Why Are Men Happier Than Women? (girlfriend, marry, divorce, couple)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Men are more happy because they are not women. Two major issues. The monthly thing and birthing children. After that the woman's mindset. Sometimes there's no logic to a woman's thinking. They will say one thing and mean another and then get mad when men don't have a clue what they want or mean.
But ya probably don't want to know what they're really thinking or meaning anyway. Ignorance is bliss!
I simply think the primary reason behind this phenomenon is based on the fact that it's far easier for men to live.....in general. We can live on the bare minimum when it comes to pay, food, shelter, transportation, and social interaction; where as a female requires far more attention and has significantly more needs. Add to this the social pressure inflicted on women to get married, reproduce and be mommies it's no wonder why women are far less happy than men. They are forced to choose between a sucessfull career and being a housewife/mother.
This brings me to my next point; the significance of gender roles in today's society and how archaic it is to still subscribe to such drivel. Ladies, this is where much of the blame falls on your shoulders. As a single male I tend to date quite a bit, marriage is not a priority but I will entertain the notion if I happen to run across that special female with whom I'm in tune with. Despite all of the tough lady/miss independent talk, many of you make it quite clear that gender roles still play a SIGNIFICANT part in your relationships. For those who don't, there aren't enough guys whom equally share your sentiment. Men still enjoy the spoiled,bratty, needy behavior that many women exemplify when they first fall in love. It gives the man a sense of being ....to feel needed. That is until he gets tired of it, not realizing he has made her this way.
May I suggest both parties try giving up gender roles, even if just temporarily I'm almost positive you'll establish better relationships as I have. You'll enjoy sex MUCH more also!!
I'm 28, single, snipped and couldn't be any more happier. I do my best to avoid women who's immediate intentions are to get married and move to the burbs to become baby factories. I prefer women who love to have guiltless fun and not feel remorse for doing so.
Last edited by ayahuasca_mike; 11-20-2011 at 08:45 AM..
Who collects the data- various uni's, the NIH, census, WHO, a host of organizations. The media publicizes it as it publicizes anything.
True; however, you know as well as I that this is far from making them infallible. The difference between "reliable" resources and "fallible, biased studies" most typically lies in whether or not we AGREE with the findings.
Quote:
If it's published it can be cited. I cite things all the time that aren't main stream. It's just a matter of looking for it. It depends on the conversation. Here's a good example. Wage disparity between the genders. A lot of folk and public media assert pure sex discrimination. That's rarely the case. Sure, it happens, but it's not at the heart of wage disparity. There is a boat load of data available that clearly shows it's a stratified issue. Much of the time, tho, the media, and even people discussing the issue, are either too lazy to bother digging deeper or they have an agenda.
And therein lies, I guess, my "tough luck" point of personal contention: No problem is solved, and the majority of people aren't really interested. Even if they were, in the end it's a discussion forum -- which in and of itself makes it thoroughly okay. Conversation is, after all, conversation.
Quote:
I don't think resentment is a part of it on a personal level when it comes to forum discussions, rather a just for the sake of argument. That's how I take much of this. Many of us like to argue/debate. I suppose to an academic who researches social issues there is greater meaning. It shapes culture. It influences policy and direction of future research. All kinds of things surface from research. Sometimes unintended things.
True; however, you know as well as I that this is far from making them infallible. The difference between "reliable" resources and "fallible, biased studies" most typically lies in whether or not we AGREE with the findings.
I don't agree here. The data is what it is and interpretation can be up for debate, but in conversation it comes down to the strength of an argument. Methods are available for review and can be debated. They often are. The idea of determining whether research is reliable or unreliable based on bias is a heavy charge from where I sit. I know it is the case for some, it has to be, but such people can be fleshed out easily via incoherent arguments while citing glen beck and love gurus. That's neither here nor there. If a study is biased then all a person needs to do is put forth the facts of that bias.
Quote:
And therein lies, I guess, my "tough luck" point of personal contention: No problem is solved, and the majority of people aren't really interested. Even if they were, in the end it's a discussion forum -- which in and of itself makes it thoroughly okay. Conversation is, after all, conversation.
I'm not really following. What's tough luck exactly? I learned about wage disparity due to online conversations (well, my hankering for research that is). To me, these threads are not really about solving problems, but there is an opportunity to garner knowledge and give knowledge. In another way, online debates very much remind me of my iPhone chess games that I have with various strangers that have the same app. It's entertaining.
I want to share an article I was just reading addressing the brass tacks of gender differences of how situations are actually perceived.
"Why Women Handle Stress Better Than Men - Genetics?
Can people's differing reactions to situations of stress be attributed at least in part to genetic differences and do those differences affect men and women in different ways - with the edge seemingly favoring the women? Research conducted at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem would seem to indicate that the answer to both questions is yes.
...
It is generally believed that the genetic code plays a prominent role in different responses to stress. It has been estimated that the heredity factor determines by some 62 percent the level of the stress hormone (cortisol) in our bodies.
...
In the test, the researchers examined the salivary cortisol response in 97 university students via the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) devised at Trier University in Germany. The TSST measures changes in salivary cortisol to assess stress reactivity to challenging social situations.
...
The BDNF gene is characterized by a variant that codes for either the valine (Val) or methionine (Met) amino acids. Individuals carry two copies of each gene, with the Val variant being more common. In the study, subjects carrying two copies of the VAL variant (Val/Val), were compared in their cortisol response to those carrying one copy of the Val and one of the Met (Val/Met).
...
When looking at the responses of the subjects in the stress testing, it was seen that the Val/Met men and women carriers had nearly equal cortisol levels. However, the men with the Val/Val variant had a higher cortisol response (and therefore a higher reaction to social stress) than the men carrying the Val/Met variant. For the women, surprisingly, the opposite was found: the Val/Val women had a lower cortisol response than the Val/Met women. Why the Val/Val variant produces opposite stress reactions (raising it for the males and lowering it for the females) remains an enigma."
Specifically, "Because of the predominance of the Val/Val type for both sexes, the males showed overall greater stress in the testing than the females."
So what is this telling us? Higher chemical stress response among the most common variants were found in males. That's innate. Men may not verbally express this experience, where women might be more inclined. But, that may likely be a social allowance. In the end, the stress experience among men is higher.
Source A, B,
This says men get more stressed. It does not contradict my point nor your nor help either of them.
My personal preference is chaos above order, I love when there is tempo etc so for me stress is usually a good thing, gets me productive and what not...I thrive in stress.
This says men get more stressed. It does not contradict my point nor your nor help either of them.
My personal preference is chaos above order, I love when there is tempo etc so for me stress is usually a good thing, gets me productive and what not...I thrive in stress.
It's too bad that you don't really grasp the point of the study. It contradicts your point that it's an innate quality among women. The cortisol response notes how a stressful situation is perceived. It's a response to stress. Men with the Val/met variant do not stress to the same degree as men with the Val/Val variant.
In terms of emotional processing power, women are rocking an intel i7 overclocked. Men have a Pentium II. (Extreme nerd references here)
I believe that it is far easier for men to subsume their emotions in work, hobbies, or sheer laziness. I'm not a "positive" person, in general. I can however escape EASILY into a visit to a friend's house, grocery shopping, reading, work, computer stuff etc etc.
As for anti-depressant use, I believe that this is simply tied to seeking psychological help. I seem to remember reading that women are more inclined to seek treatment and therapy. Men bury it.
Still, if men thought it through, I can't say that they'd be much happier. I also don't buy the "noble savage" sort of model that men need less, have fart jokes etc etc.
I like my sushi, my gas heating, and my books. My idea of hell is a futon in an overpriced studio, chinese take-out cartons strewn about, and a moron cracking fart jokes.
If men are indeed happier, I submit that it's because we're not expected to wear makeup every day, we don't have to squeeze out tiny humans via holes through which they don't fit, and most importantly, the world is our urinal.
Interesting. You may be the exception that proves the rule. Five months after my ex husband left the family to live on his own, he had a heart attack and had to have angioplasty and stents. A month later he had found another woman to move in with and has been the picture of health ever since.
Aren't there studies that show that men live longer and are happier when they are married/in a relationship, while the opposite is true for women?
There are studies, indeed. And, you'll find that the results state "AVERAGE". For example, a study found that married couples live longer,on the average, than single people.... TRUE. Then, someone got curious why not all married couples live longer than single people. The result of that study found that the couples that are "intimately active", the farthest into their elder years, the longer they live, and the better quality of life they enjoy. Couples that curtail the "activities" in their earlier years don't live any longer than single people do. So, while the "average" is longer, it's a matter of the extremes being spread farther apart. So, when it comes to studies, with as many of them as there are out there, which ones are you referring to?
Because we have our own built in toy to play with.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
