Women bond over discussing how they feel with one another, men bond over devising solutions together.
Men have the responsibility of leading and protecting, as the family relies & depends on them. Being emotionally unrestrained is dangerous for them. Not being emotionally indulgent is an act of maturity, and a great service to those under their charge for the stability it offers.
In a gynocentric society, where the female worldview prevails and is deemed superior, an understanding of male psychology is all but moot. It's a very unempathetic case of "why aren't they more like us?" followed by pressure to be more like them, whilst shaming men who are not.
How can you expect a man to offer you stability, when he's just as emotional as you are?

Is it not common sense that if you seek security and stability, then you're seeking someone who is less emotionally self-indulgent than you are.

He can't offer stability AND be like you.
And this is where the chaos of womanly confusion comes into play - the desire for contradictory things that no one man can possess. The desire for a man to be both sensitive and emotionally free, yet also solid, dependable and in control.

You want a paradox that doesn't exist.
You dislike the sensitive, emotionally free man for burdening you too much with how he feels, and you dislike the dependable emotionally unavailable man for not opening up to you.

The first man is too weak and repulsive, whilst the second man is too detached.

What's the answer?
Being emotionally available without being emotionally consumed.

As a man, you can't let your emotions consume you, but you realise your woman needs you to be emotionally available.

With some skill, experience and practice, men can stay solid and level headed whilst being open.
A man can be compassionate, whilst remaining measured. In fact when you imagine how the ideal patriarch would act, it would be in precisely this way. He would not refuse to discuss matters of emotional importance, but he would do so in a way that's very forceful but fair.
This isn't something that comes easily to men. Men are naturally either angry when opening up, or entirely shut off & unacknowledging. Men who are very emotionally free and indulgent are abnormal & have been conditioned into a feminine form of expression that does not serve him.
Less developed men thus follow 1 of 2 vectors:

They are emotional but only in one sense - they address everything with anger as it's the only emotion they're comfortable with.

OR they are simply completely detached and cold.

It's one extreme or the other with no middle.
Emotionally inchoate men thus channel everything into aggression, or suppress everything with detachment.

Neither is cooperative, nor good for a female partner's mental health - because women require an active emotional connection to feel truly bonded with their man.
So there is in an incompatibility of sorts. Women always want to talk about their feelings, but men don't.

Unless something is really bad and plaguing a man to the point he can't stop it from bothering him, most men are fine with not discussing things at all. They get over it.
This however doesn't work for women, because women bond through sharing emotions, which means they need their man to be open to feel connected to him. But this goes against men's preferred and more comfortable way of bonding and so engaging in it is a sacrifice men make for women
Let me be clear, men are not women.

Women overwhelmingly prefer to talk about how they feel and why - they have an overwhelming need to express - men do not have this.

Men, in actual fact, can find discussions about how one feels quite laborious and imposing, even exhausting.
So whilst women have a need to feel connected to their man and thus a desire for him to be emotionally available, they should be respectful of the fact that discussing emotions isn't something a man enjoys like she does. Engaging in it with her is an act of compassion from him.
Men likewise must be mindful, because if they come to enjoy being self-indulgent and free flowing in how they express themselves, they will become emotionally unstable. This will bleed into all areas of their life, and damage both parties. A man has a duty to keep it together.
It IS NOT healthy for a man to be as emotionally free as a woman, as somebody needs to remain level headed to provide guidance, HOWEVER this does not mean being detached is the answer. The answer is to learn how to be emotionally available without being emotionally consumed.
This is the only viable path to success in a relation with a woman, because it allows a man to maintain his dignity and remain ordered, whilst likewise addressing issues as they arise and giving his woman the sense of connection and emotional closeness she needs to feel bonded.
Learning to be emotionally available without being emotionally consumed is a skill that is developed over time. It is much harder to address something resolutely that makes you feel strongly without letting it consume you, rather than to simply not even acknowledge it at all.
This is why many men appear emotionally one dimensional. They're either robotic because they address nothing, or they address everything with aggression. And then you have the pathetic men who have been conditioned to express themselves like women. None of these are healthy.
The path of the patriarch is thus the man who is emotionally available, not consumed. He can discuss matters of emotional importance with you, but doing so doesn't cause him to become overly emotional himself. He is level headed & compassionate without being detached or unstable.
This is the stabilisation of the paradox women seek as it is the hallmark of a true man, but reaching this headspace requires a certain level of mastery and can take a man many years to learn. Men are not born with this ability that women require of them in order to truly thrive.
In fact, many men never reach this level. Autistic men are always rather detached, whilst sociopathic men will always be aggressive. In a sense, both of these classes of men cannot provide the sense of stable emotional connection a woman needs due to their own limitations.
To be entirely detached is to be emotionally unavailable, but to lack any capacity for detachment would be to rob you of the ability to discuss emotions without them consuming you. Total detachment is not the answer. A measure of it is.

Detachment is an asset until it isn't.
Women when open lack self-restraint, which is why discussing emotions leads to expressing them, becoming consumed by them, and her ultimately acting them out.

Your job as a man is to acknowledge and address with compassion without letting it consume you.

Detach, only slightly.
You can follow @TellYourSonThis.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: