American Women and Relationships?
 

Some background:

Someone I had met at work had gotten married to this woman from Russia that he had been a sort of pen pal with. And I remembered that another guy I knew had been on vacation in Russia and did the same thing.

And then I recalled yet another conversation (this is a seperate thing) with a guy that was saying they were arranging some marriages where the man would bring the woman over and be married for 2 years for a great deal of money. And that the man would decline the money or make some spliiting arrangement because he wanted to stay married.

The two guys I first mentioned are good looking guys in good physical shape (i.e. they train a lot) and are reasonably successful in their fields. A good catch you would think, and they did indeed date a lot. Neither had ever been married, had no children and are in their 30's.

In conversations with these guys they say they prefer the foreign culture to Americanized women because they seem to be more famlily orientated with better relationship skills. And cited the lack of a lot of these skills as the reason why dating Americanized women is hard.

I say Americanized menaing women that have embraced mainstream American vlaues and behaviors.

This has been echoed by other men that I have talked to who also believe this.

So I was wondering, especially from some of the ladies that have some trans generational experience, if they have noticed that relationship skills are on a decline among females?

We'll leave men out of it this time lol.

Needless to say neither man mentioned above was very popular with a lot of American women when they came back.

please specify
 

Would you specify what you mean by "relationship skills"? What exactly are American women lacking? What don't they do that foreigners ARE doing?

My initial thought... Maybe foreign women are more inclined to defer to men (are willing to be the submissive partner and let the guy make decisions/call shots) .... Maybe they are more likely to be comfortable and satisfied being "professional housewives" because of the cultures they come from.

Well the women seem to work, both over there and here and come from parts of the world that have no where near our standard of living.

Maybe its an intangible? Less Game playing? Less baggage or issues?

They say the women are strongwilled. *shrug*

I guess I'll have to date more overseas to find some empirical evidence for yall . .. I'll do it just for GC ;).

But seriously, if there has ben a change in the last few decades will that mean that more American men will be looking for more foreign brides? Or Culturally purer americans?

James, I think perhaps women in the US today are more career-oriented in the past, and this may attribute to their "lack of relationship skills" as you so put it..or that they sometimes don't have a relationship as priority #1.

If we think back to the "traditional" American dream (circa 1950) it would probably be that common nuclear family..i.e., having a husband, wife, 2 kids, and a dog in a nice little white picket-fenced house and 2 cars. The shift towards present day goals is more "success" oriented, being well off and later on being able to provide for a family. I know for a lot of girls my age, career/success is priority one, then starting a family so that we're stable and able to provide for ourselves, not be dependent on a man/relationship. I know I most definitely plan to be graduated with college before marriage, and be stable in my career before bringing children into the world. Relationships are *not* my number one priority.

Just my 2 cents :)

In my ESL class, there were women from all over the world who had come here to be married to strangers. Most of the women had been professionals in their countries and wanted to leave their countries for various reasons. The Colombian wanted to escape the violence there, one Chinese woman vowed she'd get out when her mother was forced to have an abortion, another Chinese woman was tired of the living conditions there...it varied greatly for all of them.

The American men that they married had never been married and though they were nice, were not the kind who would exactly be hot items on the marriage market. All were kind to their wives and it seemed as if the husbands and wives saw the marriages as a win-win deal where each person got something he or she really wanted.

In Georgia, we see this in reverse too...there are a lot of Hispanic men who marry American women just to get their citizenship more easily. Nine times out of ten, the women are really trashy, the type who look 60 years old at the age of 30. There are a lot of little half-Hispanic kids running around who I really feel sorry for because often the dads run off after they get their citizenship and these children who are usually Hispanic-looking are left in these crummy trailer parks with moms who just married the dads to have a husband. After that, the moms really resent the kids and what we're getting in the schools are tons of disturbed kids. The county south of here is going berserk.

I could not tell you how many birth certificates I've translated for Hispanic guys who are marrying these awful women. You ought to hear the women: "Yeah, Jo-say and me, we just want to git married now. I cain't talk none of that Spanish but his friend says he really loves me.":rolleyes:

So Carnation, have you noticed any real differences over the years in the ways women relate to men and the skills they are learn for relationships?

I think that since I was in college, the women have become less desperate to "get" a guy...and when I was in college, they were less desperate to get a guy than in my mother's day. The only place I've recently seen the overeagerness to please men has been on college campuses with many more women than men.

Culturally pure? This is AMERICA. There is no such thing as "culturally pure" with respect to this country, and anyone who suggests otherwise should go find Matt Hale and join his congregation. :mad:

I think that one of the reasons that a lot of these men seek foreign brides is because they have this perception that American women are too headstrong, that we are too self-actualized, that we're entirely too independent. If a man sees these qualities as detrimental to forging a relationship, then maybe he needs to take a look at himself and stop placing the blame on women. I think men use these straw man arguments in order to frighten women into thinking that "If I decide to stand up for myself/work outside the home/maintain my independence, I'll never find a suitable mate." What I find most appaling is that these men have embraced the very same "Americanized attitudes" that they blame American women for embracing, but no one even gives them a sideways glance.

Hear hear!!

There are a lot of men out there who feel threatened by the idea of an independent-minded woman who has a career and other priorities than being a housewife - someone who went to college for something other than an "MRS degree". It's "ok" for men to have those attitudes, because they're men. We as women are expected to submit, stay home, cook and clean, and make babies. :mad:

I'm not that type of woman, and I've always made that abundantly clear. I didn't spend 5 years in school earning 2 degrees to be a housewife. Have I lost potential mates because of it? Yes, but I would not have wanted to be married to them. Instead I am married to a wonderful man who fully supports my decision to work and to continue to work once we start a family. (Besides, I'm terrible at cleaning. ;) )

(I don't meant to insult any SAHM's out there - it's just not something I could do. :) )

CTHU. CTHU. CTHU. :p

All chuckles aside, SoTrue1920's point is excellent.
These men need to check themselves, not blame the woman.
But you know what -- if those men have resentment of good qualities such as independence, ability to think for themselves, et al -- let 'em go with the foreign woman. Means less chance for abuse for those of us who want reciprocal trust, love, partnership and companionship.

I have to agree with every response here:

I think the "lack in relationship skills" translates in man language to "not eager and willing to 'honor and obey' me, raise my kids, clean my house, cook my dinner...."

Even in my mom's time (early 1960's), the norm was to find a good husband. If women went to college, it was primarily to husband hunt, not get their education. That was just what was expected of you as a female. Then there was this wonderful era of rebellion and civil rights movements, including Women's Lib. People, men and women, were appalled at some of these ideas. They broke apart the family and were immoral. (Read Betty Friedan's the Feminie Mystique- it was terribly criticized for demoralizing family values. But to read it today, it's nothing special.)

Unfortunately, these ideals still exist to some level today. I personally think that some men are oftened threatened by independent, strong women because they don't know what their own role is suppossed to be in the relationship- how can they both be breadwinners? What will happen to the kids? What! you don't want kids? That's your job as a woman?!

Granted, this is a slowly dying mindset, but I mean slowly. And I support any family's decision to have one parent (mom or dad) be a full-time, stay at home parent. But I don't see this as the only option.

Anyways- I know I got off on a tangent there :D So, James, I think in most cases, the values and attributes the men you mentioned are/were seeking in a wife weren't available to them in American form, so they sought elsewhere.

It's also possible that the women they were dating in the States didn't see the men as desirable husband material, or simply didn't want husbands. Forcing them to look elsewhere.

*Edited to add this*
James, I know you said leave the men out of it, but really-- women have been dealing with men's lack of relationship (and general communication) skills for centuries. Women in America finally feel like they can say "No, I'm not dealing with your mind games, childishness, lack of communication skills...." whatever. And not be so chastized for it. So it's also very possible that the men you mentioned are the ones lacking in the relationship skills. And the women they were dating weren't having it. (To go along with my last paragraph above).

Ladies, I couldn't have said it better or added a single word!

Excellent post SilverTurtle!

This is an excellent point - although the "melting pot" cliche is overworked and banal, this statement still rings true. 300-some odd years on this continent does not a culture make.

