Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    Xtine,
    
    You bring up something I"ve wondered about myself... the actual
    "liberation" of the so called "modern" couple when faced by peer
    pressure.
    
    A lot of the problem is just that and the cliche of a married man 
    lossing his "freedom" when he is no longer single.  My personal 
    outlook is that a married man takes on certain responsiblities that 
    a single man can not relate to or understand.  Thus they tend to 
    razz the man when he says he has to go home or the misses will worry.
    
    Peer pressure can be an incredible force when you're caught in the 
    middle of it.  And although most of what the "friends" are saying is 
    meant to be taken as harmless teasing some men are forced to question
    themselves and "go with the flow" when they are faced by it from all 
    sides.  Which is one of the reasons that the single "Buddies" start 
    seeing less and less of the married man.  They just don't understand.
    
    The situation is handled by different men in different ways.  Some 
    pay no attention to the teasing get up at the approrpiate time and go 
    home.  Some handle it like you ex did, buckling under and thinking to
    themselves "It won't hurt to be late this once".  Some develope a 
    schedule where they are allowed to go out for the night once a week.
    "Now honey, you KNOW I can't go ove there with you that night, it's my 
    night out with the boys."   And many other ways.
    
    Regardless it boils down to peer pressure and how the subject of that 
    pressure chooses to deal with it.
    
    Skip

    
    Seems to me...from this end of the cheap seats...that there are two
    issues here.
    
    The first is common courtesy. When a person makes plans with
    another person...be they friend, lover, cohort, or even enemy...
    _common courtesy_ would dictate that of they are not going to make
    it on time...they call. There is very little room here for 
    prevarication...I suppose blizzards and being held hostage
    would be extenuating circumstances might qualify...but under
    normal polite circumstances...if you are going to be more than
    45 minutes late...you must call.
    
    A lack of courtesy is not necessarily grounds for breaking up
    relationships...it may be rather more a indication of lack of
    up-bringing...or a need for a lesson in manners. [grin] I often
    think that couples read way more into actions than is really there...
    a desire to personally insult the other party is not the only
    reason someone can be rude...sometimes it is just ignorance.
    
    Second...there is the issue of 'the boys' and 'the girls'. The mere
    fact that 'the girls' do not make fun of women who leave a gathering
    early is not proof that women do not censure members who do not
    conform to the 'rules' of any given group. Women are notoriously
    subtle in the ways they censure their sisters...but it is real
    none-the-less.
    
    The fact that 'the boys' razz the guys who leave early to go be
    with a girl friend or wife is a recognized and not altogether
    unhealthy [in and of itself] way of establishing membership
    rights...afterall...they could be snorting coke or chug-a-lugging
    a quart of whiskey...much more dangerous.
    
    What is going in...is simply..."Hey dude...you wanna be one of
    the 'guys'...then you party like the 'guys'" If the participant
    does not...he no lobger has membership rights.
    
    It seems to me the question is then..._not_ "Why does he [or she] do
    this to me?"...but "Does he [or she] need this group identity more then or 
    as much as he needs the realtionship?" The answer to that would
    be a deciding factor about whether one decides to put up with
    the situation.
    
    Groups are tough things to leave. If you are in a group of 15, and
    one person decides they don't like/love you any more...you still
    have 14 to rely on.  If you are in a realtionship and the other
    person says 'get lost' you are naked. [Yes, I know that is
    a simplification...but you know what I am driving at...yes?]
    
    Melinda

Surely, in the majority of relationships one partner can go out without
the other without fear of recrimination?  

I believe that men are much more susceptible to "fitting in with the lads"...


The question is really - Why is it the norm that men are "under the thumb"?


Is it just a joke, or do most men really get grief from the other-half?





Xtine

    Well, I know that when I say I'm going to be somewhere at a particular 
    time to meet my "other half" and don't show up... I hear about it.
    
    But then that goes back to what Mel was talking about.
    
    

Re: .3

Perhaps it isn't the norm, but you would tend not to hear from the
other side.

I agree with Mel in this case, the sexes aren't all that different here.

			Steve

    re: .0 (Xtine?)
    
         I think your premise is flawed.  Maybe in England all the "boys"
    do this.  Maybe they even do it in lots of other places.  But I
    offer you two other possibilities (not unlike the interceding replies)
    and they are 1. maybe they are truly boys and not adult men, and
    2.  not all men act that way (and I for one fit this category
    strongly...I tend to make "the woman in my life" very important,
    much more important than anything else, far more important than
    the "boys," and definitely important enough to try to show time/
    space considerations towards...if anything, I have an almost reverse
    problem...)
    
