Why Men Won't Commit: Men's Atitudes About Sex, Dating and Marriage

(Preface and Explanation)A special essay on young, not-yet married men’s attitudes on the timing of marriage finds that men experience few social pressures to marry, gain many of the benefits of marriage by cohabiting with a romantic partner, and are ever more reluctant to commit to marriage in their early adult years.

Available evidence on marriage trends over the past four decades indicates that marriage has declined dramatically as a first living together experience for couples and as a status of parenthood. However, in recent years, there are signs that some marriage-weakening trends are slowing or in some cases leveling off.

Marriage has been much in the news lately, but we hear little about the actual state of marriage. How is marriage faring in American society today? Is it becoming stronger or weaker? Sicker or healthier? Better or worse?

Answers to these questions from official sources have been hard to come by. The federal government issues thousands of reports on nearly every dimension of American life, from what we eat to how many hours we commute each day. But it provides no annual index or report on the state of marriage. Indeed, the National Center for Health Statistics, the federal agency responsible for collecting marriage and divorce data from the states, has scaled back this activity. As a consequence, this important data source has deteriorated. Neither the Congress nor the President has ever convened a bipartisan commission or study group to investigate and report on the state of contemporary marriage. And no private agency, academic institution or private foundation has stepped forward to take on the task of monitoring the indices of marital health.

The neglect of marriage is all the more remarkable because mating and marrying behavior has changed dramatically in recent decades. Although some measures of these changes, such as the rise in unwed childbearing, have been duly noted, discussed and monitored, the state of marriage itself has been slighted. Why this is so remains a great puzzle. Marriage is a fundamental social institution. It is central to the nurture and raising of children. It is the "social glue" that reliably attaches fathers to children. It contributes to the physical, emotional and economic health of men, women and children, and thus to the nation as a whole. It is also one of the most highly prized of all human relationships and a central life goal of most Americans. Knowledge about marriage is especially important to the younger generation of men and women, who grew up in the midst of the divorce revolution in the 1970s and 1980s, and are now approaching their prime marrying years. Without some sense of how marriage is faring in America today, the portrait of the nation’s social health is incomplete.

The National Marriage Project seeks to fill in this missing feature in our portrait of the nation’s social health with The State of Our Unions. The report is divided into two sections. The first section is an essay in a continuing series devoted to exploring the attitudes toward mating and marrying among today’s not-yet-married young. The second section includes what we consider the most important annually or biennially updated indicators related to marriage, divorce, unmarried cohabitation, loss of child centeredness, fragile families with children and teen attitudes about marriage and family. For each area, a key finding is highlighted. These indicators are updated annually and provide opportunities for fresh appraisals each June.

We have used the latest and most reliable data available. We cover the period from 1960 to the present, so these data reflect historical trends over several decades. Most of the data come from the United States Bureau of the Census. All of the data were collected by long established and scientifically reputable institutions that rely on nationally representative samples.

The mating and marrying behavior of today’s young single men is a topic of growing interest in the popular culture and among young women. To a large degree, this popular interest reflects the delay in the age of first marriage. Both men and women are putting off marriage until older ages. The median age of first marriage for men has reached 27, the oldest age in the nation’s history. (The median age for women stands at 25.) However, it is men more often than women who are accused of being "commitment phobic" and dragging their feet about marriage. Our investigation of male attitudes indicates that there is evidence to support this popular view.

The men in this study express a desire to marry and have children sometime in their lives, but they are in no hurry. They enjoy their single life and they experience few of the traditional pressures from church, employers or the society that once encouraged men to marry. Moreover, the sexual revolution and the trend toward cohabitation offer them some of the benefits of marriage without its obligations. If this trend continues, it will not be good news for the many young women who hope to marry and bear children before they begin to face problems associated with declining fertility.

2. They can enjoy the benefits of having a wife by cohabiting rather than marrying

For the past three years, as part of its Next Generation Program, The National Marriage Project has been conducting research into the attitudes toward dating, mate selection and marriage among young, unmarried adults. Last year, we reported on the results of a national survey of young men and women, ages 20 to 29. This year, we take a closer look at a select group of young, heterosexual, not-yet-married men.

