ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Gender and Relationships»
  • Advice & Tips for Men in Relationships»
  • Dating Tips for Men

The Emotional Profiles of Men

Updated on March 27, 2017

What is the reason why women are emotionally stronger than man?

This was a recent question that had some interesting and thoughtful answers.

Are women more emotional than men? Or some women more emotional than some men?

Could it be more accurate to say that many men find it difficult to know what emotions they are harboring, let alone express them.

Why is this? Is it to do with intelligence? Is it to do with upbringing or education?

What Does It Take To Express An Emotion?

That will depend upon the sort of reaction you can expect from the person to whom you are expressing the emotion.

Take, for example, the emotion of Anger. How would you want to express that? It's the sort of emotion that can built up very rapidly. Triggered by perhaps an insult, or a threat, or a request that is impossible to satisfy, the hormones rush into your blood stream and you stand your ground. Counter-attack. There is a real possibility that you will be hit, knocked to the ground, wounded, even killed.

If you have had even a little experience of this sort of emotion before, and felt its outcome, you will most likely have developed defensive skills, of one sort or another, helping you to survive.

Or consider the opposite emotion of gentleness and love. Here you will be letting down your defenses, lowering the wall, exposing yourself to the desires and demands of another person. You will be relinquishing your independence and free choices.

Similarly with the other emotions, in each case there is a potential price to pay for entering into that emotion and expressing it.

What About Our Social History?

Imagine what it must have been like when our species lived a primitive life, without the "civilised" benefits of our modern society.

The males of the family grew up with the job of having to defend the tribe and the home from enemies. You have to protect the female who has the domestic job of nurturing your children.

Your physical attributes are strong muscles for running, throwing a spear, fighting hand-to-hand.

You mental attributes are honed to perfection so that you could focus, concentrate, avoid distractions. You have to watch your enemy, predict what he is likely or about to do, so you could be ready with your defense strategies.

You would have learned, perhaps through bitter experience, that you could not afford to trust. Because your enemy would be working out little tricks to catch you off your guard. You might have used similar tactics yourself. The important thing was not to trust anyone but you own instincts. That was essential for your survival as a male.

The Female, on the other hand, had the opposite needs in her role as the care-giver and the mother. Her child/children had to develop total trust in her if they were to survive their early dependent years. Trust .became inherent in her nature and she passed that trust onto her children. She would share her concerns, fears, joys, etc., with her fellow females. That required communication skills very different from the males who were out hunting or fighting.

So, What Of Us, The Modern Male?

I suggest that we retain much of that ancient instinctive reluctance to expose ourselves in the act of Trust.

Trust can make us vulnerable to the ulterior motives of others. The other person with whom we wish to communicate, might not have told us everything about herself or her objectives. Better to not trust her until you are absolutely sure. Keep your distance. Keep your shield up to your chest, don't let her in until she has proven obedience and accepted you as King.

Even the means of communication does not come easily to most of us males. Again, I suggest this inability comes from our evolutionary past. It's hard-wired into our psyche, to a greater or lesser degree. We are not all exactly on the same level of course; we are a diverse bunch of people.

How To Overcome The Instinctive Tendencies?

I contend that it is better to recognize our basic nature than to deny its existence. We have an intelligence, the ability to learn and understand. So we don't have to get stuck in that instinctive mode. Once we recognize and understand, then we can make choices as to whether we want to change our actions/reactions. We can modify our behavior.

Conversely, in denial we are "up a blind alley." We will simply allow those ancient instincts to rule our lives and the lives of those around us.

We men need to do this homework on our selves, acquiring new skills of communication and listening to the needs of women. And the women need to listen to us, learn about us and hear our side of the story.

Maybe, above everything, we all need more patience and a willingness to share.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 12 months ago from Tasmania

      Clark, Dana, thank you so much for keeping the discussion of this subject alive. It will never become dated I suspect, always relevant.