    Frederick
    

I discussed this with some friends last night, and the following points were 
raised:

1.  Although women will rib their friends for leaving a girls night out early 
    to go home, its not done in an intimidating way, and we couldn't think of
    ONE occasion where a woman was persuaded to stay against her 'will'.

2.  It is traditional in England, particularly in the North, for the men to be
    men and the women to stay at home.

3.  Men go out a lot more often, therefore on the odd occasions that women want
    to go out they are less likely to find resistance.

4.  Its not macho to be "Happily Married"

5.  Men often seem to prefer to take the "row" after the event when the deed
    is done than to start a confrontational situation.  ie. If they think the
    other half might object they do it then defend themselves afterwards.

6.  Men probably think their other half will object because this is projected
    as the norm.  By following the action in 5. they do get a row... thus making
    them believe they would have got a negative response had they asked up
    front.  Then next time they go out they are more likely to say they've
    "escaped".



Xtine
   

    re: .7 (Ms. X)
    
          ...I can't argue with that, if that's how it is for you.
    
          This is a nit, however (and we all love nitting, don't we?) ;-)
    I suggest the use of the term "other half" is a problem.  Anyone
    who is in a relationship who sees him/herself as a "half" is very
    unlikely to ever reach a point even approaching self-realization.
    In order to be self-reliant, one should see themself (sic) as being
    a whole, entire person and the other person similarly.  Two halves
    make one, with neither complete.  Two wholes, however, can synergize
    to become far more than just the sum of the parts (or, two.)
    
    
    Frederick
    

	RE.6

>>           -< Set up your principles...then show your character.... >-



	Since I know Frederick and have met him, I can certainly
vouch for his caring and his lovingness.  You have many friends
and people who love you too, Frederick!  Right here in New England.
Please come back soon..

	Mikki    

re: .8 (Frederick)

>          This is a nit, however (and we all love nitting, don't we?) ;-)
>    I suggest the use of the term "other half" is a problem.  

    Not to let any nit go unpicked... if memory serves me right, "other half"
    is a reference to Plato's hermaphrodites (from the Symposium, I think).
    This is from very dim memory, but he puts forth the idea there that
    human souls each stem from half a hermaphrodite, and spend their lives
    on earth looking for their "other half", to reassert their former
    completed self (or something like that).

	Sharon

    Re-1
    
    Very good Sharon... for a dim memory it's served you well.
    
    SkiP

    re: .10 (Sharon)
    
          Thanks...and Carl Jung also picked up on the theme by
    saying that men are masculine energy in search of feminine
    energy and that women are feminine energy in search of masculine.
    Actually, I believe that men and women are both masculine and
    feminine energy.  The problem is that certain components of
    each are "underdeveloped" and therefore not acknowledged and 
    unutilized.  What happens then is that we seek that energy
    vacuum in someone else, usually finding it in the opposite sex
    (but not always, obviously.)  This would certainly lead to the
    situation that X (pronounced "Chris" :-)  ) referenced...that is,
    it would then truly be a situation of two halves presumably leading to one
    (notice I didn't say a "whole.") 
         To perhaps add that to this topic, I would say that it is 
    possible that we are more comfortable with those who have the same
    level of development as we have and therefore "hang around" those
    people (i.e., my masculine energy is similar to Joe's, and since I
    feel comfortable with it, I will hang around Joe.)  But this falls
    apart, eventually, if I am to grow.  I need to pick up this missing
    "scary" energy, not from another (usually the opposite sex) but
    rather from within.  ONce this occurs, then there is neither a need
    to be with the "boys" or even with a woman (for the males in this
    example.)  Then it can move to the area of preference.  Once in the
    area of preference, the victimhood/martyrhood situation prevalent in
    "X's" reply will be erroneous and unlikely.  
          We have a *need* to be a whole person.  We can take the short
    and incomplete and false cut and do this by finding someone else to
    make up that other "half" *or* we can find the whole person within
    ourself and then seek someone else for the sheer joy, preference and
    synergy which that can provide.
     
    RE: Xtine (.7, again)
        
          By the way, I meant to add in .8 that if you want that reality to 
    change, there are various things you can do...one of the best is
    changing your own personal beliefs.  If you change your beliefs,
    your reality must change.  (Beliefs precede experience.)
    
    re: .9 (MIkki)
    
          Thank you for your kind "endorsement."  ;-)  :-)  I hope to
    visit "DEC-land" (i.e., New En-gland[s]) someday soon again.
    
