Men are from Mars, Women I have no f*$%ing idea

[jingle.boy]

For the past few years (decade+), mrs.jingle. has had a backpack style "purse" that she slings over both shoulders.  The current one has a (zipper) detachable "normal" purse that she can carry around if necessary, but I don't think I've ever seen her take it off.

[MoraWintersoul]

You guys are so invested in discussing these stereotypes as they are that you won't use basic psychology to figure them out and instead treat 'em (jokingly, I hope) as some big mystery.

The reason why we carry unwieldy purses filled with many things is because our clothes don't have many useful pockets. So you have to get used to carrying things in a purse and over time come to prefer it. And then, as long as you're carrying a purse, why not fit another not-necessary-but-nice-to-have thing in it. And then, why not buy one bag that's slightly bigger so that you can fit more. And so it goes, the exact same process that would happen to men if someone sewed your pockets shut, judging by how many of my male friends treat me as a purse on legs when they need someone to hold on to some extra stuff

[cramx3]

That's what the house is for men, a place for more stuff

https://youtu.be/gDkA59e2_yU?t=40

[Northern Lion]

You guys are so invested in discussing these stereotypes as they are that you won't use basic psychology to figure them out and instead treat 'em (jokingly, I hope) as some big mystery.

The reason why we carry unwieldy purses filled with many things is because our clothes don't have many useful pockets. So you have to get used to carrying things in a purse and over time come to prefer it. And then, as long as you're carrying a purse, why not fit another not-necessary-but-nice-to-have thing in it. And then, why not buy one bag that's slightly bigger so that you can fit more. And so it goes, the exact same process that would happen to men if someone sewed your pockets shut, judging by how many of my male friends treat me as a purse on legs when they need someone to hold on to some extra stuff

Thanks for your perspective and humor .  Even though I've been married for nearly two decades, I confess, women are still a mystery to me and probably always will be.

But I've got to say that this thread has caused to fondly appreciate the quirks that come with being a woman.  Even though there are things about my wife that cause me to shake my head sometimes, those are also things that cause me to love her the most.  Femeninity is frustrating but also irresistibly attractive.  I wouldn't have it any other way.  Man I love that woman!

Also, I'm not saying that us men don't have quirks as well, I know we do.

[pg1067]

I swear, my wife has one of those bags like Hermione has in Harry Potter.  Tents, shovels, complete dinner settings....

I think every woman's bag has a pocket-sized black hole in there or a door to another dimension or something. You can put more than twice the stuff in there than what would normaly fit and it still has room for more stuff. And you can at least search for an hour for your keys in there, before you realize you left them at home.

That's what the house is for men, a place for more stuff

https://youtu.be/gDkA59e2_yU?t=40

I can still remember hearing that for the first time in high school.  Still makes me laugh (as does that whole album).

[Orbert]

You guys are so invested in discussing these stereotypes as they are that you won't use basic psychology to figure them out and instead treat 'em (jokingly, I hope) as some big mystery.

The reason why we carry unwieldy purses filled with many things is because our clothes don't have many useful pockets. So you have to get used to carrying things in a purse and over time come to prefer it. And then, as long as you're carrying a purse, why not fit another not-necessary-but-nice-to-have thing in it. And then, why not buy one bag that's slightly bigger so that you can fit more. And so it goes, the exact same process that would happen to men if someone sewed your pockets shut, judging by how many of my male friends treat me as a purse on legs when they need someone to hold on to some extra stuff

We are indeed treating the topic in a joking fashion to keep it light and hopefully not offend anybody.  It's a stereotype for sure, but stereotypes get to be stereotypes because they are true often enough for people to get it.  Yeah, yeah, there are exceptions.

The pockets thing is a fair point.  Pockets lead to bumps and bulges in weird places and ain't nobody wanna see dat.  How we gonna check you out if you got all dem bumps and bulges?  But that's not the whole story.  Women in general carry a number of things with them that men don't need to, and therefore wouldn't whether they had enough pockets or not.  Obviously there's the females-only items, but there's also things like tissues, lip balm, pocket mirror, etc.  Things that guys wouldn't carry if they had 100 pockets.  Guys have their wallet, keys, a pocket knife or other utility item, and maybe some change.  That's all most of us ever need or want to carry.

I've been married 30 years and am still amazed when there's something we need in the moment, and my wife pulls one out of her purse.  Something I would never carry with me "just in case" but yep, she's got one in her purse.  Bottle opener maybe.  Tiny flashlight.  Tiny screwdriver set.  Handy stuff for sure, but I'm not going to carry all that around with me.  Since she's carrying a purse anyway, this opens the door to carrying any number of other things.  Stuff that's not essential but hey, you never know.  I'd still never carry it.  Wallet, keys, pocket knife, good to go.