I think that, in a way, you too are making a strawman here. I think James's point isn't against the self-actualization of women - actually, I hope it's not - but more likely just a paradigmatic shift in relationship values.

"Relationship values" doesn't infer that career can't come first, or that the woman in a relationship can't fulfill herself through whatever means necessary - and it doesn't implicitly infer that she should be subservient to the man, or that the man can play the hypocrite and avoid his end of the deal.

While the foreign women may bring values to the table that are decidedly old-fashioned, and seem anachronistic to us, I don't know that the correct response to the OP is to reject the hypothesis for this reason.

Although I'm certain your generalization of men denying women as headstrong etc. certainly rings true in certain instances (we've all met that couple, whether they be grandparents or etc), I don't know that these gentlemen in question do the same - I don't personally equate 'family-oriented' with 'not career-oriented' . . .

Perhaps my lack of 'real-world' experience with maintaining a career and a family shines through here - but isn't it a fallacy of false dilemma to say it's one way or the other? Why can't a woman in a marriage situation be family-oriented, and still be self-actualized through a career and outside interests?

Help me out here if I'm wrong . . .

It has been my experience that the kind of guys who like to order their wife out of a catalog are looking for a measure of control. Let's face it.....the majority of young, marriageable women in our country want more than to clean all day, have dinner on the table when their man gets home and then be ready to perform sexually when the dishes are done and he's had enough of ESPN for the night. And on the flip side, the new two-income standard has made it really difficult for those of us women who want to be stay home moms....not only do the men resent having to be the breadwinner (which was, after all, their traditional role) but other women look down on you as lazy or unmotivated or unskilled. There is a particular "control-freak" stereotype placed upon the men who import their wives from Asian countries where women are traditionally subservient.....

I do not believe women in this country lack "dating" skills. We simply want and expect more out of a man nowadays. We also want more for ourselves. It used to be that women NEEDED men.....we now have the luxury of marrying because we want to and are in love, not because we need to in order to survive financially or socially, or because we have to in order to have sex without social disapproval. We don't even need to be married to have kids now. I don't think men like this as much as they pretend they do. At first a lot of guys liked it that the women were out there hoofing it in the workplace, bringing in money and padding their lifestyles.....now they see that it changes the whole complexion of things. These poor girls in Russia need a man to take care of them.....they are desperate to escape from their lifestyle over there and are so grateful to come here that they will do anything for the man who "saved" them.

Sorry to rant but I have seen way too much of this.....I am so sick of hearing guys whine about how women are nowadays....if they would just decide what it is they want life would be a lot more pleasant for all involved.

Relationship "Beware"
 

As far as "Americanized" women being less family oriented than internationals is a far cry from the truth. Being that the U.S is the most prosperous country in the world, most Women need to work in order to help support their families. I don't think I would ever pay someone to stay married to me if they didn't love me (In regards to the men who were willing to split money with Russian women so they wouldn't leave them)
At my university we have a LOT of internationals here who would do ANYTHING to stay in the U.S including tricking unsuspecting people into thinking they actually love them just to get their green card. I know of internationals who have married and divorced and went on their merry way. They don't even think of the people who are hurt, and lives that are ruined in the process. That should make you think twice before marrying anyone who is not a U.S citizen. My bf does not have his citizenship, so that is a definate factor in whether or not our relationship will ever move forward.

There are millions of men and women from all over the planet who desperately want to live in the U.S.A. so badly that they are willing to marry someone that he or she doesn't know just to live here. The American Dream lures millions of people here both illegally and legally annually. From what I have seen and read, many women are better of here in loveless, arranged marriages than in their native countries. Russia and many countries have been plagued by poverty, war, violence, crime, and hunger. Their career options are limited in ways that we can't even imagine. In many third world nations, women have no choice but to go into prostitution. It's tragic. From that perspective, I can fully understand why a young woman would want to marry an American man she doesn't know very well. If I were in that position, I might do the same thing and be grateful to clean and do laundry everyday because the alternative is stomach turning. I consider myself fortunate to be an American woman in the 21st century with limitless possibilities.
BTW, traditional arranged marriages are less likely to lead to divorce than modern "love" marriages because people are introduced based on similar values and goals. I don't know if this applies to the Russian mail order brides.

