you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]MezozoicGay 12 insightful - 4 fun12 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 4 fun -  (5 children)

For man being romantic and fully loving (and supporting) someone is considered as "weakness" in patriarchic society, and that role is "for mothers and wives". There even slur for such men - "henpecked". So men can be wanting to love, but they taught to not. Fear of being rejected by society can move some men to violence (I know at least one example).

At least I can openly support and love women as friends (not sure if it is legit phrasing in English, but in our language there 3 different words for "love" and one of them has meaning of very deep friendship - I mean that last one) and don't afraid of that slur, because I already marked by other, even worse crime - of being a gay man.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

"Henpecked" definitely not not mean men who are "romantic and fully loving (and supporting)" of their female partners! It means a man who is continually criticized and bossed around by his wife or female partner. It's similar to the more vulgar "pussy-whipped."

AFAIK, there is no commonly-used English language slur for men who are romantic, loving and supportive of their wives/GFs/female partners as you describe. "Uxorious" comes closest, but it's not in wide use - most people in the Anglophone world have never heard of it. What's more, my understanding is that whatever pejorative connotations it has in the view of some, those have developed only over time.

In the Anglophone West in the 1960s, 70s and 80s, it definitely was not considered a "weakness" for men to be romantic, fully loving and supportive of their GFs and wives. Back then, there were hundreds of very popular songs written and sung by men in which they expressed their love and devotion for the women in their lives. Such songs were constantly at the top of the charts. I'll post titles and links to videos in a separate thread.

[–]Feather 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I think it's a matter of interpretation.

A man who is loving and supportive of his female romantic partner would not see himself as being henpecked. He would just (accurately) see himself as being in a loving relationship.

His buddies, on the other hand, might disagree and inaccurately claim he is henpecked just because they're too immature to fathom that a man might genuinely want to put a woman first.

Their logic is basically...

  1. No man would want to put his romantic relationship with a woman first.

  2. My friend, a man, is putting his romantic relationship with a woman first.

  3. If no men want to put their romantic relationships with women first, my friend can't want to do it.

  4. But he is.

  5. So someone must be tricking or coercing him to do it against his will.

  6. He is henpecked.

[–]MarkTwainiac 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yeah, I completely agree, but I was responding to the poster who claimed

For man being romantic and fully loving (and supporting) someone is considered as "weakness" in patriarchic society, and that role is "for mothers and wives". There even slur for such men - "henpecked". So men can be wanting to love, but they taught to not.

Yes some men, such as immature incels and misogynistis, display the kind of logic you laid out. But many do not. And the other poster's claim that in "patriarchic society" universally all/most men are conditioned to consider being romantic, loving and supportive as weakness is simply not true. FFS, it was men who came up with the notions/constructs of romantic love, courtship, fidelity and marriage in the first place! And it's men who have made these ideas into institutions and built industries around them.

[–]Feather 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I see what you mean now that you point out exactly what you were responding to.

I agree with you that men came up with the structures of these institutions and ideals. It's absurd that some of them now act as though women came up with these structures as a plot to oppress men.

[–]MezozoicGay 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Here it was actually the case until recently, majority of men were supporting such behaviour. And in many countries it still the case.

Maybe I should specify more that I meant world in general and not just USA or EU, where it should be less the case (at least I hope it is).