I’ve had a couple of students lately come and talk to me about issues with jealous boyfriends. In both cases, the women involved are self-identified feminists, ambitious, bright and talented. They’ve each recently started dating new guys, and each of these beaux has started exhibiting what I would call controlling behavior.
“Lori” is 20, as is her new boyfriend. She’s still very much in the early stages of the romance, a little bit giddy. She came to see me, however, because her boyfriend has made, just within the past week, two requests: he’s asked her to stop wearing short skirts, and he’s asked her to stop going to lunch with her male co-workers. Lori told me she hasn’t verbally agreed to stop wearing short skirts, but since her fella asked her to stop, she has quietly complied. On Monday, however, she did go out to lunch — a normal ritual — with two or three of her male co-workers, something that now has left her feeling very guilty.
Lori comes from an Armenian background. (Demographically, the Glendale-Pasadena-Burbank area, in which my college is located, serves the largest Armenian community in America. Students of Armenian ancestry make up half of those whom the college identifies as “white”.) Before coming to see me to talk about her boyfriend’s requests from a feminist perspective, Lori talked about his desires with her sisters and other female friends, all of whom share her heritage. Without exception, her family members and friends told her she should do as her new beau asked. Most disturbingly, several said that she should be “pleased” that her boyfriend “cared so much”; jealousy, they insisted, was a sign of devotion. Lori reported that her older married sister said: “You should only worry if he didn’t ask you to change how you dress — then it would mean he wasn’t interested.”
My other student, “Yesenia”, comes from a Hispanic background, and has a new, Salvadoran-born boyfriend. Without belaboring the point, her story is essentially the same: her new guy wants her to stop chatting with other men and to wear less revealing clothing. Yesenia came to see me last Thursday; Lori came by yesterday. Former students in my women’s history class, each wanted my advice on what was essentially the same issue.
I mention the ethnicity of the folks involved because there seems to be such a clear cultural component to seeing jealousy as acceptable. No, I’m not trying to reinforce a stereotype of Latins or Middle Easterners as particularly “hot-blooded” and thus more prone to misogynstic fits of green-eyed rage than “calm” WASPs. But it’s clear that certain ethnic groups — in this case, Armenians and Salvadorans — are more willing than others to associate male jealousy with evidence of love and care. From a feminist standpoint, controlling what women wear or whom they speak with is a practice to be abhorred — yet a professor who comes from outside either of these societies must find a way to make that point in a way that is culturally sensitive.
Let me say this very clearly: the kind of jealousy that seeks to control non-sexual friendships or clothing choices is deeply and profoundly unhealthy and indefensible. I don’t think jealousy is always unreasonable. Should my wife — heavens forfend — come home tonight and announce she had had sex with someone else during her lunch hour, I’d be hurt and jealous. But when my wife goes out to lunch or dinner with male colleagues and clients, or wears a flattering, skin-tight outfit, I have no business getting jealous. Jealousy and anger are appropriate responses to infidelity and actual betrayal; they are never appropriate reactions to genuinely platonic friendships or revealing clothing. Would that this were so obvious that it didn’t need repeating!
It seems clear that those cultures most accomodating of male jealousy are those cultures most likely to buy into the “myth of male weakness.” This is the myth that claims that men lack the same capacity for self-restraint that women possess; the myth suggests that all men are “dogs”, or have “hidden (sexual) agendas.” The less confidence culturally in the male capacity to exercise self-control, the greater the need to outsource that restriction to women. In these cultures, men are not only expected to be weak, they are also expected to have a profound axiety about the threat that other “weak” men pose to their wives, daughters, sisters and girlfriends. As a result, a man who loves his wife, daughter, sister, or girlfriend will express his devotion to her by trying to “protect” her from the “hidden agendas” of predatory males; his best chance of doing so lies, the thinking goes, in urging her to cover up and avoid unnecessary contact with other males. And thus a tragic, desperately misguided notion is reinforced: that controlling jealousy is somehow evidence of real love. That so many men and women buy into this is heartbreaking — and for women, often deadly.
Both Lori and Yesenia feel stuck. On the one hand, they’re both falling in love with these lads; they are eager to please and anxious about what will happen if they don’t comply with what their friends and families and cultures tell them are not unreasonable requests. On the other hand, they worry about what these demands signify, and whether there will be more demands in the future. Yesenia’s boyfriend has already told her that “When I get married, I don’t want my wife to work. I want to take care of her and have her stay home full-time with my kids.” Yesenia is charmed by her fella’s work ethic, and admits to finding some aspects of his traditionalism to be appealing, even seductive; at the same time, she has genuine professional aspirations, as does Lori. Both of these women like wearing weather-appropriate clothing when it’s warm; both enjoy friendships with men and women alike. And both wanted some help in processing through their conflicts about culture, romance, and control.
I understand why some men worry about the threat that other men pose to their female loved ones. I understand insecurity, jealousy, and the longing to protect, and I know well that the first two emotions often hide behind the language of the third. For men, the solution to the anxiety about what other men are thinking and planning lies in holding oneself — and one’s male friends — strictly accountable. When a man treats all women with respect, regardless of their dress or behavior, and when he challenges other men to do the same, his confidence in his own ability to self-regulate grows. 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. The best way to understand that the male weakness is a myth is to live a life in emphatic, public opposition to that pernicious narrative. It is, after all, axiomatic that those men who are most worried about the threat other men pose are those who have the greatest doubts about their own private capacity for self-control.
Yesenia and Lori asked for my advice, and they got it. I urged them to think carefully before complying with what I, frankly, see as wildly unreasonable and potentially dangerous requests. I told them that a change in dress and a greater willingness to avoid contact with other men would likely not assuage the anxiety and jealousy that their beaux feel. When these fellas find that they are still worried about their girlfriends, they will almost certainly begin to make other demands: to give into another’s jealousy and insecurity is to slide down a slippery slope. What lies at the bottom of that slope is, all too often, nightmarish and miserable.
For so many of us, are greatest challenge in any romantic relationship is to learn what it means to trust. Trust is the sine qua non of real love; fear and control are its greatest enemies. To love another adult is to do more than trust that their own intentions are good; to love another adult is to honor their own capacity to set boundaries and protect themselves from harm. Men in particular do well to learn that lesson. As for women, they do well to become very clear that there is nothing romantic, sweet, or honorable about jealousy or the desire to control. The sooner that lesson is learned, the greater the potential for joy, and the lesser the potential for misery.
Not to mention, these requests aren’t usually made politely. The types of men who feel these requests are appropriate in the first place often try to enforce them with intimidation, anger, and threats (such as threatening to break up with the woman if she sees her male friend again).
After my brush with these sort of people, I’ve found the most effective way of dealing with it is just by getting out of the situation completely. Control freaks don’t usually lose their desire to control when faced with resistance; it just makes them try all that much harder.
Hugo,
I’m impressed your students come to you for advice on personal matters. That would have been the last thing I’d discuss with a professor. I guess that’s a big compliment.
“From a feminist standpoint, controlling what women wear or whom they speak with is a practice to be abhorred”
… unless they’re not wearing anything and engage in porn, right ;)?
As for the rest of the article - I basically agree with what you write, yet I’m a little confused that you would allow yourself jealousy if your wife cheated on you by having sex, but do not allow the other guys to be jealous about something they may possibly consider to be a similar activity.
“Let me say this very clearly: the kind of jealousy that seeks to control non-sexual friendships or clothing choices is deeply and profoundly unhealthy and indefensible.”
I don’t know these guys, I disagree with their point of view, I’d even question if they’re really jealous and not just complying with cultural demands, but if they are truly jealous, I think you’re unfairly discrediting their emotions, just because *you* happen not to be jealous when your wife is having lunch with someone else - and that is making an arbitrary standard (yours) an absolute standard, which is wrong. If “cheating” is the violation of trust, then the relevant standard for that violation must be negotiated between the trusting parties.
Personally, I agree with your standard, and I’d think it’s a good one, but I’d not be willing to suggest that it’s the ONLY standard possible.
And there one thing I really don’t understand is why most of your posts about men make me feel bad about myself (as a man). I’m not sure what it is, but it’s something in the way you write that really makes me defensive even when I agree with the gist of what you say. Can’t really pin it down though.
Personally, in both cases, I’d take Dan Savage’s advice for cases like these: DTMFA.
The worst part of the myth of male weakness is that it gives license for the men to engage in behavior they wouldn’t tolerate in their partners. If he cheats, he’ll blame the other woman.
These women probably know older couples where the men are like their boyfriends. Ask them if they want to end up like those men’s wives down the road.
Anthony and B, agreed. Sam, as you probably know, when it comes to porn, my focus has always been on changing the consumer while improving the conditions for sex workers — social ills are often best solved by focusing on demand rather than supply.
I think it’s absurd to suggest an equivalence between actual infidelity and wearing short skirts; I recognize some folks may feel that way. I would be jealous if my wife made a clear and conscious decision to, despite our vows, be sexually or romantically intimate with another person. The anger would arise from a violation of a promise made more than anything else; Lori and Yesenia have hardly promised anything that is being compromsied by their bare legs and male friends. I just don’t see these as remotely comparable.
“I told them that a change in dress and a greater willingness to avoid contact with other men would likely not assuage the anxiety and jealousy that their beaux feel. When these fellas find that they are still worried about their girlfriends, they will almost certainly begin to make other demands: to give into another’s jealousy and insecurity is to slide down a slippery slope. What lies at the bottom of that slope is, all too often, nightmarish and miserable.”
No men aren’t weak at all. Rather they are immature, deeply insecure, and at the same time both childish and dangerous. Any protective signs they exhibit towards loved ones are really just a deceptive gloss over what is really a deeply pathological need to dominate and abuse. Men really need to have this claim made in their defense.
The best advice you can give these young woman is to dump these guys, and seek out boyfriends that could care less how they dress, and could care less who they have their friendly “platonic’ lunches and dinners with. Men who have so little invested in their affections that they are blissfully indifferent to the presence of male friends, and eventually even lovers. In other words - players.
“But when my wife goes out to lunch or dinner with male colleagues and clients, or wears a flattering, skin-tight outfit, I have no business getting jealous.”
Suppose she is having lunch almost every day with a friend, and maybe one night when you’d like to have dinner, you find out she’d promised to have dinner with X instead. Now she may not be sleeping with him (Of course you’ll take her word on this. No even better, you won;t ask or even show the slightest concern about it - after all that might seem “weak” or controlling). No, she just likes having a friend, someone who can advise her, from a male perspective, about her relationship with you. Someone who she can talk to about your moods, and help her to understand where to draw the boundaries in your relationship. Maybe her friend is a Salvadorian, or an Armenian man. Maybe that raises some anxiety because you realize they may have been raised within a very Patriarchical culture. Still, you keep any such concerns to yourself, because, after all you are not going to buy into any of those nasty ethnic stereotypes, and you know, deep down inside that these men are fully able to resist the charms that mean so much to you. You see your wife taking lots of time preparing herself for those “friendly” dinners, making sure her makeup is just right, trying on dress after dress, trying to get exactly the right look - still, you are not jealous at all. Not even a little bit. Because who your wife chooses to have dinner (and dinner, and dinner) talks with, and how she dresses when she goes out is really none of your business. The fact that she chooses to spend (clearly much anticipated) time with some knuckle-dragging Patriarch, rather than an intellectual, staunchly pro-feminist professor, and the fact that she obsesses over what to wear for these “chats” means nothing. You have the security of knowing her heart will always belong to the man who is strong enough to remain completely indifferent about what she does, who she does it with, and how she chooses to dress while doing it.
Well said, Sweating Through Fog! Here are two things I have been thinking about in connection with this thread. One: it seems just a little weird for college girls to be seeking the advice of a forty-something married man about their 20-year-old boyfriends. Second: maybe these girls really do need to dress in a more appropriate, less-revealing manner.
I have some real problems with this post.
1. You assert that it’s “healthy” to exert control over your partner’s sexual activity, but not her sartorial or social activity.
Can you support this distinction? I’m not sure you can.
If these girls want the freedom to wear what they want and spend time with whom they want, then they need to stand up to — or dump — these guys. But I don’t particularly see a distinction in kind (rather than degree) between the two types of control. Just because you’ve made a particular deal with your wife that you’d rather she didn’t betray doesn’t mean that everyone else is obliged to make the same deal.
2. In practice, my relationships tend to conform to more or less the same standard you set for yourself, although I can imagine circumstances in which I might find my partner’s outfit embarrassingly revealing or otherwise inappropriate in a way that reflects poorly on me. I suspect that the same is true of you, and that you’re not being entirely honest on this count. This has much more to do with social norms than “jealousy” per se, and if I were Armenian, perhaps my standards would be different. It would be hard to be married to a woman who made a habit of appearing in her underwear in public, not because I think it makes her sexually available, but because it’s socially awkward.
3. “Jealousy” is used to describe a number of different phenomena. What has these young men bent out of shape sounds like a combination of several different insecurities: the fear of being perceived as a cuckold, the fear of his girlfriend being perceived as a “slut”, the fear of his girlfriend being perceived as romantically available, the fear of their relationship being perceived as insufficiently serious, the fear of their relationship being perceived as one in which he has insufficient leverage over her to curb her flirtation, the fear of his girlfriend having sex with someone else, the fear of his girlfriend falling in love with someone else, the fear of his girlfriend leaving him, the fear of his girlfriend using her associations with other men as leverage in negotiations in their relationship, etc, etc.
Are any of these fears legitimate? I guess it depends on which social and psychological forces you consider legitimate bases for decision-making.
Personally, of course, I’d find these demands a bit laughable, but different strokes for different folks. Some people like to get tied up or get ordered around by their partners. Whatever turns you on. If these women aren’t into it, they should dump the guys, and if the guys get dumped on this basis often enough they might start to realize that their standards are a little ridiculous.
But of course, these women are asking you whether they should be “into it”, so I suppose my position doesn’t really answer the question. I suppose two questions I might pose to them would be:
a. Do you think relationships should be equal? Are these men willing to restrict their own behavior to the same degree? What about changing their behavior in response to some insecurity of yours?
b. Do you think these insecurities reflect something that will get better over time, or worse?
Hugo, coming at this not from a feminist, but from a psychological angle, I’ve seen male behavior like this often as the first step into a codependent relationship. In other words, these women are asked to “own” their boyfriends’ feelings, and if they don’t, there may be/ will be repercussions. As we say in German: “Vorsicht ist die Mutter der Porzellankiste!”
For those who are suggesting that maybe there really is something wrong with how these girls are dressing, here’s a thought:
The boyfriends therefore should not ask someone out on a date (or agree to one when asked) if they already think they dress inappropriately. Instead, they should choose to ask someone out who already fits their image of what they want their mate to look like. Problem solved. Unfortunately, both men and women have this philosophy of dating someone who’s partially acceptable to them and then trying to force them to be someone they’re not. Dating, in the beginning, is all about answering the question, “Is this person right for me?” If that answer is “No” for whatever reason, it’s far better to end things instead of taking the next step and becoming more serious with them while intending to “fix” them.
Furthermore, having jealous feelings and requiring your mate to alter their behavior to make you feel better are two different things. Instead, regardless of your gender, conquering your own fears is a much better way to deal with it than by bullying someone into artificial behavior.
Hugo, if the subject comes up again, you might want to caution your students that there will always be guys like Warren and Sweating Through Fog who are convinced that the opposite of control-freakery is indifference.
And somehow I think that if Hugo were reporting on male students whose “traditional” girlfriends demanded they stop talking to other women, started dressing more conservatively, and started thinking about jobs that made them a lot more money, that we wouldn’t see so many dismissive commments.
These guys are testing. Right now their girlfriends can walk away and find a new guy. A girlfriend who will give in and be compliant at this stage in the relationship sure as hell isn’t going to put up a fuss when they’re engaged, or married, and the stakes of rebellion are higher. That’s how abusers work.
That type of controlling behavior is a giant red flag for me. If a guy tried it, I’d probably have one honest conversation about it. The second time would be the end of the relationship.
Hugo, not knowing the people involved, I can’t say for sure what their motivations and preconceptions are as to tradition, culture, and assumptions about choice and agency. That being said, I’m not sure that this story shoehorns so perfectly on the narrative of assumed male weakness, or if it does, that may need to be clarified a bit.
I wouldn’t necessarily assume that any man that would have an affair with an attached or married woman is necessarily “weak”. He’s making his choice, or not, as opportunity presents. It doesn’t necessarily assume or imply weakness to expect that a man, assuming that he is available and not in a committed relationship, will take the opportunity with a woman, even if married or in a relationship, who has made herself available. She has the autonomy and choice whether or not to respect her relationship and her significant other.
Assuming agency and free-choice on the part of all parties, possibly a radical notion that, the question could be asked about the intentions that people signal by their social relationships and behavior. The behavior of the boyfriends of your students does sound unreasonable and quite probably is the prelude to more controlling behavior down the road. That doesn’t rule out that people may very reasonably be made uncomfortable or suspicious by the behavior and appearance of a significant other that could be taken to signify sexual availability or invite advances. This is an extreme example, but were I to start spending 15 hours a week in the gym, $100 a month on haircuts, wearing my best to work, occasionally forgetting my wedding ring in the morning (it might get lost on the job!), and spending a good deal of my non-work time in the company of single, available women without her, such behavior would likely be cause for some concern and suspicion on the part of Mrs. Tom as to my intentions. She, and any outside observer, would be unlikely to credit any protestations of innocence or declarations of autonomy on my part. (Perhaps they’d be operating under the myth of male weakness themselves. j/k) Were she to exhibit equivalent behaviors, I’d be suspicious as well, and would consider suspicion justifiable.
Sweating Through Fog, if my boyfriend (or girlfriend, though that’s not presently applicable) did that, I’d be sad that they were choosing to spend all their free time with someone other than me, but that’s the extent of it. My boyfriend has told me the same regarding me. But then again, we actually say what we mean when we’re talking to each other.