      Thank you Catherine also. We can and must work towards that improvement of boy/girl, girl/boy communication. Our world desparately needs it.

    • CatherineGiordano profile image

      Catherine Giordano 12 months ago from Orlando Florida

      I think you have identified some good reasons why boys and girls are socialized differently and so relate to others differently. These different ways of relating could also be partially genetic. But the spectrum of emotional abilities are available in both sexes. As the French say, "Viva la difference!"

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 13 months ago from Tasmania

      Dana, thank you for visiting here, and for your heart-felt comments.

      As you might have read from previous comments above, my experience in personal relationships is very limited, so my comprehension of your situation is somewhat theoretical.

      Yet, I can very much warm to your emotional needs as a fellow human being. I have been present with and for many men in the process of "men's circles," where they are trusting of the group and free to express their deepest emotions to fellow, caring men.

      I have seen men "bend over backwards" to try and rescue their marriage, often purely for the sake of their children, who they love selflessly. Also, I have felt a man's deep desire to keep his love for a partner whom he married and joined physically and emotionally, to produce his off-spring.

      Alas, that ubiquitous failing in communication skills seemed to carry the day. Eventually, in most cases, the guy would end up the big loser. He would lose his home, his companion/friend/wife/confidant. He would lose the good will of the in-laws, because "they" presume he was the prime guilty party. His own parents would often secretly, if not openly, presume that he was at fault. He would lose numerous friendships that had been built on his relationship with his partner. He would alimony.

      Above all, perhaps, he would lose self respect and confidence as a man.

      I have also seen great success in the mending of relationships, where they got back together, each having done their "inner" work and got to understand their own selves before becoming reunited.

      I am sure you will be able to list the losses which a woman may encounter in similar circumstances. I am totally open to hearing from you and will be most happy to allow your reply here, whatever it is.

      Perhaps this is a good place for such a sharing. I hope so, in the interests of building a better world.

    • profile image

      clark 13 months ago

      I can't recall who said, "I am not in this world to live up to your expectations", but it's a timely quote to follow Dana's remark (a few moments ago) that many people in relationships feel they have the RIGHT to change or "fix" their partner. In my experience--and I think some 'experts' will subatantiate this with research--the people who demand change are more often female than male. And the assumption on which this Hub rests---that instinctual male roles are hundreds of years behind current societal needs--would support that view. That is: contrary to the 'easy' view (ie the stupid view), that women for the most part are just manipulative bitches who want to keep men under their thumbs, women may want to 'fix' men becauwe they understand instinctively, that the John-Wayne-football-hero image of a man's identity is SO out-of-touch with what women need from men in the modern world, that they feel compelled to try and effect change. What a fascinating idea? Imagine, if you will, if men were on an emotional plane with women, cried easily, were as empathetic and nurturing as women, TOTALLY accepted women as absolute 50/50 partners in all aspects of living, eagerly accepted 50% of responsibility for childrearing and caring for the home, and abandoned their worship of sports heros and macho men in films. Imagine all that. Question: WERE this redefinition of A Man to become the norm, would relationships imptove and would society be more productive? Right now, trying to change another person just so they line up more with YOUR needs is a nasty, manipulative act. But perhaps there is a hidden motive, so hidden even the 'demander' doesn't know why she does it, to ultimately help one side of our species catch up to the new societal relaity. Exciting and very scarey.

    • Dana Tate profile image

      Dana Tate 13 months ago from LOS ANGELES

      There was a time when I was so worried about being heard in my relationships I did not realize I wasn't hearing them. I was so focused on making my point I wasn't listening. As a result you got two people growing wider apart because neither party was showing compassion towards each other.

      There's also another side, when you have someone who doesn't care to listen because it's all about them and their needs. This type of selfishness can drain you when someone has put the burden on you to make them happy.

    • kenneth avery profile image

      Kenneth Avery 17 months ago from Hamilton, Alabama

      Great work here. Loved the in-depth text and research.

