What dating stereotypes can teach us about happiness | #31

flexible + agentic gf, flexible + agentic bf

I want to present a few cliché dating scenarios that I think are gesturing at an interesting lesson about how to be happy.

Most are from a heteronormative, stereotypical perspective, but I think

1. every relationship can suffer from problems like these

2. anyone can fill the “man” or “woman” role, and

3. everyone can learn something from studying these conflicts.

I try to point out what I think is the root of the issue and what it would look like for everyone to be happy.

In The Pole #31:

• Common points of conflict

  • Example 1: Men and a common reluctance to plan things

  • Example 2: Disagreement over household chores

  • Example 3: Engaged man, apathetic about wedding details

  • Example 4: What do you want to eat?

• The common conflict between these scenarios

• So, what’s the solution to all these conflicts?

  • Picking a better frame

  • Overcoming our egos

  • Listening intently to other perspectives

Common points of conflict

Example 1: Men and a common reluctance to plan things

I once dated a woman who was frustrated with how a lot of men in her past resisted planning things.

Men from dating apps wouldn’t propose places, dates, and times.

Men she dated more seriously would plan things at first, but would gradually stop. The pattern with each man was similar:

• he would construct a plan

• she would want to modify it

• he would throw up his hands and say, “ok, you plan it then”

She said she didn’t mind doing some of the planning, but she didn’t want to become the default planner.

It makes sense why many women express a desire for someone who plans in their dating profiles:

Example 2: Disagreement over household chores

I’ve lived with and been the third wheel to many couples. As a result, I’ve been privy to a lot of arguments. A lot of them are about household duties.

A common issue that arises is something like this:

• Pickier Spouse wants a certain standard enforced (e.g. the kitchen cleaned a certain way, with a certain regularity)

• Chill Spouse has a more lax standard

• Chill Spouse will either do the task to their standard OR suggest that, since Pickier Spouse wants it done a certain way, Pickier Spouse can do it, and Chill Spouse will do something else

• Pickier Spouse will often have other things they’ve already “taken over” and will feel like they’re already compromising enough

• An argument ensues

The stereotype is that Chill Spouse is a man and Pickier Spouse is a woman, but in my experience we all fit each mold in different contexts.

Example 3: Engaged man, apathetic about wedding details

I’m sure you’re familiar with the following trope:

• man and woman are engaged

• woman is ironing out wedding details

• woman asks man for opinion

• man has no opinion, whatever you want honey

• woman is peeved, wants man to have an opinion: why AM I doing all of this myself?!

• man gives his opinion

• woman says eh, I don’t like that

• man is peeved: why’d you even ask if you were just going to discard my opinion?

Example 4: What do you want to eat?

Finally, there’s the trope everyone loves to joke about:

• couple: *deciding what to eat*

• man: what do you want to eat?

• woman: idk

• man: how about X?

• woman: nah I don’t want that

• man: …

The common conflict between these scenarios

If we squint, all these scenarios are gesturing at the same conflict:

• The woman wants the man to have more agency, put more effort.

• The man wants the woman to be more flexible, more chill.

I define agency as the ability get what you want.

I define flexibility as the ability to want what you get.

Many of the negative male stereotypes and complaints about men portray a man with a lack of agency:

The guy who won't plan things. The nice guy. The doormat boyfriend. The deadbeat dad.

Many of the negative female stereotypes and complaints about women portray a woman with a lack of flexibility.

The high-maintenance woman. The nagging girlfriend. The bridezilla. The Karen.

So, what's the solution to all these conflicts?

On the surface, it seems like the remedy is obvious: each “side” meets in the middle somewhere.

The “men” put in as much effort as they can. The “women” relax their expectations as much as they can.

But I think it’s fairly obvious that what’s going on is much deeper than that.

1. Picking a better frame

For one thing, we are all “the woman” or “the man” in various contexts. Even if the stereotypes are gendered, we all have issues with agency and flexibility.

For another thing, “one side should do more and the other side should accept less” is bad framing. It’s too “one side vs the other” for me.

I like “us vs the problem” better. It’s up to everyone to

1. have both agency and flexibility, and

2. know which one is more effective to embody in a given context

(Did I just reinvent the Serenity Prayer?)

For example, in the “What do you want to eat” scenario, I think it’s up to the “man” (gender neutral) to

1. keep pitching suggestions for what to eat,

2. ask questions to identify patterns and get the couple closer to a solution, and

3. not get discouraged when suggestions are shot down.

I also think it’s up to the “woman” (gender neutral) to

1. be introspective and really drill down on what she wants

2. pitch any suggestions that come to mind for her, and

3. ask herself how much any of this really matters, if it’s worth trying to find the perfect restaurant.

2. Overcoming our egos

In my experience, the biggest road block to having more agency and flexibility is ego.

Logically, it makes sense to pursue agency and flexibility. Doesn’t everyone want to get more of what they want? Doesn’t everyone want to be more satisfied with what they have?

It’s simple, but not easy.

For example, wanting to keep up with the Joneses can cloud our understanding of what we actually want. It can make us less flexible.

Anger, fear, judgment, resentfulness, etc, can also do the same.

When I’m angry, I don’t want to be happy, I want to be dignified and validated.

I want to listen to angry music. I want to right a perceived wrong.

Telling me to calm down is the last thing I want in that moment, but it’s the most reliable path to happiness.

My pride can prevent me from embodying agency. Maybe I feel like “it shouldn’t be this hard”. Or maybe I’m jealous that it’s easier for others.

Maybe I want to look graceful and effortless, so instead of earnestly putting in the effort to solve the problem, I half-ass it. And when it fails, I can hide behind the fact that I wasn’t actually trying.

Or maybe I feel like putting in a lot of effort is beneath me. The problem is too small to be worthy of this much of my attention.

All of these things are distractions from happiness by definition - at least if you go with my definitions.

(Reminder: agency is the ability to get what you want, flexibility is the ability to want what you get.)

3. Listening intently to other perspectives

So, in a way, both “sides” are right.

The stereotypical criticism of men is rooted in men’s egos and fears getting in the way. They might focus too much on the negative parts and opt-out of making a decision or putting in effort altogether.

Like in The Lion King, when Nala is trying to find Simba and convince him to come back and fight for the kingdom. He resists the responsibility at first, but it makes him happiest in the end.

The stereotypical criticism of women is also rooted in women’s egos and fears getting in the way. They might try to control things they can’t control or play games with prizes they don’t actually want.

Like in the original Little Mermaid (which has a more tragic story than the Disney version). The Little Mermaid saves a human prince, falls “in love” with him, and sacrifices a lot to be with him. But the prince never loved her and could never be convinced to. So a happy ending was impossible from the beginning.

Anyone can make any of these mistakes. We are all lion kings and Disney princesses at various points in our lives. We all need a Nala and a Sebastian on our council.