There seem to be three kinds of women in my life, sorted by their reactions when I am smart or funny or gleeful. The first kind appreciates my happy, intellectual, aggressive brand of play, and some of the members of this group even play along, smacking my serves back over the net as it were, putting their own spin on my ideas, making jokes of their own, surprising and being surprised. I am married to one of those. But in this group, even the ones who merely appreciate me, laughing at my jokes and getting my ideas, foster more jokes and more ideas. There are a lot of lesbians in this group, partly because lesbians have, at a much higher rate than straight women, liberated themselves from fairy tale fantasies of daintiness, and are not psychologically allergic to exuberance. Also, of course, lesbians as a rule don’t hate men or male energy—why would they?
The second group of women is afraid of me. Once, when my younger son was three years old, I asked him, “If you were an animal, what kind of animal would you be?” He said, “I thought we were dragons.” Impassioned speech, unexpected ideas, inappropriate humor—these strike this group of women as interesting, but only from a distance, like fire. They don’t actively avoid me, but neither do they approach me. They’re surprised if I act kindly, but they’re not really irritated by it, because they haven’t built an explanatory architecture around what they make of me or of themselves. When I run into one of them, I see they are watchful and ready to jump out of their skins. I avoid them, not because interacting with them is unpleasant, but because I find them boring unless I am authorized to comment on what is going on between us.
The third group resents me. I mean to use Nietzsche’s term for how the weak feel about the strong, how the unhappy feel about the happy, how the dull feel about those who shine. I doubt they would read a blog I wrote, but if they did, they would bristle at my referring to myself as strong and at my referring to any woman as weak. Generally, they express their resentment by snubbing me, but some of them will directly tell me that I am unaware of my male privilege or my white privilege, as if they think that it is only my maleness and whiteness that makes me funny or clever or lively. (I am not seeking credit, by the way, for my vitality; like feeling grateful rather than guilty for having privileges, I feel lucky to be someone who has good ideas and says funny things.) These are the women who think that if a woman says something smart in a group, it’s proof that women are as smart as men, rather than enjoying what she said, and if a man says something smart in a group, they think it’s proof that he is marginalizing others by taking up air time, rather than enjoying what he said. The only thing they tend to enjoy is a man’s (or an assertive woman’s) comeuppance.
For most of my life, I spent a lot of energy trying to get resentful women to like me. Seven years ago, I promised myself to stop doing that, and I have been much happier since then. If you are yourself a person prone to happiness, cleverness, or humor, you might also want to focus on finding playmates and not on pleasing the frightened or resentful people you are bound to meet.
Michael Karson, Ph.D. 
What about all the men who resent you? 🙂
Oh yeah. Future post? Or are you thinking of someone in particular?
Perhaps you could say more about how to stop worrying about the frightened, resentful folks? I find that part hard 😦 Fortunately I’ve found a kick ass playmate! you should meet him- i think you guys would like each other.
Sounds good! And a good topic for a future post.
Devil says: “It sounds like you disapprove of women who don’t like you.”
Bite me. Seriously, it depends on what about me they don’t like. If it’s something I approve of, then I suppose it’s fair to say I disapprove of their disapproval, but my main message to myself is to try to stop getting their approval. If it’s something else about me (say, my occasional hyper-intellectuality or my more than occasional tendency to value the comedic circus over relatedness), then far from disapproving of them, I learn from them.
Refreshing to hear a psychologist unapologetically put his thoughts out there, claiming his strengths and encouraging others to lose the neurotic, narcissistic self-consciousness and hyper-attunement to how others experience us which characterizes so many in our profession. Are you turning into a “positive psychologist”?
Gak. I hope not. (Although the only thing I really have against positive psychology is the name, which is too Mr. Rogers-y for me–I prefer the Muppets.) I do find myself preferring to relate to clients as intelligent likeable people who for some strange reason are captive to their identites rather than as tragic figures, “poor dears” who can hardly be expected to laugh at life.
I would like to know what, if anything triggered the timing of this blog entry. I would also like to know what happened 7 years ago when you made the decision regarding resentful women.. Seven years ago was during my second year of the forensic program which leads me to believe Conflict Resolution class might be the culprit!
I’m working my way towards what separates people, and marginalization of happiness seems prominent to me. I believe in the explanatory vigor of power theory, but I think it’s sometimes used as an expression of resentment against people who are happy. Seven years ago, there was a specific woman I was trying to make like me, and then I noticed the pattern, but it wasn’t any of the women in that class, accusations of sexism notwithstanding. Another blog idea, but who’d believe I was accused of sexism for being against clitorectomy?
Thank you for explaining. I didn’t even remember the clitorectomy argument when I made my comment! Amazing.
The first and second categories make perfect sense because they describe basic emotions. Thus probably more honest responses to you. As far as the third category it rings a lot like reaction formation in my ears. Aversion often masks attraction and indifference surprise or amusement.
