Pop culture wisdom? Marital advice from a former model?
A week or two back, a character on television (Reality TV, believe it or not) mentioned something about how to keep a husband happy. This is her second husband and she is his third (or maybe fourth) wife.
Her love lessons? Along with little notes, signs of affection, and not too much time spent apart, this new Real Housewife of Beverly Hills offers observations (and recommendations) on the male of the species.
Yolanda Foster, former model (and still a stunner), says:
I think that men are really simple beings if you really think about it. The most important thing is that they’re acknowledged as a man. The sex is very important. And feeding them. You know, cook them a dinner once in a while…
I’ll also refer you to a classic Season 1 Episode of Sex and the City. Samantha is coaching Carrie on her relationship issues with Big, wherein she compares men to plants, making it clear that all they require is ample (sexual) care and feeding.
Not unlike a good deal of what I see on television these days – what passes for entertainment (but seeps into our psyches) – we’re hit over and over with messages that tell us men are simpler creatures than women, and we keep them happy through sex and food.
Shall I call in Father Knows Best? Shall I channel the wisdom of Leave It to Beaver? Must I consult my old Ms. Magazines? Or is the fact that we still read, see, hear (and respond to) these messages enough to tell us they bear some truth?
Or does this advice belong in the same circular file as “happy wife, happy life,” which I consider utterly ridiculous?
A Hot Heel, a Great Meal
I grew up hearing about the importance of pleasing a man. It was part of the feminine upbringing of the 60s and early 70s. I also heard that the way to a man’s heart was through his stomach. (Even as a kid, that seemed silly to me.)
Reflecting on my relationship and what makes it very sweet, sex and food certainly play their part. A big part in fact – as we enjoy both, in a manner that is about savoring. But there’s so much more, and without that “more,” we absolutely wouldn’t work.
There’s pleasure in language. There are shared values. There’s comfort when we’re keeping company and that company involves reading, walking, talking, laughing, socializing, and seeing movies. And often, we cook together, or take turns, lovingly serving the other a meal.
Sex and food?
How could they not be vitally important? Sex – if we’re of like desire (and energies), and food – because we all need it to live, and it’s divinely sensual? And aren’t both a sort of art form? Don’t both enhance our quality of life?
Shared Pleasures of the Mind
And what about the joys of curiosity? Of learning, laughing, creating, contributing? When it comes to feeling good about our lives, these are also vital factors for some of us – and we need to share them.
Happy in bed – on its own? Not enough. Splendidly fed – on its own? Not enough.
The acknowledgment – another story. That, I view as the many small acts of seeing and accepting the one you’re with, and paying attention to interacting in caring and respectful ways. Sexuality is one of them. Enjoying food together is another. But these are pieces of a pie that is far more sophisticated in its recipe and enjoyment.
As for deeming men simple creatures or as easy as “plants?” Is that any different than concluding that women are entirely ruled by emotions?
Personally, I’m not interested in men who don’t “meet me” fully and challenge my thought process. I can’t “dumb down.” Or rather, I won’t.
So what do you think? Are men “simpler” than women? Or is this nothing more than another sweeping generalization in a culture quick to label and dismiss?
You May Also Enjoy
[caveman voice] Me think generalization but clichés some truth have.
If you will forgive me this off-color remark, a female blogger wrote that her own grandmother summed it all up by giving her this advice: “Keep a man’s stomach full and his balls empty and he’ll always come home.”
Well, Mr. Belle. The caveman voice adds a certain… gravitas. Thank you for your input. (I shall now go begin my weekend Menu Planning, accordingly…) 😉
And a little more harsh, “Wife, if you are not having sex with your husband, you have to wonder who is.” There are so many more levels to consider, but like Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, you start with a good base if you ever hope for your mate to reach “self actualization.”
More than a grain of truth to that remark, @Gandalfe. But shouldn’t the men be concerned as well?
I had a very luscious 29 year old man say to me yesterday, “You know people say the way to a man’s heart is through his stomach, but really, I think it’s through his chest.” I laughed, and thought to myself, “I’ve always found it’s through a lower part of his anatomy.” That’s how it starts, and then come the other pieces of the pie. I don’t think we can generalize men. I’ve been with some men who really just want very simple things, and then I’ve been with others who analyze, and require more. The complexities of male/female interactions astound me, the simplicity of it humors me.
Impeccably expressed, Sassy Queenpin! (Always delighted when you stop by…)
I agree with you and caveman both! These days I still have women friends say “I want a guy to feed me, take me out,…basically make me feel good”; but aren’t real relationships based on the care and feeding of the other person. Shouldn’t those women be saying “I want to be with someone and rub is back, crack him a cold one, find out what he wants or needs.” Isn’t that how it works? I’ve got your back…or balls and you’ve got my….well you know! lol
And yes exploring dining dancing talking expands on that idea. btw…i’m single and available! cheers!
