Post by 3JulianG on Mar 15, 2015 22:22:51 GMT
After our recent discussions about gender and specifically “They” by Michael Crichton, this article and study is somewhere under Crichton’s definitions and way that men and women should regard each other. According to Crichton, men are really just as “emotional” as women. According to the article, if the woman is happy, the man will be happy, no matter what. While this means that the man has no individual or independent emotions, it also means that if the woman is emotional, the man will be as well.
The article then quotes Deborah Carr, a professor in the Department of Sociology at the School of Arts and Science stating that she thinks “it comes down to the fact that when a wife is satisfied with the marriage she tends to do a lot more for her husband, which has a positive effect on his life. Men tend to be less vocal about their relationships and their level of marital unhappiness might not be translated to their wives.” This means that to Carr and her studies, a happy man will not do a lot more for his wife just because he is happy, making males look like unloving schlubs. They will just go along with whatever is happening. Apparently, as long as the woman in a relationship is happy, the man will be happy too solely because she will do more for him, nothing more, nothing less. In addition, men would not get sad if their significant other became sick, but the woman would if her man did.
This definitely gives men a bad rap. I do not think that this study’s data is incorrect, but like Stephen Jay Gould commenting on Paul Broca’s study and research on the different between male and female brains, the data is sound, but the interpretation of the data is “ill-founded” and wrongly translated.
news.rutgers.edu/research-news/wife%E2%80%99s-happiness-more-crucial-her-husband%E2%80%99s-keeping-marriage-track-rutgers-study-finds/20140911#.VQX-JI7F91U
The article then quotes Deborah Carr, a professor in the Department of Sociology at the School of Arts and Science stating that she thinks “it comes down to the fact that when a wife is satisfied with the marriage she tends to do a lot more for her husband, which has a positive effect on his life. Men tend to be less vocal about their relationships and their level of marital unhappiness might not be translated to their wives.” This means that to Carr and her studies, a happy man will not do a lot more for his wife just because he is happy, making males look like unloving schlubs. They will just go along with whatever is happening. Apparently, as long as the woman in a relationship is happy, the man will be happy too solely because she will do more for him, nothing more, nothing less. In addition, men would not get sad if their significant other became sick, but the woman would if her man did.
This definitely gives men a bad rap. I do not think that this study’s data is incorrect, but like Stephen Jay Gould commenting on Paul Broca’s study and research on the different between male and female brains, the data is sound, but the interpretation of the data is “ill-founded” and wrongly translated.
news.rutgers.edu/research-news/wife%E2%80%99s-happiness-more-crucial-her-husband%E2%80%99s-keeping-marriage-track-rutgers-study-finds/20140911#.VQX-JI7F91U