Re: American Women and Relationships?
 

James you are going to have to clarify.

No one is exactly sure of what you are talking about.

If you meant things like tenderness and communication in terms of relationship skills, then I would have to say that I have seen no evidence that American women are lacking those qualities and more than internationals. But that does not even seem like the kind of thing one can quantify, much less judge and I don't hink you would really ask us to. So I am ruling that out.

The common assumption is that relationship skills as you are using the term means subservience and a home oriented mindset. If that is what you meant then please say it. If that is what you meant then please refer to SilverTurtle's post. I think she made a good point.

As for their lack of popularity with American women when they came back, that is amusing. I wouldn't be mad. I would pity anyone who feels they have to buy a wife, or that they can't deal with a woman who will be an equal in their relationship. That's just sad and yes they would probably lose a great deal of my respect. But why be angry? She gets what she wants, he gets what he wants. Not my business past that.

Re: Re: American Women and Relationships?
 

Ditto, if they want these american men they can have them-enough said.

I can't be more specific because I am relating other people's experiences and impresions.

But I thought the topic to be pointed enough that it might spark some discourse on changing gender roles. Maybe the thread should have been just: changing gender roles in relationships.

I know that men over the last few decades have gone through a lot of role confusion and upheaval as to how we are supposed to behave in relation to women.

Some skills we have never been noted for (communication ability) but suddenly seems to be demand, whereas other behaviors such as door openings, tradtional date set-ups etc have become different also.

In fact the expectations seem to be different enough on both sides that there are some real problems. And the media complicates it. Certainly Cosmo is enough to make anyone neurotic.

And it's not as if I even have a problem with that. One of my best friends from high school was a stay at home mom for six years. She just decided to go back to school to finish her bachelor's degree in Early Childhood Education. I supported her decision to stay home, and I support her decision to go back to school.

The problem I have is when men try to pit women who make different choices against each other, placing blame for the so-called "downfall of American culture" on women who have decided to work outside the home. That's the real tragedy in all of this, that women find it hard to look at each other from behind their choices.

It's very much a fallacy to suggest this, which is why the argument that they have to go outside of the United States to find women who don't have these "Americanized" careerist atitudes doesn't hold water with me. Most women aren't either/or. Most women in American society have been dancing on the balance of both/and for decades, and don't seem to be any worse for wear because of their dual roles.

What's really at stake (in my opinion) is that these men want someone to be available to them, only to them, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. A woman with outside interests is a threat to them, therefore they go outside the country to find women who are dependent on them not only for their livelihood, but for their very presence on American soil. Regardless of how good looking they are, how successful they might be, that kind of neediness borders on insecurity, and the women in some ways are powerless to do anything about it, because their lives in their home countries are far worse than the circumstances they might find themselves in when they get to the States. This kind of relationship sets up all sorts of unbalanced power dynamics, and in my opinion, when the balance of power is stacked in favor of one partner, both partners in the marriage come out on the losing end of things.

I see your point here, but most of the "role reversal" of which you speak has not only been beneficial to women. In some ways, there are men who believe that the role shift from "emotionally distant sole-breadwinner" has opened them up to develop other interests, to take more of an active role in the raising of children, and to learn to relate to their partners better. How is this a bad thing?

You say you're speaking from anecdotes you've heard from other men - in their conversations, did they say exactly what "roles" had been reversed? What relationship dynamics had changed in their eyes, and why? What roles do they want to inhabit, and what roles do they want their partners to play?

Is it so tough to ask a woman what she likes/expects? I really don't know, because I'm not a man, but before my husband and I got married -- heck, even before we started seeing each other seriously -- we had a conversation, albeit a light-hearted one, about relationship expectations.

I don't buy that, and I'm not sure about any of the other women in the forum, but I'm kind of insulted that you seem to think that most women get their relationship notions from Cosmo. Most women would tell you if they got right down to it that the only things they care about in a relationship are mutual respect, communication and honesty. Those things don't have a gender associated with them, they're part and parcel of treating someone humanely.

