Make A Man Uncomfortable Today

[joreth]

"If you’re ever going to date a guy who treats you like someone worthy of respect, though, you’re going to have to set about the unpleasant job of alienating the men who don’t." ~ Priscilla Pine (Make A Man Uncomfortable Today - Brooklyn Magazine)

This was from an article that I'm not linking to only because my comments are probably going to be longer than the article and I didn't feel there was much *practical* advice in the article to share, but this line was really important.

The point of the article was how women who date men need to unlearn all our social programming that tells us to make others comfortable at the expense of our own needs and happiness in relationships and in life. We have to start deliberately doing things to make men more uncomfortable.

Pine defines "uncomfortable" as not violating boundaries, making anyone feel unsafe or threatened, etc. She calls on us to not let people get away with ignoring the impact that their dismissal of us has. In other words, make sure that people who are raised in a culture to feel entitled and privileged start feeling cognitive dissonance when they act on that entitlement and privilege.

It is not your job sit at home and wait patiently and pleasantly for someone who has had something "come up" *again* without expressing your irritation about being stood up for the 68th time. I try to make space in my relationships for each person to be able to have feelings of disappointment while not infringing on the other's autonomy by making them *responsible* for that feeling because that can work against us too.

See, in our patriarchal culture (whether you as an individual experience this or not is irrelevant, because I'm speaking of cultural trends now), a man is expected to have this full and busy life while a woman is expected to bend herself around him. He's working late at the office? No problem, she'll just put the roast in the oven to warm and somehow not let it dry out by the time he stumbles home at midnight, ready to eat, and use that time constructively to get other household projects done, pleasantly supporting his job at the expense of her neglect and not feeling any icky feelings about it, ever.

But if a *woman* has to work late at the office? Regularly? Why, she's neglecting her husband and children! She has her priorities screwed up! So, on the one hand, some people are taught that it is not OK to feel their feelings because that might make the other person uncomfortable (because then he would have to face the fact that he is dismissing the importance of her time / effort / whatever by doing the thing that makes her feel the feeling). But on the other hand, those people are also taught that when the other person has their own feelings, it means that they are *responsible* for having caused those feelings because they are a Bad Person and they should stop whatever they're doing for themselves to make the other person not have those bad feelings. In both situations, it's the same person who is expected to do the changing and the catering.

So, when I say I make space to have feelings while not making the other person "responsible", I mean that I have to have room in my relationships to feel disappointed if my partner cancels a date, for example. I'm allowed to feel that disappointment without having to squash it in order to now comfort *him* for his feelings of guilt that my disappointment is triggering. He SHOULD feel guilty about canceling a date with me! That sucks.

But that also doesn't mean that he is necessarily a Bad Person for having something come up as things do. He needs to be aware that his actions have consequences, but it's my responsibility to do something about my feelings. I have to define the threshold, define the boundary, between what is an acceptable amount of "sometimes shit happens and we both make accommodations for each other" vs. "he is not prioritizing me as much as I would like" and I have to decide what is done about that. That is my responsibility, but he also has to know when I'm feeling uncared for so that he can also make decisions about his behaviour that affect me. When this is accomplished between two people who are negotiating and relating in good faith with each other, we have a healthy relationship, even if that relationship doesn't ultimately "work out" or it ends due to conflicting priorities.

The problem is that, for people for who that social programming really took hold and they don't know how to "lean in" to the discomfort they cause other people, or they internalized the messages and making people uncomfortable makes them feel bad themselves, it's not easy to see where those boundaries should be drawn. There is a tendency to draw them too close in, meaning that their partners can avoid the cognitive dissonance too often and therefore not have any motivation to learn or change; or that the boundaries are drawn so far out that they feel isolated and alone because they deliberately keep people "at arms length".

I delight in making people feel uncomfortable. I'm like a kid who sees a giant red button with a label "Don't Push" - when I hear about someone's "buttons", the first thing I do is push on them. tacit does this too, which is one of the things that attracted me to him in the first place. But I do so with a purpose. What will pushing on that button accomplish? Is it a button for trauma and pushing on it will only cause someone pain? Or is it a button for unrecognized privilege or unspoken assumptions that they will be challenged to face?

One of my favorite stories that I've told several times is the Pegging Story - I was the crew chief this day and most of the crew did not know me (and was mostly men). As usually happens backstage, we start joking and talking about sex, and as usually happens when there are women in this industry, we started taking the conversation further than the guys would. They would have left it to a few raunchy jokes, but the women both topped the jokes and then started actually talking about "uncomfortable" sex stuff.

Eventually we got onto kink, and as usual, the crew were unfamiliar with that world and started asking me questions, which I answered. Eventually, one guy finally had enough cognitive dissonance which was forcing him to challenge his assumptions about what "kinds of people" explore kink and what kinky sex "meant" and he blurted out "I don't need any of that kinky shit! The most I'll do is anal!"

So I, recognizing the unspoken assumptions underlying his outburst (based on other things said and non-verbal signals that I've seen a hundred times before) about just who was expected to be on the receiving end and what anal sex "meant" about the person receiving it, quipped back "oh, you like anal sex? Great! I have a strapon in the car, let's go!"

He backed up, hands in the air, and stuttered "no, no, that's not what I meant!" So I said "well, you didn't specify," much to the amusement of the crew listening. I went on to point out that he shouldn't assume that the girl must necessarily be the one to take it up the ass, he brought up the "I'm not gay" thing so I got to point out that having a woman fuck him kinda by definition doesn't mean he's gay, etc.

He didn't find any allies in the crew because of the humor I used to make him the butt of the joke when he tried to turn it on me to make me look deviant and because of the work I had just done in explaining stuff. He thought, as men who try this shit with me so often do, that making me look "perverted" would get everyone else on "his side" so that he could hide behind his assumptions once more and validate himself at my expense. Instead, I made him look foolish, but I didn't badger or bully him for not being kinky, I only teased him so that his intolerance was the butt of the jokes, which made *him* look small instead of allowing him to force *me* into being smaller than I am for his comfort.

That conversation made him uncomfortable. He was uncomfortable because he was challenged to examine his biases.

Within the context of romantic partnerships, I'm going to assume that the two people actively like each other and desire the other person's happiness, at least abstractly. I realize that's a big assumption, because I've been in relationships myself where that's not true. But I'm going to make that assumption here anyway.

For these relationships, if he genuinely likes her (again, using gendered pronouns because of the patriarchal programming that makes this pervasive and endemic, although this can apply to any relationship) and wants to see her happy, then it is in his best interest to be made uncomfortable in this context. He can't be expected to know how to contribute to her happiness if she swallows herself and makes herself small for him. He doesn't even know her when she does that. He can't see who she is, so he can't reasonably be expected to treat her the way she needs to be treated in order to be happy in a relationship.

**This should be obvious, but I'll say it anyway - if someone is stuck in an abusive relationship and leaving is not an option at this time, then clearly the victim should do what they feel they need to survive. Maybe that means making yourself small so that you don't make him uncomfortable by your presence. Maybe that means he doesn't know who you are, really, because he doesn't want to. I am not qualified to address how people in these situations should get out of them or how to apply healthy boundaries with people who are not operating on good faith with each other.**

It is not in his best interests for her to not draw healthy boundaries. It doesn't help him be a better person and it doesn't help him love her. But drawing those boundaries, making people aware of when they fuck shit up and don't treat people well, makes people uncomfortable and that will likely narrow the dating pool. You might find yourself alone for a while. You might find yourself having to reject a lot of people, or being rejected a lot for being "too harsh" or "too bitchy" or "too needy" or too whatever, or even not "compassionate enough" or not "caring enough" or not "gentle enough" or not "ladylike" or not whatever.

Trust me, I've been on a lot of first dates that had no second date. I've had a lot of conversations with guys that go "before I go out with you, you should probably see my OKC profile and read my FB page for a while to make sure that I'm really the person you're interested in" and then never had a followup conversation where they said "I did all that and you're even more awesome!" Most of the time, people I send to those pages just fade away. They might continue to flirt with me when they see me in person (that's a coworker thing - a product of my industry), but no more specific invitations to dinner.

Yes, making people uncomfortable will tend to filter out a lot of people. It will alienate people who don't respect your boundaries or your values. But that's how you clear the path for those who do to find you and for you to recognize them among the otherwise vast sea of humanity. Your pool will be smaller. Your pool will likely be more long distance (thanks to the internet, but at least it will be possible with the internet).

But your choices are to be alone for a while until you find your tribe who gets you and respects you, or to be alone even while in relationships because those people won't respect you or even know you. I decided long ago that my value is worth the respect of my partners and not a farthing less.

Comments

[belenen.livejournal.com]

This was an excellent read (and I LOOOOVE that Pegging Story). I thought I had gotten better about making people uncomfortable, but I have not worked out how to manage that when the person in question is dealing with a series of crises that would lay anyone out flat. It is too easy for me to fall into a habit of caretaking, even though I haven't dated a cis man in at least 5 years.

I definitely deal with the shrinking pool effect, and I send people to my online presence to weed them out as well. The really frustrating part of that is that the people who ARE interested and growth-focused often end up intimidated and I don't find out until years later that they would have liked to be more connected. How do you manage? do you have to do most of the initiating?

[joreth]

Thank you!

I've also been told that people were interested but intimidated and didn't find out until years later. So far, every time where that has been the case (admittedly, only a small number) and I eventually found out and gave them a try was a disaster. It turns out, at least in my situation, that if they're too intimidated by the profiles, then they don't really have the skills necessary to accept me even if they are also interested.

I used to have to do most of the initiating but over the years, my most successful relationships have been pretty mutual. One or the other of us has to make the "first" move perhaps, but there's some sense that the other is interested before that move is made. Those people don't find my profiles "intimidating", they understand why I come across so aggressive and antagonistic in those mediums and know how to make allowances for the fact that these mediums are only a small slice of who I am. Even if there is some aspect of me that they don't think is one of my better qualities (like my anger), they don't find it *intimidating*. Not in the sense that people feel small or inadequate in comparison to me, anyway. They might not wish to rouse my anger, for example, but only because conflict is uncomfortable and not because they think I'm "scary" or "intimidating" or "larger than life" or they feel frightened by me, just a normal desire to avoid conflict in general.

But, there have been times in my life when I didn't have very many prospects (at least none that made their interest in me known) and I just had to experience that time either single or with a very small pool of intimates and friends, many of whom are long distance. I spent some time deliberately solitary, and when *I* was ready, I started reaching out to people again and initiating more. The more "me" I am, and the more effort I make to be social (whether online or IRL), the more likely I am to find other people who appreciate me and who are not likely to feel this kind of discomfort from me because they're not doing things that I need to challenge them on. When I meet people like that who don't need for me to make them uncomfortable because they're not doing anything to cause cognitive dissonance, they tend to like me and that mutual interest leads to no real clear initiator.

So, for instance, I met my newest partner at a sci-fi convention where he was speaking about atheism. Being a rather outspoken atheist, this was something I knew I wouldn't have to challenge him about. I liked what he had to say and mentioned it in passing to someone else who also heard his lecture.

That person mentioned that the speaker had recently come out as poly on his blog, so I looked him up. In the blog, I found poly, atheism, feminism, and a general awareness of all the social justice issues that are important to me. There didn't seem to be much reason to need to make him uncomfortable very often, so I introduced myself and thanked him for being openly poly, on behalf of the community.

He recently told me that he had already noticed me at that point and heard some things about me that peaked his own interest and had been trying to think of a way to meet me without hitting on me (being considerate of how women are treated at conventions and all). So - mutual interest. Technically, I made the first move in introducing myself, but I did so in a platonic way and he would have come up with a way to do it if I hadn't. So, he took the next step and invited me to talk later (again, platonically) outside of the con setting. I had been trying to figure a way to steer our conversation in that direction myself, so if he hadn't asked me for drinks after the con, I would have.

continued...