As a first step toward understanding male attitudes about marriage and their timing of entry into first marriage, we conducted focus group discussions among not-yet-married heterosexual men in four major metropolitan areas: northern New Jersey, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and Houston. The participants, sixty men in all, came from a variety of religious, ethnic and family backgrounds.

These men range in age from 25-33. The majority are employed full-time, with reported annual incomes between $21-$35,000 and above. Most have had some college or hold a baccalaureate degree or better. No one reports ever being married. Three of the men have a child.

This report highlights key findings from this preliminary study. These findings are impressionistic and exploratory but they provide valuable leads for further research into changing male patterns in the timing and commitment to marriage.

For the young men in these groups, the early adult years are a time of insecure job and residential attachment.

More than half report having changed jobs in the past five years, and twelve said they had been laid off or unemployed during that same time period.

Living arrangements also tend to be fluid and unstable. The men report a variety of living arrangements since leaving the parental home. It is common for a young man to shift from sharing an apartment with roommates to cohabiting with a girlfriend to moving back in with one or both parents and then, perhaps, leaving home and living on his own again. A couple of the men moved back home to help a parent who was sick or recently widowed, and at least one moved back into the parental home because his parents said they would "do everything" for him.

Compared to work or living situations, friendships tend to be a source of more secure and stable attachments. Many of the male participants say they hang out and socialize with friends they have known since their high school or college days. These friendship groups can be male-only or can include women friends as well. These groups go out to clubs, bars, sports events, or spend time together in private apartments.

Men say that they meet women in a variety of ways: through friends; at bars, clubs and Happy Hours; at work; and through casual encounters at the gym or the grocery store. When and where men meet women influences their expectations for a relationship. They view the women they meet in bars and dance clubs as casual sex partners rather than as "marriage material." According to the men, the common and mutual understanding between men and women is that bars are for sexual hookups. "When you meet a girl in a bar, they’re the worst . . . twenty different guys have hit on them already." Clearly, the amount of alcohol consumed is a factor, as is the time of day. For example, when men get together with women during the "happy hour," after work, they may be meeting in a bar, but they engage in a different kind of socializing. They are likely to be in the company of friends and to drink less. Consequently, a woman they meet in a bar after work might be someone they would be interested in for more than casual sex.

In general, a time and place that is conducive to a conversation with a woman is more likely to lead to something more than casual sex, they say. However, several men said that they felt awkward striking up a conversation with a woman. "It’s damn hard to get the courage to go up and talk to someone," one man admitted. Some say that it is easier to get to know a woman if they are introduced by friends. And they are also more likely to contemplate a serious romantic relationship with a woman they meet through mutual friends.

Men are generally opposed to having a romantic relationship with a woman who works in their place of employment. If you break up, they say, "she’s on the other side of the cubicle."

The Internet is an increasingly accepted and popular way to find romantic partners. Some men say that it is good way to generate a high number of prospective candidates. However, no one reported achieving a long-term relationship as the result of an Internet contact, and several commented that deception and misrepresentation were commonplace.

The men say that they rarely ask women out on a date. "That’s the old way," one man commented. "I’ll meet them and we’ll just hang out," one man said. Some contend that women don’t want to be asked out on a formal date because the women themselves are

not ready to be in a serious relationship. Generally, men hold the view that you should become friends and get to know each other by hanging out before you go out on a date.

Men are divided over the question of who should pay for a date. Most believe that men should pay if they are the ones who ask for the date. However, others think that it is acceptable to split the costs of a night out or let her pick up the check occasionally. "Why shouldn’t you both pay?" one man asked, "You both work." Another commented: "Sometimes a woman wants to pay, so she can feel a little independent."

Men expect the women they date to be economically independent and able to "take care of themselves." This represents a major change from earlier times. Moreover, this expectation figures in one of the most common dating complaints among these men. They resent being evaluated on the size of their wallet, their possessions or their earning potential. Therefore, they say, they are turned off by "golddiggers. " Likewise, they avoid "material girls," women who are into "the big house and car."

A woman who wants a baby is another dating turn-off for these men. They fear that she might use them to achieve her goal of having a child and even to "trick" them into fathering a child.

