. We have a higher brain function that allows for more individuality but it does not remove the core of how we are all built.

For the record not being equal does not mean one is superior over the other it simply means they are not equal. It means most men contain certain male attributes mentally and most women contain certain female attributes.

Sexual attraction is based on chemistry and the fact that someone is not a male overrides any other qualities that would come into play.

[ldrxoxo]

Hello everyone, I'm Manon, a 25-year-old French newbie on this website! My situation is a little complicated, I'm French but am doing a Master's degree in Italy where I met my boyfriend, who was a Brazilian exchange student there. We've started dating each other in December 2012, and our story has had to deal with a lot of difficulties already (he asked his university in Brazil to extend his exchange period, which he managed to do, allowing him to stay 6 more months) and some other problems...Which made us argue quite a lot but in the end always succeed in overcoming problems.

After dating 7 months, last june, I told him to move with me, which he did; for financial reasons but also because he was all the time at my place and still paid his rent!! The first month has been quite difficult, but that's normal I guess because we had to adapt each other to this new life, which we also did
He had to go back to Brazil to finish his studies 1 month ago so we both went back to france, at my place since I don't need to attend my university classes anymore, just have 1 exam to pass and the thesis to complete everything. He flew back to Brazil and I decided to spend some time in London to have a change of air. This first month has been tremendous for me and I've been experiencing all sorts of emotions.

He studies from 8 to 12 hours a day at his university and helps his father working during the weekend, goes to a friend's place once a week or so, so add that to the time difference and you get almost no time to speak / to skype. What I get is whatsapp messages, that's all.

I feel frustrated, sometimes want to tell him he doesn't deserve me (those are strong words but that's what comes to my mind) if he can't even find time to speak to me, sometimes feel our story is going nowhere, sometimes feel he doesn't give a shit because he doesn't want to find the time, and most of all, I guess I'm completely lost. I used to not trust him before, always waiting for the worst to come and doubting each time something wasn't clear enough for me. Obviously with distance, I had to cope with this lack of self confidence and trust in himself. I need a good quantity of affection and tenderness, which are obviously lacking since we're apart.

We don't manage to talk a lot lately, that's making me doubt about him, and about our whole lovestory

When I try to explain the situation, I get those answers. My best friend tells me to accept the situation or end it definitely. My roommates tell me he's brazilian and is surely having a good time humping other ladies. That I shouldn't be so naive. That I'm only 25 and still "dream"....
I'm abroad, far from family and friends and have remained too calm so far, I wonder how much time I'll endure the whole situation....

For you all who have more experience than me, and most of all who understand, I'm all ears to your advice!

Have a great week

Ahhh your thread has be hijacked! Lol, anyway, I know what you mean about "being busy all the time." We used to talk all the time, then he did a complete 360 flip with no contact at all and he [and others] wonder why I act the way I did. I'd love for those who judge how people react to the sudden no contact to see how they'd behave if the person they love suddenly fell off the face of the earth when they used to talk every chance they get. Had he steadily been contacting me, we wouldn't be where we're at. I don't like not being kept updated, especially when I thought we were friends, too.

It's ridiculous that people can't even give ten minutes of their day: ten minutes! Not even asking to talk for 6 hours like we used to at a time.

I can't remember if I've already commented on your thread, oops if I did. I understand a lot! That was my situation and why we ended: because he wouldn't even give me ten minutes of his day anymore when I know he isn't even that busy as he acts like. I know he has tests and work and stuff, but I wonder what the heck he is doing on the weekends that he can't give me ten minutes of his time.

[ldrxoxo]

PS. For those who get on people how people react when people don't talk to each other anymore, I hope they won't make a thread here whining when it happens to them because I won't feel sorry for them.

[Luc]

This is not about stereotypes, you use that word. This is about men and women being built differently and having their brains, their chemicals, their bodies and everything else being fundamentally different tendencies and traits. In your explanation you keep overlooking this. Is a man more likely to think this way than a woman is not a stereotype it is based on that fact that our brains are hardwired differently and we have different levels of chemicals and hormones running our bodies and our brains.

Chivalry is very much based on the statement that a woman is treated a certain way by a man because she is a woman and he recognizes it and chooses to treat her as such. According to your words, this would make him a stereotypical male treating her as a stereotypical female.

How are they wired differently? I gave you a link with an example for that. What makes a man a man and a women a women, well men have much levels higher levels of the "male" hormone of testosterone and women have much higher levels of the "female" hormone estrogen, I highly doubt you need me to explain what these entail but they do affect they way we think and act.

A little girl can choose to play with a tank instead of a barbie, but most will still have those tendencies to want the barbie and will still have feminine traits regardless of how she choose to act. Only identical twins are identical so really you are comparing apples to oranges. Women are not equivalent to men. Men are not equivalent to women. We are of a different sex and created this way just as wild and domestic animals continue to exhibit these traits and tendencies. We have a higher brain function that allows for more individuality but it does not remove the core of how we are all built.

