What is the nature of male/female relationships and reasonable

There are books on this. Just remember, it's almost all social.

But personally, male or female, if you aren't being supportive then you are being an asshole: a trait most common to the human species. If you have to rely on expectations and how common/natural something is to act a certain way, then you are literally not acting for yourself; thus becoming less of an individual and more of the same. But hey, if you don't want your identity to be your own then that's on yourself. The life being changed the most is your own, not anyone else's.

Unless of course you decide to kill someone. Then you are REALLY changing their lives for the shorter.

>>18299093
It's a fucking conundrum I wonder about too man. This is a good question, hopefully we get some great responses in here!

File: 1486854189039.jpg (103KB, 486x445px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 486x445px

>>18299093

>Does anyone know?

No. This armchair pseudo-intellectual bullshit you guys perpetuate around 4chan about relationship dynamics and evolutionary psychology is a terrible, terrible meme. Yeah, society isn't perfect. Some things about being a man suck. Some things about being a woman suck. Somewhere in the middle we all have our gripes and sacrifices that we all must endure to find out place.

Being a human is unfair. Get a girl you're compatible with or don't. Play the game or don't. That's it. Do something productive. This conversation is not.

>>18299189
You're definitely wrong, this conversation is productive. If this is just the way it is and I and other posters are unaware, then we should be made aware. If this is not the way it is, then ways to deal with this should be discussed.

File: 1485392841494.gif (503KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 200x200px

>>18299200

>this conversation is productive.

It might be if you knew anything about evolutionary psychology but you don't. Nobody here does. Thats why I called it pseudo-intellectual bullshit. Browsing Wikipedia and red-pilled pseudo-science forums for information that validates your confirmation bias is not research. Its not knowledge. Its narcissistic cherry-picking at best.

People here pretend like they know anything about evolutionary psychology because they desperately need a legitimate platform upon which to place their feelings of inadequacy.

The honest answer is that "society" has nothing to do with your ability or inability to develop a relationship with a woman who emotionally supports you. There are millions of decent men out there in relationships with decent women. There is no evolutionary imperative one way or another that absolves people of their unwillingness to accept personal responsibility for their journey through social interactions.

Instead of jamming yet another thread with 300 posts about a subject that none of you legitimately know anything about how about we talk about YOUR life and YOUR choices and see if there are any issues you need to deal with in yourself. Generalizing women and men in "society" and blaming unfounded biological oddities that you read about on reddit for your inability to develop a positive social and romantic identity is the oldest, lamest meme in the book.

>>18299227
I think that was the point though, that we talk about *our* own experiences and try to find common ground; not to "solve" human interaction.

>>18299227
>"Your partner's behavior is your fault, and your own behavior is your fault"

Good to know

>>18299256

>I think that was the point though

If that was the point then it was poorly illustrated. Nowhere in the original post did OP mention anything pertinent to his personal experience or inquire about anyone else's.

He rattled off a two paragraph pseudo-intellectual hypothesis about male/female interactions based on his anecdotal observations of "society" and then ended the post by asking if anyone knew if his anecdotal observations were correct.

Didn't really sound like an attempt to be introspective to me.

>>18299267
These anecdotes are deeply ingrained in literally all cultures on Earth. The lives of men are disposable, their emotions don't matter, they are expected to be tough and supportive to allow their female partner to be weak and emotionally needy

Pseudo-intellectual? These are well documented and even rational feminists acknowledge this to be the case.

You people just think that women as a whole are so radically different than they really are.

By best friend of 15 years is female. We hang out a few times a month, grab a beer, and vent to each other. She is my absolute biggest supporter and I wouldn't have been able get through a lot of the last few years without her.

It's really, really comforting to know that there is someone out there who genuinely thinks the world of me.

So yeah, girls are capable of human emotions lie empathy, who knew.

>>18299286
I'm not gonna stick around this thread to watch it fill up with the same shit for the 300th time.

Literally every word that guy said was right. If you wanted any sort of advice, that was it.

>>18299227
>It might be if you knew anything about evolutionary psychology but you don't.
I agree with almost everything you're saying. In fairness, though, this quote also describes a hefty proportion of actual career evolutionary psychologists.

>There are millions of decent men out there in relationships with decent women.
This is certainly true.

>>18299200
>If this is not the way it is, then ways to deal with this should be discussed.
I'll put it plainly for you, then: this is not just "the way it is."

I'm married and I can honestly say if I lost my wife I would feel about as crippled as if I lost an arm or a leg. And while she's amazing, she has plenty of faults and so does our relationship. The fact that she supports me makes her a good partner, but it doesn't make her one in a million. And don't delude yourself, lack of emotional support is a problem that a ton of women have with the guys in their lives, too, and a lot of them also probably wonder in their own ways (without invoking evo. psychology), is this something men just aren't built for? "Why is my boyfriend so emotionally unavailable?" Probably because you picked a shitty one, lady.

