The need for conflict

There was a post earlier today on the outrageous things gays are doing in some Australian schools to ensure that children grow up gay.   I have only one more thing to say on tha’ -  that they themselves use the term “straight” for the vast majority.

And I’ve used the term “straighten up and fly right” more than once.   You would think that wanting us all just to act normally would be boringly mainstream but it’s obviously not – it attracts such vilification that it shows that either “normal” has shifted or else a proportionally few loud tin cans are controlling the instruments of communication to us as part of the wider Them.

Where it is difficult to speak of “normal” is in men and women because women are the majority and their behaviours are endlessly fascinating.   Just as with ours, there are those behaviours which are similar, those which are different and vive la difference and then those which cause conflict, misery and divorce.

The latter get all the attention and are what people focus on.   I think one must look at the whole package and the “whole package” of a woman is a pretty wonderful thing and so it was designed to be in a man’s eyes.   So how come there are so many posts on those behaviours if one “must look at the whole package”?

Again, it’s because it is forced on us.   And we can’t let them get away with this bollox.

So what to make of this?

Battle of the sexes: How women can recover more quickly than men from rows with their partner – but only if they’re really bad rows

Researchers found that generally anxious women suffered relatively more prolonged stress from discussions of relationship problems where there were lower levels of hostility.

To bite or not to bite?   This falls under the heading of natural, instinctive behaviour by women which is destructive and yes, we have ours too so is there any point looking at something none of us are likely to change?   It’s like trying to change money being very high on women’s priority order list – so what?   It’s high on our list too but not in a partner, i.e. we don’t need our partners to have money, we need them to have looks and be “nice”, whatever that means.

Women have always been the professionals at creating and getting  a buzz from resolved conflict [resolved in their terms] and it puzzles me why the Mail would be interested in it.   As Agatha Christie wrote:

“Well,” said Mr Satterthwaite slowly, “you see, I’ve known a good many young men, and these emotional scenes upset them very much. Women now, can go through a scene like that and feel positively better for it afterwards. It acts like a safety valve for them, steadies their nerves down and all that. But I can see this young man going away with his head in a whirl, sick and miserable …”

For men, it’s usually liquor which steadies theirs.   Or football.   Or woodworking in the shed.  Or sex – sex calms both sexes down for a time.

In relationships, most men learn to say: “Yes dear, no dear,” and then keep their mouths shut.

As Helen Rowland wrote, in A Guide to Men [1922]:

A husband is what is left of a lover after the nerve has been extracted.

Do women genuinely want that in a man – that he’ll shut up and let her do all the talking? That he’ll just be a compliant lapdog with his tongue hanging out as he trails her around the house?

As Chandler pointed out in Farewell My Lovely [which I re-read last evening]:

“Kind of smart guesser, ain’t you, young man [Marlowe]? Can’t wait for folks to get their mouth open hardly.”

“I’m sorry, Mrs. Morrison [says the detective]. This is an important matter to us-“

“This here young man don’t seem to have no trouble keepin’ his mouth in place [she says to  Marlowe about Randall, the detective].”

“He’s married,” I said. “He’s had practice.”

Her face turned a shade of violet that reminded me, unpleasantly, of cyanosis. “Get out of my house afore I call the police!” she shouted.

“There is a police officer standing before you, madam,” Randall said shortly. “You are in no danger.”

“That’s right there is,” she admitted. The violet tint began to fade from her face. “I don’t take to this man.”

“You have company, madam.”

Many men, it seems to me, don’t realize that the woman actually needs conflict as her daily fare, endless angst-ridden discussions over every topic under the sun, as the study indicated – it’s cathartic for her.   She needs to have everything in her world “just so” for her to be confident, from an errant strand of hair to the major issue of whether he is her image of what she wants in a man and if not, she’ll socially engineer him to make him so.

It’s pointless trying to keep the peace and quiet going because peace and quiet puts her on edge, generates this feeling creeping up her spine that all is not well – that she must be missing out on something here if he is satisfied and happy – and if there’s one thing a woman can’t bear, it’s missing out on something she might have had.

So if there’s nothing to row over, if everything seems just too complacent, she has to dredge up something.   That’s why she keeps mental lists.   It’s a fulltime job keeping all the little facts and figures in good order in the mind and the minutiae in women’s conversations with each other is an endless source of fascination to men studying them.

A man is hopeless at this sort of thing as a rule.   Which makes him guilty of not remembering things he sees as unimportant and yet they are vital to her.

Which makes him the catalyst for conflict, not her – he caused it all.   Simples.

And most men will concede every time in the interest of peace and quiet – married ones anyway.    I concede too when I like her, when  she’s not actually talking sh*te but something which might be right and where it doesn’t directly affect my wellbeing.

At other times, when the result of that dispute is quite critical, e.g. allowing the feminazi narrative the time of day, then I’ll dig in for the battle to the finish and beyond that.   Mordor and the ragtag had nothing on this.   Quite happy to go the 15 rounds any time she wants.   It’s a case of choosing the battle ground and being armed with the facts.

A mate of mine had a blog fight with a woman friend of mine and she said something like: “You always have to have the last word, don’t you?”

He replied: “No I don’t.”

Which confirms that we men really are puerile at heart and never let it be any different – keep the inner boy going till your dying day.

In real life, say at work, I never argue with the ladies and thus everything goes swimmingly whilst they’re naturally at each other’s throats.    I mean, one can’t fight on two fronts at once – blog and there – and one should never buy into a woman-on-woman fight to the death.   And playing my role properly in real life, keeping my opinions to myself and paying attention, the benefits accrue – it’s only on the blog that women are p’ed off with me.

A blog’s just an exercise anyway.    In the way haiku said – that he was never all that interested but because these muvvers can’t let it go, must always win – then that polarizes him.

So when someone – anyone, not just women – come in and insist on their narrative with no factual basis whatever, then I’m going to stonewall and the term is used in the old, non-hijacked way.

I’m going to lay down the facts which show readers [not them] how and why they’re [not the readers] actually wrong.

In the case of a woman, I’ll generally let her have the last word.

Unless she’s wrong, of course  ;-)

………..

I’d do this too.  Why?   I’d do most things for her. Strange male behaviour, eh?
No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Please copy the string HAdnff to the field below: