Originally posted by Luc
View Post
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.
Good luck!


Leave a comment: