Life is not like the movies. Find a man who will fix things, not create more problems.

Is it necessary that men "emote" more often in relationships?  Karen and The Fashionable Geek weigh in!

Karen Song

If we had the choice between Robert Pattinson and Taylor Lautner in "Twilight" most women would probably choose Robert Pattinson. Why? Because we love a complicated, tortured man who will indulge our need for “emotional intimacy” and someone that we can become co-dependent, entangled soul mates with. We want someone sensitive, someone we can stare at the stars with, fight, then make up and make out with. It gives us a sense of purpose and fulfillment because we love to dwell in our emotions, get lost, and find our way in a journey (hence the popularity of books like Eat, Pray, Love). 

 For many women, sharing their problems and discussing the intricacies of life are the primary ways in which they connect and deepen their relationships with other women. This relational female trend is so predominant that powerful, successful women may even feel the need to create problems and self-denigrate in order to properly bond with other women and avoid becoming a source of resentment and envy.  A New York Times study even revealed that women report higher levels of satisfaction in a relationship where the spouse is emotionally unloading and not doing well in life (professionally, socially, or otherwise) than in a relationship where the spouse is doing quite well and doesn't have anything to unload or share. We must fight this impulse to derive pleasure and purpose from commiseration because being in the same emotional place is a false substitute for true happiness in a relationship.

Here is my obvious tip #1:  Do not seek to replicate the ways in which you relate and connect with your female friends in your relationship with your man.

Taylor Lautner, an uncomplicated, lighthearted fixer who probably emotes through sports and video games, is the sort of man you should be pursuing. Like most men, he will become impatient listening to your problems, will not be able to take the discussion beyond the point of offering solutions, and will try to fix the issue instead of dwelling, coddling, and becoming "emotionally intimate." This tendency to stay on the surface with logistical concerns is not because he is shallow or because you do not have a soul mate; it is because he is a man. Men are wonderful because they are designed to complement women. I love men and thank God for men everyday because they make my life just that much easier. Why ruin God's precious gift by seeking something else? You deserve someone who fixes your computer, enjoys hammering nails, can drive your car, and listens to your problems with impatience because he literally can't stand your unhappiness and is wired to provide you with happiness. I wish I could tell every female who wastes several hours a week on unrequited love or analyzing their beloved's complex family history and his distancing issues to just stop with the emotional porn. 

Life is not the movies. Find a man who will fix things, not create more problems.
...............................................................................................................................

The Fashionable Geek

This ones a little easier because to a certain extent I agree with Karen here.

That Men and Women communicate differently is obvious by the fact you're reading this blog. That doesn't mean your guy shouldn't be able to open up.

Let me say this again, so it sinks in, you're guy should be able to have an emotional conversation with you. That's what makes him you partner. If he can't talk to you on your level, he's not a partner, and instead of being part of the solution he's part of the problem.

But understand, this does not give you license to start demanding long drawn out conversations with him whenever you want. I said your guy can do this, I didn't say he doesn't have limits.

It's as simple as compromise folks, and the easiest way to do that is setting clear and enforceable boundaries.

Which brings me to one of the most frequent issues with any relationship- lack of boundaries.

It may seem odd to hear the words boundaries and partner so close together, but the reality is, every person has a different set of needs and wants. The people we spend the most time with- for most of us our significant other- are the people it's MOST important we set realistic expectations with.

So if you're guy says he needs an hour of silence after work, give him two.

If he says he can only talk for an hour, keep the conversation to thirty minutes.

And just as importantly, recognize his needs, if different, are still as important and valid as yours. If he wants sex twice a day, then you should be having it at least once...

You know, as long as he's talking to you.

UPDATE:  I wanted to clarify this post a bit, because on second thought I feel like I've painted women as unending annoying chatterbox's and men as sex-starved mutes.  That's not true.

So let be be clear on this point:  If the relationship is currently in a healthy state, he WANTS to talk to you, and she WANTS to have sex with you.

This really applies to all healthy relationship behaviors.  We hopefully want to engage our partner, and if we don't, there's a deeper issue that needs addressing.

My point was this: sometimes we get lost in the fact that the intensity of our need doesn't match our partner.

Male or female, sex or emotional intimacy- we need to indulge our partners.  Which means talking when you don't want to talk, and having sex when you aren't necessarily in the mood.

Now I can already hear the screams of a few saying, "I shouldn't feel pressured to have sex with a partner if I'm not in the mood."

Let me define not in the mood here as, "Not currently aroused, but still able to have enjoyable sex with your boyfriend/girlfriend."

If you actually CAN'T have sex with your partner, because it makes you feel sick, or you can't get aroused- that's a huge issue that either has to be worked out, or the relationship has to end.

But to say "I shouldn't have to..." regarding sex is only fair if the phrase "I shouldn't have to..." also applies to emotional intimacy (ex. talking).  That line of thinking leads to NO needs being met.

So yes, indulge your partners needs.  Just as importantly, recognize when your partner is indulging your needs- that you may not get 100% of what you want.  That compromise means meeting in the middle.  On both sides.  And being appreciative of that.

Too often I see both men and women who do not appreciate compromise.  They don't recognize their significant other gave more than he/she wanted to, they only recognize they didn't get enough of "what I wanted."

The alternative- when there's a lack of appreciation- is a sexless, silent relationship.
..................................................................................................................................



Hey reader!  Have a question you'd like Karen and The Fashionable Geek to tackle.  Well just e-mail KarenPlusGeekQA@gmail.com.

All questions are completely anonymous, but if want to include your age and gender it will help us tailor our response to you!