    Frederick
    

    Some guys have a harder time outgrowing the "pub and chicks" scene. I
    know when I seriously started dating my husband who is not into clubs
    and bars, when I was really into going out dancing every weekend, it
    was I who had the tough time adjusting, but then after a while it was
    no big deal.  About 6 years ago, going to those places meant so much to
    me, and matter of fact when my friends took me to a dance club for my
    "bachelorette party" I was bored!!!
    
    Do this.....if it bothers you that he goes clubbing, you call your
    friends and YOU go clubbing and stay out to the wee hours....you will
    see him do a roundabout face once the shoe is on the other foot and he
    has to worry about YOU!
    
    
    Good Luck ;-)
    
    Lynne

In 1981 - 1983 I worked for a company that had several guys from the UK. I 
believe they all had similar family situations -- the men worked hard and drank
*a lot* both at lunch and after work ( also were smokers ); the women stayed
home with the children and some of them were taking horseback riding lessons.
The odd thing was at their parties -- the men were talking and having fun in
one room, while the women gathered together in another, and talked about
things that to me were very boring.  Of course, I was normally hanging out in
the bar drinking and playing pool with their husbands (I excuse my behavior on
the basis that it was within the first several months of a divorce.).

The point is that their family and social roles differed quite a bit from the
Americans, even back then.  Perhaps this behavior mentioned in the base note
is more prevalent there than here?

Just wondering.

Paula

    
    
      RE: .0  Funny you should write about this very same subject.  I was
    the recipient of similar actions from a male friend from Boston who used
    to work for DEC Hudson.    I decided to give him a piece of his own
    medicine every chance I get.  ;-)    
      RE: .2   I like your reply very much.   You said exactly what I was
     thinking but better!!
    
      Melinda
      

I think it may well be a British thing...

I just have to say here that this isn't really a problem for me, just a 
discussion point.  Having had one relationship where it is a problem, I am now
fairly confident I could handle it sensibly if it happened again... or avoid
anyone who thought like that in the first place.

I was just wondering if it was so common that avoiding it was going to be
difficult?

And I don't like the idea that I can be either at home or out having agreed with
no problem that the "other half" is also out, and yet still get bad-mouthed to
his mates cos thats what he thinks they expect.  

This is one of the things that got back to me... a joint friend (male) said... 
"Its no wonder Denis went out and got p*ssed so much - it was a reaction to your
constant nagging"... turns out Denis had said nearly every time he went to the 
pub "Boy am I in trouble tonight"... what he failed to add was "Cos I said I'd 
be home 3 hours ago" :-)!

Xtine

    Re the hypothoesis about the terminology "other half"
    
    It is JUST an expression... nothing more nor less.  In fact, I've heard
    it used so often where I come from that I don't even think about the 
    refrences it may make in using it.  Still you have made me stop and 
    think about it.  
    

    I watched a friend go through this once. He said he was going to go
    home, his wife was ill. Fine, I thought, shows he cares about her. His
    friends ragged him rotten about being 'under the thumb' etc. I sat
    through all this, and nearly told him to go home and ignore the idiots
    around him. Grrr!!!
    
    Mind you, this was the same group of friends who tried to get me to
    join in with their drinking 'games'. I found I can tolerate the group
    on odd occaisons, but they ain't my cup of tea.
    
    Pete (a UK noter).

    Although it isn't as strong in the states I think it still happens on 
    occasion depending on life style, location, etc.  
    
    I know a lot of "Good Ol' Boys" who foster the attitude of married men 
    being "hen-pecked" and "Under the thumb".  You learn to accept it, or 
    ignore it, or go along with it.... that's all there  is to it.
    
    But it is a choice made by each individual and the bottom line is that 
    each person is responsible for how they deal with the situation.
    
    NOT the guys.... 
    
    Skip

    re:10
    
    sharon only got part of the story (yes, it is from the Symposium)...
    
    in the times before our time, humans were four armed, four legged
    because of this they were quite strong and made war against the gods on
    mt. olympus. zeus zapped them with his thunderbolts and split them up.
    they were divided but since then the two soul parts have tried to find
    each other again. some were hermaphrodites (one part male and one part
    female), some were of two male parts, and some were of two female parts
    ...so for some of the other half is of the opposite sex and for some
    of us the other half is the same sex.
    
