Misconception: Minimalists don't care about people.

[pinkytoe]

Grew up in the 50s, so vestiges of the "Prince Charming" stuff pop up from time to time. The media of that time definitely had gender roles and it's hard to undo some of that. I much prefer an egalitarian marriage which we mostly have, but there are days when I feel like I am too much the "man" - having to make the big decisions just to make something happen. I don't know if it's because DH is not confident enough to or prefers not being resonsible for outcomes. Possibly, he is just avoiding an unhappy spouse if he makes the call and it isn't the right one. I am jokingly called "Bwana". Marriage is interesting. Confidence in either sex is very alluring - I must admit. We definitely have different feelings about stuff that doesn't affect our other issues.

[ApatheticNoMore]

As a result, I seem to attract men who want/expect me to take care of them. Not a 50/50 sort of thing, a partnership. But coming home from work and whining about what Bob said to Sam, and I'm supposed to make it all better. Everyone is out to get them; no one understands them; no one ever gives them a break. They may act "manly" at work, but at home, they expect a lot of support and shoring up from their girlfriend. Emotional leeches. It's exhausting. They are childlike.

sounds like these guys just need to cry (yea I know men don't cry, hey all women aren't much for crying either for that matter though usually slightly more than men, and I don't mean cry as a bid for attention - maybe I just mean cry alone where noone can see, but I do know the feeling of accumulated PAIN at the end of the day).

Yes I am familiar with all the other 'answers', but none of them work. Of course if they want a therapist, the question is why don't they get one, but therapy doesn't really solve all people's problems either whatever one may think and can misguide as often as it guides.

IMO this usage means the person who has the ultimate control/direction over the household. It's his ultimate responsibility to take care of trouble, make sure there's enough money, and be the voice of reason and stability.

oh it sounds so nice. adulthood is such a heavy burden to bear. but sounds nice and realistic aren't necessarily the same thing (finding out a long lost uncle I never knew existed died and left me two million dollars tomorrow also sounds nice ...)

[Zoe Girl]

[QUOTE=Miss Cellane;2

Maybe it's not so much "acting manly" as it is "acting like an adult." Dealing with your own problems as much as possible. Not expecting someone else to step in all. the. time. to validate feelings and offer suggestions and basically put a bandaid on whatever is oh, so wrong This Time.[/QUOTE]

i like that , acting like an adult. i am probably more comfortable with male feelings that are softer, but there is a difference between that and just wallowing around. i really don't want to tell someone what to do with their life, but i will talk things through.

[kib]

Ah, I think I know what you mean. People tell me that I come across as very independent and in control. (Where they get that idea from, I have no clue. I do not *feel* all that much in control of anything.)

As a result, I seem to attract men who want/expect me to take care of them. Not a 50/50 sort of thing, a partnership. But coming home from work and whining about what Bob said to Sam, and I'm supposed to make it all better. Everyone is out to get them; no one understands them; no one ever gives them a break. They may act "manly" at work, but at home, they expect a lot of support and shoring up from their girlfriend. Emotional leeches. It's exhausting. They are childlike.

Maybe it's not so much "acting manly" as it is "acting like an adult." Dealing with your own problems as much as possible. Not expecting someone else to step in all. the. time. to validate feelings and offer suggestions and basically put a bandaid on whatever is oh, so wrong This Time.

Now that's really interesting. I feel like I could have written it. But I also feel like maybe I'm starting to be that "guy", a kind of passive rebellion against being pushed into the 3M role (maid, manager and mommy). Bleh!!!

[bekkilyn]

Maybe it's not so much "acting manly" as it is "acting like an adult." Dealing with your own problems as much as possible. Not expecting someone else to step in all. the. time. to validate feelings and offer suggestions and basically put a bandaid on whatever is oh, so wrong This Time.

Yes, I think a lot of it is "acting like an adult" but there's also a sort of "masculinity" to it too. I just can't specifically put my finger on it though. Alan was pretty on the mark too though.

But yes, the whiny types...ugh! It's not that I'd care for the type that *never* shows a shred of emotion about anything, but there's a balance.

I was reading something on a different forum a while ago that kind of fits. A guy there was complaining about women never wanting to date him because he was "too nice." Someone else started talking about the qualities she liked in men and one of those qualities was decisiveness and how she didn't like to be the one to have to make *all* of the decisions in the relationship and how the "nice guys," thinking they were being nice, would always defer every single last thing to her. It's something that drives me crazy too. For instance, guy wants to go somewhere to eat, so you agree and ask where he wants to go. Response is, "I don't know. Where do you want to go?" Now I'm thinking in my head, "Hello! *You* were the one who had the idea. Why do *I* now need to be the one to decide this?" So rather than getting into a long drawn out back and forth thing of, "Doesn't matter, where do *you* want to go?" when the reality is that I *really* don't care as long as it doesn't involve green peas, I'll just randomly pick something only to get the response of, "Not really in the mood for that. Can't we think of somewhere else?" or end up going just to find out later that he really wanted to go to such-and-such and acts moody about it. Drives me *insane*.

