Common Male Misinterpretations of Women
She's interrupting me.
She's criticizing me.
She’s telling me what I already know, as if I’m stupid.
She's controlling me.
She's contradicting herself.
She's being illogical.
She wants to wear the pants in the family.
No matter what I do, it’s wrong.
She has a double standard.
If I do it, it's "abuse," if she does it, she's “just upset."
Sex only happens when she feels like it.
She's too soft on our son; he’ll be a wimp.”
These objections don’t make sense to women. Of course, not all women are alike and not all men are alike, but to the extent that gender tendencies apply to your relationship, we can begin by doing away with misunderstandings. Men can read this article and women can read the article, Common Female Misinterpretations of Men, and both adjust slightly for the sake of the relationship.
Thus, in that spirit, I have heard many women respond to the above misunderstandings as follows.
She's interrupting me.
She doesn’t see it as "interrupting," but as participating in the conversation. It’s what women do. Unlike men, who have sequential conversations, women have fluid conversations, chiming in mid-sentence, talking back-and-forth almost at the same time, and yet hearing one another. To women, it signals that attention is being paid; interest is being shown by interacting. Yes, both spouses need to major on listening to understand, rather than talking to be understood. And, most humans are bad at responding first with empathy (typically a woman’s initial need), or reflecting understanding of the point the other is trying to make (typically a man’s initial need). If both can become good at reflecting empathy and understanding, both will feel heard, seen, and understood, even if the conversation is fluid. And if one had more to say before the other chimed in, they can patiently and kindly ask to be heard, or, in a mature and kind way, add in what they wanted to say.
No matter what I do, it’s wrong.
(Variations on this include: No matter what I do, she criticizes it, or corrects me like I was a child, or second-guesses what I did, or gives unsolicited advice, or gets mad that I didn’t do it the way she would have done it.)
Her comments, observations, questions, wonders, doubts, fears, alternate ideas, suggestions, and worries are not votes of non-confidence; she’s not implying that you're incompetent. Three things may be going on. She may be verbally processing her feelings—especially fear born of concerns over safety, security and uncertainty—especially if children are involved. Or, like above, what she’s voicing may be her way of caring, of helping. She’s not doubting you nor competing with you, she is trying to connect and to help you. Or, she may be letting you know what is of importance to her, trusting that in your love for her, you’ll make it important to you. (Of course, no matter our gender, we must allow each other to be different, state what we’d like as a positive request, and affirm when our partner does that is meaningful to us (basic behavioralism).)
She’s telling me what I already know, as if I’m stupid.
She is helping. It’s what women do for one another. They point out things; they remind; they give information that might be helpful. And they don’t take offense at it. In fact, women would more likely take offense at another woman silently sitting by, not helping. This makes a woman feel alone, without a friend. What she’s said is not implying anything about you; there’s no reason to take offense. She’s voicing what would be helpful to her if the roles were reversed.
She's controlling me.
She would not consider it an attempt to control, but an attempt to be “seen,” heard, considered, included, and part of a team. Dr. John Gottman’s research reveals that a key predictor of marital happiness is the husband’s acceptance of his wife’s influence. In our egalitarian culture, we would prefer to read that marital happiness is characterized by mutual influence. Why doesn’t he write that? Because he’s a researcher; he’s not presenting his philosophy, but the results of his research. And those results show that when men oppose or resist their wives’ influence, there is more conflict and less relationship satisfaction. He says, “Statistically speaking, when a man is not willing to share power with his partner, there is an 81% chance that his marriage will self-destruct.” So, if men are willing for the sake of a happy marriage, they can change their mindset from “She’s controlling me,” to “She’s giving me a clue toward how I can be there for her; how I can make her feel loved and cared for; how I can defend what’s important to her. And no, it doesn’t mean that women automatically get their way. It is fair for either spouse to communicate—maturely—“This is very important to me, I’d really like your support on this.” The measure is not “Who won this one,” but, “The marriage won.” That happens when both hear and understand what is important to the other (almost guaranteed to be different) and there is an atmosphere of mutual support and yieldedness, especially to what is very important to one partner.
She wants to wear the pants in the family.
One of the most common scenarios in couples therapy is a couple discussing a past incident in which he made decisions and she felt left out. In that incident, the man and the woman had different desires. He wanted to be trusted to independently make a competent decision; she wanted to be included in the discussion, her input to be valued and considered, and for the final decision to be a team decision. In addition, two other things are often at play. For the man, the incident was—first and foremost—about pragmatics, functionality, logistics, mechanics, spreadsheets, and other tangible measures; for the woman, the incident was—first and foremost—about the relationship and the feeling between them… the atmosphere, tone, and sense of friendly camaraderie. Neither is unimportant; but husband and wife often differ over which is most important. And finally, as stated above, women want their “hearts to be heard” and their feelings about a matter considered and defended (a “Venus conversation,” per Dr. John Gray), in contrast to a “Mars Conversation” in which he wants his logical, pragmatic, mathematical or mechanical point to be understood. Both want what is important to them to be considered important by the other. Both must voice understanding of what is important to the other, without negating it with a “But.” If we state what is important to the other, the “But…” becomes unnecessary.
She's contradicting herself.
A woman would say that she’s sorting things out as she talks, and her husband can help her do so by being an empathic, supportive listener. More often than men, women are verbal processors. That means that what she said a few sentences ago does not need to line up with what she just said because she’s sorting it out as she goes, amending things in-process, refining her understanding and honing her decisions with the help of a supportive, listening friend (you).
She's being illogical.
