.jpg)
Have you ever wondered why arguing with the opposite sex gets heated so quickly? Why is it so easy to frustrate each other, without that ever being an intention?
Why must we lose all of our eyelashes and get all red and spotty just to communicate a point of view? More to the point, why do our female friends understand so seamlessly but men are harder to talk to than a broom?
Men and women eat, sleep and move differently. When it comes to communication it seems that we need a translator just to carry even the simplest conversations out effectively. If that's the case then when gloves come off how can we argue fairly?
Here’s some insight:
Women don’t start an argument when they open their mouths. You can bet your Oat Milke Latte that there’s been an internal debate raging for at least two days. By the time women raise an issue they’ve been pissed and seething in silence for a while. This is a huge disadvantage to men who begin the conversation on the back foot, and often, from a place of surprise.
Men are better at reacting on the spot with some amount of authenticity. They are also more likely to be direct and short in their communication. Unfortunately this can be interpreted harshly because men can be more abrupt in delivery and tone, particularly once they begin to get frustrated.
Typically women take more care with their words, which can mean they are indirect at communicating the root issue. She might be less likely to lash out but he’ll go for the throat and cause a lot more imminent pain. This might shut down an argument quickly, but for the wrong reasons, so the issue will resurface once the tears are dry.
Historically men have grown up in a context in which conversations are a contest. It’s not unusual for men to enter such robust discussions that they end up in tears or in a fight, yet this result doesn’t stretch them too far beyond comfort, nor does it do long term damage.
On the other hand, women use conversations to exchange information and provide support. Women stay present by methodically comparing and making sure they show signs of being engaged. Due to the indirect nature of conversing, it's harder to ascertain when an issue arises meaning it will often be buried under easier exchanges of niceties and vague interest.
Men are generally more comfortable with anger. They grow steadily angry and subsequently appear strong or moody in the process. On the other hand, women have a confusing relationship with anger and struggle to express it. Instead, suppressing their anger and often resorting to passive aggression and bitchiness then exploding into a fit of white rage when they drop a pen a few days later. It’s a tumultuous process that challenges the image of women as elegant, subtle buds of perfection.
Women often try to get their point across by asking questions; it’s either to understand context better (ie. how and what you are thinking) or to build more of a case. Unsurprisingly men are not fond of feeling like the subject of a relentless interrogation and respond to such questions usually with as few words as possible. Women interpret short answers as being evasive so this won't be received positively.
Women look for a definite resolution from an argument, and if they don’t get it then you can be sure as hell it’ll go full circle until it’s another argument. Ever heard the expression, ‘looping back?’ Pretty sure that came from the cyclical nature of women in arguments. If the argument does not ‘end’ with a resolution, even a fluffy one, then a woman will remain unsettled about it. Men are likely to put it aside and get on with life. Unfortunately women interpret this as being ignored. Big fail, especially for your sanity.
Women start arguments to try and prompt action and/or change. Men avoid arguments at all lengths and would prefer to stay silent than cause (what they perceive to be) unnecessary chaos.
Men are traditionally more adept at staying present which means in an argument they’ll focus on the here and now. On the contrary, women think about the topic of an argument on a broader scale and in the context of the patterns of the relationship. To give an analogy; women are collecting information for writing an essay and then citing their references whilst men are playing a game of uno. You’re playing a different fucking game altogether.
When women bring up past events (because they’re drawing comparisons and gathering data) it makes men feel that they’re finding fault in their overarching character and neglecting their good points. It is often perceived as aggressive and inflammatory and the response from a man will either be combative or they will retreat.
Fight fair kids