Male Bonding vs. Female Bonding

[earllogjam]

I have noticed that men and women have completely different styles of forming friendships. Men often need to do things together to bond, go bowling, fix cars, go fishing, play softball, go hunting, play pool, darts, poker....etc. They can experience a deep sense of intimacy working together without talking at all. The bonding is usually around an activity.

Women on the other hand need to talk to bond. They seem to be perfectly content to just talk over a cup of coffee and they are able to do the Sex in the City girl bonding thing over dinner or coffee. Just plain talking around a table seems odd for most guys unless they were playing poker or doing something. The focus is different. The two sexes bond differently and I always wondered why this is the case.

Has anybody else found this to be true? Any ideas why this is the case?

 

[viking1]

Seems to be true. I don't know why. Male and female psychology is very different.

 

[IntoxicatingToxin]

Yeah, men and women are just wired differently. I would say it probably goes all the way back to the caveman era... I mean, women didn't do much but cook and raise children. Men hunted. So women just sat around and talked about their kids, or shared recipes, and men hunted together. :biggrin: That's my insanely wild guess, though.

 

[viking1]

I don't know either, but it makes as much sense as any other theory.

 

[TxAg]

Men often need to do things together to bond...
Women on the other hand need to talk to bond. Any ideas why this is the case?

Yeah. Until men are pretty well bonded already, they don't like to talk much because this exposes the inner self and feelings, and that raises fear of a perceived vulnerability.

Someone once pointed out how men also are much less likely than women to say "I don't know" if indeed they don't know something. Is this a pride thing, a fear of being adequate in some way? I don't know.

 

[earllogjam]

This is a constant issue with my women friends. I like talking and all that and do the Starbucks thing but it just gets boring sometimes so now I insist on walking and talking, or eating and talking. A woman friend of mine were discussing this and she says it's because that is how they were as kids and it just carries over into adulthood. I think it is hardwired into us Meg.

I would imagine this difference in bonding is a bone of contention and source of conflict in straight relationships. Whenever I see older couples out together the men are invariably together doing things like looking at a buddy's car and the women are sitting talking. They are rarely mixed.

I think this crosses the sexuality divide too. Lesbians like to "process". Gay men are just like straight men on how they bond, there is just that sex part that is included.:tongue:

I also think that on a basic level men fear each other and are competitors. For thousands of years, men who were not of the same "clan" were potential enemies. It was better not to trust at first. For some, this fear is unconscious. Being unconscious makes it a more powerful inhibitor to developing bonds. I think men do not begin to trust one another until an opportunity for violence has passed untaken. Activity enables that to happen. Probably the most frequent type of violence men do to one another in our society is not physical but mental- public ridicule and humiliation. Like in some of these threads

 

[whatireallywant]

I'm a woman and I'd rather do things than just talk.

 

[earllogjam]

I'm a woman and I'd rather do things than just talk.

I'm not saying that this is cut and dry. Just a trend I have observed. I'm a guy and I like to talk but I can usually be buds with other guys doing activities where talking may not be so important like skiing or playing video games together. Do you ever find yourself bonding with women without talking being the center of activity? I have not been able to do that.

 

[Kimahri]

Like another poster said, we are just wired differently. I have strong ties to one guy that doesn't understand what is going. I think women have the advantage over us. There don't seem to be any "taboo" subjects. Unless you're in a fraternity or sports team, I've not heard the subject come up. Though, I did read an article in Details a few months ago that talked about how non-gay m/m relationship's nature changing.

Any guy interested in sharing ideas of insights on male bonding would be cool to talk to. It's a subject I am VERY much into. Not alot of the guys around me get it.

 

[Love-it]

There hasn't been a bar in our small town in years so I have stated many people come to my business just to talk. I am pretty open about what I will talk about and try to take clues from comments, questions asked, changes in mannerisms or judge how their day is going by how they look and/or act.

I have found that a lot of men are willing to talk about their problems if given the opportunity, are asked directly and there is some privacy. Most of the time they welcome a question and a chance to talk, you can find out some amazing things, if you ask.

Some men are lonely, it doesn't always mean that they are alone, it just means no one has listened to them in a long time.

I have also found that women will talk about some pretty intimate things about their health and love life if given a chance, I think because I am somewhat of a stranger and I listen.

Ask.

 

[earllogjam]

I have found that a lot of men are willing to talk about their problems if given the opportunity, are asked directly and there is some privacy. Most of the time they welcome a question and a chance to talk, you can find out some amazing things, if you ask.

Some men are lonely, it doesn't always mean that they are alone, it just means no one has listened to them in a long time.

I have also found that women will talk about some pretty intimate things about their health and love life if given a chance, I think because I am somewhat of a stranger and I listen.

Ask.

Yeah, my barbershop is like this. I think I tell my barber more that most people. Do you cut hair?

 

[sdg475]

I also think that on a basic level men fear each other and are competitors. For thousands of years, men who were not of the same "clan" were potential enemies. It was better not to trust at first. For some, this fear is unconscious.

I think you're on to something. Just the other day I was at an advising day for college where we got to meet fellow students and learn more about the university. I noticed the difference between how men and women act towards one another upon meeting for the first time. Two of the girls in my little assigned group had the same major, and talked to each other all day. While on the other hand, one of the guys in the group had the same major as me. We talked briefly, but it was a little forced (and nothing more than "oh so you're in this major too...have you seen the _______ building?"). It was pretty obvious that we thought of each other as competition and did not really want to mingle.