Mutual care & feeding… Sounds good, Pia! Cheers to you, too… and hoping you kick up a little “saxy” trouble this weekend in that jazzy locale you live in…
To answer your question, Wolf, yes, men are simpler than women. I’m guessing that grandmother quoted by Mr. Belle had a long and happy marriage.
Well, Hmm….what to say that does not sound boorish or trite. First, I am a pretty good chef, I am a little picky, and can afford to go out for good food. Second, sex is like money, it is important but only becomes really very important when you do not have enough to survive. Third, I think the former model’s “not too much time apart” may be more important than sex and definitely more important than food. Fondness and face time keep one connected in a way technology cannot. While technology will do in a pinch it does not do well long term. Again as I stated before sex but also lovingly and physical touches are important.
Food and sex? Sounds a little reminiscent of bread and circuses. While both have a foundation in truth, they are simplistic and faulty. Any man (and more so any woman) can obtain food and sex quite easily. The reality is that a physical, romantic and intellectual connection is so much more elusive and desirable. So men, while simpler than women, need many things more than food and sex.
I will leave this dissertation for another day.
I am surprised that the first thing she said (“The most important thing is that they’re acknowledged as a man”) seems to have been skipped over. Men and women need work and love (said Freud) and need to be acknowledged for bringing both to the relationship. Work doesn’t just mean a job: it means the work of caring for a family, meaningful conversation, and the satisfactions of the work qua work (building a table, growing food, doing neurosurgery). It’s the same for both sexes. Are men needier, more infantile? Many are. So what? Ladies: You wan’t to make your point by not feeding them and making love to them? Go ahead. Soon, your bed will be cold.
I’m a plumber by trade, and my wife is a wizard scientist. But when we get into bed, most nights, it’s us and it’s very very good. Oh, by the way, I do most of the cooking (I mean the food).
Quite right, to note that the issue of acknowledgement was not taken up…
You mention work, love, “meaningful” conversation. I would say “meaning” – tout court – and suspect that’s part of the more left to your (and others’) imagination…
We are, most of us, all so different – and all so alike. We want that acknowledgement. (I suspect Curtis would agree.) We want our lives to “mean” something or we want to mean something to someone. That leaves the details to be drawn by the individuals involved, and hopefully their beds will be warm – if they wish – and they’ll all be cooking… if they’re hungry.
BLW,
On this one I can’t refrain proposing this famous song by Juliette Greco:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-xmrVole38
And I give a translation of one verse for your readers 🙂
La cuisine:
The ones who were bragging in Dior’s dresses with Hermes bags
Put away in Madame Tussaud’s museum of film club or Sam Levin*
Will be sorry when the time of salt and pepper and hair curler comes
That they didn’t learn that fine cooking skills
refraining the little hubbies from fleeing away
(*) famous photographer of stars in old movie times
PS:
Well beyond the wry song of Juliette Greco, I still want to add this about the different ways we men and women envision a relationship, and what makes us stick to it. Just to say that this difference is coming with physical appeal and sex, I always saw it. Let a man be unhappy about his sex needs in a relationship, and you soon find it in serious jeopardy.
About this there was a very subtle way to express it in the film “Sex Lies and Videotapes”. Talking to his buddy’s wife that he will soon seduce, James Spader puts it that way, quoting something that he read somewhere:
“Men learn to love the persons they are attracted to, and women become more and more attracted to the person they love.”
We men shouldn’t be very proud of that, but mostly that’s how it goes 🙂
Dearest D – it says a lot about how glorious your blog is when visitors send juliette greco clips 🙂
*wavingfromlosangeles*
_tg xx
Ah, tg… You make me smile. Hoping it is a day filled with chandeliers, even under the sunny LA skies.
Men are more “direct” ie; wear their hearts on their sleeves, than women who can be more “manipulative” and underhanded, therefore more difficult to analyze/diagnose. Men are just easier to read and therefore feed and keep warm. That being said, I would be bored by a man that does not challenge me or always lets me have my own way.
I’m with you on the “bored” thing, La Bergère…
Et les hommes ? Eux aussi ? Ils ne cherchent jamais à être “rencontré” par une femme ? Je crois que si… les hommes aussi, ils peuvent s’ennuyer.
Oui… c’est vrai, les hommes aussi ils préfèrent les femmes qui leur présentent un peu de challenge. C’est à dire, les hommes qui sont biens dans leur têtes, avec une confiance solide et humble au fonds de leur ames…
Expertly expressed BLW. I, too, think that great sex and great food while being bored out of your mind and lacking in basic trust/common values will not get very far on the lasting relationship scale.