FamilyLife Forums

    Thats an important question on many levels. There maybe was a time that there could be, in a stretch, a correlation...that being that forcing women to stay in abuse was a bad thing.
I think that mindset stuck, even as the problem diminished. Being pro marriage (aside from the absurd claim the being pro marriage is somehow anti marriage) means calling everyone out and looking at the situation........the situation, meaning what EVERYONE is doing.

In any case, I wonder if any men would answer this question. If a forum consisted solely of the posts where someone comes for help after the marriage was over, or almost over, and the sole purpose for replying was to offer "virtual support" by typing comfort, would there be a high level of male participation beyond the ones that are hurting? Hopefully men can get that question without it seeming to put down efforts to help people casuse thats not the point at all.
 
Men seem more able to accept stereotypes like, we are fixers, without letting that bend us out of shape. I notice women nearly always rejecting these kinds of observations, even about things that are good things....as if to BE a certain way is good, but to be CALLED a certain way is somehow insulting.....never got that.

But men participate in those threads, spare especially, with hints, questions, suggestions. Thats how men are. Doing that even leads into the debates though, because the "fixing" gets to the point it makes assumptions and holds people accountable....and off we go into the same wild blue yonder. So I reject the notion that only threads that start with provocative gender quesytions lead to bickering. What it leaves me with is almost ONLY those very short, very general support threads DO NOT bring out gender differences, and therefore, I am concluding....even if Im wrong and I'm happy to be corrected, that many prefer just those kinds of threads. BUT, they'd get very angry if that was observed as prefering something about feelings, because the sterotypes are not valid.

Anyone?   trying to post here and not bicker with the ladies.

divorce in church:

 In any case, I wonder if any men would answer this question. If a forum consisted solely of the posts where someone comes for help after the marriage was over, or almost over, and the sole purpose for replying was to offer "virtual support" by typing comfort, would there be a high level of male participation beyond the ones that are hurting? Hopefully men can get that question without it seeming to put down efforts to help people casuse thats not the point at all.

 

Let's assume that a man did post that sort of post... my marriage is over and I don't want it to be over and I am really hurting.  As of now, with my marriage intact and stronger than it has ever been, I would probably respond to such a thread with a few words of encouragement, urge the man to go to church if he isn't, recommend counseling, recommend a support group, etc.  But after that, I don't know how much I'd really have to offer.  I try to NOT post specifically and I don't post "general" responses like "pray more" or "chin up" or "God has a plan" in threads about things I really don't know much about.  I know what it feels like to face the real possibility of marital separation and not being able to see my kids when I want, but I've never actually had to live it.

I think women, generally, tend to be more emotionally supportive to other women even if the one wanting to help can't completely empathize. 

I think men, generally, tend to be less so with each other.  BUT.. that said.. I think the men who frequent a site like this and do engage in threads are more likely to reply and offer some support.

So, to concisely answer what I believe is your question:  yes, I think some men would respond and offer comfort and support.  I think the number of responses and the length of the thread would both be smaller than a similar post by a woman.  And, having said that... I find myself thinking that it is more likely some women would reply to the man, than any men to a woman.

The short answer is No. Pro-marriage is not an exercise in being anti-women.
 But because men are often taken by surprise when their wife says she's quitting the marriage, it a useful study to look at the reasons wives act like that. And why so many marriages are playing out that scenario.
That is what was being debated in the now defunct marriage forum. But some were interpreting it as anti-women, and lodged complaints. It was an attempt to understand what drives those decisions to opt out.Those kind of attempts at understanding what makes a woman tick have never been able to get very far on these F L forums.
Often someone will say they are being victimised just by the subject matter. Perhaps that is something about women we didn't know?   So how can these things be srutinised for the benefit of all men, if  it gets stopped?

Yet if men who are going through separation and men who aren't, can understand what makes a woman do what she does, why her "feelings" are so powerful in calling the shots, then it may save marriages from disintegration. But that opportunity was cut short. There are others people who simply browse here looking for clues about marriage and wives, so it is of value to them as well.

formerlyalpha:

The short answer is No. Pro-marriage is not an exercise in being anti-women.
 But because men are often taken by surprise when their wife says she's quitting the marriage, it a useful study to look at the reasons wives act like that. And why so many marriages are playing out that scenario.
That is what was being debated in the now defunct marriage forum. But some were interpreting it as anti-women, and lodged complaints. It was an attempt to understand what drives those decisions to opt out.Those kind of attempts at understanding what makes a woman tick have never been able to get very far on these F L forums.
Often someone will say they are being victimised just by the subject matter. Perhaps that is something about women we didn't know?   So how can these things be srutinised for the benefit of all men, if  it gets stopped?

