Women by nature of design love to involve in a one-to-one relationship or rather in closely knit intimate relationships i.e. smaller social circles. Men, on the other hand, love larger social circles and do not mind expanding their social circle as well.

The above fact has been corroborated by Playground observation studies which find that girls pair off and play one-on-one with the same playmate for the full hour. Boys will either play one-on-one with a series of different playmates or with a larger group. Girls want the one-to-one relationship, whereas boys are drawn to bigger groups or networks.

When two girls are playing together and the researchers bring in a third one, the two girls resist letting her join. But two boys will let a third boy join their game. My point is that girls want the one-on-one connection, so adding a third person spoils the time for them, but it doesn't spoil it for the boys.^[1]

The above observation is merely illustrative and not exhaustive, illustrative of the fact that males find it relatively easy to expand their social circle while females do not find it, which holds good even in case of a family as well.

Often it has been observed in most marriages breaking up, especially in India scenario which is a mixed bag of joint and nuclear families, the real root cause is due to the clash between the females of the family, i.e. the newly wedded wife and the mother or sister of the husband.

As men's rights activist who is approached by men seeking solace from troubled marriages and from my experience of listening to marital problems I can say 85-90% of marriages falling apart, fall in the above category.

This is explained by the above socio-psychological difference between men and women. The males of the family easily absorb the new member in their family as part of their social circle; however the females, both the newly wedded wife and the mother/sister of the husband have a lot of problems expanding their social circle.

Had it stopped at it, it would have been much better, but the real brunt of the fallacy comes to light with the fact that it is man who is expected to be creating balance between two non-adjusting females and are made to pay the price for the same as well. It always has been a woman vs. woman war and men have paid the price for the same. We even have judgments citing that it is a husband's duty to balance his mother and wife.

In the famous historical epic, Ramayana, it was a competition amongst the queens of King Dasharatha, as to whose son gets the throne that leads Kaikai, one of the queens, to have Rama sent to exile so that her son Bharath can enthrone the kingdom. A woman vs. woman war, but price paid by 3 men - Dasharatha, for acting against his wish, Rama, Lakshmana and their family for spending 14 years in exile in forest.

Comments

Add New

Write comment
Name:
Email:
Website:
Title:
UBBCode:	-color-aquablackbluefuchsiagraygreenlimemaroonnavyolivepurpleredsilvertealwhiteyellow -size-tinysmallmediumlargehuge
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.26

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."