Angry Men and Premenstrual Women

[GirlWithTheLionHeart]

Sorry, didn't know how to title this.

A lot of women are 'told' to take various herbal remedies, pills, teas etc for PMS to stop them being irritable etc. However, I've noticed that angry men aren't told to do the same, even though they are probably more damaging to society, women and children.

Any thoughts on this? I just read this article and I quote:

"If you've worked with angry male clients, you can understand why. These men are generally highly reluctant clients, who are often in your office only because they've gotten "the ultimatum" from their wives or girlfriends or bosses or sometimes court judges: "Get therapy for your anger or get out / you're fired / you'll go to jail." Many, considered by everyone who knows them to have an "anger problem," arrive in your office convinced that they don' t have an anger problem: the real problem is their stupid coworkers, annoying girlfriends, demanding spouses, spoiled kids, or unfair probation officers. However, they arrive at your office with a shotgun at their backs, so to speak, and know they have no choice. They hate the entire situation because it makes them feel powerless."

This actually really riles me on a personal level as I've had to give my partner the ultimatum over his reactions and anger.

The OP is about the perceived difference between men's anger and women's PMT. I'm saying there IS a difference.

If you read my post above if anything I suggest that PMT is probably more excusable, and if anything it's a good thing that research and medicine is attempting to help the situation.

Psychological anger, whether it be men or women, as far as I know is usually dealt with by therapy or serious medication (anti depressants etc), which tend to have a much more severe reaction and not in a good way.

However, despite all of this constructive chat, people on the thread seem compelled to just boil it down to "women need to be medicated, men don't" - I just don't think it is as simple as that.

The 'Devil's advocate' comment is an illustration - surely one could make the same argument in reverse - that women are actually better off because people care enough to try to alleviate the symptoms of hormonal imbalances.

Just look at the OP's comments:
"Maybe I want to be a miserable snappy arse for a few days, thank you. Stuff your evening primrose and St. John's wart"
so the women is rejecting the medicine
"My partner has been waiting for a referral for weeks now to speak to someone"
so the partner wants the man to get some help

Yet the original post is about how having more medicinal assistance indicates sexism because it implies the woman needs it? Don't you think that is a bit ironic when the poster then says "I reject the medicine but I want my husband to get help"??

I don't think it's that easy to separate physiology from psychology , hormones aren't a 'separate' self determining unit, their combinations have an affect on the mind and the mind also affects their release and combinations.

I also don't believe that hormones are the only reason for PMT, nor do I see it as medically proven, especially if you consider it from a constructivist standpoint.

Male aggression/anger/violence is often put down to testosterone, would it not be better to target them with medicine, given that most violence is male?

"that women are actually better off because people care enough to try to alleviate the symptoms of hormonal imbalances"

yes and no

what happens in reality is that many women's anger (whether unwarranted or a legitimate reaction to circumstances) is dismissed as hormonal

that is what people are trying to say here

I wasn't talking about men being ignored either - I was illustrating that you can make another argument the other way, so I didn't think it was appropriate to dismiss the topic as "society thinks women should be medicated and men not"

I agree with a lot of the last couple of posts - I think maybe it has to do with traditional gender stereotypes - men as the cavemen protectors, women as the frail mothers. Clearly in the modern age that is not appropriate but those stereotypes tend to be hard wired.

If men get into a fist fight it is seen almost as childish. If women start hitting each other it is often (by both sexes I might add) seen as 'unladylike' or 'manly'. I think that contributes to those stereotypes.

If there was medicine to help all forms of anger, whether it be men or women, that would be great.

So men's emotional reactions tend to be rationalised, and women's rational reactions tend to be emotionalised (is that a word?).

This.

And as Germaine Greer once said when told it was fine not to employ women because, well, they went a bit funny once a month - "Am I Menstruating Now?"

Isn't men's anger down to higher testosterone levels mostly, which is in fact hormonal?

Why no herbal shite for their hormones then?

Frankly, I put monkeying around with my hormones on a similar level to monkeying around with my brain chemistry - especially since their both intended to promote the same result.

Personally I've never had PMT. I have noticed a slightly shorter temper due to discomfort, and I've also noticed quite a dramatic response to anyone suggesting that the reason I'm standing up for myself is PMT.

Let's not forget that some significant proportion of us are permanently on artificial hormones, doing well more than our share of keeping the population down...

It may just be coincidence, but I have noticed a significant reduction in my anger and emotional PMT symptoms now I no longer have to live in close proximity to a man . I can recommend it

Isn't there a similar finding with PND, which is presumably hormonally driven to a large extent - risk of PND much higher if you live with an unsupportive twatbadger!