“These guys are testing. Right now their girlfriends can walk away and find a new guy. A girlfriend who will give in and be compliant at this stage in the relationship sure as hell isn’t going to put up a fuss when they’re engaged, or married, and the stakes of rebellion are higher. That’s how abusers work.”
Exactly. And the people who make excuses or try to justify this kind of controlling behavior when it surfaces in the beginning of a relationship are the very same ones who tend to ask why victims of abuse “didn’t see it coming.”
Mythago,
“And somehow I think that if Hugo were reporting on male students whose “traditional” girlfriends demanded they stop talking to other women, started dressing more conservatively, and started thinking about jobs that made them a lot more money, that we wouldn’t see so many dismissive commments.”
The chance that Hugo would take any truly sympathetic view of a man’s position vs. a vs. a women and characterize any woman’s behavior towards her male partner as unreasonably controlling, is nil. Hugo doesn’t care how women treat men - it just isn’t important to him.
“These guys are testing….That’s how abusers work.”
So in you’re view, when woman have expectations and boundaries, it is just a matter of having standards. When men have expectations and boundaries, it is at best blackmail, and almost always the precursor to abuse.
“Hugo, if the subject comes up again, you might want to caution your students that there will always be guys like Warren and Sweating Through Fog who are convinced that the opposite of control-freakery is indifference.”
Hugo, you need to point out to Mythago that indifference is the appropriate attitude towards those who demonstrate that they value your affections and feelings less than their absolute independence, and who treat any request to consider your feelings as the first step towards an abusive relationship.
Like all of our emotions, jealousy can be a helpful and/or harmful emotion. I think we all can list the various harms caused by jealousy. But what about its helpful aspects, it can motivate someone to grow in their relationship when it is being threatened by outsiders.
In one study, 93% of American men and 82% of women said they had been the recipient of someone else’s attentions while in a romantic relationship. And 87% of men and 88% of women believed that they had been the victim of someone who tried to lure away their partner. Also 53% of men and 41% of women reported having had a romantic partner lured away by a rival.
Mild forms of jealousy can provide signals to our partners about the strength of our love and commitment. Sometimes people intentionally evoke jealousy in partners by flirting with others precisely to test their love. A lot of people interpret a complete absence of jealousy as a sign of a lack of love. Jealousy sometimes reignites desire in relationships whose romance has cooled over time.
Mythago,
“And somehow I think that if Hugo were reporting on male students whose “traditional” girlfriends demanded they stop talking to other women, started dressing more conservatively, and started thinking about jobs that made them a lot more money, that we wouldn’t see so many dismissive commments.”
That may well be so. But in a reverse-gener case I think the gist of post would have been: “True eros means being able to control yourself and your eyeballs, which most men have never learnt and cannot be reasonably expected to do from the girlfriend’s perspective, so her request to stop interacting (flirting!) may be reasonable. Besides, men today have it far too easy anyway, being Peter Pan in the “unholy trifecta of porn, pot and video games”, so they should be grateful their girlfriend cares enough about them to lead them in the right direction. And if she even gives fashion advice, they should truly hold on to her!”
Too farfetched? That said, I still think Hugo is right that it’s utterly inappropriate to control people in that way. And I also think you’re right these guys are testing. If I were the girls, I’d dump them. But love or it’s early stage neurophysical substitute is hardly ever rational…
Hugo doesn’t care how women treat men - it just isn’t important to him.
Then I’m puzzled - why are you HERE?
Women can be controlling abusers, too. I’ve seen it. But Hugo writes from a certain perspective. That doesn’t mean he thinks all other perspectives are invalid. I think a lot of his posts that target men can really be targeted to both genders. Because everyone is entitled to their autonomy within a relationship without the other partner dictating their behaviors. Male or female. Obviously the students who came to Hugo came from cultural backgrounds where men are the controlling partners more often than the women are, and so he responded in kind.
Seriously, outside of some pretty extreme behavior (such as the emotional affair that Sweating brought up in his first post, which is far, far beyond the normal, respectful having lunch with male friends, and therefore doesn’t even apply to the situation Hugo described), there’s no reason to expect the person you picked to date to change just to suit your desires. And if they DO have an affair, emotional or otherwise, or do something else that you feel disrespects you, JUST LEAVE. There’s no reason to stick around with a partner who’s making you miserable. You picked them for your partner, and now you can choose otherwise as well.
B
“Then I’m puzzled - why are you HERE?”
Because I have mixed feelings about feminism. I have some sympathy for it, some concerns about it, and, like many men, I have great stake in its success - I have daughters. On the other hand, because I have a son, it is important to me that the success of feminism doesn’t create hatred against men, and injustice towards men. I come to this site, and comment here, because so many other major feminist sites are, in my view, just hate sites. It is also unusual among feminist sites because, within certain bounds, differing views get treated with respect. It is not an echo chamber.
Besides, quite often I agree with what Hugo says! And i try and read everything Gonz writes!
“Obviously the students who came to Hugo came from cultural backgrounds where men are the controlling partners more often than the women are”
True. But let’s not forget that the young woman may have cultural concerns as well. The men, because of their culture, may see their girlfriend’s behavior as a possible threat to their honor. On the other hand, the women, students of Hugo, have one foot in western, feminist culture that has the view that any compromise with men is a one-way ticket to the battered women’s shelter, or the morgue. The males may wonder what their male friends will think if they don’t control their women. The women may wonder what their female friends will think if they seem to give in, and change their behavior. So there are two sets of cultural influences in play here, not one. It is just that to us, our culture is “invisible” - it just seems like the right order of things. So this just seems to me like young, immature people worrying about what their friends will think of their partners, and making that the primary consideration in the relationship.
“There’s no reason to stick around with a partner who’s making you miserable. You picked them for your partner, and now you can choose otherwise as well.”
Amen.