[bosk1]

I don't do a pocket knife anymore.  Got out of the habit when airports got weird about that.  But I'm still limited to basically only 3 "must-have" items at any given point:  wallet, keys, and phone.  If I can't find one of those 3 items, it can result in instant panic mode.  But outside of those, I don't need to have it on me unless there is some reason specific to a specific excursion.

[Orbert]

Yeah, today I guess I have to add phone to the list, but the pocket knife is my magic good luck charm.  I don't normally believe in that, but it was a gift from my now late sister-in-law, and has been lost countless times over the years, sometimes for weeks, but always turns up somehow.  It's unexplainable.  It's also a file, screwdriver, and mini-scissors, and there've been days when I used it a dozen times or more.  I've had to leave it in the car a few times, but it's on me otherwise.

[cramx3]

But I'm still limited to basically only 3 "must-have" items at any given point:  wallet, keys, and phone.  If I can't find one of those 3 items, it can result in instant panic mode. 

Yup, all in three different pockets and whenver I leave from where I am, I do my 3 pat check to make sure all are there otherwise instant panic mode.

I also stopped carrying my pocket knife once I forgot to remove it before going to a concert and ended up tossing it, never to buy another because I know I'd end up bringing it accidently where I shouldn't.  There are times I miss it, but they are few.

[Northern Lion]

Yeah, today I guess I have to add phone to the list, but the pocket knife is my magic good luck charm.  I don't normally believe in that, but it was a gift from my now late sister-in-law, and has been lost countless times over the years, sometimes for weeks, but always turns up somehow.  It's unexplainable.  It's also a file, screwdriver, and mini-scissors, and there've been days when I used it a dozen times or more.  I've had to leave it in the car a few times, but it's on me otherwise.

For me, phone, wallet, keys.  And on my key chain is my knife, a flashlight and some blessed oil (for religious purposes).  All are small so they don't make my keychain too bulky.  But I carry all of them where ever I go.

I've thought about a multitool, to replace my knife, but I just can't find one that I like that's small enough.

[Dublagent66]

Orbert pretty much nailed the pocket issue, which really isn't much of an issue anyway because we're talking about quantity and volume.  I have the usual keys, wallet and phone.  But when I go to and from work, I have a square shaped lunch tote with a shoulder strap to carry my headphones and some snack items.  Not a purse and not much different than a backpack, but they all basically serve the same purpose.  Not much of a mystery at all, male or female.

[Orbert]

For a while, the 80's or so, many guys carried "bags".  Gym bag, duffel bag, whatever you might call it.  "Fanny packs" were catching on around this time, too.  I remember my buddy Mark always had his gym bag with him.  Mark was a stoner, so he had his stash and some necessary gear, in addition to the obligatory wallet and keys, and he worked out so he usually had clothes or at least an extra shirt or something.  It really was his gym bag, but let's face it; it was his purse.

Remember George Carlin's bit about purses?

"Hey, can you pass me my... bag?"
"Fuck you, it's a purse!  If you can't say the word, don't carry the bag!"

[Evermind]

Ehh, I carry a small backpack with me everywhere except when I'm abroad/travelling. I can't fit everything in my pockets, which includes: my phone, my ID, subway/bus monthly pass, train monthly pass, work permit, a handkerchief, a "wallet" with all my cards in it, a pocket knife, a small bag with band-aids, pills against headache, pills against sudden shits (you never know), napkins, wet towel wipes (or w/e it's called), needle and a thread, I think I've missed something but ehh. I also usually carry a book there and my power bank and my headphones whenever I'm not listening to music.

I'm also bringing my own food to work so there's that too. I have no idea what I would do without a purse/backpack.

[cramx3]

I use a backpack every day for work since I have a work laptop that I live and die by, or for travel, but not for my daily roaming I may do.

[Evermind]

Can't do it for travel as it's small enough so not everything fits in there

I've got a new backpack for my birthday that looks promising though, I may just start wearing it everywhere as it's just awesome.

[Stadler]

So....   just casual question, no implications, no waiting gotcha <Stadler whistling, casually> you guys aren't those people that forget their backpack is on and swing it like a wrecking ball behind you, are you?   

Seriously, though: I took a trip to Atlanta last week and I must've seen like four people whack someone with their backpack without thinking.   It's like a deadly weapon if you're not careful. 