      FYI: Your "Send Alan an Email" is not seen on your Fan Mail slot on your profile page, so if you do not mind, I am leaving you a Personal Note of Thanks for Following me here.

      Hello, jonnycomelately/Alan

      I want to take this moment to say "thank you," for becoming one of my valued-followers. This was a very humble gesture that I will never forget.

      I offer my sincere, heart-felt apologies to you for taking so long in sending this note, but I had to have a heart cath in November 2015, due to me having Congestive Heart Failure and I was near death the doctors said. But thank God, I am here now, going slow in recovery, but I am alive.

      Actually, and truthfully, my followers are THE reason that I do my best to provide hubs that are not just interesting, but a little on the comical side to take the readers' minds off of their troubles only if for a moment.

      Thank you once again and anytime you want to write me with hub ideas, comments, or suggestions on how I can produce a better hub, just send me an email.


      Kenneth Avery

      Your Friend for Life

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 24 months ago from Tasmania

      Thank you Vlad. Much appreciated. Lots to think about there.

      That last comment was where I accidentally sent the previous message twice. It was my own deletion.

    • ValKaras profile image

      Vladimir Karas 24 months ago from Canada

      Hello, Alan - Quite an interesting hub you wrote old buddy. You got me thinking about how much of analytical work I must have missed due to my personal version of individualism. Namely, I am not too prone to generalizing, and that almost disqualifies me to talk about the topic at hand.

      Nevertheless, I hope you won't mind my modest opinion.

      Socrates had Xantipa for his wife, and she was said to be a big mouth woman who was probably calling shots in that household, regardless of the fact that he was so much smarter than she. They also said that if Cleopatra had a little more crooked nose, the history of Rome would have been different - since Anthony found her irresistible. Behind every great man, be it a statesman or a composer or a painter, or a poet there was a woman as his inspiration. So far I am saying that women have never been really out of the field of influences, but very often in the driver's seat.

      But then again, that impression gets all lost when we talk about men treating them as inferior to themselves. Whether we are talking about ancient or modern times, there are examples for both, and that's where my individualism actually kicks in, dismissing all generalizations.

      Namely, we can always find enough evidence for just about any of existing different combinations of relationships between man and woman, and how one may treat another.

      So, can we trust our primordial instincts or our intellects? It depends on who we are, and what kind of woman we are dealing with. It ALWAYS DEPENDS, no two cases are the same. There are behavioral phenomena where we can generalize up to a point, like emotional problems in humans, romantic problems, problems with children, etc. But if you asked me if I could trust a man, or a woman, I would immediately ask : "WHICH one?"

      Don't take me wrong, it certainly must be interesting to look at some historical or present statistics that would tell their stories about the social status of men and women in different historical eras. But personally we are never in a situation to go by those statistics, and it's up to us and our co-players in life what best position or even strategy we should apply.

      Well, don't start hating me now, old buddy, but my brain is not set for generalizing. What I know is that you are one exceptionally great and smart gentleman that I WOULD trust. But that doesn't mean that I would trust ANY Alan from Tasmania. LOL. - Val.

      P.S./ By the way, I did not delete your comment on my last hub, I don't know what happened. Something similar happened before.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      What profound awareness!!!!


    • profile image

      moonfroth 2 years ago

      JONNY - If your orientation SHOULD produce offspring, please get in touch immediately. Not only will this turn a new page in the logistics of our ongoing evolution, but what with the serialization of the book, the movie rights, franchising the toys and gadgets, never mind the video games, lecture tours and guest-hosting on the Ellen show--WE are going to be wealthy beyond imagination!

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Moonfroth, welcome indeed, long-time-no-see.

      Those "... useless vestigial traits and characteristics..." seem to be indelible for the most part, don't they? They can remain stuck in us like the little spears featured in my Hub about the wonders of nature.