These men also say that they try to avoid going out with women who already have children. Some say they are uncomfortable in the presence of a woman’s children and not eager to be thrust into the role of a play "daddy." Moreover, they feel bad if they establish a relationship with the children and then break up with their mother. Finally, they want to avoid competition and conflict with the children’s biological father. One man says that it is easier to date a woman with children if the father is entirely "out of the picture."

Half of unmarried men, ages 20-29, agree that there are people with whom they would have sex even though they have no interest in marrying them, according to last year’s Gallup survey commissioned by The National Marriage Project. More than half of unmarried men, 20-29, agree that if two people really like each other, it’s all right to have sex even if they have known each other only for a short time. Although young men are more likely to hold these views than young women, there is widespread agreement about the prevalence of casual sex in today’s youthful dating culture. Among all young adults, 20-29, eight in ten agree that it is common for people in their age group to have sex just for fun without any expectation of commitment. This view is more strongly held by those with higher levels of educational attainment.

However, once they have casual sex, men say, they are less respectful and interested in pursuing a relationship with a woman. "If a girl wants it on the first night we go out, I definitely lose respect for her, ‘cause she’s probably doing it with someone else." They are more likely to "take it slow" sexually when they are romantically interested in a woman. Again, this is consistent with the Gallup survey. Seventy-four percent of single men agreed that if you meet someone with whom you think you could have a long-term relationship, you will try to postpone sex until you know each other. Apparently, "waiting" for sex typically means holding off until the fourth or fifth date, though one man said he waited seven months. At the same time, some men expressed the opinion that it was up to the woman to hold them in check. "We’ll always push for more," one said.

Men realize that casual sex places them at risk for STDS, including HIV, and also at risk for unplanned fatherhood. Their concern about "diseases" and pregnancy is further heightened because a significant number admit that they don’t use condoms every time they have sex.

For some, the risk of unwanted fatherhood arouses more worry than the risk of disease. With DNA testing, it is now possible to establish biological paternity beyond a reasonable doubt and thus to hold men legally responsible for the financial support of any child they father. These young men express concern of "spending my life connected to someone I’m not in love with." They worry that a woman who got pregnant after casual sex might deny them the opportunity to get to know and bond with a child whom they are nonetheless legally required to support. Moreover, they are concerned about the financial burden associated with unwed and unplanned fatherhood. "For eighteen years, it’s like $70,000 or $100,000 dollars," one man remarked. Their anxiety is greatest when it concerns the risk of pregnancy that might occur as the result of a one-night stand. As one man put it: "If it’s a girl I just met in a bar, I used to wake up in a cold sweat worrying about pregnancy."

Some men express resentment toward a legal system that grants women the unilateral right to decide to terminate a pregnancy or to have a child without any say-so from the biological father. There is also mistrust of women who may "trap" men into fathering a child by claiming to be sterilized, infertile or on the pill and then to exploit his resources in order to have and rear a child "of her own."

At the same time, these men are generally accepting of the social trend of women having children "on their own." "I could deal with a woman using a sperm donor a lot better than I could deal with a messed up marriage," one man remarked.

Cohabitation is a common and popular form of romantic partnership for young adults today. Slightly more than 44 percent of single men, 20-29, agree with the statement that they would only marry someone if she agreed to live together first. Close to a third of the men in this study say that they have lived with someone in the past or are currently cohabiting with a girlfriend.

There are several reasons why men say that they choose to live with girlfriends. One is to test compatibility for marriage. They believe that living together is a good way to get to know a woman intimately, since "it’s the little things" that can wreck a marriage.

Another reason has to do with the convenience of having a regular sex partner. Living with a woman reduces the risks of sex with a stranger. Men believe that they can dispense with condoms if they are in a monogamous living together relationship. Moreover, they can avoid the time-consuming effort of searching for a sex partner when they have one living at home.

Also, there are economies of scale associated with shared living. One man commented on how helpful it was to have a girlfriend who could look after the house, pay the bills and take care of the dogs when his work took him away from home for extended periods of time. Several others noted that they were better able to save for the purchase of a house if they lived together. For some, this economy was associated with shared plans for future marriage, or at least, future joint home ownership. For others, buying a house was part of the try-out for marital compatibility. "If the house works out, then maybe we’ll talk marriage," one man said.