So I think you shouldn’t feel bad that the woman you wanted to make like you 7 years ago was giving you a hard time. She probably really liked you, and your courtship, whether friendly or romantic, was stirring up a lot of cognitive dissonance for her for reasons I can probably guess knowing how you like to rock the boat! What’s not to love about that? Her loss.
We often forget we are bound by our biology (static factors) as much as we are bound by societal norms (dynamic factors). We also know that cognitive dissonance is not resolved at the expense of one’s ego. Its always easier to acquiesce and conform externally than internally. Its always easier to say, “He’s sexist and offensive,” rather than accept your perceptions and assumptions as distortions covering up your own unresolved ‘-isms.’ Unfortunately what we are not ready to accept within ourselves we simply project onto others. Jesus (who you brought up in earlier posts – I have been quiet but sill following you) said something about not judging unless you are ready to be judged. The rest is hypocrisy.
Reframing: Lets ask ourselves why these women in the third category (or open it up to anybody really in that third category) resent the white heterosexual male and all his privilege with such passion rather than focus on the resentment itself. I mean when it comes to complex emotions like love or hate, the intensity of the experience is more of a sign of what is really going on rather than the actual manifestation which is often deceiving. Emotions have value like symptoms do. They keep us (and basically our ego) safe from some of the perils of intimacy. Freud said its the tax we pay for the privilege of living with others. Frequent retreats to “psychic” Monaco and the Cayman islands are just bad for the soul.
Introspection: Following my logic, if I strongly resent hypocrites is that a hint that perhaps I could be one too? That’s a tough one to swallow. I ll admit I resent them still (fear them really), albeit not that much. Unlike most Greeks I want to pay all of my taxes…
Thanks for your comments. I think it’s interesting to consider what we would recommend for a marginalized person or marginalized identity element. Grin and bear it? Ignore it? Demean the hegemony? Try to be like the hegemony? Suicide? It seems like it all depends on one’s chances for success. What I have found is that enjoying myself, whether in the dominant or marginalized group, pisses off a lot of people.
I know a few women who are in group three; they dislike and actively avoid you. When they describe why, the stories are of you acting aggressive and cavalier; the characteristics that you write group 2s react to. They would never admit to being afraid of you, but we after all often hate those we fear. As Ioannis notes, we hate in others that which we hate in ourselves.
I like and respect these women, and being a fan of yours, I notice that I am not okay to agree to disagree with them about you. I think they are missing out. I want to tell them, I too used to find him too aggressive, and then I got to work closely with him, and learned that the aggression that I felt was merely hostile, was actually playful and even helpful (no tee ball for doctoral trainees:). I want to tell them that, but I would rather preserve the relationships, so I nod and say I get it. Now I have another reason to avoid this debate…. They would likely bore you!
Gak. I suppose I invited this to be about me personally. I thought it was about the challenges of getting a seat at the multicultural table. But yes, no tee ball for doctoral trainees. Jonathan Shedler points out that martial arts training must be done with real swords, or else the trainee can never learn enough in training to survive actual combat.
I was prepared to say this was a multicultural non-issue. Aggression from anyone makes most people uncomfortable. Women don’t so much as want to see aggressive, happy, white guys get their comeuppance, but anyone who comes off as a pompous, bully. Wouldn’t you say that Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh are equally disliked?
Then I recalled how careful I was in graduate school to not appear aggressive. Many of my fellow male students were equally mindful of aggression (they were all white guys). Point taken. However, is aggression from any guy equally unwelcome at the multi-cultural table?
I think it helps to clarify what is meant by aggression. Telling someone, “Shut up, stupid,” in some multicultural discussions (and in many social science graduate schools) has the same received meaning as saying, “I think I disagree” or “Uh, that’s not correct,” or “What’s your evidence for that statement?” Especially if it comes from a white guy, some women and some men will hear, “That idea doesn’t fit the data” as “Shut up, stupid.” I was doing a child welfare trainning once, and I said to a social worker, “I don’t think that will work, but I admire your willingness to try it.” The room feel silent. Ten of the twenty people present thought I’d said, “I don’t think that will work, and I ???? your willingess to try it.” They filled in the blank with “despise” or “revile” or some equivalent word. The main problem with multicultural discussions, in my view, is that disagreement (a useful form of aggression) sounds hostile.
What is your evidence that disagreement from a white guy in a multicultural discussion will be perceived as more aggressive and hostile than disagreement from a black guy? (If I were asking this question in any other collegial context I can think of, I would have felt the need to soften it to mitigate risk of perceived aggression on my part)
My evidence is entirely anecdotal, but the white guy, it seems to me, can seem racist or sexist for questioning the party line, whereas the black guy is likely only to have to worry about seeming sexist. Questioning the party line is read as hostility in many of the discussions I have participated in, but black people in multicultural discussions are often perceived as determining the party line, so they can’t be perceived as challenging it.