      Vestigial can sometimes prove not so past-their-use-by date. It used to be assumed that the Coracoid Process of the scapula was vestigial, until modern scientific investigation allowed further understanding of its functions. Therefore, we must leave the doors and windows wide open for further education and learning about our evolution.

      Evolution is continuing today, but we are not able to see it over the short life time of 3-score years and 10. It is my wager that, 3000 years from now, if records survive the intervening wars and catastrophies, people will be able to look back and study how those strange people survived their brush with the internal combustion engine, fossil fuel abuse, refusal to cut back on our reproductive rates, blindly trying to prevent death whilst living lives of mundane misery, etc. THEY will be the ones who have evolved enough to survive.

      Yours truly will be one of those who did not add to survival of the species, simply because my orientation did not produce offspring.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Icv, thanks for your input. I have written and spoken simply as a layman, without any professional education into this subject. Always open to other points of view. We are in evolving times!

    • profile image

      moonfroth 2 years ago

      A few months ago (I really must visit HP more often), "Ausseye" expressed his fears that we would not change our gender roles enuff or in time to avert the disasters that seem destined to destroy us (global warming etc). I must disagree with the gentleman. The ULTIMATE ' survivor is Nature itself. She may permit herself to be pushed to the limit, but she will always come up with the action or process or strategy to ensure her survival. When men needed to be short and muscular and absurdly brave (care to take on a mastodon with a short spear? [I left the misplaced modifier in to wake you up. . .]) , they were. When women needed to be intensely intuitive, creative, nurturing, and stoic (how long will mastodon steaks last in the summer before they turn to poison?), they were. When Europe was a cesspool of filth and ignorance re basic hygiene, enter the Black Plague, which killed 25 million people in China and Europe in five years ( I'm not permitted to provide sources. Just google 'Black Plague Deaths), more than WW II. They learned. And so it goes. Right now, the West desperately needs a more enlightened and productive attitude towards the burgeoning population and increasing geopolitical might of the middle East. Enter ISIS, a vicious evolutionary tool to quicken our awareness and strategic creativity. The USA is floundering economically, politically, socially, and psychologicaly. Enter Mr. Trump, who is shocking even the conservative right of his party to yank their heads out of their asses and look at the their world with (somewhat) more open eyes (just in passing, I have faith in my neighbours to the South. They will never elect that clown to lead the most powerful nation on earth).

      Returning to the specific issue of the evolving male--here we face a problem in what I'll call discordant pacing--in its wildest dreams (yes, I do sort of think of Nature as a 'person'), Nature could never have envisaged the sheer blinding speed of modern technology. It is SO far behind The Machine. Physically, men are still designed to throw spears and run faster and jump further than their female partners. I'm told that re: vision, the ideal 20/20 is the optimum distance to throw a spear at prey! (I have NOT checked that out. . .). Men need none of these 'talents' in most of the modern world (we'll grant passes to industrial welders and cement bag carriers). Not too many mastodons thundering down Wall Street. So Nature has fallen behind in terms of what we really need in modern male characteristics to copw with modern problems. So we must evolve MENTALLY to combat the useless vestigial traits and characteristics that men still possess. We don't have 50,000 years to wait for Nature to catch up.

      Enuff of my blathering. Let someone else pick up the mental evolution issue, if 'someone' finds merit in the argument.

    • icv profile image

      IRSHAD CV 2 years ago from India, Kerala

      Great hub. It is very difficult to deal with social behavior since it is a mix of many behaviors. Any way you did a great work on emotion. Thanks for sharing...

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Thanks for the feedback, Gaurav. I hope life will blossom for you once again. The world is beautiful. But Beauty is transient. It cannot linger and remain as beautiful. It must decay and fall as a seed, so that Beauty can grow a-new.

