Tags
battle of the sexes, being single, break ups, casual sex, commitment, couples, courtship, dating, divorce, fatherhood, love, marriage, red pill, relationships, singledom
A few months ago I noticed a very interesting social dynamic I had never quite picked up on before: the validation of coupledom.
Now I have pondered this from a female point of view before, and there’s much discussion within the manosphere about how for many women, the social validation of being married might be a big motivator for a woman to marry for the wrong reasons (and I would agree, it can be.)
As a single female, I have felt the unease people feel around singles in certain social settings where a “plus 1” is expected. I can usually find a friend to accompany me to such events, to minimize the awkwardness. But there is something about being a single person after a certain age that makes people uneasy, for single men and women alike.
But what about single men versus coupled men? Is there any social benefit of being a in relationship for men?
I think there is, based on a random observation about a single biz associate and friend I know. First of all he is an INTJ (a Meter’s Briggs Personality Type) so he is not the most social butterfly of a person, and in fact his resting face is rather stoic, almost hostile, blank. I have heard other INTJ’s refer to it as the “INTJ death stare.” I could see how people might perceive him as a brooding and perhaps dangerous character (he’s anything but, what it is, is he’s very intelligent and observant so he is always taking in and processing lots of info internally when in public, but at first glance I have seen people shy away from him, give him lots of extra room, not stand near him, even cross the street to avoid him!)
Then I noticed when we are together in a social setting people will often assume we are a couple, and him being in the company of a woman somehow “softens” his image or the perception that he is a threat. They often will address me vs. him, but people are more at ease for lack of a better way to put that.
Then I was really amazed when he and I and my two kids were out and about in public to see what a difference that made in how strangers seemed to perceive him. My girls get along well with this guy and follow him like little ducks, so it didn’t surprise me when a woman working at a supermarket spoke to him as if he was their father, and we didn’t feel the need to correct her because after all it was a natural mistake and nothing to make a big awkward scene over with someone we’d never see again. But she treated him wholly differently than I had ever observed with him before — he was seen in the light of being a “family man” and it was like that somehow undid all of the apprehension or awkwardness or whatever people feel about this same person when he is alone in public and the gal was very friendly to him.
I don’t know what to make of it from a red pill or philosophical perspective, but I do think after seeing this that there is a “social proof” benefit to men for being part of a couple or part of a family in particular that single men may not have.
Not that it is a reason to be in a relationship only for this social salve, but it made me wonder if society extends perks to the “family man” that they do not to single men?
For example, I have heard male friends say promotions at work often go to men with families. Or that men with families get extra concessions that single men do not. I have also heard that men with what other men consider good wives and good families get social rank and are favored in the job market as well (Like Liz, she and their children reflect well upon her husband as a leader, because he is leading a successful family, people notice they “have it” and Mike benefits both professionally and socially for it).
Of course the other side of this is its unfair men who are single are possibly perceived differently and don’t have the same opportunities and advantages “family men” have.
Anyway this is kind of a half-baked post, I am just toying with the idea — is there a validation of coupledom effect, or not? Share examples where you have seen it to be so or not, and let me know what you think in the comments!
Not as half-baked as you might think. I’m definitely an NTJ, but I’ve tested as both INTJ and ENTJ on multiple occasions. I don’t like the personality tests, especially the proprietary ones like the MMPI, because the questions are dual purpose and the differences in answers in related questions reveal information that the subject wouldn’t otherwise willingly provide. Those tests have an overt and a covert purpose. The overt is one that essentially tells what you’re like based on the answers you provide. The covert one is based on the information gleaned to answer the questions they didn’t ask, which focuses on how to manipulate, control and hurt you.
Anyway, I can present a very innocuous appearance, a very threatening appearance, or different points in between- whichever is appropriate to the situation. But when out as a family (large family), I got more positive reactions from people when I was in threatening mode than nice mode. Two sons and one daughter are natural extroverts, so that probably helped, but I think people were reacting positively to me being protective of my kids. It’s all in the body language.
In Latin America, being known as a family man was a definite plus in terms of doing business. I can’t tell you how many times people said “you’re a serious man” in a very complementary way. So, yep, it may not be much more than a feeling here, but in other parts of the world demonstrating that you’ve taken on the responsibilities of a family is a mark in your favor. Part of it is you’ve got something to lose so you are far less likely to blow off obligations or screw things up through neglect.
Interesting Toad, thanks for adding those observations!
BV, this anecdote is for you. I know you don’t believe me when I describe how I get approached, or you seem to imply it’s “in my head.” Anyway, last night I was out to dinner with my two friends I was with the night of the foot rub guy and so they got to talking and razzing me about that. Then my gal friend says, “What is it about her and how can I get some of that? Guys are all over her!” And my male friend said, “It’s simple. She’s genuine. She’s one of only a few genuine people I have met in my whole life. That stands out. Guys notice that.” (I was honored! How nice!) and then he said, “And she smells like woods, guys like that.” I don’t know what that means, I don’t wear perfume and avoid fragranced soaps and products as much as I can, so maybe he meant I didn’t smell like perfume? Not sure.
So there you go, for what it’s worth. And no I don’t think I have a magic golden V 😉
Oh and then they talked about how they both worry about me being too open and trusting bc of the genuine thing (they are both much more street wise than me) so they said they look out for me and protect me bc of that! Which I thanked them for. I actually did not fall off the turnip truck just yesterday, and I think I am more hip to people’s motives and agendas than they give me credit for but yes, I do default assume people are coming from a good place and that is not always so…
This is what I heard growing up: “any man not married by the age of 25 is a menace to society”
I think this relates to your post.
RPG,
I have to take a much darker view of this. What they see in a married manis a someone who has suborned his goals to those of his wife.That is the “social proof”. We live in a gynocentric society. What you are observing is the approval of the man submitting to the female imperative. If he had ambitions of his own, that’s over now.
To support my last comment, I can speak from the experience of taking care of a woman in her dotage. In public, I got a lot of admiration from women. That would be the ultimate service to women.
a man with a “soften” image is failing at life. Soften means no longer a threat ie no longer a man to be feared or respected
I got a lot of admiration from women……
which lead to how many dates?
Wow Fuzzie, while yes sometimes it is like that, it is clearly not always like that. Love is not a battle.
Nobody is evil. Both men and women are broken. There is one path.
RPG,
The boys had their hearts in the right place. What I se is that women took advantage and the boys became broken by contact.
That it got their “admiration” was true. That never lines up with being attractive.
Fuzzie you assume girls don’t get broken by the new rules too… It works for nobody
RPG,
I don’t see that happening but, it could. What I do see is men and boys who started off with good attitudes getting crushed while alpha cads are having a lot of fun.
@ fuzzie I get it but at the same time there’s a lot of gals also not going for the cads… Truly I know many!
RPG,
I am afraid that is only what they are saying.
Perhaps it is Blurkel’s new post.
https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2016/04/18/a-husband-is-what-is-left-of-a-lover/
As an INTJ myself, I have had much the same experiences and treatment as your friend (note: I think it’s MYERS-Briggs). As I didn’t get married until I was 37, I had several years of being regarded as tantamount to a predator while going about my business alone in public. I still notice it when I talk a walk around the neighborhood: if I am with my wife people (particularly women) are more apt to say hello or smile in acknowledgement. If I am by myself it’s like they think I am going to throw them on the ground and rape them in broad daylight on the sidewalk!
As far as work bias goes, I have never noticed it in regard to married vs. not, but I definitely have regarding having children. Some supervisors (“family men” or women themselves, of course) seem to think that if you don’t have kids your time is less valuable, and since you weren’t doing anything important clearly you are the best choice to come in on a weekend or stay late. This is especially insulting for someone like myself, who didn’t choose to be childless (since my wife has serious health issues that made having and raising kids problematic).
An unmarried man over 25 is a threat to society. Especially European men. We have a whole country full of single European men. This will not turn out well.
Interesting reactions to involuntary celibacy. Arabs turn to sodomy. Asians do the same, or run amok, which is where English got that phrase. Africans are generally violent, but probably get more so. Hispanics turn to rape or pedophilia. Europeans? We start a war, kill a bunch of other men, and take their women.
The Shadowed Knight
no body is evil? Dont get out much do you?
Lol ok Ton, yes there are evil people for sure, but as a blanket whole I wouldn’t say “all men are evil” or “all women are evil. And I am fortunate to be able to say I don’t think I personally know anyone who I would say is “evil” although there are some I don’t think much of for other reasons (usually because they are idiots and not in a harmless way!)
Meistergedanken,
I have to wonder how much of that difference in attitude when you are accmpanied by your wife as opposed to alone is not natural but induced by the bad press men get everywhere?
As for extra work, I have to presume that it is uncompensated. It’s even worse if you are single, as in working full shifts on Thanksgiving and Christmas.