I really liked a guy who I was friends with many years ago who would just decide he wanted to go to such-and-such restaurant, see so-and-so movie, visit such-and-such place, etc. and then just ask me if I wanted to go. I'd also do the same if I was really interested in something. None of all the above sort of wishy-washy-ness.

[TxZen]

I am not sentimental in the way of things. I have nothing other than photographs from my family. I may inherit some jewelry but beyond that, I don't have a single thing. On the other hand, my sister hoarded every last thing of my mother's should could. This is where I have to laugh- there is a pretty picture of some sheep in the pasture that supposedly belonged to my Great Grandmother. This was something passed down to the females on my mom's side of the family. About 15 years ago, I asked my Aunt about the picture. How did Great Grandma get it? Why is it sentimental? Well, the answer I got had me howling. It was something she was given when she traded some food she raised on the farm, to help a family out. She never really liked it and gave it to my Aunt, who gave it to my Nanna, who in turned gave it to my Mother. It went from a sentimental piece of art work to just another thing in an instant.

I have never been attached to things. At 16, I gave all I had to a local animal shelter for their yard sale. I kept some books, a teddy bear and a few small items. My mother about flipped out but it has never bothered me. I was thinking about this today. I am in my 25th year of simple/minimal living and am ever so grateful for living like this. I can't imagine moving the 18 times I have with a lot of stuff nor would I give up all the countless memories and places I have gotten to see, because of simple living.

When I went to CT last summer, I was looking around my parent's place. Yes, some stuff brings back memories of where we bought it or where it was in the house, but nothing I would want to take or keep. Like I said, all I took was a large envelope of photos.

[ToomuchStuff]

On the ORIGINAL post, I do think you pushed her and she got defensive and that will need further discussion to say if she actually believes that, or just said it that way to try to end it. One way to test it, would be with a COPY of a photograph (reprint, not photocopy). Because you could sit it down in front of her, and then ask her what the person is saying. Then ask her if she had the memory of the event as you tore up the photo. (this is why you need s reprint)
She may freak about that, which is why you would produce the original then. And explain that those that have suffered fire, flood, etc. have the memories, but not the possessions, or as a minimalist calls them, the entrapping. (have to pay for storage, upkeep, etc). The stuff isn't the person, but a physical reminder that brings back happy memories (or people don't tend to keep the stuff), and IMHE, the photo's are the thing most fire victims miss. (they also help with our memories later in life)

On the subject of selling everything, when one of my neighbors passed away, her entire estate was put up for sale. The auctioneer asked the entire crowd, if anyone minded if he gave the family the photo albums. There were three of us there, that were willing to bid on them for the family, just in case. Without any of us seeing them, I have no idea what was in the albums, if there were any that connected with her family (Paul Henning, creator of Beverly Hillbillies), but then the family had to bid on everything else. (missed a couple pieces they wanted, that went back a few generations)

[Ultralight]

On the ORIGINAL post, I do think you pushed her and she got defensive and that will need further discussion to say if she actually believes that, or just said it that way to try to end it. One way to test it, would be with a COPY of a photograph (reprint, not photocopy). Because you could sit it down in front of her, and then ask her what the person is saying. Then ask her if she had the memory of the event as you tore up the photo. (this is why you need s reprint)
She may freak about that, which is why you would produce the original then. And explain that those that have suffered fire, flood, etc. have the memories, but not the possessions, or as a minimalist calls them, the entrapping. (have to pay for storage, upkeep, etc). The stuff isn't the person, but a physical reminder that brings back happy memories (or people don't tend to keep the stuff), and IMHE, the photo's are the thing most fire victims miss. (they also help with our memories later in life)

On the subject of selling everything, when one of my neighbors passed away, her entire estate was put up for sale. The auctioneer asked the entire crowd, if anyone minded if he gave the family the photo albums. There were three of us there, that were willing to bid on them for the family, just in case. Without any of us seeing them, I have no idea what was in the albums, if there were any that connected with her family (Paul Henning, creator of Beverly Hillbillies), but then the family had to bid on everything else. (missed a couple pieces they wanted, that went back a few generations)

I think she and I will revisit the issue in a more calm space. She told me she felt bad for saying the stuff she said later one (something she rarely does, haha).