For the record not being equal does not mean one is superior over the other it simply means they are not equal. It means most men contain certain male attributes mentally and most women contain certain female attributes.

Sexual attraction is based on chemistry and the fact that someone is not a male overrides any other qualities that would come into play.

I guess the reason why some people are afraid to admit that men and women are not equal is because they think it will be gateway to unequal treatment or unequal rights. This is ofcourse ridiculous. Just because men and women are not the same/equal does not mean we don't deserve equal rights. I'm not a sexist, I most definitely support equal rights and equal opportunities for men AND women. But facts are facts and the fact is that men and women are not equal on a physical/biological level.


To get back on topic, I think it's important to let your SO know what is important for you. He probably doesn't realize he's doing something wrong, nor should you tell him he's doing something wrong, but instead tell him how he makes you feel and how you think that could be solved. If your SO cares about you he will listen to you. Your SO probably doesn't realize how serious this is and how miserable he makes you feel. So tell him, but try to tell him in a non-accusatory way. You don't want him to feel attacked or criticized, because the he will only retaliate and make you feel even worse. Instead, try to show him you care about him, that you want to understand him, and that you want him to understand you as well.
I guess this is going to be really difficult considering the fact that he barely makes time for you, but I'm sure you can find a way to let him know. Good luck!

[TwoThree]

PS. For those who get on people how people react when people don't talk to each other anymore, I hope they won't make a thread here whining when it happens to them because I won't feel sorry for them.

You hijacked the thread in a much, much worse way than the people discussing gender equality did. You have no class.

[silvermoonfairy3]

I guess the reason why some people are afraid to admit that men and women are not equal is because they think it will be gateway to unequal treatment or unequal rights. This is ofcourse ridiculous. Just because men and women are not the same/equal does not mean we don't deserve equal rights. I'm not a sexist, I most definitely support equal rights and equal opportunities for men AND women. But facts are facts and the fact is that men and women are not equal on a physical/biological level.

I don't think anyone's arguing that men and women are the same biologically. We're definitely not. There are chemical differences, brain differences, all sorts of things beyond just genitals.
However, many people use that science to justify ingrained social constructs. Chivalry came up earlier. There is no "chivalry gene." Little boys push little girls on the playground, partly because they haven't learned about chivalry and treating nicely yet. Furthermore, what is considered chivalrous varies by culture, as does what is considered "womanly" or "manly."

There are absolutely things that are scientifically, biologically different about men and women. Men tend to be stronger, physically. Men tend to have brains not wired to multitask as easily as women. Men tend to have more testosterone and accordingly levels of aggression. But there are a lot of things people claim as based on biological differences that simply aren't.

Men having trouble communicating or not communicating their feelings well is a huge one. It's not a biological fact that men are bad communicators. It's a learned behavior. (In some places. In others, men are taught to be emotionally open.)
The amount of communication, what type is appropriate, etc. is socially learned. Guys sometimes are taught to bottle up their feelings, or might have grown up seeing their strong silent dad or whatever.

And it's hard to think that something like "men should be the strong silent type" when it's learned that early isn't an inherent part of male existence, but it's not. Just because we learn something at a young age and really take it to heart doesn't mean it's a scientific, biological part of us. It's a social concept.

The danger comes in with us shrugging it off for two reasons. 1) If there's a guy who has trouble communicating his feelings and it's shrugged off as "well, it's a guy thing, men and women are different" he'll probably never be able to get better at it, because no one expects him to, he doesn't expect to. Men and women are different and that's not overcomable.
Secondly, if there's a guy that communicates his feelings really well, by this sort of logic, he's actually unmanly. Because not communicating well is a guy thing. That sets up communicating well to be a woman thing. Some guys who could communicate well are aware of that, and consciously work to not be considered "unmanly" in some way, by engaging in the "womanly" communication style. It's self-perpetuating, in some ways, if "it's a guy/girl thing" goes unquestioned. Is it *really*? Or is it just a deeply ingrained societal thing? Often, we just use "it's a guy/girl thing" and don't question further.

I absolutely completely agree that there are factual, legitimate differences, but I think that gets used as justification wayyyy too often to have an easy explanation for things that are actually quite complex social concepts, and how we've societally treated notions of masculinity and femininity.

To get back on topic, I think it's important to let your SO know what is important for you. He probably doesn't realize he's doing something wrong, nor should you tell him he's doing something wrong, but instead tell him how he makes you feel and how you think that could be solved.

Completely agree with this advice.. and even one step further, maybe try to not even think of it as him "doing something wrong" but just doing something "differently" than how you would and how you would like. It helps remove blame, so that you can work on constructive solutions.

Good luck!