Come again? Why exactly is anyone arguing that trying to forbid your girl friend from having lunch with any male coworkers is remotely like not wanting to sleep with someone who’s also having sex with other people? Have any of you guys considered how your job networking prospects, and your career, would be dented if you couldn’t have lunch with any male colleagues*? And not even just one-on-one lunches with male colleagues, though that would be bad enough; Hugo’s describing a woman who’s now feeling guilty when she goes out in public with several male colleagues at once. Hardly anything remotely resembling an emotional affair.
Some levels of jealousy may be negotiable among couples, no right or wrong involved, different standards for different people and you sort yourself with the people whose ways of monitoring fidelity match yours. But I think there are a few red flags that say certain kinds of jealousy are out of whack, and not something one should get involved in. And rules that would cut into your ability to build your career, keep in touch with former coworkers so you have contacts if layoffs should hit, etc., are way too controlling to be tolerated, and not OK, period. Likewise any time sauce for the goose isn’t also sauce for the gander. And there can be other red flags. Not all levels of jealousy are OK.
* I’m deliberately making the example male colleagues, rather than female ones, because men tend to control most of the jobs in my field, so being able to have work lunches with women only does not get me the same level of work contacts that a guy gets from being able to have lunches with men only.
Did you make that reducto ad absurdam yourself? It has that nice homemade touch. Trying to compromise with controlling abusers is, indeed, dangerous–whether you’re male or female. Portraying a demand that one’s partner give up her job after marriage, or stop meeting with members of the opposite sex in public, as “compromise” is disingenuous.
As for culture, US culture certainly encourages women to ignore red flags in relationships. They’re just different ones. It is only recently that ’stalker’ started to be less part of our romantic ideal.
Mythago,
Go back and read Hugo’s post again. Hugo did not say her boyfriend “demanded” anything - the word Hugo used was “requested”. Hugo did not say her boyfriend “demanded” she stay home if they were to marry. Hugo said her boyfriend told her “I want to take care of her and have her stay home…” Not a demand but a statement of what he is looking for, one she is quite free to take a pass on. Making requests of your partner, and stating clearly what type of relationship you are looking for, is not necessarily a sign of a controlling abuser.
I’m a little dubious about the framing of this issue as being mostly about “other cultures” — if the post was the same except that it starred two WASP girls with WASP boyfriends, I wouldn’t have batted an eye.
Sweating Through Fog,
Yes, that’s how HUGO worded it, but I’ve dated guys like this. Read my very first comment under the post. If the “requests” start out polite, they don’t stay that way for long once the abuser realizes that his girlfriend is going to do things her way. Women who have been in this situation recognize the red flags immediately.
There are differences between making requests of your partner and trying to control them. The biggest sign of control is trying to change their partner into someone they’re not. When you start dating someone new, you’re dating someone who has a whole life that they created before knowing you. They bring a whole package - male friends, a certain style of dressing, their job, etc. When a partner starts going through the new significant other’s life and tries to start making revisions, that’s an attempt to control. Because as I said earlier, the logical route here would be to say, “Okay, I don’t like this person as they are, therefore I should break up with them and find someone who is right for me.”
Making a request for them to change would make more sense if they begin changing their habits after you’ve been dating for a while. Because then you’re not getting what you originally signed up for. In that case, you certainly can let them know how the change bothers you and ask if there’s a solution. And if they say no, well, then it’s time to decide if that’s a deal breaker.
That’s how a healthy person works. The type of guys that Hugo’s discussing here - they are not healthy. Luckily, in my experience, they are also not representative of most men. But they exist, and they’re scary because they’re not playing by any logical rules. They just want to dominate.
I tried to keep this mostly gender neutral because it works both ways. I know women who started dating a guy preparing to “fix” them - all they need is a new haircut, a new wardrobe, find a more ambitious job, stop hanging out with those friends so much, etc. It’s just not healthy, and it stems from something deeper than the actual haircut and clothing.
I would allow for some possibility that these particular (young) men are being influenced by their culture or by their male peers/elders, to enact a ritual of control. (Maybe one of their older brothers said “how can you let your girlfriend run around in such short skirts”).
Given that they like the guy, and that it’s certainly plausible that the guy is being influenced by others, I think a forthright conversation about it might be reasonable before simply running in the other direction. If the women say - I’m not going to change what I wear, because I know how to draw boundaries that respect our relationship; or I’m not interested in my co-workers as romantic partners, and I gain XYZ from going to lunch with them, so no, I’m not going to stop doing that - the guy’s reaction is going to tell them A LOT. If he flies off the handle, then DTMFA, but if he understands or looks at it in a new way, everyone grows.
This is the perfect time to find out if these couples can communicate about important, emotional, serious topics. And if these guys respect their girlfriends’ opinions enough to listen genuinely to them, or if they just want to dictate the way the relationship is going to be.
yet a professor who comes from outside either of these societies must find a way to make that point in a way that is culturally sensitive.
One way in which to do this is to be frank about the fact that WASP culture also replicates this dynamic. That it is very common for WASP men to want girlfriends to “dress down” and stop having male friends or attending workplace gatherings that include men; that it is also common for WASP women to be raised in families that see this type of behavior as positive—a sign that “he cares”.
Come on, Hugo! Please! The “my culture is so much more feminist and advanced than your culture” line is damn tired after so many decades. You know better than this.
My advice to these young women would be to take the hard line–this is who I am, this is how I dress, this is the direction my life is going in, and if you accept that, great. If you don’t accept that, it’s best we go our separate ways. I’m working hard in school and on the job in order to have a future, the same as you. If this—me—isn’t the kind of woman you want in a future wife, well then, you don’t want me.
I don’t know if the young men these women are involved with are future abusers, or if they are just following the (universal cultural) script also. Maybe they would be relieved to be able to abandon that script themselves. Maybe not. But it does need to be said, out loud. Like mythago said, better to find out now than later. You’ll put up with more from a spouse than a boyfriend. Now’s the time to find out if they need to DTMFA.
And Hugo? Let me know when you want a grand tour of flyover country to observe your fellow WASPs in their midwestern habitat. This “jealous” behavior isn’t limited to us “swarthy” types, y’know.