    • Gaurav Oberoi profile image

      gaurav oberoi 2 years ago

      Fantastic hub. Nice conceptualization and compilation. I have just come out of one of the most depressing phases of my life, possibly the biggest shock. Someone I trusted a lot had a sudden change of heart and a complete U-Turn in personality. She was suddenly without a warning rude, arrogant, merciless and unforgiving. Whereas I had nurtured her with every breath. This hub explains a lot of things. Thanks!

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Thank you. And thanks for looking more deeply into the matter. It's an on-going learning for me.

    • savvydating profile image

      Yves 2 years ago

      An interesting take about our "Social History." Men certainly had to be very alert, but in some later cultures, learning was not required for the male. That was thought to be a woman's duty. (The Roman culture, I believe.) Also, in middle eastern countries, men allow themselves to be emotional---the same goes for Italians and some South American cultures. However, as you stated, that does not mean we are communicating well with one another. We need to do more to understand how to respect one another in romantic relationships---and all relationships for that matter, primarily by understanding that our brains actually are wired differently. So it's not so much overcoming, as adjusting our thinking.

      I enjoyed this article. You definitely made your point!

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Thank you Catherine. Glad it has given you new food for thought.

      The "platform" I speak from is not that uncommon..... having never had a partner or close companion and now 74. Life has certainly not been easy, indeed at times it's been down right lonely. We could search 'til the cows come home for reasons. Who knows what they are. Early childhood, war-time years; the stiff-upper-lip attitude, where children were expected to be seen and not heard; brother/sister squabbles; being bullied; the false impression a child can have in so many aspect.

      Yet I have watched families and partnerships. Some are beautiful cooperative lives, sharing joy and pain yet coming through as really wonderful people to be with. Others seem destined for failure.

      I can be envious of the former, relieved at not having suffers as the latter.

      From all of this, my opinion is that being open, honest and clear about ourselves as gregarious species can show the way to better lives, regardless of gender.

    • CatherineGiordano profile image

      Catherine Giordano 2 years ago from Orlando Florida

      This is a very interesting exploration into the instinctual emotional make-up of men vs. women. It is very well done and very worthwhile to keep in mind that next time I want to moan, "Men are from Mars..."

    • profile image

      Ausseye 2 years ago

      What a wonderful piece on male mature, just so delicate and well targeted. Now if only I had read these immortal words when I was a young lad what might I have achieved in our modern world. Time moves and we males lag behind, just following the trail of time. Can we change, alas politics and distrust are ever so real today as there were yesterday. Geese I hope I'm wrong and we can change our global warming (warning) ways. Loved the earthy depth of your human being turned into thoughts about our male nature, even if we have had thousands of years to contemplate our nature.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 2 years ago from Tasmania

      Thanks Peter.

    • Peter Grujic profile image

      Peter Alexander 2 years ago from Pittsburgh

      Beautifully written. Emotions can be a field of landmines but I would rather take a chance and get "blown up" than stay in a protective cocoon not utilizing 'the good the bad and the ugly' of our emotions. looking forward to reading more of your articles!

    • peachpurple profile image

      peachy 3 years ago from Home Sweet Home

      i guess different people has different views, judging from the response here

    • Kathryn L Hill profile image

      Kathryn L Hill 3 years ago from LA

      The animated movie with Woody Allen's voice as the main character is a great little movie!

      Its called Ants.

      Pertinent message, as I recall...

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Ant-agonists, no less!

    • Kathryn L Hill profile image

      Kathryn L Hill 3 years ago from LA

      such a mystery this life is! (I am contemplating the communication methods of ants! :-) )

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Awesome to think that of the 7 billion individuals (human) alive today, plus tbose other billions who have preceded us , each is unique, even identical twins. Like each and every wave/wavelet upon the sea. I wonder if you and I were ants, we would be able to recognise each other in the colony crowd! Probably we would have other ways to distinguish - ants don't wear spectacles or hearing aids.

      Do you suppose they have a soul? Or different gender rôles?