As I’ve written in “Why Married Couples Stop Talking to Each Other,” allowance must be made for temperament differences over gender differences, but generally men lead with the left brain (cognitive, logical, practical, mechanical, independent, solution-focused), while women lead with the right brain (emotional, considerate, sensitive to the atmosphere between people, interdependent, relationship-focused. Both men and women use both sides of their brains; it’s a matter of which goes first. This means that, as stated above, an issue – especially a relationship issue – is going to be for her first and foremost about the atmosphere between them. This is true even if in her profession she is a logical, efficient and effective decision-maker. This is not work; this is a romantic relationship. It’s not that she won’t get around to a logical solution. She will. But first, she wants validation for how she feels, and how the atmosphere with her partner feels. For him, an issue is going to be first and foremost about the problem that needs a solution. His empathy opens the door for her readiness to listen to the logical, tangible solutions he offers as a male way of caring. His tangible, non-relational points are more likely to be heard when she has experienced empathic caring—empathically voicing understanding of what she’s feeling (not then erasing it with “But…”). And he will feel heard when she voices understanding that his practical solution would probably work. He needs understanding like she needs empathy; she needs empathy like he needs understanding.
It has to be her way.
Like above, she doesn’t see it that way, even if you pull out your spreadsheet with tabulations of how often in the past month things went her way.(Please don’t do that.) Similar to the explanations above about control and “wearing the pants in the family,” she doesn’t see it as “getting her way.” Rather, if her husband is attuned to what is important to her and how she feels about something, and yields to her, she feels loved. If he stubbornly insists upon his own way, she feels less loved. If he does so with a harsh and angry tone—especially if he reduces her to silence or tears—she feels unloved. It doesn’t mean that a man must always yield to her way; it does mean that if the “win” is measured in relationship satisfaction, he’s more likely to win by kindly supporting her than by insisting on his own way. A man has an opportunity to use his strengths to protect, serve, love, and support. That’s a relationship win! (And yes, a woman can also support what’s important to her husband, but in this article we’re talking about what men can do.)
She has a double standard.
Again, women don’t see this, even if a man documents and “proves it.” (Please don’t do that, either.) If a woman does what she has asked her husband to not do, she does not see it as a double standard, but expects him to understand that she had a good reason for doing it - say, checking her phone in the middle of a conversation, when she has asked him to not do that, or inviting guests over without checking with him, when she’s asked him to not do that. Rather than get irritated or challenge her, she’d like him to presume the best , maybe inquire, but overall to be supportive of what she regards as important. Again, the question is “What is the ‘win’ here?” Is it that the man wins his case? Or is the win that his wife feels loved? And yes, a woman can reflect upon her husband‘s curiosity about the standards they’ve agreed to, and come to recognize when she is applying a double standard. I’ve seen this happen in conversations between couples. It’s far better that she draw this conclusion through genuinely curious dialog than through contentious debate.
If I do it, it's "abuse," if she does it, she's “just upset."
It used to be that “abuse“ applied only to physical assaults. But, the damaging effects of emotional abuse have come to be recognized as just as scarring, or more-so, in their long-term impact. The list of what is considered abusive has also grown exponentially over the years. Men often read these list (as long as 40 terms long) and scratch their head in disbelief. Men interacting with men would not feel “abused“ by many of the things listed. Annoyed, maybe, but not abused. The common denominator in the things listed is that they cause women to feel afraid. Often, those same things would not cause a man to fear. Thus, his confusion. For instance, if a fellow male put his fist through a wall, another man might actually chuckle at how ridiculous he’s being in his anger, and give him space. But it would strike fear in the heart of a woman. Likewise, two men could raise their voices at each other and later go out for a beer; no harm done. A woman might experience fear and intimidation at the same volume. The reason she feels free to do the same thing she considers abusive is that she thinks of him as strong compared to a woman. No matter how much the 21st-century would like to paint the genders as alike, most men could probably overpower their girlfriends or wives. So, she may think he can take it. That doesn’t make it OK; harsh is still harsh and negative interactions are still negative, and both are costly to the relationship, regardless of which gender is their source. So, women should learn to not excuse themselves for behavior they ask their partner to not employ. It’s not helpful to the relationship. But men can understand that a woman may be intimidated and frightened by things that might not frighten men. Understand it. Respect it. Protect her. Demonstrate your strength as mature self-control.
Sex only happens when she feels like it.
Almost universally, women say that it is difficult, if not impossible, to want to connect sexually if they don’t feel safe, cared for, helped amid stress, and tended to emotionally. Relationship connection must precede physical connection for most women. The opposite is often true for men, for whom physical connection is de-stressing and creates a feeling of relational closeness. As it turns out, positive attention is an aphrodisiac for both men and women, but that attention is nuanced by gender. Men generally feel drawn to intimacy with a woman who respects his intelligence, competence, strength, body, looks, success, or some combination thereof. Women generally feel drawn to intimacy with a man who listens to her, empathizes with her, prioritizes her, protects her heart, is there for her, helps her, and creates a peaceful, stress-reducing atmosphere. It is then that she is most likely to want to be intimate. And given the power differential between men and women, it is not OK to pressure or force a woman to bed. Better to make the bed.
She's too soft on our sons; they’ll be wimps.
Parenting styles may be determined as much by temperament or upbringing as by gender. However, if a man is complaining of his wife's softness toward their sons, she is likely prioritizing empathy and nurture over mental toughness and tangible effectiveness. Both have a place in human development. If we’re willing to accept and value our differences, we can accept the value of one another’s parenting style. The trick is allowing for those differences within a shared sense of parenting values. Like other marital hot spots, couples do well to not let parenting differences divide them, nor let the children pit them against one another by playing them off of one another. Children should expect from their parents consistent values with nuanced individuality. Women are more likely to be cautious, caring comforters. Men are more likely to be rough and tumble, consequential coaches, Ideally, both parents can agree to empathic encouragement and non-shaming, non-injurious, consistent, logical rewards and consequences. Within these consistencies, let mom be mom and dad be dad,