Androgynous men make better marriages!

[Dorit]

I just read the most amazing book review in the Hebrew press here. The title of the book is "With this Ring." The book is written by a retired 65 year old social worker that has specialized in counseling married couples and is her advice for a quality marriage. One of the major conclusions she comes to is that the quality of the married life is strongly correlated with how "androgynous" the man is! This is an orthodox religious Jewish woman that knows that the term "androgynous" is a very negative term for someone with both male and female sex organs, but she is trying to redeem the term and make it positive. Her point is that as to the degree that the man in a marriage has what are considered traditionally "feminine" personality traits, the quality of the couple's life together improves!

As others have written on this forum, some of us are blessed with very happy and fulfilling marriages precisely because we have a strong feminine aspect to our personalities! I can certainly say this is true for my marriage. I think this might shed some light on the difference between CD and TG and the marriage issues some of us face. It seem to be that those of us who have strong feminine personalities make good marriages, with the need to express it in female clothing being only a part of it.

For me this has been a very confirming article and helps me see how positive my personality really is, as I have struggled with this all my life and have felt guilty about it. Things are really changing, for such a book to come out in my country!

[pamela7]

I'm glad you've found an affirming expert source.
While i would like to agree, cos I fit that demographic nowadays in all senses, I sense a problem with the census. The people who visit a therapist are by nature having relationship difficulties great enough to warrant choosing a therapist. It's not like she is going to meet the same number of ordinary people who stay married and steer clear of counselling - which many macho types would avoid like a bargepole. I reckon a valid conclusion from her work is that of those couples who seek counselling the ones with an andro male do better. This is still good news!

xxx

[Teresa]

Devorahk,
Thanks for bringing this to life, I wonder how much religion comes into this equation, it could be a general finding from many counsellors .
I can see the point Pamela makes bout the type of person seeking counselling , a tough macho type may possibly up and go rather than go through counselling to be more compliant in their relationship .

I've tried very hard to be more open with my dressing to prepare myself for possible changes to come. My wife clearly states that she just wants the man she married, to me unless we split up she still has that man, plus a little extra that can bring an added dimension to our relationship and improve it if allowed to do so but I don't think she's ever going to see it that way !

[Belle Cri]

Yes, I should think that there would be a lot of religious conservative objection in Israel from any of the Abrahamic groups, but in many ways given Israeli intellectual culture and tradition, the fact that a book like this would be published is not surprising.

I've long held the same belief if nothing else on an empirical basis. Women ought to be lining up for men like this. I've certainly observed a pronounced tendency for women to view feminized men (regardless of spectrum status) as just much more fun and approachable, or the radical extreme - fear and hostility, with the latter being far less prevalent Perhaps because many get married at an age where they have quite figured this little gem out? Hard to say. I know that I can say for my part that Cletus the Slackjawed Yokel will not turn my head when he flashes his confederate rodeo buckle, but I'm sure Cletus doesn't have too much complimentary to say about my fey little butt either. Oh well.

Jane and I had an interesting experience last night. Since we're empty nesters now (and thank god), we decided to attend a local meet & greet. She got all dolled up and of course I was right there with my brushes and gloss (this won't take a minute! famous last words....). I went in elegant drab - black linen shirt and slacks, but I'm good enough at make up now where I can apply and nobody but the really savvy women in the crowd will pick up on it. Deadly sexy, but now strangely odd in the circumstance with my expanded awareness. But, I risk highjacking. The notion is that it's a much different experience going out together when you and your partner's awareness levels are much more finely attuned.

My point being that, to the extent that we begin to express our whole personalities and not bite significant aspects of our emotional selves off by merely accepting gender norms, it's only sensible that this makes for better relationships because we just bring more to the table.

[pamela7]

more to the table, more to the bedroom, more to the conversation, more to the spice of life!

[Bridget Ann Gilbert]

I'll add to the anecdotal evidence in support of the article. I firmly believe that my marriage works so well because I have a healthy dose of feminine personality traits that allow me to view situations from my wife's perspective. As a result I don't get entrenched in my own point of view and can find ways to compromise when differences of opinion come up. It also helps that we share many of the same interests.

One thing I wonder, though, is that Western culture views submissiveness as a feminine trait. Are androgenous males less likely to engage in conflict, and thus their marriages tend to run more smoothly?