    • Kathryn L Hill profile image

      Kathryn L Hill 3 years ago from LA

      I believe we absorb what is around us and use what is inside of us (genetically) very uniquely according to our one of a kind self. It is the self that chooses on a subconscious level during the first six years and on a more conscious level until fifteen years of age. By fifteen we have pretty much set our own personality based on absorption (environment) and choice according to preordained personality and dare I say it…


      Just me

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Thank you Promisem and Kathryn.

      I suggest we inherit traits....i.e., the tendency to think, observe, connect with situations and interact in certain ways, that have their origin in genetic make-up.

      Then we build up a personal history with those traits, adding layer upon layer according to experience and temperament and this constructs our personalities .... which then become, of course, unique.

      It is in the expression of my personality that you, the observer, will seem my emotions and you will react with your own emotions.

      Maybe one or several of your inherited traits will cause you to think and react in certain ways, according to your "make-up," part of which is being female, and part of the feminine society. That association helps you build on your female way of viewing the world. I will think and react in different ways because I am male. To the extent I likewise associate to a greater or lesser extent with masculine society, this can affect the way I view the world.

      The differences are not clearly defined and not absolutely true or consistent, but they are worth considering and getting to appreciate/understand, in my estimation. Perhaps thus we can get much more united as a global family.

    • Kathryn L Hill profile image

      Kathryn L Hill 3 years ago from LA

      no, proisem, I know it is not a forum… but I disagree. We are what we are on an individual level. Our personalities are unique to ourselves. In other words I do not believe we inherit personalities.

      ...according to me.

    • promisem profile image

      Scott Bateman 3 years ago

      I am emotionally expressive. My brother is the opposite. I have my mother's personality, and he has my father's. I can't help but think that genetics plays a large part in each of us and our ability to express emotions.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Hahaha! How beautifully true, Moonfroth.... thank you for that. Hoping life is treating you well.

    • moonfroth profile image

      Clark Cook 3 years ago from Rural BC (Canada) & N of Puerto Vallarta (Mexico)

      I'm curious too--but only about the level of official nastiness that pervades HP. At one point, when I was commenting and posting hubs frequently, i was a Level I'm a Level 2. I think the quality of my conversations has remained the same, but HP makes money ONLY when you post FREQUENTLY. So, post crap every day and you'll soon be an 8. Post Einstein-level posts once a month, and you'll stay deep in the hold of the ship. A cameo of Corporate America, right here in these forums..............

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 3 years ago from Tasmania

      Thank you Kathryn. You know that regardless of disagreement, I very much respect you and your opinions. That ability to "bug" me is a sign of true acceptance.

      How HP comes about those "Level x Commentators" I have yet to discover, but they are obviously way out of credibility.

    • Kathryn L Hill profile image

      Kathryn L Hill 3 years ago from LA

      Dear Johnny.

      What you say is true. The needs of survival have created our differences and I would add this: our differences have created our different roles. It is natural for men to be touch with their logical sides and women to be in touch with their emotional sides. It works in the end toward survival. Everything we do in life hinges on our ability to survive. We were born to survive on this physical plane. We are geared for survival since….

      before we were born…

      ( I said that to bug you, having just read your hub about consciousness after death… or before birth)

      :-) BFN

    • profile image

      YoungIlluminati 3 years ago

      Ty for following my hub :-)

      It will take a bit of time to understand the complicated hubpage system :-).....The grammatical errors are mostly due to me writing with my smartphone :-) and not being a native english speaker.....It will improve :-)

    • Vinaya Ghimire profile image

      Vinaya Ghimire 4 years ago from Nepal

      Behavioral Psychologists say men and women's brain function differently. Thanks for this interesting analysis.

      PS: Thanks for reading and commenting on my hub.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 4 years ago from Tasmania

      I note there have been 60+ visits to this hub..... yet so few are willing to give constructive input to the discussion. Maybe GW's apparent anti-male feelings are at the root of this reluctance. I am male, let's face it, and find it (have always found it) difficult relating/communicating with many of the female gender.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 4 years ago from Tasmania

      Rich input, thanks Moonfroth.

