Anonymous wrote:I am happy with a man who is self aware enough to understand what emotions he is feeling and to deal with them in a healthy way. That can be a guy who prefers to deal with sadness or anger on his own or via exercise or a therapist -- whatever works for him. I don't necessarily need a guy who is going to share all his feelings with me.

The main problem with a lot of men is that they have been trained not even to acknowledge emotions, because they were raised with the belief that emotions are feminine or "weak." What happens with these guys is that they still have emotions (they are human) but shove them down or channel them in unhealthy ways because they have no ability to recognize them, name them, and deal with them. A lot of these men are the ones with rage issues, because anger is the ONE emotion a lot of men believe they are allowed to have, so when they experiences grief, envy, sadness, embarrassment, etc., it just becomes anger. Thus: rage.

So I don't need an "emotionally available" guy. But I don't want an emotionally stupid guy who can't even figure out "oh I'm feeling disappointed and a little embarrassed about being passed over for that promotion at work, instead of taking that out on my loved ones as rage, I will go for a run, maybe process my thoughts in writing, and then make peace and move on."

Emotional maturity, not emotional availability.

Anonymous wrote:For the moms here, are you confident that your sons will be emotionally available for their future wife/gfs? Y'all seem to have diagnosed what's wrong with men so I assume your sons will be role models.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am happy with a man who is self aware enough to understand what emotions he is feeling and to deal with them in a healthy way. That can be a guy who prefers to deal with sadness or anger on his own or via exercise or a therapist -- whatever works for him. I don't necessarily need a guy who is going to share all his feelings with me.

The main problem with a lot of men is that they have been trained not even to acknowledge emotions, because they were raised with the belief that emotions are feminine or "weak." What happens with these guys is that they still have emotions (they are human) but shove them down or channel them in unhealthy ways because they have no ability to recognize them, name them, and deal with them. A lot of these men are the ones with rage issues, because anger is the ONE emotion a lot of men believe they are allowed to have, so when they experiences grief, envy, sadness, embarrassment, etc., it just becomes anger. Thus: rage.

So I don't need an "emotionally available" guy. But I don't want an emotionally stupid guy who can't even figure out "oh I'm feeling disappointed and a little embarrassed about being passed over for that promotion at work, instead of taking that out on my loved ones as rage, I will go for a run, maybe process my thoughts in writing, and then make peace and move on."

Emotional maturity, not emotional availability.

Testosterone drives a lot of our actions. I don't understand why women want to define how we should act We are different for God sake. We are not going to react the ways you want us to react. I feel like we are trying to "reengineer" men into the kind of men that women want. It creates resentment on both sides.

That’s fair. Men should be able to walk in the door and unburden their rage on their innocent loved ones. It’s just biology.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am happy with a man who is self aware enough to understand what emotions he is feeling and to deal with them in a healthy way. That can be a guy who prefers to deal with sadness or anger on his own or via exercise or a therapist -- whatever works for him. I don't necessarily need a guy who is going to share all his feelings with me.

The main problem with a lot of men is that they have been trained not even to acknowledge emotions, because they were raised with the belief that emotions are feminine or "weak." What happens with these guys is that they still have emotions (they are human) but shove them down or channel them in unhealthy ways because they have no ability to recognize them, name them, and deal with them. A lot of these men are the ones with rage issues, because anger is the ONE emotion a lot of men believe they are allowed to have, so when they experiences grief, envy, sadness, embarrassment, etc., it just becomes anger. Thus: rage.

So I don't need an "emotionally available" guy. But I don't want an emotionally stupid guy who can't even figure out "oh I'm feeling disappointed and a little embarrassed about being passed over for that promotion at work, instead of taking that out on my loved ones as rage, I will go for a run, maybe process my thoughts in writing, and then make peace and move on."

Emotional maturity, not emotional availability.

Testosterone drives a lot of our actions. I don't understand why women want to define how we should act We are different for God sake. We are not going to react the ways you want us to react. I feel like we are trying to "reengineer" men into the kind of men that women want. It creates resentment on both sides.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am happy with a man who is self aware enough to understand what emotions he is feeling and to deal with them in a healthy way. That can be a guy who prefers to deal with sadness or anger on his own or via exercise or a therapist -- whatever works for him. I don't necessarily need a guy who is going to share all his feelings with me.

The main problem with a lot of men is that they have been trained not even to acknowledge emotions, because they were raised with the belief that emotions are feminine or "weak." What happens with these guys is that they still have emotions (they are human) but shove them down or channel them in unhealthy ways because they have no ability to recognize them, name them, and deal with them. A lot of these men are the ones with rage issues, because anger is the ONE emotion a lot of men believe they are allowed to have, so when they experiences grief, envy, sadness, embarrassment, etc., it just becomes anger. Thus: rage.

So I don't need an "emotionally available" guy. But I don't want an emotionally stupid guy who can't even figure out "oh I'm feeling disappointed and a little embarrassed about being passed over for that promotion at work, instead of taking that out on my loved ones as rage, I will go for a run, maybe process my thoughts in writing, and then make peace and move on."

Emotional maturity, not emotional availability.

Testosterone drives a lot of our actions. I don't understand why women want to define how we should act We are different for God sake. We are not going to react the ways you want us to react. I feel like we are trying to "reengineer" men into the kind of men that women want. It creates resentment on both sides.

