I don't think that women are honorable like men, but that does not mean we are not honest, ethical, moral or even reliable. It means that all that stuff will go out the window to protect a child, without thought or consideration for self, contracts, Husband or even God. Everyone and everything will be put on hold until the child is safe, or I am dead from the effort.
In my experience, married women with children are more honorable than single women without children, especially when it comes to being reliable.
Yeah... probably. But Fearless has a point... depending upon the culture and a women's upbringing, you may find this to be more or less so, simply due to behavioral training/family/traditions, etc. All that will have an impact on her zoo. But her maternal instinct, still, is biological.
The ones who get real interesting are the Single Moms. It's like, all the typical zoo rules kind of change... let me know when you meet one...
Maybe I'm channeling Stig here but I'd tend to think that people will act honorably in relationship to you if they respect themselves. If I tell somebody I don't respect that I'm going to do something, I do it.
Right. If the bully tells you to give him your lunch, you should say "No" and show up to fight him after school if necessary because you are a boy with self-respect. You shouldn't say "Yes" and then just hide out during lunch hour even if you don't respect his bullying tactics. What should you do if you are a girl walking your little sister to school?
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
You all will have to forgive me if this is even less coherent than usual. Death in the Afternoon. Unfortunately, it's evening.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the virtues of loyalty vs. honor on this thread have me a bit fogged. In practice, they seem like exactly the same thing. However, loyalty seems more like a virtue chosen out with reference to the other ... acting in loyalty out of a sense of bonding and consideration of the other's agenda and feelings first and foremost. Regardless, it's *personal*. Whereas honor seems more self-focused and theoretical. In that, honor is what you do with relation to your own code of ethics, regardless of one's actual *emotions* toward the recipient of said fidelity (in this case).
Do you all really think men and women are *that* different? 'Cause I question that. I think this whole discussion is thrown off for me because I have plenty of cow but no (as far as I can tell) actual *maternal* instincts. When all the girls my age were cooing over babies, I was over playing tag with the boys or something. Damnit, I just like boys. Whereas I've never had the vaguest idea what to do with a baby. Some things never change, apparently.
All I know is, my sense of honor has kept me this side of the fence (if only just) when my sense of loyalty was shot to hell by frustration and resentment.....
Blackfoot and maybe Stig, what the hell rocks have you been finding these women under????
Burgbud, you cannot respect women too much. Same for men. Kowtowing and placating and princessing and pedestaling are not forms of respect. Respect says, "I trust you to save yourself and calm yourself down, to a degree ... I know you are competent." Respect also says, "I trust you to not kick the damn puppy dog."
BTW, to a general audience, what the hell is this prejudice against the puppy? How unreasonable is that? Like every man doesn't have a puppy. What kind of LTR will thrive on pretending that isn't so? God knows I have no wish to spend an inordinate amount of time cowing the puppy. That is hell on desire. But come on. In a serious relationship (read: marriage) any man is going to have his puppy moments. It's authentic. If I was with a man who caved up whenever his puppy might be making an appearance, I would feel like he didn't trust me to care well for his puppy, whereas I am perfectly competent with puppies. (Again, I don't know where you guys are finding these women.) If he can't trust me with the whole zoo, why the hell is he with me at all? What motivation do I then have to expose my bunny? He gets to be one up by not having a puppy, but I still should display my bunny so he can be all rescuing and knightly? Sucks to that. Everyone wants to be the saviour sometimes. Nor would I desire a (committed) relationship where *nobody* shows their vulnerable animal. What's the point? Are we all not equally human and flawed and vulnerable?
Very slightly inebriated message ends.
Kett, my fellow cat, I couldn't have said it better myself. Even with more ‰.
I agree with Corri that I'd do anything to protect my babies but I don't think it's a female trait. There have been plenty of men throughout history who have compromised their principles in some way or another simply because they loved someone. A woman. A child. Someone. And the situation of "either my honor or my child's life" is pretty theoretical. How often does it come up in real life? And would the average man really answer it any differently than the average woman?
In a non-relationshippy context I've worked with both men and women and it's pretty much a wash whether they'll do what they say they will. There are plenty of guys who'll promise you they'll do things and then they don't. I've worked with women who painstakingly try to always keep their word. And vice versa.
Mojo, I don't think the women I'm dealing with are analagous to girls walking their little sisters to school.
After some pondering, I think you could look at the issues I'm talking about as female testing, which has been discussed 'round these parts before. When a woman doesn't do what she says if a guy makes excuses for her and goes on about business as usual, his goose is cooked. If instead he says, "I'm not going to deal with you because you're not reliable," she suddenly wants to know what she can do to make it up to him.
Women seem to be fine when it's called "testing but most bristle when it's called "dishonest" or "unreliable". It's there, though, and a guy's gotta deal with it...probably all the way up to the extreme of tending fences.
