Introduction
From prehistoric to the present times, it has been found that men and women are remarkably different in expressing feelings of love, sentiments, and personal emotions. In prehistoric times, men were the hunters, precociously exposing themselves to external danger to gather food. Male bonding as such was formed in response to external threats and looming danger and to protect one another from wild animals. Thus, it was largely action-oriented. The duty of the womenfolk was to nurture the young and provide emotional support. Thus, the role of women was largely expression-oriented. This basic differentiation in the orientation of the two sexes has caused much trouble and misunderstanding from times immemorial and tends to create confusion even today.
Main body
Carol Tarvis, in her article, discusses the asymmetrical responses of men and women under similar situations of emotional demands. Through several case studies, she seeks to underline the basic differences in men’s and woman’s approaches to love. As evidenced in the case of Roberta, it is essential for women to continually reiterate emotions of love at regular intervals, in the absence of which she begins to lose faith in the very basics of the shared relationship.
Men, on the other hand scarcely understand why they have to vocally provide assurance of their love. According to men, their commitment towards their wives and children, their desire to return home after a hard day’s work should actually speak volumes. In one particular case, a husband actually washed his wife’s car as an expression of love, but the wife hardly noticed. For, traditionally, the woman relies more on expressions of love rather than dutiful actions and would be happier if her husband simply talked to her or shared her problems with her.
Men, on the other hand, are no experts on verbal communication. When faced with problems they would rather divert themselves in exhaustive games or drinking bouts in the local pub. Women, when faced with the troubles of life would much rather discuss the issue with their friends and find relief in their solidarity.
Thus, for women, like Eve, it is better to have a sympathetic listener to her woes rather than someone who offers practical advice, and her husband does only the advising part. It is the perpetual women’s problem that men do not communicate; women, on the other hand, assign much importance to “deep talk” and “small talk”. For men, action speaks more than words, and they are perennially puzzled as to why women nag incessantly and talk dime-a-dozen instead of actively seeking to employ the hands-on method to resolve problems.
Personal commitments and healthy relationships between the two sexes may seem difficult, but then despite all the differences relationships are forged and maintained. By the 1970’s popular literature in America had already assigned the “deficit approach” as man’s inability to display emotions and express love. The concept of intimacy is also feminized as it is defined in terms of the female language of closeness in interpersonal relationships. Men, not being overtly vocal, are dominated in this instance by the woman’s language. As such, the private sphere of life belongs to women, whereas the public sphere is assigned to men.
For men, personal commitment means their daily work to take care of their families, but women often fail to identify this practical help as love. Such action-expression diametric opposites are manifest in the opposite sexes right from their adolescence. Girls appreciate a “face-to-face” talking session with their friends and peers, while the boys adopt a “side-by-side” attitude to shoulder problems or even to enjoy games, and sometimes their shared activity can be as dull and ordinary as watching the television together.
Diametrically different also, is the way men and women respond to jokes. Women tend to look beyond the surface reality of the jokes and are often labeled as humorless creatures. Men, on the other hand, thrive on jokes and use them as a medium to create bonds and nourish camaraderie.
Conclusion
While talking and expressing emotions are all too important to women, to men they seem useless and superfluous. Tarvis recounts the experience of a particular woman and her husband whose morning ritual was to read the newspapers and drink coffee to the accompaniment of radio music. However, when she moves away, irritated with the music, her husband is sensible enough to turn off the music. This small gesture reveals that it is the company of his wife that he enjoys most; music is irrelevant. Such is also the case of the majority of men; they prefer companionable silence rather than mindless chatter. Yet, in times of crisis men help women as much as they can. Today, the middle-class woman realizes that a man works for the simple fact that he loves his family, his actions speak more than words.