    • moonfroth profile image

      Clark Cook 4 years ago from Rural BC (Canada) & N of Puerto Vallarta (Mexico)

      Hmm. I note that no females have yet booked into this discussion. A good friend of mine has a sign on the door of his workshop: MAN-CAVE NO WOMEN WITHOUT INVITATION. Th sign is just so much feather-fluffing bravado. The existence of the man-cave, however, is apropos this discussion. In his shop he has tools and workbenches, a woodstove, his computer, comfortable chairs, and a full bar. When they have a party, the men gather here; the women occupy the house. Everyone is comfortable. Why? The answer is that genetically, historically, socially, men and women are intrinsically different, behave differently, have different value structures and personal aspirations. When in mixed groups, given unfettered free choice, they will more often than not gravitate to their own gender. where they feel more open, more relaxed, more eager to communicate.

      I agree with you, Jonny, that the roots of this separateness lie in our evolutionary past, when men had necessarily circumscribed roles defined for the survival and well-being of the tribe, as did women. Society has evolved rapidly AWAY from those kinds of roles. They are no longer necessary....but someone forgot to tell our "inner beings", which are gawd knows how many eons behind the social realities of the modern world. We're like cowboys running around in a rodeo, carrying saddles and bridles and spurs, not understanding that there all the horses are gone. Forever.

      So, in the cities, in the big businesses, in the corporate world of striving and stress and promotion and demotion and gathering symbols of fleeting success as benchmarks of human achievement, confusion reigns between the sexes. Both are trying to be alpha hunters, forgetting that there is great honour in being a nurturer, a role we desperately need if we are to achieve the "equality" that many of us mouth, but few of us have ever gained.

      Returning to my friend's man-cave. These are country folks. Yes, they role-play, without even knowing they're dong it. The women see nothing threatening about the man-cave. The men partying in the man-cave do not feel superior to the women in the house. Both groups are thoroughly enjoying communion with their ow sex. And when they're home with their spouses and kids, their union is good. And strong.

      A parting note--therapists and personal counselors in my little country town are very hard-pressed to make a living.

      Good talk, Jonny, as always.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 4 years ago from Tasmania

      John-Charles, let's see what "productive" discussion comes out of that!

      I just hope that ultimately we will learn maybe just one other point of view, way of looking at the issues, that we had not considered before.

    • d.william profile image

      d.william 4 years ago from Somewhere in the south

      John-Charles that is the funniest thing i have read this week. (Assuming your comments were meant to be comical). I especially liked the last paragraph. L.O.L. Certainly not the kind of comments that spark a productive dialogue about the emotional profiles of men, however.

    • John-Charles profile image

      John-Charles 4 years ago

      I beg to differ on this subject. Women want men to lower themselves to a women's level.

      If emotions were the key to getting along, why is it that most women are so "katty" that other women can not stand to be with them.

      I coached girl's high school volleyball. A female athletic director gave the make coaches a talk about how to deal with girls on the team.

      First she said that girls can not take direct criticism. If you want to criticize the girl, do not look them in the eye. They will shut you off because they feel you hate them and their emotions would be spiteful. Also, most women want to have everyone feel sorry for them so they are the center of attention, even if they instigated the problem. Being the victim, whether perceived or not, is the goal.

      Secondly, try to talk softly because women want everything to be secretive. They want to be the one that will spread the story to show they are the top of the information chain and do not forget it.

      Thirdly, women circle there wagons. Meaning do not let the player you just took out of the game sit next to the other players. If you do, the player removed will talk to the one beside her, and the one beside will side with her because she can tell the bench player to shut up, she might hurt her feelings. So she sides with the benched girl, and now hates you as te coach for making the girl feel bad. So on and so on down the bench, even if they liked you and knew the girl should be removed, you will have a rebellion on your hands.