Communication isn't hard, James. It really, really isn't. It may take some time to work out the particulars, and learn to negotiate the waters safely, but anything worth having is worth working for. Buying a wife out of a catalog because you don't want to have to work on a relationship is an easy way out.

SoTrue1920-Beautifully put-Most women aren't either/or. Most women in American society have been dancing on the balance of both/and for decades, and don't seem to be any worse for wear because of their dual roles.

A good solid relationship allows both partners the latitude to express and develop different aspects of strengths and weaknesses. It's like a symphony. Sometimes the female has the supporting role others, the male. It's in constant change as we face changing demands.

When we see what people write on these boards, "Why do guys..." or "Why are women...", it shows our desire to understand others. The problem I see is we tend to compartmentalize individuals when maybe the truth lies somewhere a little deeper. Sweeping generalizations work on the surface, but once a relationship is beyond the initial stage, in my own life I've found you can toss a lot of those generalizations out the window. I don't want to be put into a box and have people expect me to be one way or another. There have been times I was the strong one and times I needed the strength of my husband. We allow each other to be what is needed at the moment rather than what some stereotype might dictate.
This leads me to think the men you refer to may have image or control concepts that aren't only out of sync with the times, but the reality of what women (and men) are fully capable of in a relationship. As usual, I could be way off.

Gender roles... well it's hard to decribe the change because it is different for everyone. I know women who firmly believe that the man is the head of the family and that is their perogative. I know women who have no place in their lives, or are unwilling to make those places to accomodate a man. And that is their decision too. Gender roles haven't changed for everyone, and yet for others have done a 180.

I guess that you can say the change in roles has been the developement of the ability to choose what it will be rather than have it dictated to you by social mores.

James says: In conversations with these guys they say they prefer the foreign culture to Americanized women because they seem to be more famlily orientated with better relationship skills. And cited the lack of a lot of these skills as the reason why dating Americanized women is hard.

I think this quote is a riot--like American guys are good at relationship skills???

In my opionion the guys being referred to are doing just the opposite--running from girls who have relationship skills to women who don't...haha.

A guys perspective

Well the women have definitely made their point on the subject. Personally, I think it is great that women have achieved what they have, to get out of the house and be an individual. While at the same time I'm seeing a pretty bad trend that might be directly or indirectly related to that. Honestly, I believe that the morals and values that use to define the family in this country are getting worse everyday. Parents are getting divorces, not spending time with their kids, which in result has given the media the opportunity to raise our children. Coming from a divorced family it makes me sick to see how the family gets tossed around these days. While I know that women want to be liberated and show that they can achieve, but at what cost? Talk to any house mom and I guarentee they will tell you that there life has been far from a waste. Being able to watch your kids grow and provide a loving household is not such a bad thing. By saying this I don't imply that the women should do all of the grunt work around the house while pappy comes home and sips on his budweiser. That to me seems like a wasted life for the husband. Im sure a lot of you women are throwing up your arms saying that I would just be intimadated by my wifes success. Thats not the case, thats not me, I want my future wife to have her own mind and opinions. A women can be productive and an asset to society even if she decides to stay home and take care of the house. Productiveness does not always have to revolve around money. Well thats my opinion, maybe im totally off, but an open mind is the best mind.

SAE, it sounds like you are blaming women for the decline, as you see it, of the family and morality. I don't think that is fair. Don't the men have a job to do in terms of family structure and morality? Do you think the divorce rate is what it is because women have jobs? I am certainly not faulting you that you personally would prefer to have a wife who stays home with the kids, but it sounds like you're saying more than that. I also don't think that a woman being employed is all about money and "productiveness" -- I think that it is about independence, which is *very* important to some people. As a side note, not all women even want to have children.

BTW, I have to give props to all the women on this board who have responded so eloquently and thoughtfully.

After reading that again, that is what it sounded like. I appologize about that, I really did not mean to make that assumption. I believe that BOTH parents are not taking care of their responsibilities the right way these days.