I’m a guy; I get along well with kids. So more than once I’ve been mistaken for their father. It’s a nice compliment.
My personal observation is: you can tell a person by who chooses to hang out with them. If nice, kind, authentic people do – then however they *appear*, who they really are is pretty good.
And if only superficial, greedy people hang out with them – same thing.
You get the same effect with children and dogs – neither are good at hiding how they feel if they don’t like/trust someone.
Lastly, there is a BIG difference between “authentic” and “naive”. Authentic means you’re not going to lie to people to take advantage of them, or to present yourself as someone you are not. The reason being authentic is so valued is it means you know that you can trust the person.
One other comment on the whole “being married” thing: being married indicates that there’s more to your life-focus than “you”. Also, being married means you have to be able to negotiate for the long-term. There’s a big difference between a one-off deal (one-night stand or buying soda at convenience store by the highway) and the long-term (where you can’t just throw a temper-tantrum, or rip off the other person).
so being married indicates some level of ability to plan for the long-term, negotiate for the long-term, and being able to shoulder responsibility for the long-term.
I found this gem in the archives that sort of fits the topic.
Ben Franklin’s advice to a friend on how to choose a mistress.
The first bit offers a lot of advice on the benefits of marriage (of course, this was 1745, a very different time…but some of it still applies, in some ways).
Anyway, I enjoyed it…it’s pretty funny. Also, it sounds like older women were a LOT nicer back then!
https://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/bdorsey1/41docs/51-fra.html
“June 25, 1745
My dear Friend,
I know of no Medicine fit to diminish the violent natural Inclinations you mention; and if I did, I think I should not communicate it to you. Marriage is the proper Remedy. It is the most natural State of Man, and therefore the State in which you are most likely to find solid Happiness. Your Reasons against entering into it at present, appear to me not well-founded. The circumstantial Advantages you have in View by postponing it, are not only uncertain, but they are small in comparison with that of the Thing itself, the being married and settled. It is the Man and Woman united that make the compleat human Being. Separate, she wants his Force of Body and Strength of Reason; he, her Softness, Sensibility and acute Discernment. Together they are more likely to succeed in the World. A single Man has not nearly the Value he would have in that State of Union. He is an incomplete Animal. He resembles the odd Half of a Pair of Scissars. If you get a prudent healthy Wife, your Industry in your Profession, with her good Economy, will be a Fortune sufficient.
But if you will not take this Counsel, and persist in thinking a Commerce with the Sex inevitable, then I repeat my former Advice, that in all your Amours you should prefer old Women to young ones. You call this a Paradox, and demand my Reasons. They are these:
i. Because as they have more Knowledge of the World and their Minds are better stor’d with Observations, their Conversation is more improving and more lastingly agreable.
2. Because when Women cease to be handsome, they study to be good. To maintain their Influence over Men, they supply the Diminution of Beauty by an Augmentation of Utility. They learn to do a 1000 Services small and great, and are the most tender and useful of all Friends when you are sick. Thus they continue amiable. And hence there is hardly such a thing to be found as an old Woman who is not a good Woman.
3. Because there is no hazard of Children, which irregularly produc’d may be attended with much Inconvenience.
4. Because thro’ more Experience, they are more prudent and discreet in conducting an Intrigue to prevent Suspicion. The Commerce with them is therefore safer with regard to your Reputation. And with regard to theirs, if the Affair should happen to be known, considerate People might be rather inclin’d to excuse an old Woman who would kindly take care of a young Man, form his Manners by her good Counsels, and prevent his ruining his Health and Fortune among mercenary Prostitutes.
5. Because in every Animal that walks upright, the Deficiency of the Fluids that fill the Muscles appears first in the highest Part: The Face first grows lank and wrinkled; then the Neck; then the Breast and Arms; the lower Parts continuing to the last as plump as ever: So that covering all above with a Basket, and regarding2 only what is below the Girdle, it is impossible of two Women to know an old from a young one. And as in the dark all Cats are grey, the Pleasure of corporal Enjoyment with an old Woman is at least equal, and frequently superior, every Knack being by Practice capable of Improvement.
6. Because the Sin is less. The debauching a Virgin may be her Ruin, and make her for Life unhappy.
7. Because the Compunction is less. The having made a young Girl miserable may give you frequent bitter Reflections; none of which can attend the making an old Woman happy.
8thly and Lastly They are so grateful!!
Thus much for my Paradox. But still I advise you to marry directly; being sincerely Your affectionate Friend.”