To think MN has it all wrong re proposals?

[alfayruz]

Inspired by a thread the other day, but also a general observation on here, I was thinking ... whenever anyone posts on MN about waiting for a proposal from their DP, you can guarantee hundreds of posts along the lines of ‘just propose to him....’ AIBU to think this is ridiculous because -

1. Nobody in actual real life does this

2. Having to propose to a man would be a massive turn off anyway so what is the point?

3. Even if you could still muster some kind of sexual attraction towards him, the bar is set at rock bottom before you even start - so why would you expect any initiative or effort from him on any other occasions or general life going forward?

AIBU?

Oh you're just backtracking. You had plenty to say about biology and social constructs at the time.

So if your daughters do the proposing in the future, will you forbid the marriage? Or will you be over the moon and congratulate them?

I’m not explaining this again so just think whatever it suits you to think.

I think you're being needlessly defensive, because you keep responding to the things people haven't said (e.g that your daughter will be held back in life for liking pink) and making points that actually undermine what you think you're saying.

So I'll keep thinking that I guess 🤷🏻‍♀️

As I said cuno, I’m not explaining again.

I doubt my daughters will be proposing . Can’t see that happening. They may have the ‘marriage conversation which means you are engaged,’ I suppose? Whatever. It’s up to them.

What would be your reaction though if your daughters did the proposing?

“These messages tell us how society expects us to behave and that in turn has an impact on EVERYTHING. My particular specialism is career development..... from a very young age we can see societal expectations in relation to gender influencing career and education choices.”

When I mentioned educational choices and outcomes it was in response to that from Spin.

That post where I stayed ‘biology’ was in response to someone saying biology has nothing to do with social constructs - and therefore gender expectations.

Except she didn’t, I don’t know why you keep fibbing about this when we can all read.

@alfayruz

“These messages tell us how society expects us to behave and that in turn has an impact on EVERYTHING. My particular specialism is career development..... from a very young age we can see societal expectations in relation to gender influencing career and education choices.”

When I mentioned educational choices and outcomes it was in response to that from Spin.

So how does your daughter liking pink and getting into Cambridge disprove what Spin was saying? It is needlessly defensive.

‘Yes, there are biological differences between men and women but those biological differences do not influence how we behave in relation to our gender.’
Gender is a social construct.’

That was Spin yesterday Jassy, and what was responding to.

It’s as if people see ‘biology’ and ‘gender’ in the same sentence and literally start frothing on here. You can’t have a nuanced debate because they get so triggered.

She wasn’t saying that female biology wasn’t a factor in how that construct developed.

She clearly said it wasn’t a factor in how we behave in response to that construct.

That is: our female biology isn’t what attracts us to pink or dresses (incredibly facile examples), it’s a learned response based on our social and cultural environments.

We don’t do less STEM subjects or jobs because our female brains can’t handle it, we are less attracted them because of factors related to how we are socialised.

@JassyRadlett

She wasn’t saying that female biology wasn’t a factor in how that construct developed.

She clearly said it wasn’t a factor in how we behave in response to that construct.

That is: our female biology isn’t what attracts us to pink or dresses (incredibly facile examples), it’s a learned response based on our social and cultural environments.

We don’t do less STEM subjects or jobs because our female brains can’t handle it, we are less attracted them because of factors related to how we are socialised.

This!

@alfayruz

“Why does the man have to do it in hetero couples? Are you really saying it would kill your attraction to him if you proposed to him?”

Yes it would 100% have killed my attraction for my husband if I’d had to propose to him.

Why?

@JassyRadlett

She wasn’t saying that female biology wasn’t a factor in how that construct developed.

She clearly said it wasn’t a factor in how we behave in response to that construct.

That is: our female biology isn’t what attracts us to pink or dresses (incredibly facile examples), it’s a learned response based on our social and cultural environments.

We don’t do less STEM subjects or jobs because our female brains can’t handle it, we are less attracted them because of factors related to how we are socialised.

Wonderfully put.

@alfayruz

‘Yes, there are biological differences between men and women but those biological differences do not influence how we behave in relation to our gender.’ Gender is a social construct.’

That was Spin yesterday Jassy, and what was responding to.

It’s as if people see ‘biology’ and ‘gender’ in the same sentence and literally start frothing on here. You can’t have a nuanced debate because they get so triggered.

Don't be so bloody dramatic 🙄 I wasn't 'triggered'. I'm a university academic and I teach, research and write about this for a living. I've been clear all along that sex and gender are two different things and should not be used interchangeably. I was clear that there are biological sex differences between men and women but it's the reaction to these differences by society ( mainly men) which in turn creates the social construct of gender.