La Lubu and Stentor, I referenced culture because time and again, I hear “push-back” from my Armenian, Latin, and Asian students that this sort of behavior is part and parcel of their ethnic group’s expectations. You’re right that WASPs, as a whole, are no less immune from jealousy and controlling behavior than anyone else, of course. The problem is, my students often connect what I say to my class and ethnic background, which — no matter my attempts to disguise it — seems so different from many of theirs. I’ve learned that making sweeping generalizations about universality tend not to work well.
B,
I think we’re in general agreement. It’s usually not a good idea to try and change people after you start dating, and it seems to me this would be a deal breaker - on both sides.
My general problem with this post is the sweeping generalization it makes. Rather than just say these young people might not be right for each other, people need to place a dark, sinister narrative on it. Instead of just advising the young women to be true to themselves, and either work something out or leave, the young women are told to literally run for their lives. Because any signs of anxiety he shows about where he stands in your affections, or any avowal that he wants to devote his life to protecting and caring for you means that your suitor is some sort of sociopath.
Controlling? I’m basically an asocial slob, and my wife thrives in social gatherings. I’m introverted, she is gregarious. There are certain social gatherings I’m expected to attend, and she makes it very clear to me what I’m expected to wear. If I don’t attend, or dress like a slob, she loses face among her friends, because while they got their husbands to attend, she didn’t. So it there is some power and control there - my behavior and dress has some affect on her social standing. Does she “demand” I go? No it is a request, and I take requests from someone I love very seriously. This is one of the things I do for her. Her happiness is of primary importance to me, and so I surrender some of my autonomy.
Now, were I to put some sinister narrative on this, I’d see this as fraught with danger. Allowing her to control who I socialize with, and how I dress, and being put in the position of some trophy she can use to demonstrate her control, is but the first step in a downward spiral of orders of protection, allegations of abuse, onerous child support payments, and having her run me over with her car. It would be silly.
So why do we - in our little Hugo-blog culture - tend to gravitate towards the most sinister narratives whenever there is a man involved?
So why do we - in our little Hugo-blog culture - tend to gravitate towards the most sinister narratives whenever there is a man involved?
I think because, in sitautions like this post, women come to Hugo with questions because something bothers them. If the boyfriend had requested that the girlfriend stop wearing skirts, and she wasn’t bothered by it, she wouldn’t have asked Hugo for his opinion. But something about it sent up a red flag for her.
I also think that comparing your long-term relationship to the situations Hugo is blogging about is a little bit of an apple/orange situation. From what I can tell from your post, you and your wife have a history of negotiating on this subject and you’ve both reached a solution that doesn’t bother either of you. She accepts you in all your asocial slobbness and you accept her social nature. She’s not trying to change you, but seems to be saying, “Hey, in this situation, help me out.”
The girls in Hugo’s post are, in his words, “very much in the early stages of the romance.” They’re not targeting certain situations (”When you meet my parents, could you wear a longer skirt? They’re very old fasioned”) but wanting to make sweeping changes. Unlike your marriage, they haven’t accepted their partner for who they are - they’re trying to make them acceptable. And that’s what makes it sinister.
Or, old fashioned, too.
And I just wanted to add (I wish these comments had editing capabilities), it’s not just partner-making-request-of-another-partner that’s giving off red flags. It’s the type of requests and the responses to the meaning and acceptability of jealousy that the women’s families and blog visitors are giving.
Not showing their legs and not talking to other men - the combination of prohibitions is worrisome. If the boyfriend feels like he needs to protect her - why? Can’t she protect herself? Aren’t both she and the men who see/talk to her capable of restraining themselves from bad behavior? Does being in a relationship mean that all contact with the opposite gender is now unreasonable, and is the woman not capable of deciding which contacts are reasonable and which aren’t? These requests are policing behavior, they aren’t similar to your wife asking you to join her for her engagements.
Furthermore, the ideas presented by many people that this policing behavior “just means he loves you” is sinister, to use your word. You said you have daughters - I obviously don’t know anything about them, but if at the age of 14, one of them suddenly stopped her beloved ballet classes because her new boyfriend wanted her to spend all that time with him, would you tell her, “Well, if he wanted you continue your classes, that would mean he doesn’t care about spending time with you. Be glad he cares so much that he doesn’t want to share you with anything or anyone else”? We wouldn’t get jealous if we didn’t care, but the absense of jealously does not mean there is an absense of caring.
“So why do we - in our little Hugo-blog culture - tend to gravitate towards the most sinister narratives whenever there is a man involved?”
I blame the patriarchy… and sexual reproduction ;).
B,
I take your point about the difference between requests to make sweeping changes, vs. requests to make targeted changes, and how a history of commitment makes negotiation easier. Very true observation.
My only quibble is whether by sinister you are referring to the men, or the request. In my view sinister means manipulative and dangerous. In the absence of any specific information about these men, I see no reason to consider them thusly. They might be manipulative, or then again they might be confused, and unable to identify what is really important to them. They might have a very clear idea of what they want, and if the young women move on, the men will just look for someone else, with nary a second thought. The men might be devastated by her rejection, spend years being depressed, but ultimately grow from the experience. They might be cold, ruthless tyrants, spotting a mark, and anticipating years of slow, incremental torment. They might be wise beyond their years, and somehow realize, through close attention to their love, that deep down inside that these women might indeed be happier embracing their traditional culture. Maybe all it takes is a gentle push? The men might be right in this, they might be wrong; they might be genuinely loving, or just narcissistic. They may need the stark reality of her rejection to see that they loved her far more than they care about their culture, or what their family thinks.
Now, if my sinister you meant a deceptive lure, some bait that these woman might accept, but regret later - for whatever reason - that we can agree with. She may make all the changes he wants, he may be the model of a loving devoted husband, but she discovers in her heart that she gave up something more precious even that his love. That’s the danger of taking the wrong path for yourself.
So who the hell knows? I see no need to make dark opera about this. You can leave someone without claiming they are sinister; you can decide a person isn’t right for you without insisting you barely escaped with your life.
B,
Regarding your second point, on the sinister nature of jealousy, I equally mock cultural attitudes that claim that jealousy is the true mark of love, and Hugo’s attitude that any expression of jealousy by men, except in cases of sexual betrayal, is the sure sign of a manipulative male sociopath.