    /peter

    There is a story I've heard (and told myself once or twice). It
    seems that there were two lines for married men into heaven. One
    was very long and labeled "Men who were hen pecked". The other line,
    labeled, "Men who were not hen pecked", had but one man on it. One
    of the angels at the gate went over and asked him if he was in the
    right line, His reply, "I don't know but this is the line my wife
    told me to get on."

    In my experience many men do, when with the guys, complain about
    the wife telling them what to do. Few are really that serious. In
    fact I know a couple of men who totally rule their wives who tell
    the same kind of stories. I think some use it as an excuse not to
    do things that they really don't want to do. Knowing that some are
    just making an excuse leads others to sometimes place additional
    peer pressure on them. I should also mention that many man tend to
    say things when with their "pals" that they don't really mean. It's
    often hard to tell what is serious and what not unless you are part of
    the group.

    I know that most of the women I know who decline to do something,
    giving the excuse that their husband will not let them, are quite
    serious. Other women tend not to push back on that excuse because,
    unlike for most men, it is often a real problem for women. Men will
    push back because submission to a wife is hard for them, especially
    if they are single, to accept and/or understand.

    As for going out. My wife goes out at night quite a bit more then I.
    She has school several nights a week, there are the usually home party
    plan parties (Tupperware, etc) and the occasional girls nights out.
    I tend, other then for school, to only go out a couple of times a
    year to a Noters party. She's been out later then expected a number 
    of times and I don't recall her ever getting a hard time about it.
    Everytime I've been out later then expected I've heard about it. Why
    I don't quite understand. When I go out I make an estimate of my
    return. Sometimes the party turns out to be much more fun then I
    expected. So much so that I don't always notice the time. Why should
    it be no big deal when it happens to a woman but major trouble when
    it happens to a man? I know a lot more women then men who give their
    spouse a hard time for being late.
    
    			Alfred
    
    PS: Is it cultural perhaps? Men are expected to be on time but women
    are expected to be late?

Re: .21

Alfred, I think the cultural expectation is that if a man stays out late, he's
up to "hanky panky", but a woman staying out late must have an innocent
reason.  Partly this is because our society doesn't want to admit that women
too are capable of "hanky panky", partly because such behavior is tolerated
in men.

It all really comes down to a matter of expectations and trust.

			Steve

    Actually I think it is because women tend to worry more about 
    "What could have happened" then men.  I don't claim to understand why.
    But it seems to be so... I remember growing up when I came home late...
    
    My mother would exclaim... "For all I knew you could have been laying
    dead in a gutter somewhere." or some other equally exotic "problem"
    that would have made me late.
    
    My father on the other hand would yell at me because I made my mother 
    worry about me....
    
    Go figure.  I tend to try and stick to my "promised" times and meetings 
    and make an honest effort to call if I'm running late.  But
    realistically it isn't always possible to call, and sometimes time
    slips away from me.
    
    SKip

    I believe it to be more worry than anything else....I've been through
    it so I should know.  I never gave my husband a hard time about being
    out (which wasn't often) - BUT, if he was an hour or so later than what
    he had told me, I started worring.  All I ever asked him was if you aren't
    going to make it home by the time you said, please call and let me
    know.  Now is that really TOO much to ask guys??  The one time I didn't
    worry - something really DID happen.  I'm not saying that it's only
    women worrying - but some of it is.  FWIW....
                                                
    Lynne

    
    RE: .7
    
    [I think all the other replies have covered any other comments
    that I would have made at least as well if not better than I 
    would have...]
    
    However, I feel I have to respond to your first (1.) point.
    
    I really disagree with this. I am not disputing that you
    can not think of a situation where women have forced other
    women to do things...I am disputing your definition of
    'forced'.
    
    [Give me minute, won't you, and let me try to explain myself?]
    
    Human Beings...people...as a species operate by 'force', although we
    prefer [especially women] not to use that term. We would use
    'convince' or 'suggest'...or any other number of other terms that
    dress the action in socially aceptable garb.
    
    We [people] are social animals. Every interaction we have is based
    on and defined by our relationship with the people we are reacting
    to. Is the person our boss? A fried? A lover? A subordinate? A
    student? We could say the same thing to each of these people
    but phrase is differently. 
    
    For instance, I can 'force' a subordinate to go to a unit lunch 
    by saying something like: 
    
    "You know, Betsy, our group uses these little informal gatherings to 
    form good working relationships...and we would really like you to 
    become an integral part of our organization."
    
    Now, no one could accuse me of using the type of 'force' that guys will
    uyse on their buddies in a bar....but anyone who does not see that I
    have given the poor little darling an ultimatum is in trouble.
    
    What I was trying to say in .2 [and didn't make very clear, I am
    afraid] is that women use 'membership' in groups just as effectively
    as men do...and just as often. [How do you think the women who go
    against the 'stay-at-home' norm feel? They may be dedicated to the
    cause, but it can get real lonely on the end of some limbs...]
    
    The only difference I see, is that men tend to use more easily
    identifiable, physical, sometimes even violent [at least verbally]
    methods of 'force' where women use more subtle methods.
    
    Melinda

> .0 by CARTER 

> Do men like to pretend they are "under the thumb" cos ...
> ... it gives them something to joke about? 

Yup.  :)

The note before this, 1127, talks about people walking down
the street singing ... how natural ... how fun.  And I believe
a lot of the "talk" being discussed in this note is sort the
same. 

Perhaps there is a linguist here who can pass along the formal
name for this sort of ritual or habitual talk -- where you 
complain about husbands, wives, weather, politics, diets, sports,
whatever.  

For instance, I never once actually dieted or sincerely tried to lose
weight in my first 44 years.  But I would joke about dieting, join in
diet talk, rib a friend "Ah! there goes your diet!" who bring back
a large chunk of chocolate cake from the cafe line.  But it's just
group talk, tribe talk. Most of it doesn't mean anything. We are
mostly just "singing" together. Different groups have different
songs.

To me, this habitual talk is like a jazz chorus made up of
sequential solos. :)                Meigs

    something tells me I relate to that last comment !

    Well,
    
    	Once again, I feel that there's some ritualistic inbalance to the
    question in the first place, as it seems to assume that the ladies
    don't bring similar peer pressure to bare/make their own ritualistic
    conversations when together in large groups in the same way that men
    do.
    
    	I'll try to explain what I mean. I can distinctly remember
    just after getting married, sitting with a group of women who
    grew positively hostile to me when I said that my spouse did not
    mind me going out late when I wanted to because he trusted me.
    These ladies were convinced that I should be at home and that because
    I was not, my poor husband was hard done by and that I must be some sort
    of floozy out for a good time with OTHER men. (aparantley living 
    together dousn't count???) I was NOT out on the razz night after night
    I hasten to add, but probably once a week I'd accept an invitation. 
    
    	From the single ladies, I got the distinct impression that as
    I'd bagged my catch so to speak I should't be confusing the odds
    by being in competion with those who had yet to get their own.
    
    	Suffice it to say that I decided that these were not like
    minded people who it would be worthwhile FOR ME to spend too
    much time with.
    
    	Even with my good friends, those of whom are attached and those
    who are not, there seems to be a fair amount of "ladies" ie: 
    gender specific chat. IE: He dosen't help around the house, he's 
    always tired :-}, THEY are different to us, HE can't cook his dinner 
    on his own therefore I had to cook for him last night and leave his dinner
    in the freezer with specific instructions on what to do with it
    because the guys such a CONGENITAL IDIOT, Bless him! that he'd starve
    tonight without me if I didn't. I do know that a lot of this is just
    not true, but it breaks the ice and once its over and done with we
    can have some reasonable conversation. If you get most of these
    ladies outside of a large group, they are much less lightly to feel
    the need to come out with all the rubbish.
    
    	So I think my feeling about it is that any group has some
    ritualistic language/behaviours (Look at DEC) where each member 
    shows that they conform in order to appear non threatening, to show 
    belonging and you make yourself different (IE: Threatening)
    in that arena at your peril.
    
    	At the end of the day though, you make your own choice and
    not all of us are pack animals. Its probably better to find this
    out about your partner and learn to live with it either way
    before he/she becomes the "better half" 
    
    	There again aint hind site a wonderfull thing??
    
    Hope that this shows I have the right "Mindset" and that I've
    absorbed a fair amount of "Group Dynamics" in my four years
    at DEC :-)
    
    The Other Christine

RE: The last note and various previous notes:

It seems to me that it is unattached people, or people whose relationship 
with their partners is not as strong or as open as it should be, who take part 
in the "join the lads/stay with the lads" pub game, or the like. Perhaps it's
the desire to seek replacement/alternate companionship that leads them to 
seek the solace of the high stool by the counter.

- Paul