Moreover, for some men, cohabitation is desirable because they are less answerable to their partner. "We have an interesting relationship," said one cohabiting man. "I come and go as I please . . . as long as she understands, we’re together . . It’s the same as being married. We’re totally happy."

Finally, these men see living together as a way of avoiding an unhappy marriage and eventual divorce. This view is widely shared among people their age. Sixty-two percent of young adults agree that living with someone before marriage is a good way to avoid eventual divorce, according to last year’s Gallup survey for the National Marriage Project. "Everyone I know who’s gotten married quickly – and failed to live together [first] – has gotten divorced," one man said. Another commented: "It should be a law, you should move in together and have a one year trial period. Then you have to wait another year before you have kids."

Many men also fear the financial consequences of divorce. They say that their financial assets are better protected if they cohabit rather than marry. They fear that an ex-wife will "take you for all you’ve got" and that "men have more to lose financially than women" from a divorce.

Several men expressed the opinion that there was little difference between the commitment to live together and the commitment to marriage. According to them, marriage is "just a piece of paper," a "legal thing" that you do for family and friends. One observed that cohabitation was just like being married, so why go through the hassle of an expensive ceremony and legal contract? However, this was not the majority view. Most men put marriage on a higher plane of commitment than a living together partnership.

Most of the men in these groups want to marry at some future time in their lives. They expect their marriages to last a life time. Like the majority of young adults today, they are seeking a "soul mate." They envision a soul mate as a woman with whom "you are completely compatible right now," "someone you’re not putting on a show for," the one person you connect with. Notably, they emphasize a soul mate’s willingness to take them as they are and not try to change them.

Until they find a soul mate, however, they are willing to wait. They don’t want to "settle" for second best in their choice of a marriage partner, though they don’t have the same standards for a choice of a live-in girlfriend. Indeed, in some cases, they see her as a second best partner while they continue to look for a soul mate.

Men want to be financially "set" before they marry. For many men, this means owning a house before they marry. However, most of the men in these groups are not yet homeowners, and some are living with a parent, relatives, roommates, or girlfriends.

Most men had no ideal age or timetable for their own eventual marriage. They say: "I’ll know when I’m ready" and "Whatever happens, happens." One man referred jokingly to the Larry King syndrome: you can get married and have kids at any age.

A number of the men stated that having children was the main reason to marry. However, these men are in no great hurry to have children. Unlike women, they have no biological clock to impose a strict time limit on fertility. Several men expressed a desire to have children at a young enough age to enjoy them. As one put it, "I don’t want to be a grandfather to my kid." But for most of these men, having children was a remote life goal. At their age, they did not yet feel ready for the financial responsibilities or disruptions of a child. Some recognized that children would burden their relationship with their partner, and that the presence of children would require compromise and change. Notably, none of these men expressed a burning desire for children, a view that would likely have been different if the study participants had been childless unmarried women of similar age and background.

Today’s young men encounter few, if any, traditional pressures from religion, employers or society to marry. Some men in the group reported mild, teasing pressures from parents who wanted grandchildren, or from married buddies, but they shrugged this off. A few noted that they first began to think about marriage when their friends began to get married. However, since some of their friends’ marriages seemed ill-advised or doomed, they were not unduly influenced by peer pressure to marry either.

Men support the idea of women working outside the home. Indeed, most say that they expect their future wives to work for pay outside the home. Underlying this expectation is the idea that women should be independent-minded and pursue their own career interests. As one man explained: "I like the idea of marrying someone with drive. I would expect her to want her career just as bad as I want mine." However, most of the men describe the advantages of having a working wife in affective rather than strictly financial terms. That is, they think that a wife who works is likely to be a more interesting companion than one who isn’t employed. "She doesn’t have to have a big income, but a career, a life of her own" said one man. "She definitely has to work . . . or in the evenings, it’ll be a one-sided conversation," another observed.

When children come along, however, men think it is preferable for one parent to stay at home or for relatives or grandparents to provide childcare. The overwhelming consensus is that you don’t want to put your children in "stranger care." A number of men say that they will stay home with the children if their wife makes more money and prefers to be the primary breadwinner. However, the men who expressed interest in becoming stay-at-home dads tended to be less well educated and less well employed than other men in the group, so it may be that their relatively poorer employment prospects make the idea of staying at home with children attractive in theory. (However, it remains to be seen whether they would continue to hold this view if they actually had the responsibility of full-time house and childcare, or whether they would prove themselves to be competent primary caregiving parents.)