[cramx3]

There's times, in tight spaces with a full backpack where I turned and it might have hit someone.  I say sorry and try not to do it, but it happens on trains for example.

My backbag is good size, a nice patagonia from work (given to me on my first day just about 6 years ago on the dot) that has been through it all and still fully intact and functional.  Thing is a beast.  I absolutely love it for travel and daily use to work.   They updated the backpack they give new employees now, it's smaller, less functional, and looks uglier.  I have one.. in my closet.

[MoraWintersoul]

No one is being offensive, and you don't need to tiptoe around anything, I'm just like... all these forum topics that come down to "man, women are from another planet, does anyone get them, for example, MY WIFE"... like, do you only socialize with your wives, and is that why you think women are an impenetrable hivemind, impossible to comprehend  I don't have a black hole of a bag, but I always carry a backpack to fit extra clothes because that's what I need, and then I carry all the practical shit in it too. Some women carry a full makeup kit to their office job. I can't relate to that, but I understand why they need it, if you do wear makeup every day you need to do touch-ups, you're not gonna go out with a perfect face and let it go to shit during the day because you're too lazy to carry a bigger bag. On the other hand, I can totally relate to MirrorMask's backpack, and I have to add a needle and thread into my rotation.

[Stadler]

No one is being offensive, and you don't need to tiptoe around anything, I'm just like... all these forum topics that come down to "man, women are from another planet, does anyone get them, for example, MY WIFE"... like, do you only socialize with your wives, and is that why you think women are an impenetrable hivemind, impossible to comprehend  I don't have a black hole of a bag, but I always carry a backpack to fit extra clothes because that's what I need, and then I carry all the practical shit in it too. Some women carry a full makeup kit to their office job. I can't relate to that, but I understand why they need it, if you do wear makeup every day you need to do touch-ups, you're not gonna go out with a perfect face and let it go to shit during the day because you're too lazy to carry a bigger bag. On the other hand, I can totally relate to MirrorMask's backpack, and I have to add a needle and thread into my rotation.

Speaking of stereotypes, this IS a prog-metal band forum, after all.  I include myself in this, but some of us are DAMN lucky to even have that ONE woman with whom we associate.   

[lordxizor]

some of us are DAMN lucky to even have that ONE woman with whom we associate.   

Definitely put me in this group!

And for the record, I was 90% kidding about my wife and her purse. It get why she carries it, but I also think it's silly.

[Northern Lion]

some of us are DAMN lucky to even have that ONE woman with whom we associate.   

Definitely put me in this group!

And for the record, I was 90% kidding about my wife and her purse. It get why she carries it, but I also think it's silly.

Same.

My wife is my whole world.

[cramx3]

No one is being offensive, and you don't need to tiptoe around anything, I'm just like... all these forum topics that come down to "man, women are from another planet, does anyone get them, for example, MY WIFE"... like, do you only socialize with your wives, and is that why you think women are an impenetrable hivemind, impossible to comprehend  I don't have a black hole of a bag, but I always carry a backpack to fit extra clothes because that's what I need, and then I carry all the practical shit in it too. Some women carry a full makeup kit to their office job. I can't relate to that, but I understand why they need it, if you do wear makeup every day you need to do touch-ups, you're not gonna go out with a perfect face and let it go to shit during the day because you're too lazy to carry a bigger bag. On the other hand, I can totally relate to MirrorMask's backpack, and I have to add a needle and thread into my rotation.

Speaking of stereotypes, this IS a prog-metal band forum, after all.  I include myself in this, but some of us are DAMN lucky to even have that ONE woman with whom we associate.   

true

[Phoenix87x]

Did you guys ever have a significant other that gave you crap about stuff that their previous partners had a problem with?

Like my ex's previous partner had a severe alcohol issue and it was a constant problem.  I barely drink, but the moment I tried to have any drink suddenly they were all like "gasp, you are drinking?!" and making a big deal about it.

And it turned into a fight after me being held responsible for things that someone else did 

[Northern Lion]

I can't say that I've ever had that happen to me, but I can sure see why she's now your ex.  That's rough!

[Stadler]

Did you guys ever have a significant other that gave you crap about stuff that their previous partners had a problem with?

Like my ex's previous partner had a severe alcohol issue and it was a constant problem.  I barely drink, but the moment I tried to have any drink suddenly they were all like "gasp, you are drinking?!" and making a big deal about it.

And it turned into a fight after me being held responsible for things that someone else did 

Sure.  Both wives to a degree; depending on the issue it's hard not to.