Bridget

[Krisi]

If you look hard enough you will find "experts" with every opinion on every subject. Marriages are far too complex to explain in a book. I know a lot of people in happy marriages and none of them are "androgynous". For that matter, I don't know any men who are or appear to be "androgynous".

[Greenie]

Well I am getting married to a wonderful Androgynous man who just so happens to be a cross dresser in 35 days! So... There is that. ;)

[Jennifer0874]

I think it helps that I can relate to my wife in ways a very macho man could not. My wife is also more of an alpha female and I'm more on the submissive side. It creates a better balance than two dominant personalities battling for supremacy. I'm usually the one more willing to compromise.

[Rhonda Jean]

Not according to my ex.

[Isabella Ross]

Well I am getting married to a wonderful Androgynous man who just so happens to be a cross dresser in 35 days! So... There is that. ;)

Congratulations, Greenie! The world needs more GGs just like you...

[mechamoose]

If you look hard enough you will find "experts" with every opinion on every subject. Marriages are far too complex to explain in a book. I know a lot of people in happy marriages and none of them are "androgynous". For that matter, I don't know any men who are or appear to be "androgynous".

I think the difference isn't the idea of looking andro as much as it is *being* andro.

A fully bedecked male is a big, imposing figure. I can easily see where a smallish person of any gender would have a 'warning' flag pop up just being around one. That can be a positive or a negative depending on your likes.

We clever little monkeys like being around critters like ourselves. Sure, we can mix, but I am suggesting that a 'comfort' issue can skew how that works.

Pairings of people usually have the same issues. Most of it comes down to roles played by each partner. In the 'old days' there was an amlost-written list of the roles of a woman and the roles of a man. I more inclined to think of it as one big checklist, and you assign either A or B to each one. Just because I have a Y doesn't mean I automatically take out the trash. (I do, however, still have to rescue people from spiders)

- MM

[docrobbysherry]

I'll bet she meant "wimpy", not, androgenous?

My cousin is Jewish. He has gone from one strong demanding women to the next since college. They always dominate him because he's so compliant. But, there's nothing androgenous about him!

[Belle Cri]

One thing I wonder, though, is that Western culture views submissiveness as a feminine trait. Are androgenous males less likely to engage in conflict, and thus their marriages tend to run more smoothly?

Bridget

Um..no hahahhaha

[ReineD]

The book is written by a retired 65 year old social worker that has specialized in counseling married couples and is her advice for a quality marriage. ... This is an orthodox religious Jewish woman ...

No doubt her views are influenced by her old-fashioned orthodoxy. She assigns "feminine" and "masculine" attributes to what is now considered non-gendered, i.e. the ability to work, or care for the kids, and communicate about all these things. She may not be aware that the gender gap in many parts of the world has narrowed considerably, resulting in modern day parents who share what were once considered traditional gender roles. Both partners have outside jobs now (in our economy), both share the responsibility for household income and financial decisions, both share the household and childcare tasks and child-rearing. With this, comes the necessity for both partners to communicate at the same level.

I don't call this being androgynous. I think that we finally have come to the point of allowing both men and women to be all they can be. They are still very much men and women (respectively) when it comes to biological functions and how they relate to one another in a romantic sense. :)

[mechamoose]

I don't call this being androgynous.

I do.

A 'guy' is used to being a self serving person. An androgyne is 'comfortable' in themselves, and is willing to be flexible.

Roles, roles, roles...

"You should do whatever your lover wants"

<3

- MM

[ReineD]

I dunno MM. I think I have raised three modern sons. They don't look or act androgynous in the sense that I know the word (a perfect blend of both masculine and feminine characteristics and physical attributes to the point where we cannot tell which side of the binary the person subscribes to). My sons are viewed as males by everyone they meet. At the same time, they are caring individuals and they respect their female partners as equals. My oldest son and his gf live together. They by no means have a stark separation between their gender roles like my parents did, who had me in the 1950s. They both work, even though he earns more than she does despite her advanced degree (she is a sports trainer and is crazy about all manner of sports). They both cook, do the housework, the laundry, share the yard work, car maintenance, etc. Things just aren't the same as they used to be.

[mechamoose]

Hey there ReineD!!