Like other young adults, these young men are highly critical of divorce. They think couples are too willing to call it quits without trying to work through difficulties in a marriage. As one observed: "One fight, and it’s like ‘I’m out of here.’" Some attribute the readiness to divorce as part of a societal trend toward narcissism, consumerism, and "too many choices." "You used to fall in love with the girl in your high school English class. Now you have more choices and you get married and then three years later, a better one comes along," commented one man. Others believe that both men and women are more independent and need each other less: "Now women are making as much as their husbands so they can say ‘see ya,’" one said. Finally, these men cite the legacy of parental divorce as a factor contributing to a persistently high divorce rate: "We figure ‘hey my parents got divorced, so we can get divorced.’" A couple of men expressed the opinion that living together before marriage lowers the level of commitment to marriage and thus contributes to a greater propensity to divorce, though this was a minority view.

However, despite the strong and pervasive criticism of divorce, the men generally feel that children are better off if their parents divorce rather than stick it out in an unhappy marriage. They concur that this is the better choice even if the couple does not fight but simply has "fallen out of love." They say that "children are smarter than you think and can pick up on parents’ unhappiness." Apparently they believe that a child’s intuition that parents may be "out of love" is more harmful than the actual experience of parental divorce. Clearly, these men consider and evaluate marriage as an intimate couple relationship rather than as a child-rearing partnership. Thus, the perceived quality of couple satisfaction is more important in deciding whether to stay in a marriage than any perceived harms to children that might come from parental divorce.

Overall, men are not optimistic about the future of marriage as a lifelong commitment. They are acutely aware of the risks of divorce. Although they hold out the hope that their generation will work harder at marriage than baby boomers, they say that they are already seeing the first wave of divorces among their friends and this shakes their confidence in the future. Also, they believe that adults continue to change and "grow" and this makes it much harder to stay married to one person for a lifetime. One man said that he thought a contemporary marriage partnership of equals is more difficult to achieve than the traditional marriage with strict gender roles.

As with the respondents in our earlier focus groups and surveys, these men do not believe that there is much that can be done to strengthen marriage on a society-wide basis. However, they do favor education on how to have and sustain successful relationships and marriages.

Men see marriage as a final step in a prolonged process of growing up. This trend has a positive side. Men who marry at older ages are likely to be more financially stable than men in their late teens and early twenties. Further, men who marry at an older age may have gone through a "wild oats" period and may be more dependable and mature husbands and fathers.

At the same time, there is a potentially negative side. Financial stability, often equated with owning a home, comes before marriage in their personal priorities. However, pegging the timing of marriage to mortgage rates may substantially delay marriage, especially in more difficult economic times. Further, a prolonged period of single life may habituate men to the single life. Some of these men have spent a good part of their early adult years living with parents, roommates or alone. They have become accustomed to their own space and routines. They enjoy the freedom of not having to be responsible to anyone else. Like Henry Higgins, they fear losing their solitary pleasures by "letting a woman in their life." More than a few men expressed resentment at women who try to change them. "Women look at men like computers; they always want to upgrade," one said. Some of the men describe marital compatibility as a matter of finding a woman who will "fit into their life." "If you are truly compatible, then you don’t have to change," one man commented. Another man, who was a member of a band, said that he was grateful that his live-in girlfriend didn’t give him a hard time about his late nights and the time he spent socializing with his bandmates after their gig.

In the past, of course, men might drag their feet about getting hitched, but there were pressures to wed. Marriage was associated with growing up and taking on male adult roles and responsibilities. Parents expected sons to leave and set up their own household. Now the pressures are mild to nonexistent. Boys can remain boys indefinitely.

In addition, some of the traditional community and family forces that might encourage single men to learn the habits of compromise, give-and-take, and fitting in with others are weakening as well. Young men today live in a peer world. Some have grown up with only one or no siblings. As young adults, they may have little experience or contact with children in a family household, something that was more common for unmarried young men in times past. Even meal times can be solitary.