      Notice that through all this, not once was common sense or reason a motivation for how women think about you.

      So if you want to impress your woman, learn how to cry for no reason, speak without saying anything, and most of all, just agree because you will be mean and cold hearted if you do not agree.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 4 years ago from Tasmania

      Good discussion, and thanks again. Hopefully we will see some more constructive input here.

      In the men's groups that I have and do attend, your point about men becoming more emotional without fear is certainly on the up.

    • d.william profile image

      d.william 4 years ago from Somewhere in the south

      sorry for not being more explicit. I was viewing your question as an outsider, or an observer of society, not a participant. And the comment about women taking over the world was in jest, and yet, our history does swing from one extreme to the other in many ways.

      I predict that in 2016, if Hilary Clinton runs for president she will win by a landslide.

      As to your fear about women in charge going toward "aggressive feminism" it would serve the male population right for doing so to women since time began. And i certainly do not see someone like H. Clinton promoting aggressive feminism.

      I see modern man as much different than that man of the past. today men are more sensitive and have abandoned those staid ideas that i mentioned above: (seeing men as being stronger, either physically or mentally, etc..). Men are becoming more emotional without fear of what others think of them and finding equality with women as something more desired than controlling over them..

      I have never believed that there was an evolutionary distinction of certain emotions between men and women, but rather those perceived distinctions were imposed by the needs (and/or roles) of both throughout history. Today there is little need for emotional distinctions between the sexes and those distinctions remaining are rapidly waning.

      Perhaps our evolutionary destination is androgyny.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 4 years ago from Tasmania

      PS., d.williams, I just love that photo of a cat looking in a mirror and seeing its reflection as a lion.... wondering if the cat itself is male or female, lol.

    • jonnycomelately profile image

      Alan 4 years ago from Tasmania

      Thanks very much for your comment. I don't necessarily agree with every point you have made, but respect the sentiments you express.

      My worry is that control of the world.... not so much by "women" but by an aggressive feminism, that is by its very nature selfish and ignoring of the need to nurture.

      If the pendulum swings too far the other way, from the masculine dominance to the feminine dominance, then I fear we will have a very sorry world indeed.

      I disagree with what you say about "The emotional ability is equal in both sexes." By saying that I don't feel you have really understood my point about evolutionary influences. You write: "Men, being stronger, do not cry as easily in public, as this is a sign of weakness." Please look at it another way: that being stronger is not the problem. (Many women, who want a man to be the father of their child, are really wanting that strength of physique and brain in order to better protect them selves and their child.)

      But that inability to cry in public is more centered in the primeval instinct to be wary of letting our guard down. When we do, we are vulnerable (or think we are!)

      I am simply asking you to be aware of this influence and how it affects a man's stance when he holds back his emotion.

      Without your being willing to understand this and adjust your agro towards men, DW, I feel there can be no advance, only an empty victory for you.

      I am not saying this in anger towards you, just trying to lift the discussion and in friendship.

    • d.william profile image

      d.william 4 years ago from Somewhere in the south

      Great hub. The emotional ability is equal in both sexes. It is the expression of those emotions that is different because of social beliefs and mores.

      Men, being stronger, do not cry as easily in public, as this is a sign of weakness.

      Anger and aggression in men is more apt to be acceptable in society, as women are taught to be passive and subservient.

      Children are still erroneously being taught: men = strong. women = weak.

      But times, they are a changin'. Women are getting more aggressive, self reliant, and demanding equality. Men are getting more stuporous because they have not learned to accept that women are actually their equals.

      As the roles of men and women reverse themselves in some instances, and equality in responsibility becomes more prevalent, it is the male that must do the most adjusting.

      And as we look at our political arena where men still outnumber the women the old fogies are still trying to cling to their past dimwitted ideas that they are more important to society than women are.

      It is only a matter of time before women control the world.