Exactly my point, sweetie!

It is about how you act, not what you look like! }:>

- MM

[Belle Cri]

I dunno MM. I think I have raised three modern sons. They don't look or act androgynous in the sense that I know the word (a perfect blend of both masculine and feminine characteristics and physical attributes to the point where we cannot tell which side of the binary the person subscribes to). My sons are viewed as males by everyone they meet. At the same time, they are caring individuals and they respect their female partners as equals. My oldest son and his gf live together. They by no means have a stark separation between their gender roles like my parents did, who had me in the 1950s. They both work, even though he earns more than she does despite her advanced degree (she is a sports trainer and is crazy about all manner of sports). They both cook, do the housework, the laundry, share the yard work, car maintenance, etc. Things just aren't the same as they used to be.

I think this is the real payoff. Congratulations to you, Reine. It is enormously difficult to raise what honest, good men given our experience. I think this is critical. We have the acquired benefit of years of suffering, perspective, patience and wisdom, and also, to be special to our sons (and I really do mean this in a collective sense since we are talking about children). If I could imbue my sons with this, I certainly would. I only had a regrettable fleeting opportunity. Now, my daughter is my pride, joy, and princess incarnate (sorry, but, well, lol - ya couldn't see that coming??), but I am also extremely cautious.. So, thank god, they are not the same as they used to be, and one thing I am very careful with in all the hordes of children I have raised through various, erm, arrangements, is this: 1) no matter what your issues, or their mothers', they come first 2) learning to care for a child is simultaneously the greatest curse and blessing that we get, so to make that a positive experience, focus on what is positive and best for them 3) whatever issues you have on your own or with your ex, leave them at the door and NEVER EVER say a nasty thing about your ex, their mother, or frankly, much of anyone else in their presence. Take pride in your role as role model. You will then take pride in yourself as a woman, as a man, as a beautiful person, and fundamentally as a full fledged human being, I think we are all after that here, and in the end it fundamentally makes sense.

[tommy]

it's an interesting theory but i think it depends on how dominating the wife is in the marriage

[Dorit]

As has been stated by others, the author is using the term "androgynous" for lack of a better word to describe the type of men that are not on the extreme male end of the gender spectrum in attitude and behavior; not necessarily in appearance or life style choices. She noted that in her 40 years of counseling couples, the more the man was toward the female end of the spectrum the QUALITY of the marriage increased. She is not talking about who goes to work or does the dishes or changes the diapers! She is talking about men who can relate in the same way women relate: issues of empathy, emotions, expression, intimacy, etc. Obviously this is a generalization, there will always be exceptions, but she is talking about a way to a quality of married life that I believe is rare.

[ReineD]

She noted that in her 40 years of counseling couples, the more the man was toward the female end of the spectrum the QUALITY of the marriage increased .... She is talking about men who can relate in the same way women relate: issues of empathy, emotions, expression, intimacy, etc.

Why must a man who is empathetic and caring be deemed "toward the female of the spectrum"? Or more accurately, why do so many CDers like to believe that nurturing men are feminine?

It just seems to me that members here subscribe to male stereotypes perhaps more so than average people. I can say with all certainty that men in general are indeed nurturing, sympathetic, caring. They are capable of intimacy. I look at the men around me: my sons, other family members, colleagues at work, neighbors. They discuss things with their wives/gfs. They are able to feel and express emotion. They are nurturing towards their wives and children, caring with their friends and neighbors. They discuss things among themselves that are not limited to beer, cars and sports. They care about aesthetics ... they have a say as to what type of couch to buy for the living room or what color to paint the bedroom wall. They go shopping with their wives, they are well able to provide opinions about what they like and don't like. They engage.

I agree, any man or woman who is mature, selfless, and communicative, and who can prioritize other people's needs and emotions as well their own make better partners than immature, selfish people. But why on earth is this considered a "female" thing to do in this forum, especially by more modern CDers who are aware of how things have changed in the last 50 years? :strugglin

I saw the cutest thing on a facebook video the other day: an elderly woman, shoulders stooped, pulling at weeds in her garden on what seemed to be a hot day. Her equally stooped and rickety-looking elderly husband was standing over her, holding an umbrella for shade in one hand, and spraying bug repellant with the other at any mosquito or wasp that came in the vicinity. He was not wearing a dress.