Perhaps the most significant factor contributing to male delay of marriage is the rise of cohabitation. Men can get many of the benefits of marriage without the commitment to marriage, or, as they often point out, without exposure to the financial risks of divorce. Cohabitation gives men regular access to the domestic and sexual ministrations of a girlfriend while allowing them greater legal, social and psychological freedom to lead a more independent life and to continue to look around for a better partner.

The men realize that women face time pressures to marry and bear children. At the same time, however, they express little sympathy for women’s circumstances. Several men took the view that men had to be careful because women "want to get married just to have kids." Moreover, as noted above, there was strong sentiment that an unmarried woman who already had a child was less desirable as a date, and certainly less desirable as a prospective marriage partner.

The vast majority of young women today hope to marry and have a family. Men also share this aspiration for marriage and family. However, unlike women, they can postpone marriage for a longer time without losing the chance to have a biological child. Consequently, men’s reluctance to marry makes it harder for peer women who are in their prime marrying years to achieve their desired life goal. As one man put it, "That’s their issue."

I shall await your return with breathless anticipation. ;>)

What charming replies. :) But start breathing again, please!
Breathing patterns have an effect on the mind, then the mind further effects the breathing, and so on ... many times with amazing results! (Even a "baby", as you call me, knows that ;-)

I read some more of the thread (sitting on my hands to keep from replying to some of them!) and I'm glad I took the time.

"males have always honored the female of the species,
It is how we are wired; no one had to instruct us to act in that manner.
change the individual involved into a child, and you see some quite, quite stupid chances taken -repeatedly. We all know: we must get the child out of danger!

I see in your post #541 that you realize women do have some wiring designed for protection, too. Fierce protection where children are concerned, I might add.
Our size and strength may only enable us w/ a quieter, gentler protection for a man, but still powerful.
Though I would argue with your comment that women ever held all the power. Men also held, do hold, women's lives in their hands, like it or not.
Sadly, today it appears both women and men, in general, have deviated from their natural pulls to honor/protect eachother.

"I simply can not agree with your opinion that men held the best interest of the woman higher than his own. Just as I would not agree with the opinion that women did."

"I am greatly saddened to hear of your disagreement...There was a time, when this was absolutely true, and some still indeed believe in this manner. Women as well. "

Just to clarify: my comment(s) are really more general rather than specifically directed. Men , in general - women, in general. And most in the context of today's society.

I'm steering a bit off topic, again, here. But:

Perhaps it might be helpful to mention that when someone is in pain, they tend to lash out in pain. During the dissolution of a relationship, where one of the participants is incredulous about it and fighting unbelief that the one they care for so much is telling them that the feelings are not returned -indeed, 'uncaring' is the painful summation... they tend to take actions and make comments that are deliberately designed to hurt. We are all, I think, guilty of such actions at one time or another.

Then they are just fooling themselves and attempting to fool the other.
If they trulycared "so much" they wouldn't deliberately hurt. If they honestly held that person's interest higher than their own, they wouldn't be lashing out to relieve their own pain through causing pain to the other. Both emotions can't exist together.

I think I understand anger and how it works, I don't believe on this topic we're talking about the sudden flare up but relationship-damaging hurting. Where true care and higher regard for someone else honestly exists, one would accept and wish the person happiness and success. Not attempt to hurt them or overpower them in order to force their own way. How can it be otherwise?

That does not mean you should give up on all others, especially one as young as you... and have yet to meet some of the real treasures that are out there.

Thank you, but, really I don't! I enjoy accepting each person as an individual and as they come. I have met some treasures, too!:-)

"Encouraging", is it? Well, we shall have to see about providing more of that, no doubt. *smile* "

Yes, and you did very well, thank you. :-)
But I'm curious...

we need to realize the folly thereof and figure out some method to come together and decide how best to resolve the mess, such as actually getting together and formulating some concrete actions.

How do you suggest we come together and "bell the cat" ?

What charming replies. :)

What alluring incentive. ;<)

But start breathing again, please!

I shall try, but with continued exposure to such a fascinating commentator, such might prove to be somewhat difficult without constant reminders. *smile*

Breathing patterns have an effect on the mind,...

Ah, lassie; trust Me when I say that breathing is not the only thing affecting My mind thus far.

I read some more of the thread (sitting on my hands to keep from replying to some of them!) -Oooh, now THERE'S a mental picture worth noting!- and I'm glad I took the time.