I would tell my daughter that her boyfriend’s wanting to spend time with her is a good thing. His wanting her to spend all her time with him is excessive. Her wanting to accede to his request is unwise. I would not tell her that I think her little admirer is “testing” her, to see if she is a suitable candidate for a lifetime of hell.
Were it not for the cultural thing, I’d say he’s not up to her. Lose him.
I recall a Saudi man watching a girl’s soccer game (juco) and getting angry at the women. They were strong, free, spit-in-your-eye, good athletes, attractive in the perfectly healthy and vigorous way on top of being attractive in the usual fashion.
He was angry IMO because he saw himself approaching them and getting rejected, if not laughed off.
He had nothing going for him but a bank account, which aren’t that hard to find in this country, and he knew it.
Ideally, and more so in the US than most other places, a man has to impress a woman and an impressive woman is even more difficult to impress (as being personally attractive in the many ways that interest her). It was not his culture that he had to work to attract a woman.
This is an exaggerated case, of course, yet probably relates to Hugo’s situation.
This guy needs to control the woman or he feels outclassed. He is outclassed and knows it, so….
Add to that the cultural baggage and this is a bad deal.
Having said that, this is, as Sweating says, the place to say goodbyefarewellaufwiedersehnsolong. Not to start on a novel of satanic obsession. Just good bye. No reason need be given, no argument need be won. Just, “no chemistry”. Sorry, sport.
Hugo, I’m not denying that there are differences in culture between different ethnic groups. What I am saying, is that the propensity of boyfriends to start micromanaging their girlfriends’ wardrobes and friends and the propensity of those girlfriends (and their family and/friends)to see jealous behavior as a sign of caring is not one of them. (do I really need to bring out the “but I have WASP friends!!” card out?)
This is the sentence I have problems with:
But it’s clear that certain ethnic groups — in this case, Armenians and Salvadorans — are more willing than others to associate male jealousy with evidence of love and care.
I’ve heard that all my life about my people, from your people. So, when you say “more willing than others”, if you weren’t absolving your own people, whose were you absolving?
The fact is, those young women aren’t the only ones negotiating the transition from youth to full adulthood, while simulaneously negotiating barriers of class, race, ethnicity, and assimilation. Their partners are too. It is possible that their partners are just following the script, the same way “Lori” quietly stopped wearing skirts. Or not. Remember, there could be some class conflict going on too. These young women are in college. Probably with the goal of a nice, white-collar job at the end of the rainbow. Some men take issue with women who outpace them in earning power or educational advancement (trust me—when I was going through the apprenticeship program, I had to dig my textbooks out of the dumpster more than once after the ongoing “you think you’re hot shit/you think you’re better than me!” arguments with my ex-husband, emphasis on “ex”. It’s a common problem for working-class women who marry young and seek better job opportunities. I first started telling the dumpster story as a way of illustrating how outrageous my ex was, but the most common response wasn’t “what a weirdo” but “ha! mine did that too!”)
Hugo, you gave them the correct advice. Next time, add the following: an admission that this is a problem for your culture too (if you can’t think of any personal illustrations offhand, think about pop cultural references—there’s plenty of examples of this dynamic there), and you may want to reference the questioner to someone who has more personal experience negotiating the specific barrier. It might be more meaningful for “Lori” and “Yesenia” to hear the take of a female professor (or other mentor) who shared their background.
Admitting that white guys do this too will deflect any thinking that “well, that’s what works for WASPs, but it won’t work for me.” Hearing from other women who’ve already negotiated the barriers these young women are working through will drive home the idea their choices are put up, shut up, or abandon their culture. Those of us who aren’t WASPs get to hear often enough how much “progress” you folks have made in the realm of feminism, and how much “regress” our cultures represent. It meant the world to me to hear from feminists from my own background; I’m thinking the same would probably be true for Lori and Yesenia.
And if you’re looking for an example from WASP culture - look no further than purity balls and all that “stumbling block” nonsense.
I would not tell her that I think her little admirer is “testing” her, to see if she is a suitable candidate for a lifetime of hell.
I think it was Mythago who used the word “testing” - I don’t even know if I agree with the idea this word evokes - that it’s a conscious act that they do for the purpose of seeing if they can get away with more later on. I DO believe that it will never stop, though - there isn’t going to be a limited number of demands that finally soothes the person’s jealousy and brings an end to the controlling behavior.
La Lubu, fair enough — I do try, whenever possible, to “hook up” those whom I mentor with other possible mentors who share the mentees’ sex and culture. You’re absolutely right that that does help enormously.
SWF, I did indeed read Hugo’s post — the whole thing. Please explain to me why “stop having lunch in a public place with a group of male co-workers” is a reasonable ‘request’.
What would you tell her, just out of curiosity, about why it is ‘unwise’ for her to give in?
It’s not necessarily conscious, and it’s to see how the other person is going to react to “stop doing this/do that because I am jealous”. If they accede, then you know what you can get away with, and you can see if you can get further next time. Even little children know this technique.
Mythago,
“Please explain to me why “stop having lunch in a public place with a group of male co-workers” is a reasonable ‘request’.”
I don’t have enough information to make a judgment. She may have a romantic history with some of these coworkers. There may be bad blood between her boyfriend and these coworkers - he may know they have contempt for him, and those lunches raise doubts in him about whether his girlfriend shares that contempt. She might be flirting, keeping a court of admirers on simmer, so she can make a quick switch if the opportunity arises. The “request” might be made with clenched fists, or the “request” might be a simple statement that says that it tears him up inside to see him with these other men, because he is afraid he’ll lose her. It may seem like a demand to her, because she senses this feeling is too intense for him to get over. She might be afraid not of beatings and abuse, but that this feeling will make it impossible for him to stay with her, and she fears losing him. It might be a specific concern over these particular coworkers, or a free-floating panic that she is secretly is testing him - seeing how far she can go with relative strangers, and preparing him for a lifetime of painful betrayal. And yes, he might be testing her.