Yet if men who are going through separation and men who aren't, can understand what makes a woman do what she does, why her "feelings" are so powerful in calling the shots, then it may save marriages from disintegration. But that opportunity was cut short. There are others people who simply browse here looking for clues about marriage and wives, so it is of value to them as well.

While I pretty much agree with what you say here, I differ a little on what I believe the purpose of the discussion was. While understanding the decisions to opt our was probably the ultimate goal,we weren't even getting close to that point yet. Before we get there, we have to do away with the notion that the overwhelming majority of divorces are ultimately because of the man, either through his choice or through his words and actions "forcing" her to want to file. 

If we consider that to be the focus, it becomes a little easier to see how the whole thing was perceived as being anti-woman, although the countless ignored explanations make that conclusion, IMO, pretty difficult to arrive at through honest misunderstanding.

In the purest sense, the idea of exploring that portion of divorces female originated, and for lame reasons, is okay, viewable as anti woman BUT BUT BUT but at the very very extreme most it would be anti ONLY the ones who did that....even then it was not intended to be anti anyone.

I marvel at how pointing out the converse never was understood. I tried to show how men generally will own our junk pretty easily. If a thread comes about porn use, the men here to my knowledge didnt get all worked up that we were seeing anti man discussions, and further we would agree and OWN the matter as a gender.

The claims of irrelevance of things like cartoons and sitcoms etc. aren't really correct either, because we were saying that this pervasive attitude in society is WHY the perception is so entrenched that its men men men ending so many marriages that it is a waste of time to even consider women in analysing causal factors. The closest acknowledgement to the fact that there exists a percentage of women was "all sin, the problem is sin" , that being true but in the context being a dismissal of sorts of the topic.

I know of lots and lots of men who see this stuff , and lots of women as well. I have dialog with lots of them elsewhere, and I assumed they once were rejectors and deflectors at one time of certain of the stats etc. So I was cautiously optimistic that we may get somewhere in those talks.

I was wrong, and that wont be the last time Im wrong.

While I posted in many different threads, I did start several in the recent past.
I can't speak for others, but the threads I started were not meant to be an end in themsleves.
They were intended to be like chapters in a book. Chapter one may lay out the problem, and chapter two may cite stats about the problem, and then once the groundwork had been laid the later chapters may propose answers.

But it seems that those threads were seen as a total position, but they weren't. Nevertheless they were attacked as if they were some kind of difinitive statement, they weren't. Perhaps I should have explained their purpose, but considering the cross-purposes of so many posts it seemed pointless.
The threads were asking questions, seeking data, and once that was established it would be posible to move to the next chapter of looking at answeers.
But the furore over stats, and even over the simple fact of asking those particular questions, ultimately meant there was little likelihood of forward progress.  A pity, because the questions still remain.

Holten:

Let's assume that a man did post that sort of post... my marriage is over and I don't want it to be over and I am really hurting.  As of now, with my marriage intact and stronger than it has ever been, I would probably respond to such a thread with a few words of encouragement, urge the man to go to church if he isn't, recommend counseling, recommend a support group, etc.

No assumption necessary we had two of then in spare and baron.

I can't say this with great certainty because I haven't taken the time to read every single one one your posts to spare, but my recollection of what has been posted was, IMO, a lot more of a critical, stop whining  type tone than it was encouraging or recognizing his hurt.

Again, bear in mind that we're talking not only about my imperfect impression but also my imperfect recollection. But it just seems to me that you are much quicker to account for the effects that someone's hurt may have on their perspective in some cases than you are in others.

Holten:

divorce in church:

 In any case, I wonder if any men would answer this question. If a forum consisted solely of the posts where someone comes for help after the marriage was over, or almost over, and the sole purpose for replying was to offer "virtual support" by typing comfort, would there be a high level of male participation beyond the ones that are hurting? Hopefully men can get that question without it seeming to put down efforts to help people casuse thats not the point at all.