[TAC]

yeah, and I don't think it's a big deal, honestly. I mean depending on the degree of course.

[Orbert]

If my wife had an issue with some guy in the past doing something, and I started doing the same thing, I wouldn't hold it against her if she raised the concern.  Obviously there are ways to do this that make sense, and ways that don't.  We're usually pretty good about talking about it.  I don't think there's ever been a situation where "he used to do that, and it got out of control, so you must never do that".  But if he used to do that and it turned out bad for some reason, I'd expect her to at least say something.

[cramx3]

Did you guys ever have a significant other that gave you crap about stuff that their previous partners had a problem with?

Like my ex's previous partner had a severe alcohol issue and it was a constant problem.  I barely drink, but the moment I tried to have any drink suddenly they were all like "gasp, you are drinking?!" and making a big deal about it.

And it turned into a fight after me being held responsible for things that someone else did 

Yes, and to be honest, I've unintentionally done the same to a previous gf.  Hate to admit it, but it happened and I totally didn't mean it, but this type of thing can be engrained in your head and you don't realize the way you expressing it to your current SO until after the fact.

[H2]

I'm a practical guy.  Scientific minded, logical thinking, all those horrible traits that come standard equipment with Asians.  If the plusses outweigh the minuses, it's worth it.  You try to maximize the ratio by "choosing" someone with whom you are compatible, therefore minimizing the the negatives while hopefully accentuating and taking advantage of the positives.  But a marriage is two people, and there will be disagreements.  It comes down to how you handle them.  Also, unless you're a real prize and literally have multiple babes after you, you don't get to choose, which is why I put that in quotes.  You play the game, live your life, and you end up with someone.  Again, there are things you can do to possibly improve the odds of ending up with the "right" person, but there are no guarantees.  Life is adventure.

I have been thinking about what you said here since you posted it. This is a point I really kinda disagree with and am wondering whether anyone agrees with me. In my view, one should choose singleness unless one finds that right person. I've been in long-term relationships with the "wrong" people--people that I had some degree of compatibility with, but for whatever reason weren't right with me (e.g., communication issues, lack of passion, lack of chemistry, lack of similar life goals). When I chose to "stick it out" and try to pretend to be really happy to be with them, resentment slowly crept in until I couldn't ignore it any longer. I can only imagine getting married to a generic "somebody", who might even be a responsible, good person. I would slowly die inside, lose motivation for life, and probably fail to live up to my potential. I really think you need to seek someone who you are really passionate about, someone who pushes all your buttons in the right way, someone who makes you feel like a boy. I really feel like Orbert's philosophy masquerades as hardened realism but in reality is just jaded bitterness and complacency. I don't want to say anything about Orbert himself--because you are such a chill guy, Orbert--but I buck up against this philosophy.

[eric42434224]

I identify more with Orberts view than yours H2.  In reality, most people's expectations and experience are on a spectrum, and probably include some from both of you (and others not mentioned).  (To me) Orberts comes across as more pragmatic and realist, and yours as a bit more overy romantic, and a bit black & white.
Each person is different, and each person will have different goals, plans, expectations, experiences, and reactions.  Whatever works for you really. 
Orbert can have a more pragmatic approach, and have a massively rewarding marriage.  Some can wait for what they want, and can end up with a massive failure of a marriage. 
The point is that is is very difficult, if not impossible, to determine if a person is the "right" one unless you give it a go in a relationship.  Date people, and if one starts to feel right, pursue it further...until it doesn't feel right.  Just don't wait for a "perfect" fit, as perfect doesnt exist.  Be aware that ANY relationship will have bumps, and will require work.
Love and life are unpredictable and messy...there are no guarantees either way you approach it.  JMO

[eric42434224]

I've been in long-term relationships with the "wrong" people--people that I had some degree of compatibility with, but for whatever reason weren't right with me (e.g., communication issues, lack of passion, lack of chemistry, lack of similar life goals). When I chose to "stick it out" and try to pretend to be really happy to be with them, resentment slowly crept in until I couldn't ignore it any longer. I can only imagine getting married to a generic "somebody", who might even be a responsible, good person. I would slowly die inside, lose motivation for life, and probably fail to live up to my potential. I really think you need to seek someone who you are really passionate about, someone who pushes all your buttons in the right way, someone who makes you feel like a boy. I really feel like Orbert's philosophy masquerades as hardened realism but in reality is just jaded bitterness and complacency.

A few things jumped out at me in your post after I replied.

1) If you are not happy in your relationship, sticking it out by "pretending" to be happy makes no sense, isn't being honest with the other person, and appears to show no desire to do any work to save the relationship.  Not sure why you would think this is appropriate.