The takeaway: whether you like men or women, if your partner doesn't emotionally support you, then it's a shitty relationship. Period.

>>18299321
I want to add to this and say that as a male, I'm very emotionally absent. I don't think there's any deep rooted biological reason, probably a deep rooted psychological one though that every individual is susceptible to.

The human mind is /literally/ the most complex thing in the known universe. I'm genuinely upset at how many uneducated people believe they've cracked the complexities of human nature, while that very subject is the forefront of our scientific strife.

>>18299339
>The human mind is /literally/ the most complex thing in the known universe. I'm genuinely upset at how many uneducated people believe they've cracked the complexities of human nature, while that very subject is the forefront of our scientific strife.

This isn't about the implementation and workings of an individual brain, it's about broad sociological phenomena which we can most definitely quantify and observe. Stereotypes exist for a reason

>>18299295
>best friend of 15 years is female
>best friend

That doesn't matter, things are different when you're in a relationship

>>18299321
>lack of emotional support is a problem that a ton of women have with the guys in their lives, too, and a lot of them also probably wonder in their own ways (without invoking evo. psychology), is this something men just aren't built for? "Why is my boyfriend so emotionally unavailable?" Probably because you picked a shitty one, lady.
This is off topic

The topic is social support for personal expectations of emotional support between genders, not tendencies to provide or withhold it between genders.

>>18299352
So what, you want me to talk about her husband?

>>18299373
No, I don't care about her because it's anecdotal

>>18299350
Right, but if you wanna start going around parading those stereotypes as a standard or a fact, you're a fool.

There is no group, only the individual. Yes, society is a thing, cultural norms exist, and they account for a lot. But the fact of the matter is that when you boil it down, trying to assign a hard behavioral sciences to broad strokes of people is not accurate and never will be.

"All X are Y" is a fallacy, no matter how many times you reassert it. If you were as science oriented as you'd like to be, you should recognize that the individuality of a person has WAAAAAAAY too many variables to judge solely on whatever group you lump them into.

Don't base your philosophy on statistics you found on 4chan, you'll be happier and more adjusted.

>>18299377
Lol, so you're literally just looking for an echo chamber. Ok then.

I suppose it's too much to expect you to realize the hypocrisy in this, so I'm just doing to dip. Enjoy your thread.

>>18299359
>This is off topic
Are you 15? Have you ever had a conversation before?

Read the entire post, instead of pulling a third of it out of context and laser-focusing on that. I provided a complete answer to your question. (I can feel you gearing up to argue with that. Don't. This is a conversation, not a debate club.)

Several people have responded to you, and they've told you in no uncertain terms, "You're wrong, and you need to cool it with the amateur evolutionary psychology." The right thing to do here, given that pretty much all of them seem to have more life experience than you, is to quit arguing, politely thank them, and listen.

>>18299392
>Right, but if you wanna start going around parading those stereotypes as a standard or a fact, you're a fool.
I'm not doing that and have not done that

>>18299392
>There is no group, only the individual. Yes, society is a thing, cultural norms exist, and they account for a lot. But the fact of the matter is that when you boil it down, trying to assign a hard behavioral sciences to broad strokes of people is not accurate and never will be.
It is accurate as long as you interpret the statistics correctly. "X percent of Y group self report Z quality". Interpret it as self reporting, not Z in and of itself

>>18299392
>"All X are Y"
I made no such categorical claims, only broad generalizations

>>18299397
>Are you 15? Have you ever had a conversation before?
He's responding to claims I never made

If you were to read the OP you would find that it is discussing broad the broad sociological topic, with only one tangential mention of individual behavior at the end

What do you think this topic is about? Do you think it's about whether men or women provide more emotional support? That's the conversation you seem to be having, and that is NOT what the OP is about.

>>18299403
People have addressed EVERYTHING you've written in the OP, but you apparently lack the (incredibly basic) critical-thinking ability to infer and extrapolate their larger point without having it explicitly spelled out for you, or to reframe it when they put it in slightly different terms than you would have.

>What is the [...] reasonable expectations of emotional support for relationship issues solely caused by the opposite party?
It is reasonable to expect your partner to be emotionally supportive and if your partner acts like an asshole to you, it's reasonable to expect them to apologize and explain their behavior. By and large, this is how it works in practice. It's how it works in my relationship and in every good relationship I know of. When it doesn't, it's because one or both partners are emotionally immature.

You strike me as being quite young, so if that's not how it's worked in the relationships you've been in, look no farther than the last sentence as to why.