 

Let's assume that a man did post that sort of post... my marriage is over and I don't want it to be over and I am really hurting.  As of now, with my marriage intact and stronger than it has ever been, I would probably respond to such a thread with a few words of encouragement, urge the man to go to church if he isn't, recommend counseling, recommend a support group, etc.  But after that, I don't know how much I'd really have to offer.  I try to NOT post specifically and I don't post "general" responses like "pray more" or "chin up" or "God has a plan" in threads about things I really don't know much about.  I know what it feels like to face the real possibility of marital separation and not being able to see my kids when I want, but I've never actually had to live it.

I think women, generally, tend to be more emotionally supportive to other women even if the one wanting to help can't completely empathize. 

I think men, generally, tend to be less so with each other.  BUT.. that said.. I think the men who frequent a site like this and do engage in threads are more likely to reply and offer some support.

So, to concisely answer what I believe is your question:  yes, I think some men would respond and offer comfort and support.  I think the number of responses and the length of the thread would both be smaller than a similar post by a woman.  And, having said that... I find myself thinking that it is more likely some women would reply to the man, than any men to a woman.

Its a lot more detail than I was after, but thanks.
I was really trying to say that, first, the overall level of participation on the forum would drop, because there are only so many ways to say "chin up" or however you would phrase it.

Secondly, the male participation would drop even more in my opinion for some reasons you admit holten.

It would leave a largely womans area, with the men who do post predominantly being the ones seeking help, not offering it.

Im not saying this isa  good thing, a bad thing, its just a thing.

divorce in church:

Holten:

divorce in church:

 In any case, I wonder if any men would answer this question. If a forum consisted solely of the posts where someone comes for help after the marriage was over, or almost over, and the sole purpose for replying was to offer "virtual support" by typing comfort, would there be a high level of male participation beyond the ones that are hurting? Hopefully men can get that question without it seeming to put down efforts to help people casuse thats not the point at all.

 

Let's assume that a man did post that sort of post... my marriage is over and I don't want it to be over and I am really hurting.  As of now, with my marriage intact and stronger than it has ever been, I would probably respond to such a thread with a few words of encouragement, urge the man to go to church if he isn't, recommend counseling, recommend a support group, etc.  But after that, I don't know how much I'd really have to offer.  I try to NOT post specifically and I don't post "general" responses like "pray more" or "chin up" or "God has a plan" in threads about things I really don't know much about.  I know what it feels like to face the real possibility of marital separation and not being able to see my kids when I want, but I've never actually had to live it.

I think women, generally, tend to be more emotionally supportive to other women even if the one wanting to help can't completely empathize. 

I think men, generally, tend to be less so with each other.  BUT.. that said.. I think the men who frequent a site like this and do engage in threads are more likely to reply and offer some support.

So, to concisely answer what I believe is your question:  yes, I think some men would respond and offer comfort and support.  I think the number of responses and the length of the thread would both be smaller than a similar post by a woman.  And, having said that... I find myself thinking that it is more likely some women would reply to the man, than any men to a woman.

Its a lot more detail than I was after, but thanks.
I was really trying to say that, first, the overall level of participation on the forum would drop, because there are only so many ways to say "chin up" or however you would phrase it.

Secondly, the male participation would drop even more in my opinion for some reasons you admit holten.

It would leave a largely womans area, with the men who do post predominantly being the ones seeking help, not offering it.

Im not saying this isa  good thing, a bad thing, its just a thing.

This participation drop that you speak of would not be entirely dissimilar, in both cause and effect as the drop in male participation we are currently seeing in the Church, would it?

Chaz you are onto something there. I know I struggled mightily to try and explain the sort of fuzzy thing(s) that were not about burping and scratching that kept men away from church. I usually got into the corrective vs. supportive stuff and all that, and I think thats all  part of it.

But, you have , if not defined, at least just drawn a line around the nebulous blob that is indeed whats going on there. I hope we can develop this further here and see what the other guys think.

Its a little bit in the "fix it vs. understand it" camp, but its much much more then just that classic conflict.

All in all I'd say good catch sir.