[joreth]

...continued

And so on. Our conversation was basically a series of small pokes to see if we were compatible on some of these issues, and as we discovered reciprocity at each step, one or the other of us would take another step. Eventually, we had taken enough steps that it was obvious we were interested in each other. I think I was the first one to say something like "I'm totally crushing on you right now, BTW", but he had been flirting with me for some time by then.

He was not intimidated by my online profiles. He finds my aggression and competence attractive. tacit is similar - he isn't intimidated by me even though he likes to joke about being "scary" whenever I do something fierce, like when he sees how well I can shoot a firearm. He's not terribly into guns, but he also finds competence and independence attractive.

I have another partner who, about a decade ago, was interested in me but did find me intimidating at the time. We tried dating, very briefly, and then he freaked out and disappeared. It took many years to get over that and rebuild a friendship. Now that he's more adult and we also took more time just being friends without the romantic attraction leading things, he no longer finds me intimidating. He can see me more clearly now, even though I *do* challenge him and make him uncomfortable every so often. He has reached a point in his maturity and in his life where he embraces the challenges I throw at him and he leans into the discomfort better than he did as a much younger man.

So, the way I look at it, if they are so intimidated that it takes them years before they can confess their interest in me, then all those years of being "intimidated" is time where he is not yet ready for me and the relationship would not be as healthy as it would be once he got over being intimidated. Having a (very) few relationships that I actively regret and would undo if I could, I'm not very likely to see these kinds of situations as "missed opportunities", but more like "dodged bullets" these days. Really internalizing that lesson makes it much easier for me to deal with those times when I'm not feeling very loved or attractive due to lack of partners.

And I'm not really sure how I finally got over my programming that says not to initiate, but I don't really see initiating as being a big thing either, so when I *am* ready to start a relationship with someone, I just do. I think what makes it easier for me was letting go of any attachments to preferred outcomes of my initiating. So, I mean that I've learned to enjoy my crushes on people just as they are, with no expectation of reciprocation. Then, if I feel it's worth mentioning (sometimes I don't, for whatever reason - sometimes I'm attracted to people who I know would make poor partners for me so I stick to fantasizing about them privately), I mention it without really caring about their reaction, except of course to try and not make them feel uncomfortable just for my admission of interest - me being interested in someone is not something people ought to feel uncomfortable about. So, if they say yes, that's cool, but if they say no or they try to politely reject me without having to actually say "no", that's cool too. The point of me saying something isn't to get them to reciprocate, it's just to let them know the opportunity exists if they want it.

That sort of thing makes all this a lot easier on me too - initiating interest, dealing when people don't seem to like me or are intimidated by me, potential missed opportunities, etc. I just feel my feelings and nothing necessarily has to be done about them.

I must be tired, I think I'm rambling now.

[belenen.livejournal.com]

Yeahhh I've had disasters when trying to date people who were intimidated by me, even if they said it was in the past -- usually they put me on a pedestal. If I can't trust you to tell me off, we aren't going to be able to connect in any sustainable way.

my most successful relationships have been pretty mutual
What is most frustrating for me is that I don't think I have ever had a success when I reached out first, unless my reach-out was very very indirect like adding them on FB or LJ. I haven't really had any 'mutual' experiences? at least not ones I code that way. But I do tend to meet people where they offer, so it becomes mutual almost instantly.

I spent some time deliberately solitary, and when *I* was ready, I started reaching out to people again and initiating more. The more "me" I am, and the more effort I make to be social (whether online or IRL), the more likely I am to find other people

I find this works for me very well. I get a lot out of my own company. I don't get much out of being social, usually, because it is such a big spend of energy due to social anxiety, but if I plan carefully I can avoid being drained.

I like your story with the poly atheist sci-fi speaker. I should make more of an effort to reach out like that, I think, as I tend to unthinkingly react as "oh they're a celebrity well then they won't care" which is silly.

I don't get crushes on people before I know if it is possible for them to feel the same way, so enjoying a non-reciprocated crush is not something that could happen for me. I just build friendships, and hope that something else may arise from some of them. Usually I fall in love in a platonic way first, and then fall in romantic love because they usually interpret that as romantic love and 'reciprocate'.