 

[ManlyBanisters]

Yeah, men and women are just wired differently. I would say it probably goes all the way back to the caveman era... I mean, women didn't do much but cook and raise children. Men hunted. So women just sat around and talked about their kids, or shared recipes, and men hunted together. :biggrin: That's my insanely wild guess, though.

Sorry to go OT but I'm going to have to take you up on that, Meg - I think you'll find in most hunter gather societies (that I assume you are referring to) the women did a VAST amount of work - the gathering, just for starters, was mostly done by the women (and children). These women would have walked for miles every day to get water, berries, various naturally occuring food stuffs - and if you are talking about slightly more developed societies with an arable constituant then the women did an awful lot of the farming too. And then when all the stuff was gathered, who do you think prepared it. I mean have you ever made your own bread? - from raw un processed wheat? - using just stones and fire? And who do you think cared for any animals that might have been kept?

I'm sure you're right about the talking but they would have been just as busy as the men - if not more so.

Seriously - look at the Maasai women of today to get a picture of how much sitting on their asses these women might have done. From wikipedia - hardly THE authority - but it'll do for now:
Warriors are in charge of society's security while boys are responsible for herding livestock. During the drought season, both warriors and boys assume responsibility for herding livestock. The elders are directors and advisors for day-to-day activities. Women are responsible for making the houses as well as supplying water, collecting firewood, milking cattle and cooking for the family.

 

[Love-it]

Yeah, my barbershop is like this. I think I tell my barber more that most people. Do you cut hair?

No, I have a hardware store, the people who come in have problems with their plumbing, electrical, construction, etc. so they have a need for materials, tools or advice on how to fix, build or solve something. Never thought of it in that way, that I am already helping them solve problems on a mechanical level, I see people who are frustrated about their plumbing problems,etc. so maybe it's easier to recognize when they are having life problems. I am a curious type of person and ask people what they have done or do and I have met some wonderfully talented, open and interesting people. There are all kinds out there and you can learn something from everyone.

 

[D_Bob_Crotchitch]

People tell unreal things to their mailman. Many days, I have to come home, and scrub my brain. I come on the net, and act crazy to vent the stress of the day. Please! Please! If you tell me your business, I will detest you, and get even in the most polite, and genteel manner.

 

[Corius]

Aren't we forgetting the way in which our society communicates a whole different set of values to boys as opposed to girls?
Boys don't get much encouragement in the "tender talk" that reveals deep feeling and emotion so important to real bonding.

In the matter of bonding, I suspect men still have a lot to learn from the ladies.

 

[Rugbypup]

No, i dont think thats fair, you cant say male bonding isnt as good as female bonding, we are after all different creatures. If men have so much to learn from women, then its certainly no more than women have to learn from men.

 

[DC_DEEP]

I think you hit on something there, corius.

For me, I have to have a balance of the "talking/sharing" and the "doin' stuff".

But earl, I have to ask: are you talking about bonding, or socializing? I don't see those as the same thing. I can go bowling with the guys, but if that's the entirety of it, I see it as socializing rather than bonding. There aren't many with whom I enjoy just sitting and talking all the time. But with those people to whom I am closest, I have to do more than just tinker around on the car or stare at a game on the tube.

With a good friend, would I rather drink a cup of coffee and discuss my current relationship, or go bowling, or talk about my current relationship while we are bowling? It would have to be the latter. If it's a casual friendship with no real "bonding", I would pick the non-discussing activity.

 

[Rugbypup]

As I understand it and I’m no expert on this, bonding occurs on three initial assessments of the other.

Superior, Equal, Inferior. These subconscious assessments determine the nature of the bonding process and ultimately any bonds and friendship formed, a variant of our pack instinct to alpha, beta, follower/member, omega social roles.

From a male perspective, men are decide to bond on subconscious decisions.

Basically, if two men look at each other and feel...

Superior to Superior, then both recognise the others strength, knowledge or ability or feel bonding with this man would reflect well on his social standing, will ultimately compete with each other be it banter or aggression until a bond is harmonised as equal to equal or superior to inferior. Usually overly competitive to stormy to confrontational, testosterone laden relationships.

Superior to Inferior, then a man recognises his need or wants strength, knowledge or ability he acknowledges in another man, or simply desires to bond with a preserved superior man to increase his own social standing, will adopt a (all be it subconscious) submissive role in the bonding in order to present no threat and achieve favour. Usually stable relationship if bonding occurs but should these men bond a preference to ‘using’ abuse may arise.

Equal to Equal, were two men recognise strength, knowledge or ability similar to themselves and desire mutual alliance, companionship and support from bonding with each other. The most harmonises relationship men can achieve, neither feeling overly superior or inferior to each other. A relationship that leads to more open and communicative interactions and long lasting bonding.

Inferior to Inferior, the least subconsciously desirable bonding, neither man feels the other has any attributes that can offer any social gain to them. Both men fear negative reflections on themselves but association. A bonding of this type may offer some degree of support and may eventually result in an Equal to Equal state.

After all, strip away all human psychological rational and understand and we are all especially just clever apes...

...in my humble opinion anyways, lol

 

[D_Humper E Bogart]

That seems to work!

I prefer female (platonic) relationships. They can be stormy (oh boy!) but it's nice to say my mind without having to go down the "CRUSH THE INFIDELS!!! YARRGHHH!!" masochism. OK so you can roll your eyes at any talk about shoes, but I'll do a Peter-rock, if anyone needs it.