@JassyRadlett

She wasn’t saying that female biology wasn’t a factor in how that construct developed.

She clearly said it wasn’t a factor in how we behave in response to that construct.

That is: our female biology isn’t what attracts us to pink or dresses (incredibly facile examples), it’s a learned response based on our social and cultural environments.

We don’t do less STEM subjects or jobs because our female brains can’t handle it, we are less attracted them because of factors related to how we are socialised.

Thank you .... exactly this!!

I swear, this thread is making 11+ comprehension prep feel like a walk in the park.

Jassy - you keep giving these really obvious, rigid explanations ad infinitum without actually understanding what it is I’m saying. It’s like you’ve assumed a position for me and are using it to argue with yourself.

Jassy - you keep giving these really obvious, rigid explanations ad infinitum without actually understanding what it is I’m saying. It’s like you’ve assumed a position for me and are using it to argue with yourself.

I do understand what you’re saying, I think the difference is that I also understand what other posters are saying, and therefore I can see how you’re misrepresenting them.

Its that fundamental misunderstanding that has taken us down this bizarre and wonderful rabbit hole.

But anyway: men who are proposed to are unshaggable, eh? I think we all now agree that the (bizarre) lack of attraction is based on socialisation rather than biology? Please?

(I’ll admit that it took me a while to realise that some of your statements were based on a fundamental misunderstanding of Spins’ post. I think we’re all a lot closer to consensus than it seemed at the lowest points of the thread.)

I feel how I feel Jassy. You don’t choose who or what you’re attracted to. You will of course tell me that it’s affected by socialisation (and I certainly wouldn’t disagree with that), but I still think there are some innate drives that run deeper than socialisation. That is where we differ, I guess. But that’s ok. I have lived a life. I know myself and that’s it really. You can draw you own conclusions.

Our responses to a specific, fairly recently manufactured social construct are biological? It’s a massively implausible argument.

We all feel how we feel. Just because our feelings are deep doesn’t mean they’re driven by biology. It’s such an odd contention. Why don’t you think the impact of socialisation on our feelings is somehow less than the impact of biology on those feelings?

I wasn’t talking about the proposing thing in and of itself. Sorry I should have made that clear. Of course its ridiculously simplistic to talk about ‘biology’ in relation to a specific act such as proposing. That wouldn’t be how I would respond to what I think you’re getting at. I would say that people don’t choose who are what they are attracted to - behaviours, physical aspects or whatever. Sexuality is innate. Yes, socialisation will affect anyone, but it’s impossible to quantify the extent of this. You can’t second-guess yourself on everything. So you might as well just be honest about how you feel and get on with it.

Sorry - but from an historical perspective, this whole debate does not really tie in with reality for the past 2000 years and more.

For most of that time - WHATEVER biology said - marriages were arranged by parents or agreed among couples - some very different from what we'd expect today - to benefit family fortunes/connections, or as a matter of convenience or sheer survival. Or - as in witty but cynical Jane Austen - as a matter of social and/or financial advancement.

Proposals based on sexual attractiveness were simply not the thing for many - maybe most - couples. That's really rather the point. Marriage and romantic love/sexual attraction were not co-terminous. That difference between the two is quite probably how the concept of 'romantic love' was created, by poets/songwriters/other literary folk in the Middle Ages, with 'courtly' suitors sighing after their (already married) would-be lovers. It was 'rediscovered' by late Georgian/Victorian novelists etc, and publicised by the wedding industry in the 20th cent. But for a great many people, it was never their real-life experience, any more than glossy adverts or Instragam scenes are 'real' today.

As other posters have said, among poor/ordinary people, men did promise marriage as a way of getting into bed with women they fancied. But even in the Middle Ages, people knew not to take such promises seriously. Public shaming and punishment for 'immorality' were quite damaging; 'shotgun marriages' were definitely a thing. It's been shown (case studies, SW England) that in over one-third of 'poor' rural peoples' marriages, the bride was pregnant. Being pressuried into a marriage to save face/escape punishment is not very "romantic" either.

Yes I totally agree scottishnames. We have relatives who had arranged marriages in the previous generation and even some of DH’s cousins on our generation have had marriages that if not arranged, were kind of orchestrated (the men still has to propose though). These are doctors, lawyers etc. This is within a broadly Islamic cultural context.

Yes, socialisation will affect anyone, but it’s impossible to quantify the extent of this. You can’t second-guess yourself on everything. So you might as well just be honest about how you feel and get on with it.

But there is lots of research on this topic. Those of us who teach and research this aren't just pulling these ideas out of thin air.