As am I. Doubtless you now have a better understanding of why I hold the positions I do than at your initial summation.

Where to begin on this one... As always, I do realize that women have some wiring designed for protection as well, nor have I ever attempted to diminish or demean the capabilities of women for any reason. Indeed, the core of My position in this matter has been that both males and females are two parts of a combined whole. Not exactly two halves, as that immediately pushes some to suspect that 'their' half is of less or more importance than the other, but more of a blending of two separate parts into a whole much greater than the sum of the two alone.
Perhaps the Far Eastern viewpoint sums it up best: A man's strength is as a rock; hard, solid, unyielding. A woman's strength is as water; soft, liquid, yielding to all. A rock may seem incredibly powerful, but its strenth is only in its unyielding firmness. Water may seem to be yielding to all, and the ultimate in conforming to any changes... but ultimately, water will defeat stone, and to attempt to classify one or the other as stronger or weaker is illogical in the extreme. Both have strenths, both have weaknesses. They are neither equal or unequal, merely different aspects of a much greater whole.

Though I would argue with your comment that women ever held all the power. Men also held, do hold, women's lives in their hands, like it or not.

I make that observation from the position that women are entrusted with the nurturing and instruction of the future generations, and from that standpoint they literally hold the fate of our entire species in their hands. We males entrust our offspring into your care, and set ourselves to providing and protecting for you even at the cost of our own lives. From that standpoint, females do indeed hold the greatest power imaginable.

Sadly, today it appears both women and men, in general, have deviated from their natural pulls to honor/protect eachother.

In general, on this we are agreed, oh beguileing one. However, I still maintain that the vast majority of males that I have known, and do know, wish passionately to find a special someone to honor and protect -and that will honor and respect them in return. Is this mostly fallen by the wayside in this day and age? Sadly, yes, but that does not mean that this is not something unhoped or unstriven for. Too, I will readily admit to being one of those with such a hope.

My, oh my, sir, ... how you do make me *blush*!

Indeed, the core of My position in this matter has been that both males and females are two parts of a combined whole. Not exactly two halves, as that immediately pushes some to suspect that 'their' half is of less or more importance than the other, but more of a blending of two separate parts into a whole much greater than the sum of the two alone.

It seems my earlier posts, both on this thread and the other one I referenced, would prove that in our core positions we completely agree.

Perhaps the Far Eastern viewpoint sums it up best

Yes, it does. Quite beautifully, thanks!

BUT (I'll bet you saw that coming ? ;), at the regrettable risk of appearing tenacious in my core position, isn't strength equivalent to power?
If so, then it follows that by stating this:

...women are entrusted with the nurturing and instruction of the future generations...From that standpoint, females do indeed hold the greatest power imaginable.

aren't you attempting "to classify one or the other as stronger or weaker "-- which, in your own words, would seem "illogical in the extreme" ? ?

My point here is that, as you also stated:
We males entrust our offspring into your care, and set ourselves to providing and protecting for you...

Yet, both generally and specifically, a woman's influence can be greatly undermined or even forbidden by men's lack of support, lack of protection, antagonism, etc.

In the end, this female "greatest power imaginable" is still proven to be interdependent on the male...still proves out the necessity to blend the two seperate parts into an effective whole. I would argue that it is the combined, effective whole that is truly "the greatest power imaginable".

I still maintain that the vast majority of males that I have known, and do know, wish passionately to find a special someone to honor and protect -and that will honor and respect them in return. Is this mostly fallen by the wayside in this day and age? Sadly, yes, but that does not mean that this is not something unhoped or unstriven for. Too, I will readily admit to being one of those with such a hope.

"Vast majority of males" is an impressive total, I must say. Females aren't completely unrepresented in sharing or striving for those hopes.
Chin up! Perhaps we may find a way to come together and turn the tide before too long. For our future's sake, I sincerely hope so!

Oh, btw, regarding your earlier question:
Yes, your character's dialects in the "Bell the Cat" story were very convincing and smoothly fluid w/ the story. Well done! *S*

"My, oh my, sir, ... how you do make me *blush*!" The better to see you with, my dear! *laugh!* " "Indeed, the core of My position in this matter has been that both males and females are two parts of a combined whole. Not exactly two halves, as that immediately pushes some to suspect that 'their' half is of less or more importance than the other, but more of a blending of two separate parts into a whole much greater than the sum of the two alone." It seems my earlier posts, both on this thread and the other one I referenced, would prove that in our core positions we completely agree."
Indeed so, and I am ecstatic beyond words to discover this. Now to see if we can arrive at mutually satisfactory agreements on our other positions to more readily determine results that are more compatible and applicable to the interests at hand. What of My other positions? Perhaps a more penetrating insight will occur as we delve into the other areas adjacent to the core positions.
"...at the regrettable risk of appearing tenacious in my core position, isn't strength equivalent to power?"
It grieves Me sorely to disagree with you in this matter, but I do not believe so.
Just as knowledge does not necessarily equate to wisdom, neither does strength mandate power. You can be so strong physically that you can lift a set of weights totalling five hundred pounds over your head, but if you can only do it once and cannot throw bales of hay all day long at the farm, is that really power? You can be a general in an army, but if you cannot do anything without the express written consent of five politicians in your government (all of whom are rivals), you have no actual power, I believe. Relating directly to the male / female issue; if a male is physically stronger than his female partner, but uses his greater strength to physically abuse her, he has by his actions stated without a doubt both that he has no power, and that he either knows that fact or is afraid that it might be so -and any observer knows this instinctively.
" "...women are entrusted with the nurturing and instruction of the future generations...From that standpoint, females do indeed hold the greatest power imaginable." aren't you attempting "to classify one or the other as stronger or weaker" -- which, in your own words, would seem "illogical in the extreme" "
Well argued! I applaud your observational skills and insights.
The statement was not made with the claim that the power mentioned was therefore greater than any male 'power', but in respect to our species as a whole. I full well realize that we males contribute to this in our own manner, such as the previously-mentioned protection and honour towards the female. It is the combination of the contributions of both that enable such a power, but it is not done so to the detriment of any male strengths. Quite the contrary; the male does not bear the child, the female does. However, at this stage the female is completely unable to defend herself and requires someone else to do this for her. Does that mean that the male is therefore more powerful than she? Not in the slightest. He instinctively knows that he must defend and provide at this time more than any other if the child (and mother) are to survive. It is not a contest, it is life. Too, the nurturing and instruction of the child until it reaches adulthood is given to the female, because the male is bigger and stronger (in our species) and better able to go out into the world and fight for what is necessary for their survival.
"My point here is that, as you also stated: "We males entrust our offspring into your care, and set ourselves to providing and protecting for you..." Yet, both generally and specifically, a woman's influence can be greatly undermined or even forbidden by men's lack of support, lack of protection, antagonism, etc. In the end, this female "greatest power imaginable" is still proven to be interdependent on the male...still proves out the necessity to blend the two seperate parts into an effective whole. I would argue that it is the combined, effective whole that is truly "the greatest power imaginable." "
Hmmm. Your argument could also be made: 'since the male provides the seed necessary for the formation of the child, the "greatest power imaginable" is in actuality an unavailable power without the male's contribution.' How far should we reach? If the female was sickly, and unable to successfully bring the pregnancy to fruition, it is in actuality 'health' that provides that 'power'. If the female's parents did not properly instruct her in successful child-rearing techniques, then the chances that the offspring will actually reach adulthood are very slim, and therefore 'successful child-rearing instructions during the mother's childhood' is what provides that 'power'.
Scientists today can tell us specifically what makes up our physical bodies, the chemicals and elements and percentages therof that go into our physical formation. That does not mean that they can combine those ingredients in a bathtub and create life. Women hold their ultimate power due to many contributing factors, including male ones, but it is they who actually wield it.
" "Vast majority of males" is an impressive total, I must say. Females aren't completely unrepresented in sharing or striving for those hopes. Chin up! Perhaps we may find a way to come together and turn the tide before too long. For our future's sake, I sincerely hope so!

Indeed, the representation of females with this hope is what I am searching for -and one of the main reasons your captivating commentary is so fascinating to Me. You and I are alike in our hopes for the future in this regard, and I hope that this attitude will penetrate more and more into the general populace so that our destiny is the better for it. (are you blushing yet, lass? If not, I shall simply have to try harder) *smile*

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.