@le_inferno I think I agree with your analysis in terms of average behavior (there are always exceptions). I wonder what it means. Where do these differing behaviors come from? Is it just men’s insecurity about articulating feelings? Could this be a consequence on men not developing a language for feelings? Or is it something more innate?
I have long thought that if it weren’t for women, we wouldn’t have civilization. Women are the ones pushing for social organization—the ones who want to domesticate men. Men don’t fully want to be domesticated. There are advantages to being a wild animal. But women want us to help out around the house, or, more importantly, provide resources to help bring up the kids.
Once the kids are raised and gone, men aren’t as necessary to women, and so they are often cast off. Although, cleverly, women blame it on the male philandering so as to get the moral upper hand. I do not believe this is a conscious thing. Rather I think that women won’t fight as hard to hold onto a man once the kids have been raised.
Men, no longer needed by the first wife, will often find someone younger to start a second family with. Many older single women seem to find this life to be much better than the one where they have a whining man around.
If I am right, then “issues,” rather than being an attempt to make a relationship better, are actually a way of reminding a man he isn’t necessary, except as a provider. It also serves to prepare the ground for the jettisoning of the man when he is no longer necessary.
If women are the civilizing power, then they have a knowledge that gives them a lot more power then men. It is quite clever, because it allows women to get what they want while blaming men for screwing things up. Women have the morally superior position, and men have no clue what hit them.
In most cases, I would say this does not happen consciously. I would expect most people to deny that it happens. It’s just a theory, and I know it sounds wacky. We’ll see what the evidence shows over time.