2) What does "generic" mean when describing another person?  Are you saying Orbert and others just settle for a "generic", good and responsible person to settle down with?  That is just silly.  Everyone looks for attraction, passion, compatability, etc....it may just not be at the level you do....which from someone's point of view, might be considered unrealistic, perfectionist, and fairy tale...especially over the long term of a relationship.

3) You should not call Orberts view jaded bitterness and complacency, just because it differs from yours.  Your views on love are just different.  And being married for MANY years, with a view more like Orberts, I feel his relationship is far more likely to survive.  People and relationships change over time...ALOT.  Passion wanes, interests and attraction change, kids and stress come into play.....your romanticism will be challenged severely when all those things that had to line up for you romantically shift over the years.  Knowing that the person and the relationship are no where near perfect, and never will be, is a lesson in reality, and that a LOT of work is required to keep the fire burning.

Maybe we can all take a bit of a lesson from you in that we should never "settle" for something that doesn't really work, especially if you feel your options are limited.  Better to be single than in an unhealthy relationship.  I think we can all agree with that.  But I also think you would be well served to adopt a small bit of Orberts philosophy too....it will serve you well in the future, when the relationship loses some passion.

[H2]

Eric, I totally hear what you're saying, and hopefully you're not understanding me as saying I think we should all look for this perfect person that matches this overly romantic ideal.

2) What does "generic" mean when describing another person?  Are you saying Orbert and others just settle for a "generic", good and responsible person to settle down with?  That is just silly.  Everyone looks for attraction, passion, compatability, etc....it may just not be at the level you do....which from someone's point of view, might be considered unrealistic, perfectionist, and fairy tale...especially over the long term of a relationship.

Orbert can correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard him as saying that you should just find someone that you kinda get along with that rides along with you in life, and yeah maybe that person isn't your first choice but "they'll do." That's the mentality I buck up against. It could be that I completely misinterpreted him.

[bosk1]

I agree wholeheartedly with everything in both of Eric's posts.

[Orbert]

Orbert can correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard him as saying that you should just find someone that you kinda get along with that rides along with you in life, and yeah maybe that person isn't your first choice but "they'll do." That's the mentality I buck up against. It could be that I completely misinterpreted him.

You definitely misinterpreted my meaning.  It's much closer to what Eric is saying.  There is no "perfect" match.  Even if you seem to agree on everything, get along fine, are compatible socially, politically, sexually, everything, that will change, because people change.  The odds of finding someone you're 100% happy with and will be for the next 50 years or however love you are together, are zero.  I'm not saying that you settle for the first babe that seems alright.  I'm saying that if you wait for the "perfect" match, you will die alone.  Therefore, adjust your expectations.

[H2]

Orbert can correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard him as saying that you should just find someone that you kinda get along with that rides along with you in life, and yeah maybe that person isn't your first choice but "they'll do." That's the mentality I buck up against. It could be that I completely misinterpreted him.

You definitely misinterpreted my meaning.  It's much closer to what Eric is saying.  There is no "perfect" match.  Even if you seem to agree on everything, get along fine, are compatible socially, politically, sexually, everything, that will change, because people change.  The odds of finding someone you're 100% happy with and will be for the next 50 years or however love you are together, are zero.  I'm not saying that you settle for the first babe that seems alright.  I'm saying that if you wait for the "perfect" match, you will die alone.  Therefore, adjust your expectations.

Ah, I see. Then it sounds like we are in an accord.

EDIT: Well....ugh, maybe we aren't in an accord. The one line from Orbert that really throws me off, just to clarify, is the "you don't get to choose unless you have multiple babes after you" bit. I guess I think that we're all roughly in the same boat, and we all do, in fact, get to choose.

"You play the game, live your life, and you end up with someone" -- This sounds so very passive and, yeah, I'd have to be really defeated to accept something like this. But perhaps I misunderstand Orbert's meaning?

Just to clarify my stance to see who agrees or disagrees with me. You do get to choose. If you're not in a position to choose, you're in a position to improve yourself to get to a point where you are in a position to choose. If you're out of shape and thereby can't score chicks you really like, you can get in shape. If you have a crappy job or live in a crappy state and can't score chicks you really like, you can get a better job and move to a different state. If you dress poorly and can't score fashionable chicks, you get make yourself fashionable to thereby score said chicks. Etc, etc..

Part of being responsible and living a full life is accepting that you do get to choose and you shouldn't let life make decisions for you. Hopefully that makes sense.