... not that there is anything wrong with wearing a dress. Just saying that doing so does not make the wearer any more human than a man who doesn't wear dresses.

[Belle Cri]

Very elegantly put, Reine. Think it's high time I hit the kitchen again.

[Jessica5536]

The other day my wife and I were talking about an incident where a friend was saying some degrading things about how men were just better athletes than women and she asked me "Do all men look at women and think that they are physically better?"
I really wanted to say that when I look at women I just think about how cute I would look wearing their outfit. But instead I just assured her that it was not all men ;)

[sometimes_miss]

One of the major conclusions she comes to is that the quality of the married life is strongly correlated with how "androgynous" the man is!
So who and what the woman is has nothing to do with it. Suuuuuurrrrre. I think she needs to do a bit more research.

[Dorit]

Hi Lexi! Correlation does not mean other factors do not play a part. Of course the women has everything to do with it too!

[Claire Cook]

DevorahK,

Add me to the list of those whose softer and gentler qualities have added to the success of our relationships. Sue has often told me that if I were a macho alpha male type, I never would have had a chance. She always called me "sweet one", even before I got into serious dressing. Now either as a "normal" hetero couple or as two gals we share everything.

Reine, I appreciate your comments about the distinction between being a warm caring male and CD'ing. But I know I feel more emotionally female when I'm dressed.

Hugs,

Claire

[ReineD]

Reine, I appreciate your comments about the distinction between being a warm caring male and CD'ing. But I know I feel more emotionally female when I'm dressed.


Claire, of course you do and I do not dispute this. :hugs: Just saying that being a warm, caring person is not the providence of people who have feminine affinities or a female gender identity. There are CDers who are not warm and caring, just as there are cismen and ciswomen who aren't.

[Claire Cook]

Reine,

Of course there are (for all of your aboves!). And the feeling is mutual -- you know how much I/ we appreciate your perspective .:hugs:

[Bridget Ann Gilbert]

Why must a man who is empathetic and caring be deemed "toward the female of the spectrum"? Or more accurately, why do so many CDers like to believe that nurturing men are feminine?

It just seems to me that members here subscribe to male stereotypes perhaps more so than average people.

You bring up a good point. Why do we cling to old stereotypes to define masculinity, femininity, and in the case of this thread, androgyny (which is generally understood to be a balance of the other two)? I’ve mentioned in other threads that all humans are capable of experiencing the same emotions and performing the same functions. It is becoming a rather quaint notion that some personality traits are distinctly masculine or feminine, yet it will take time for this notion to fade.

At the same time, there is an almost instinctual understanding that men and women are psychologically different, hence the popularity of the book “Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus”. The question becomes how does one measure those differences? If attributes like empathy or logic, aggressiveness, or gentleness, etc. are useless because both sexes can exhibit them to extreme degrees, what do we use?

Try this hypothetical scenario. Imagine you meet an alien species that functions as a simultaneous hermaphrodite (one that has both functioning male and female sexual anatomy). How would you explain to one of their individuals how human men and women are different from each other beyond the obvious physical differences?

I doubt we’ll come to an agreed upon conclusion. Volumes have been written in psychological journals trying to answer this question. I think that’s why addressing gender identity issues is so difficult. We have such a hard time getting even the basic definitions settled.

Bridget

[ReineD]

How do we describe the differences between men and women? Honestly, Bridget, I think we can only boil it down to differences in primary and secondary sexual characteristics (XX-estrogen vs XY-testosterone). We can also provide a historical context, that it is or has made more sense for the woman, who is smaller and who does lactate, to stay home with the child while the larger and stronger husband fends off the tigers and chases animals for food. Things just became less cut and dry with the disappearance of tigers from our neighborhoods, and the appearance of grocery stores where both parents can shop for baby-formula. :p

As far as I understand it, rapid advances in technology are causing an unprecedented equalizing of gender roles (which does inform how we behave). There are couples where the female is the major income earner and the male plays a larger role at home, either due to the female having a more advanced degree or the male having lost his job due to out-sourcing. Most couples do share work and household responsibilities. Does this mean that the female is "becoming" male and the male is "becoming" female? No. They still mate as man and woman, they still identify as man and woman, respectively, and they still present as such within our current cultural context.