I said in the first sentence, “With more information I would agree that the requests are unreasonable and controlling.”

I was agreeing with Hugo’s assessment of the siutation with the women who came to him.

These are women who are in college, who are taking enough responsibility for their intellectual growth and development to form a bond with a professor, and who specifically approached an older adult for advice. They are clearlying THINKING about their boyfriend’s behavior, and their own. To suggest that they’re part of some group of women who “act like children” and by implication need someone to tell/teach them how to act is insulting.

Hugo has described two thoughtful, apparently responsible young women. To use that to jump off on how irresposible and foolish young women are, suggesting that they need to be told what to do is exactly the kind of patriarchy-reinforcement that these women’s families are engaging in by saying they should be happy their boyfriends care enough to be jealous.

Seems to me “Talibanesque” was entirely appropriate. The Taliban exercised absolute domination over women, and one of their ways of doing this was dictating how they could dress. Some guy orders his girlfriend not to wear short skirts, well, maybe that isn’t 100% Talbianesque, but it shows the same desire to possess and control her sexuality and personal expression. I see no reason to show “cultural sensitivity” towards any culture that oppresses.

“When he sees women as agents with their own capacity for self-protection, he will begin to know what it is to feel love without a concomitant desire to control.”

Sometimes what seems like “control” actually comes from a valid concern for another person’s safety. Unfortunately, I’ve known a lot of risk-taking, oblivious adults who act like children when it comes to personal safety issues and self-protection. Sadly they make poor, foolish choices. Unfortunately and for whatever reason they seem to lack simple-problem-solving skills and the capacity to set appropriate boundaries, both important for self-protection. One can try to demonstrate to another how to protect themselves, still many are self-resistant to accepting that knowledge. A woman can be an agent with her own capacity for self-protection, but do so very poorly.

“For so many of us, are greatest challenge in any romantic relationship is to learn what it means to trust.”

I agree, although I would add that trust and respect is earned and earning both, takes time.

La Lubu, fine: “over-controlling” works, but I think it is important to note that a cultural component frequently does exist here, often because the controllers themselves cite their culture or their religion as an excuse for limiting women’s freedom to wear skirts or uncovered hair, or to have friendships with men. You’re right that WASPs can do this: I know many blonde Mormon types, for example, who are quite concerned about covering things up.

Let’s not - violence has been known to happen in Lesbian relationships too. There are also cases of women maiming, killing and mutilating their husbands.

Why that particular form of phrasing? Why not “draconian” or “overcontrolling” or “domineering?” Why the need to invoke the Scary Sexist Brown Other? (in contrast to the earlier invocation of the kinder, gentler WASP man….)

For crying out loud Hugo. What was that about cultural sensitivity again? Being mindful of how an audience that isn’t (as you say) your “kind of people” might interpret things? I’m going to be very blunt here Hugo—in your past (and present), when folks who are not WASPs make inferences and assumptions about WASP culture, you have been very defensive and angry. You’ve put up several posts to that effect. Hyperbole like “the Taliban” isn’t likely to lead to understanding—and understanding is what you’re after, right? Think about how you react to folks who insult, belittle, or demean your culture. Well, the rest of us don’t care for it either.

(Now, if these young men have threatened their girlfriends with mutilation, maiming or killing, then yes, that is Talibanesque. It’s also “white-guy-esque” or “black-guy-esque” or let’s just say “guy-esque”, because as the local women’s shelter will tell you, that behavior crosses all boundaries of race, ethnicity, religion or class.)

I think if this is the same couple that Hugo comments on above,and he made the Talibanesque (or Amish-like?) rules for her, it narrows the possibilities a lot. Now it sounds like any request was more a discussion of inflexible rules rather than an expression of his feelings. Either party would have to give up an awful lot, and he certainly doesn’t seem at all willing, at least s far as matters of dress. So the prospects are not good.