Well, there are two things that aren't really negotiable: 1) Anger should never be directed at people who aren't the source of it; and 2) you live in a society that requires you to regulate the time, place, and manner in which you express your anger. The upshot is that, as an adult living in a society, there will be times when there simply is no good outlet for your anger. That's tough for you but it's not anyone else's problem to deal with.

So, testosterone or not, you're going to have to figure out how to regulate your emotions. It might bruise your ego, but sometimes there is a societally permissible way to express "sad" that's not there for "mad." So maybe learn how to work on "sad."

My God most men regulate their emotions. Why are you guys acting like ALL men are savages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am happy with a man who is self aware enough to understand what emotions he is feeling and to deal with them in a healthy way. That can be a guy who prefers to deal with sadness or anger on his own or via exercise or a therapist -- whatever works for him. I don't necessarily need a guy who is going to share all his feelings with me.

The main problem with a lot of men is that they have been trained not even to acknowledge emotions, because they were raised with the belief that emotions are feminine or "weak." What happens with these guys is that they still have emotions (they are human) but shove them down or channel them in unhealthy ways because they have no ability to recognize them, name them, and deal with them. A lot of these men are the ones with rage issues, because anger is the ONE emotion a lot of men believe they are allowed to have, so when they experiences grief, envy, sadness, embarrassment, etc., it just becomes anger. Thus: rage.

So I don't need an "emotionally available" guy. But I don't want an emotionally stupid guy who can't even figure out "oh I'm feeling disappointed and a little embarrassed about being passed over for that promotion at work, instead of taking that out on my loved ones as rage, I will go for a run, maybe process my thoughts in writing, and then make peace and move on."

Emotional maturity, not emotional availability.

Testosterone drives a lot of our actions. I don't understand why women want to define how we should act We are different for God sake. We are not going to react the ways you want us to react. I feel like we are trying to "reengineer" men into the kind of men that women want. It creates resentment on both sides.

That’s fair. Men should be able to walk in the door and unburden their rage on their innocent loved ones. It’s just biology.

There we go again as if all men act this way. You take the most extreme of behaviour and give the impression that this common with men. The vast majority of men don't come home and take their anger on their loved ones. I am sorry if the man in your life does that. Most don't.

The man in my life doesn’t, but the man in the example does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure everyone has a different opinion but for me it's 2 things.

1. Don't hide your feelings behind macho BS. If something is going on that's bothering you, I want to be with someone who can talk about it and not keep it inside and let it fester or build up into something bigger
2. Understand my emotional needs as well. I work a stressful and at times, mentally exhausting, job. I love that I can vent to DH and he knows what to do or say.

Everyone has different levels of it. I have friends who definitely have a higher emotional level than I do.

That's the hardest part for men IMO. The way we respond when women need emotional support is well intentioned, but often women perceive it as wrong. Men aren't emotional communicator. IMO this is why sometimes we just stay quiet and respond as if we are walking on eggshells because a no response is superior to a bad response. But I'm other cases a non response is seen as not caring.

It is n't about know what to say, to men there is nothing to say. Woman that complain about work, work drama need to do some serious self reflection. Unless you are saving the world, or curing cancer, there is almost no reason to be emotionally attached to your job. The amount of emotional energy wasted when it comes to work is dumbfounding to men and are sitting there saying to themselves it would be nice if you put 10% of that energy toward our relationship. The continuously putting up with absolute BS at work or not letting coworkers who should fail, fail, is insanity. You don't need to do everyone elses work because they didn't or pick up there slack, or change your schedule to meet everyone elses. It is a means to end, nothing more & nothing less. Your company does not care about you, and will not hesitate to lay you off tomorrow if it makes business sense. They don't deserve what woman given them and for some reason woman feel indebted to them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am happy with a man who is self aware enough to understand what emotions he is feeling and to deal with them in a healthy way. That can be a guy who prefers to deal with sadness or anger on his own or via exercise or a therapist -- whatever works for him. I don't necessarily need a guy who is going to share all his feelings with me.

The main problem with a lot of men is that they have been trained not even to acknowledge emotions, because they were raised with the belief that emotions are feminine or "weak." What happens with these guys is that they still have emotions (they are human) but shove them down or channel them in unhealthy ways because they have no ability to recognize them, name them, and deal with them. A lot of these men are the ones with rage issues, because anger is the ONE emotion a lot of men believe they are allowed to have, so when they experiences grief, envy, sadness, embarrassment, etc., it just becomes anger. Thus: rage.

So I don't need an "emotionally available" guy. But I don't want an emotionally stupid guy who can't even figure out "oh I'm feeling disappointed and a little embarrassed about being passed over for that promotion at work, instead of taking that out on my loved ones as rage, I will go for a run, maybe process my thoughts in writing, and then make peace and move on."

Emotional maturity, not emotional availability.

Testosterone drives a lot of our actions. I don't understand why women want to define how we should act We are different for God sake. We are not going to react the ways you want us to react. I feel like we are trying to "reengineer" men into the kind of men that women want. It creates resentment on both sides.

Well, there are two things that aren't really negotiable: 1) Anger should never be directed at people who aren't the source of it; and 2) you live in a society that requires you to regulate the time, place, and manner in which you express your anger. The upshot is that, as an adult living in a society, there will be times when there simply is no good outlet for your anger. That's tough for you but it's not anyone else's problem to deal with.

So, testosterone or not, you're going to have to figure out how to regulate your emotions. It might bruise your ego, but sometimes there is a societally permissible way to express "sad" that's not there for "mad." So maybe learn how to work on "sad."