When adult (post-college) relationships don't work that way, it's not because "society" condones it. It's just because some people unfortunately remain emotionally immature into adulthood.

>Are the females ever expected to provide any form of emotional support, closure, or explanation to the male,
Yes. They are. "Society" doesn't give women carte blanche to skate away from their relationship screwups. Whether you're a dude or a chick, most people - and understand, "society" is a near-synonym for "most people" - would consider "My partner isn't emotionally supportive, and never takes responsibility for it when they screw up!" to be a fair complaint no matter who's making it.

>This makes sense on the level of evolutionary psychology.
You don't know the first thing about evolutionary psychology. You think you do but you don't. Stay away from that shit. I'm serious.

There. A comprehensive and explicit point-by-point reply to your questions in the OP. Happy? Yeah, I thought not.

File: LulYM.png (663KB, 601x601px) Image search: [Google]

663KB, 601x601px

>>>18299430
>Whether you're a dude or a chick, most people - and understand, "society" is a near-synonym for "most people" - would consider "My partner isn't emotionally supportive, and never takes responsibility for it when they screw up!" to be a fair complaint no matter who's making it.

Well then I think you're responding in reference to the exceptionally reasonable subset of the population, but the outliers for whom this does not apply matter to. They are a part of society

And then what is the solution when they don't, and when they repeatedly deny any wrongdoing on a regular basis, denying having ever said literal exact quotes of what they did say, and denying having done things they literally did do? And even when they admit that they did it, they have the attitude that it doesn't matter and you're overreacting, and even if they admit it matters they find a reason why it's your fault and you made them do it

>>18299286

>These anecdotes are deeply ingrained in literally all cultures on Earth.

False.

>The lives of men are disposable, their emotions don't matter, they are expected to be tough and supportive to allow their female partner to be weak and emotionally needy

Firstly, YOU allow your female partner to be week and emotionally needy, not society. If you get stuck with a shitty girl its because you're not capable of attracting anyone better.

If you really want to delve into the world of "evolutionary psychology" i'll entertain you for a moment. Our species can survive with just a few men. It cannot survive with just a few women.

Sorry, but women are more valuable than you. Its an "evolutionary" truth. If the basis of your grip is "life isn't fair" then I'll agree with you, and raise you with a "who cares".

>>18299594
>If you really want to delve into the world of "evolutionary psychology" i'll entertain you for a moment. Our species can survive with just a few men. It cannot survive with just a few women.
>Sorry, but women are more valuable than you. Its an "evolutionary" truth. If the basis of your grip is "life isn't fair" then I'll agree with you, and raise you with a "who cares".

Okay thank you for confirming my claim in the OP

>>18299259

Thats the weakest blame shifting I've ever seen. You attract shitty girls because you are shitty.

If you're an intelligent, self-aware, confident dude with a functional brain stem and a decent moral compass there is literally no excuse for being in a shitty relationship. Period. End of story. Stop falling for and attracting dysfunctional messes and then blaming "society" for you being so desperate for female attention that you're incapable of differentiating a sane girl from an unstable one.

The common denominator in every one of your relationships is you. If you're constantly in shitty ones its because thats what you're subconsciously attracted to. Putting the burden of not being able to acquirr positive relationships on "society" is weak, through and through.

File: 1392790884996.gif (472KB, 245x184px) Image search: [Google]

472KB, 245x184px

>>18299615

>Okay thank you for confirming my claim in the OP

Your confirmation bias has been the focal point of this entire conversation. Focus on the information that fits the narrative of what you want to believe and then ignore the information that doesn't.

I imagine you're a real hit with the ladies.

>>18299628
>Your partner's bad behavior is your fault because you're stupid enough to be with them

Nice literal blame shifting

>>18299641

>Your partner's bad behavior is your fault because you're stupid enough to be with them

Ummm. Yes. Absolutely. The blame is on you for not only letting your insecurities and irrationality drive you into a relationship but then instead of taking responsibility for your contributions to your dysfunctional behavior you instead decide to blame "society".

You can't drive into a drug infested neighborhood flashing 100's and then park it with your door unlocked and then blame everyone else's behavior for the fact that you got robbed. In this case you just shuffle the blame onto "society" for taking advantage of your weakness and put absolutely no emphasis on the fact that you yourself have personally fostered this weakness through an inability to take responsibility for it.

You go out of your way to develop relationships with insane women and then come here and want us all to lament with you about this shit situation that you've gotten yourself into through a series of uninformed, ignorant choices. Its bullshit. Its scapegoating.

Lets put it like this, if your worldview has absolutely zero room for personally responsibility, then you're doing it wrong. Yes, it would be wonderful if the world were sunshines and rainbows and no one was bad or manipulative or deceitful but thats dumb. You fail to make good decisions with good people and the blame rests with you, not them. The only decisions you can hold yourself accountable for are yours. Stop trying to look for ways that your fuckups are other people's fault and life will go so much simpler for you.

>>18299651
How do you explain the MGTOW? They are on the rise and all can come to the same conclusion on how shitty western women are. When men are moving to Asian and Eastern European countries for women, you know it's bad.

>>18299651
That's a nice long spiel about personal responsibility but you're blaming me for the actions of others, when these actions seem to be systematically sanctioned by society itself

Society does not hold women responsible for their transgressions to the same extent that it holds men responsible. Look at prison sentencing

You're victim blaming

File: thread.jpg (55KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 960x720px

>>18299227
/thraed

>>18299691

>That's a nice long spiel about personal responsibility but you're blaming me for the actions of others

Like I said, you ignore all information that doesn't fit your narrative and instead mindlessly seek to validate your confirmation bias. Its almost like you didn't even read what I had to say at all. The only parts you managed to grasp were the ones that made you feel like a victim which, incidentally, perfectly illustrates the point I was trying to make.

>>18299658

>How do you explain the MGTOW? They are on the rise

Kek. No they aren't. Although, I can appreciate the hell out of any man who is so emotionally and psychologically weak that the only way he can wrap his mind around an adult relationship is to move to a culturally backwards country where women are treated like misbehaved dogs. I'm happy for them. The more the merrier. Get the fuck out of my country and stop giving the rest of us men with functional brain stems a bad name.

It has always been the same story though; immature, insecure men who lack the mental capacity to be with a self-aware woman always spout off about "muh traditional values" and "muh western women" because, of course, blaming society is much easier than looking inwards and realizing that good women avoid them like the plague because you're a worthless sack of shit.

There is always a boogeyman to blame; always some kind of false flag to pin your failures on. Its no wonder that these petulant man babies who insist upon residing themselves to be helpless observers to their own lives in order to avoid the pain of failure and rejection grow up wondering why they feel so unfulfilled and angry with the world.

>>18299295
because shes your friend
you wouldnt be able to do that if she was your girlfriend

the truth is, unless you are really lucky
they expect their dad to be their husband

dad never goes to their daughter with problems, he solves their problem, offers a solution, decides, calms, dad is never wrong, dad is smart, dad has a little princess
and so on
the sex is just the fact you are both adults and attracted to eachother

things change a bit when you get kids, but some mothers never grow out of "daddy please" phase

>>18299846
So, if she were my girlfriend, she'd suddenly do a 360 and care for me less? Why, because of her reptilian woman brain?

I should warn her husband of many years, he probably doesn't know about this stuff as much as you guys do.

>women are shit why won't they like me? waaa waaa waaa waaa waaaa waaaaaaa abloobloobloobloooooo

why is this literally the entire board

File: ce3feeac-ec42-47a7-9ec8-9dd48f379249..jpg (299KB, 782x793px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 782x793px

what a shit show

>>18299839
... and there you have it.

Guys, don't ever be "emotionally and psychologically weak". Don't you dare admit insecurity. Not for a fucking moment. This is how you'll be treated.

quod erat fucking demonstrandum.

Welp since op suggested people use their own examples here's my own two cents.

Through my life I've been with only two men. First guy was a fat lazy piece of shit who was also my best friend. He begged me to be with him and me being the weak shit I was back then, said yes.
He was a jealous person, extremely insecure, addicted to porn but at the same time very religious. He had some qualities of course otherwise he wouldn't be my best friend at the time.
I couldn't stand his complaints and insecurities. I tried to emotionally support him but I just wasn't emotionally invested in the relationship because of how repulsive his personality was (huge victim complex, being a hypocrite etc).
He refused to change or work on himself which annoyed me because he would keep complaining.

My point is, if a girl won't emotionally support you, either she's a piece of shit, or it's you, or both like in my case honestly.

After I grew a pair and decided to end it finally I met the most amazing person, someone I am very connected to.
We solve all of our problems, and there is no lack of trust in our relationship. Both of us are imperfect, but we're both very invested in improving eachother or simply taking care of eachothers faults.
He cries in front of me, I don't feel repelled by it. He can also be very emotional if we're having a fight, in a feminine way I guess. Nothing bothers me simply because we're very compatible and work well together.
I think I even support him more than he does, because he never really had proper care in his childhood yet he grew into a very impressive person.

So in the end, it's all about the right person and both of your personalities. Imo this has nothing to do with society because men might hide their sadness infront of the (scary bogeyman) "society" but in the intimacy of your relationship such constraints and conventions should be stripped off because you're not supposed to be with "society" you're supposed to be with someone who understands you

>>18300318
I thought it was funny that he asked for personal examples, then gave me shit for "anecdotal evidence"