Depending on the circumstances, it might be a reasonable request, it might not. Like I said - who the hell knows? I’d trust Hugo, who knows far more, to offer sound advice.
“What would you tell her, just out of curiosity, about why it is ‘unwise’ for her to give in?”
The way the question was framed, she is 14, and giving up something she clearly loves in order to spend all her time with him. It is generally unwise to narrow your scope in life, and commit so much to a person at such a young age.
Hugo,
I basically agree with what you wrote, and in the unlikely event that I ever was asked a similar question I suspect I’d offer similar advice.
But playing the devil’s advocate briefly, I wonder about the clothing part (set aside the conversations).
In our culture, wearing “a flattering, skin-tight outfit” is acceptable; in some it is not. But there are lines in our culture too. Would you be upset if your wife went out topless? Because — if National Geographic is to be believed — there are certainly cultures where that’s normal. And there are certainly cultures that see going out in a “a flattering, skin-tight outfit” as just as shocking as we would see going out topless.
Incidentally, I am certainly not saying that you *should* be upset; I’d like to think that in that situation I wouldn’t be upset at all, although who knows. Because, as I said, I agree with you: men shouldn’t control women’s clothing choices. But it’s easier to say when imagining things that violate another’s culture than imagining things that violate one’s own. So to be fair I think we should imagine the latter. Although, again, I’d agree that we should have the same reaction.
What do you think?
SF
Steven, toplessness is illegal for women in Los Angeles County at all but a handful of beaches. It would be a massive violation of all social norms if my wife went to work topless, and it would also be a misdemeanor, and I would be gravely concerned about her decision to violate the law so flagrantly. On the other hand, if we were in a part of the world where a great many people were topless, it wouldn’t bother me in the least if my wife did so. But in Los Angeles, revealing clothing is legal and widely accepted — and an objection to that is worlds apart than an objection to illegal nudity.
It is generally unwise to narrow your scope in life, and commit so much to a person at such a young age.
Is it a good idea at any age? Going back to you and your wife, you said she loves being social, which is not something that you share. But she didn’t give that up to be married to you - she still gets to do something she loves while being committed to you.
But now I’m veering off topic, as the idea of preserving the things that make you separate people while still fully committing yourselves to each other doesn’t have much to do with jealousy (unless, of course, one IS a jealous, co-dependant type who can’t handle that).
Some people do feel that jealousy, rather than indifference is a sign of devotion or interest. I do know that jealousy is a normal reaction to a perceived threat of pair-bonding and everyone struggles with it at some time or another. As far as her attire choices, if her dress code is suitable to the situation and not provocative and out-of-place then I think it is all about his issues, insecurity and a type of control tactic. I don’t know about her co-workers–if it truly is platonic relationship and not romantic, then I see the request as another sign of insecurity. If they had a past romantic involvment, or if the co-workers have made suggestive comments or romantic overtones, and she told him, then I can see how it could evoke a jealous response and maybe she would have to problem-solve to confront the situation. I don’t know enough about this situation. Why not try being direct with the guy to sort out the situation. Maybe ask him directly what is it about her clothing choices that he finds objectionable or if he is suggesting her clothing choices are inappropriate. Some people are very poor communicators, which often is part of the problem. It never ceases to amaze me how some people dress and I do think some people make very poor clothing choices for some situations. I’m assuming from your post that you think this isn’t the case, and if so, then it sounds like the boyfriend has other issues.
The clothes comment in this case: “no short skirts”, ever. Ever. Not for clubs, work, school, etcetera. That’s Talibanesque.
Hugo, I think it’s a little disingenuous to say you’d only be upset if your wife were to have sex with another man because it would be the betrayal of a promise. I think it hits on a much more visceral level, and to deny that it does is to be building a straw man for people who don’t want to take responsibility for controlling their actions to knock down. Needless to say, our duty is to channel our own visceral urges into respectful socially healthy relationships, and to take control of them, and not to bother anyone else with them.
That said, it is perfectly possible to have a chaste yet intimate social relationship which is a unfaithful to one’s life partner, and I can just about imagine encouraging a partner to include me when she met with a friend she seemed to be growing closer to than she was to me.
I can also imagine feeling left out if she were having fun with all her colleagues every lunchtime. But being emotionally literate, my own self monitoring would whack me upside the head and tell me to get over it, and deal with it as my own problem.
In the end though, it’s clear that these men aren’t thinking of these issues, and it’s far too early for them to have cropped up. While the requests may not be malicious in intent, the men clearly need to be made to understand why these are a) not acceptable things to ask & b) an indicator that they need to think honestly about why they made them, and that they should fix their subconscious expectations so that they’re not feeling insecure on these issues, and resolve the root causes, which may well be innocent in nature, but ones they have no other tools to express.
Anyway, a little rambling, but I think it makes sense.
I agree, Ambrose, that emotional infidelity is a real and dangerous phenomenon — but awareness of its dangers is hardly a reason to avoid friendships with folks from either gender.
I’d put money on this being exactly what she fears - not a beating, but losing his love. She isn’t experienced enough to see that love is not worth that price.
Of course it’s possible to speculate on excuses that might justify his asking her to stop being around those co-workers, but there’s nothing in Hugo’s account to suggest that his student is omitting salient details.
Mythago,
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.
“Talibanesque?!” Really?
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.)
“let’s just say “guy-esque””
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.
STF, that’s massive thread drift — we’re talking about cultural patterns of men seeking to cover up women here.
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.
With more information I would agree that the requests are unreasonable and controlling. Women are subjected to far too much pressure (from relatives and friends),to mate, marry and have children, without much thought to their personal well-being and happiness.
“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.
Hyperbole like “the Taliban” isn’t likely to lead to understanding—and understanding is what you’re after, right?
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.
Oof. Atrocious spelling goofs in that one.
I find it interesting that Karen takes the opportunity to say that because some women behave in a way that she believes is irresponsible, these men’s requests may be legitimate (she didn’t explicitly say they may be legitimate, but in the context of this discussion, I think that was the clear implication of her comment).
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.
Emily,
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.
That kind of behavior is a deal breaker for me.