Stop WaitingFeel EverythingLove AchinglyGive ImpeccablyLet Go
A question for you, and maybe you can address it on Mojo's thread... the Puppy one. You said:
Quote: I want a man who will love me and who I can love. It's as simple as that.... I just want to be able to speak to him honestly and NOT feel the urge to go outside the M. Because I know myself too well. I could easily fall in love with that person and I think that is where H might say "game over." Who could blame him. The goal : loving each other, would be shot to he!! at that point.
Now. You and I often do not agree on the details, but typically it seems we can find our way to the same point. (Which means you and I should NEVER take a Road Trip together, we can just meet wherever it is we decide to go, if we can decide that... LOL )
Based on what you've said up there... I'd see that as basic male honor and woman loyalty. Does that, for you... mesh in any way with my latest grand theory I spoke of on Mojo's thread? Just curious.
This thread is a little overwhelming but wanted to reply to what Corri asked me. And my official answer is "He!! if I know."
The honor/loyalty thing gets a little blurry. I liked what other people said about the strong puppy/bunny and also about not needing to create a fence when you get your own zoo in working order. I think H and I are striking a good balance now between all the animals. I think it was you Corri who said that loyalty Becomes the fence. I liked that. And if the loyalty is being questioned, a man who says "don't cheat, because we have a contract" is certainly not going to impact me as much as the man who says "don't cheat because we love each other, are good together, are soulmates, are happy, etc." But I'm a sucker for emotional men. And vulnerable men, (not weak!) as MJ said, but a strong manly vulnerability. yummy
My grandmother was the little sister and she was the one who would fight anyone who picked on her sister who was 2 years older!!
LOL- I was the big sister and I did on occasion fight bullies who picked on my little sisters. What if instead of fighting the big bully who asked for my lunch money I were to say "You are bigger than me so you will clearly be able to take my lunch money if you want it but maybe instead you could use your muscles to carry my books for me?" Also, I must admit that on occasion I was the annoying monkey-girl who yelled "Betcha can't hit me with a snowball! Na-na-a-boo-boo!" and thereby provoked violent behavior - lol.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
OTOH, it seems reasonable to me that a man might want to be with a woman who is both trusting and strong, not trusting just because she is strong. If a dark alley must be traversed, sometimes a man might want to be with a woman who carries her own sword but sometimes he might want to be with a woman who takes his hand and says "I trust you.". The woman who will only ever enter the own alley with her own sword in hand is IMO less brave than the one who can do both. The woman who always has to have her own sword is more concerned with earning the respect of men than engendering (literally!)their affection.
But this is mixing in a whole different set of questions and issues. I am and have been perfectly capable of trusting men (who are capable) to take care of me in situations where I needed someone to take care of me. Although sometimes it is scary for me because my XH would refuse to help me at times when I needed or asked for help.
What I was talking about in my previous post were women who wander down dark alleys ALONE for no needed reason with no means to protect themselves and then wait for someone to jump in and protect them. To me that's completely different than a man asking me to trust him in a dangerous situation that I cannot handle myself. Does that make sense?
I completely understand that men want and need to take care of women. My biggest question is why so many men seem to look to women who have foolishly and repeatedly gotten themselves into trouble versus women who have had a "bad break." (That's why I did like GP in that he admired you for your strength in doing what was right for your kids and in honoring your marriage as long as you did. he understood that you stayed because of your strength and not because of weakness which is why I think he admired you. I don't think he would have necessarily wanted to take care of you if you were a personality who had just stuck with 2bx because you were afraid to be alone.)
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
Mojo, I don't think the women I'm dealing with are analagous to girls walking their little sisters to school.
Well, you might if you considered all her undeveloped ovum to be her little sisters and reflected on the reasons why you would never hit a woman.
Quote:
After some pondering, I think you could look at the issues I'm talking about as female testing, which has been discussed 'round these parts before. When a woman doesn't do what she says if a guy makes excuses for her and goes on about business as usual, his goose is cooked. If instead he says, "I'm not going to deal with you because you're not reliable," she suddenly wants to know what she can do to make it up to him.
The thing I can't figure out is if you Deida-following guys want to be the leader in your relationship or want an equal partnership. To me it's like you're all saying "I'll be the leader as soon as I find a woman who is just as capable as me to be the leader too so if I f*ck up she can take the helm." I'm not finding fault with either philosophy. I'm just confused. Maybe this is just due to the fact that you are all in lone wolf rather than Alpha mode. Have any of you read the book Deida wrote for women about yearning and such? I haven't actually read it but I skimmed some excerpts and I think I kind of get it. IMO, he is saying that a woman should be strong bunny but all you guys seem to be looking for a strong lioness. However, it's entirely possible that I am dead wrong.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
IMO, he is saying that a woman should be strong bunny but all you guys seem to be looking for a strong lioness.
I think that assessment is probably true, at least for the men who are not ready for a real R. Soldier guy liked when I responded lioness, but probably got freaked out when I responded bunny, for the very reason I stated above. Plus, I was M so...that probably had something to do with it. And I'm sure the guys you are dating now MJ would probably respond similarly since you are not D yet. Not that you are looking for a serious R either so it's not really an issue.