I think you're right about that. Now that I'm getting to the age where people I know are starting to have kids, it's kind of bizarre -- it's like some people just have kids because that's what they're *supposed* to do, but they have no clue as to how much work and sacrifice and time and everything raising children will require.

In my opinion one of the main reasons for a higher divorce rate is the lack of committment needed to work through conflicts.

The main areas where women who work factors into this are: 1) a women who is more independent financially may not put up with as much as a wife who is financially dependent on her spouse, and 2) a wife who works outside the home needs more help from her spouse who may not give what she needs putting more stress on the relationship.

I believe if both spouses are doing their share and communicating, then the relationship should work. In the past many stuck it out in spite of a bad situation. The main difference being level of committment and opportunity.

Here's the way I see it...

In the 1950's (I'll take that as an example) gender roles were clearly defined. Dad went out and made a living, Mom stayed home and cooked and cleaned and minded the children. But suppose Mom wanted to be a doctor or lawyer, and had the skills for it. Tough luck, she was a woman and therefore had no place in the business world. No penis, no paycheck.

Nowadays, if Mom wants to be a professional, she can do it. She's not excluded from the workplace simply because she's female. And by the same token, if Dad wants to stay home with the kids, he can go right ahead. This is a recent phenomenon, and still predominantly an American attitude toward family structure.

Both women and men have a lot more freedom now in the path they take in life. A woman who chooses to be a SAHM isn't "wrong", she's just made a different decision from a woman who's chosen to have a full-time job.

But some men are threatened by the idea that their wife would want to work outside the home and be successful in an arena traditionally reserved for men. The reverse isn't true - women are generally glad for the help their husbands give them with cooking, cleaning, and looking after the kids - and a little kid can be quite a handful even for two people :) But there are a lot of men out there who want the typical '50s family, where there is no question but that Mom will stay home with the kids and he will be the unquestioned master of the house - and it's hard to find an American woman who will agree to such a situation. I certainly don't agree, and I wouldn't marry a man with that attitude, but there they are.

[stepping off soapbox]

You might be surprised by the amount of women who stay in the workforce for a while after having kids and then choose to stay at home....I've known a few...Working 9 to 5 in a typical job is not exactly fun...

My cousin is the primary income earner and her husband stays home with the children. She works as a doctor which she loves. Her husband was downsized when she was pregnant, and they decided that he would be a stay at home dad. She says that she is very lucky because she can afford this arrangement and he is better than any daycare. They are both happy and this arrangement has worked out for their three children.
Most American families cannot afford this arrangement no matter which parent stays home. A two family income is not a luxury, but a necessity in most cases. My friend and her husband both work full time and have been since their son was three months. Living in New York is extremely expensive. They pay over $1,000 per month in real estate taxes, $2,000 for mortgage and utilities in a modest home and neighborhood, and $1,100 per month for child care. :eek: She loved being home, but there was no way possible financially even if you subtract the cost of daycare. Women have more choices now than ever in history. Unfortunately, not all families can afford what they want.

Here's the way I see it. No one should be allowed to have children unless they pass several very stereous tests. There are too many people in this world. Abortion should be implamented as a form of birthcontroll. And if you're against abortion...then don't eat ommletes.

How non-optimistic of you. I believe in a woman's right to choose, but abortion as a form of birth control is flat out wrong. WRONG. And it happens all too often. What about IUD's?

This is about as dumb a thing as I've read from you, and that says a lot.

Uh, no!

What I am seeing is many women quitting work to stay at home but they don't stay at home and spend the time with their children. They are out constantly "doing lunch", shopping, nails, workout with trainer, etc. While the nanny is home all day taking care of the children. The father is away all the time on business- the children grow up loving this nanny more than their own parents!

Yes, it is the area I work in (very wealthy) and the work I do that I see this style of living and yes, I wish I could live that lifestyle (except for the nanny replacing me as "mom" part) but I think if you are successful enough in life where you can be a stay at home mom- be a mom!!



And Op Prime.... I'll never eat eggs again! What were you thinking buddy?

XO Sue says: "And Op Prime.... I'll never eat eggs again! What were you thinking buddy?"

He wasn't, or at least I hope he wasn't.

You hate me don't you?