A lot of interesting stuff here.

I agree with the point which has been made / nearly made about women not really being "allowed" to express negative emotion.

Much as women and girls are chastised by strangers on the street for not smiling, they are dismissed as being "hormonal" when their disposition does not meet the "airy friendly cheerful smiley" standard.

As soon as a woman expressed anger / strong annoyance / anything more than a mild gripe many people (women included - we are all socialised in the same society after all) get all "Ooohhhhhhhhhh" what's got at here / must be PMT / blah etc

Man gets angry and generally the response is everyone goes a bit quiet and backs away as this is SERIOUS and depending on the situation things may escalate.

As for the medication - I'm not being funny but while I know herbal remedies have active ingredients etc being exhorted to pop into Holland and Barrett for some whatever it is, isn't quite the same as getting Medicine from the Doctor IYSWIM and many women get short shrift from the GP about all sorts of things around menstruation even if they are actually really fucking ill.

And another thing I never got PMT while on hormonal contraception (that I noticed) so that was, what, 16 to 32. Women in the UK, in many cases, are consuming a diet of artificial hormones from when in many cases they are little more than children to well past the menopause - which is a worwworrrying concerning state of affairs and one for another thread. But since the artificial hormones I feel a bit low for a day or 2. From talking to other people and from what I've read there is a range of things from nothing at all to a variety of moods to really serious issues. Also physical symptoms as well. Yet all that gets talked about is the "oooh she's a bit tetchy must be her time of the month snigger" dismissive stuff.

In fact that is interesting - why is PMT the only aspect of the menstrual cycle which is considered "OK" to mention in say a bog-standard office environment? That's a bit weird in itself. Why is the only non-tabboo bit, the bit about going "haha women go nuts every month"?

the problem with "within the normal range" for PMT symptoms is that it seems to be a really fucking big range, and women with some quite debilitating symptoms feel fobbed off and not listened to

I can only speak for myself, obviously but I do feel an elevated level of irritation prior to my period. However two things about this:

I only get irritated by things that irritate me the other 27 days of the cycle. I am just less tolerant those odd days.

Low blood sugar has a far greater effect on my mood swings. And I don't see why similar symptoms wouldn't affect men in the same manner. My father used to always be ratty first thing in the morning and when he got home in the evening from work. Why is no one suggesting angry men go and have a sandwich? Because as others have suggested, certain levels of anger from men are accepted and also suggesting that their anger could be hormone related would be very shocking (and obviously irrational ).

I read an article somewhere that pointed out that women were allowed a much narrower range of emotions at work than men (despite all protests of the opposite). And it's true. I'm having this argument at work at the moment. A man from another team came over and spoke to a member of my team in an agressive manner a couple of days ago. Unfortunately I didn't see it otherwise I'd have said something. But the guy has form for this. And is still getting away with it. My team member is unwilling to take it further as he feels it's just one of those things, yet a couple of years ago a woman did exactly the same thing to him and he basically refused to speak to her again.

I'm lucky in that I have never encountered a man in a towering, domestic violence-y rage or anything.
I have seen lots of men being snappy, fickle, silently stroppy etc and thought "hmm, if you were a woman, people would be chanting peeee emmmm teeee!! Moody cow!! " at you, but you're not, so apparently it's OK"

I think there is a lot of sense in the blood sugar thing, personally, with DC and also I remember at an intervention programme for domestic violence years ago, they mentioned 6.30pm was a really flashpoint time. Their focus was keeping the kids out of the house at that time of day.

Dp's dad is vile first thing in the morning, and dp used to behave in the same way once he had left university and got a job he had to be up for first thing in the morning. I wasn't prepared to put up with extreme moodiness every morning and basically said "look, you need to find a strategy to deal with this". It turned out that making sure he ate a decent breakfast made all the difference (low blood sugar), and I made sure I left him to it until he had managed that.

Yes I've seen that too BelleCurve. Meant to say I agree with you about not living with a man reduces PMT. I noticed that when I was single. Mind you that was after being with an abusive man so I was just happy generally .

I suffer from PMS I'm personally very glad to be medicated for it, it's debilitating. I don't want to feel that angry for nearly half a month, it stops me functioning properly in most aspects of my life and most importantly I don't want it to negatively impact my children.

However, I do agree that all too often women are dismissed as pre-menstrual whenever they display anger or annoyance. Get annoyed with the labelling though rather than the fact that medical help is available to those who require it.