Women often lack accountablility.. is this nature or nurture?

Question

Please read the whole question before answering.

Is it natural for women or is it something society enforces? The main example of this is how when a couple fights and the woman gets angry and upset, the first thing the man thinks is: "What did I do now? What did I do to upset her?"

On the other hand, when a man is acting stupid and behaving like a jerk, the woman is a victim, she doesn't think "oh, what did I do to upset him?" She thinks something more along the lines of "I can't believe he is acting like this! How immature! What a jerk..."

Answer 1

Women are like cats. They may not always be right but they are never wrong.

The truth, most women are spoiled. You apologise, walk out and disappear for 5 or six hours. Have a couple of drinks, or just spill some whiskey on your shirt and go back home.

Keep repeating this exercise until she decides to play fair.

They hate being left alone after a fight, especially if you apologize and disappear.

Answer 2

How is it that we are living in the year 2007 and still believing and spreading these ridiculous myths? Many women do a tremendous amount of self-blaming and self-denigration, and we are all accountable for the mistakes we make or the wrongs we do. What goes around comes around, as the old saying goes. Think of it as karma or simply the logic of cause and effect. So, even if you do encounter a woman who pretends not to take responsibility for her actions, her actions lead to logical consequences, such as the destruction of her relationship. We should all think things through before we write or speak, asking ourselves is the belief I am harboring true, or is it simply some stereotypical assumption I've heard all my life. Projection is at work here too. If you believe that all women are irresponsible, whenever you see a woman behaving irresponsibly or without any accountability, you will think "Ah ha! See. There you go. All women are irresponsible. Women lack accountability." There is a saying for this one too: "If you are a nail everything is a hammer." (Sometimes women stereotype men too. How would you feel if someone asked you why all men are dogs (or players)? Not so good right? And def. not true.)

Answer 3

Pretty big generalization there isn't it? That's not something I'd think about my man...I'd try to figure out if it was something I did or said. I think most women would...but let's assume you're correct. If you're correct, here's why:

It's all societal. Men have had it ingrained in their heads that they screw up all the time and that anytime their girl is upset, it's their fault. Women have had it ingrained in their heads that men don't really have feelings, and that they're jerks.

We're all just playing the roles that society has taught us how to play all too well (Incidentally this is something feminism is fighting against).

If women lack accountability (which I really don't think we do) it's not because we as a sex lack the capacity for it, it's because society has beaten it out of us. Most gender differences are societal. I won't argue that there are SOME mental and emotional differences...but we're really not so different.

Answer 4

As a women i can say we let emotions rule our head
we are emotional creatures afterall and we do have a tendency to blame ourselves and think we have done something wrong whilst the man can be blissfully unaware he has caused upset.
Unfortunately we then get frustrated with having to spell out the problem everytime as man doesn't see it.
I think men can control their emotions more because when they are in conflict they are aware of the damage it causes
when you let go, where as women go crazy screaming, crying and throwing things.
Men have been conditioned not to show emotion.

Answer 5

You ask an interesting question!

Actually, when I find I'm upset with with a man (or anyone, really), the first thing I think about is, why am I feeling so upset? I ask myself questions like, "Is it me? Am I being overly sensitive here, or do I have a legitimate reason to be upset with this person?" I try very hard not to react impulsively or give emotionally-driven "quick responses" that I may end up regretting later. I like to think things through...probably to a fault sometimes. My lack of getting angry or defending myself when perhaps I should is a result of really wanting to keep the peace. I'll do most anything to avoid a fight. I just know that anger tends to be something that can cloud an issue...it can cloud good judgment, it can delay resolutions to conflict, if it is extreme, or mis-directed in any way, it can hurt people...and damage the relationship. It can also be the cause of feelings of guilt directed inward, that are hard (at least for me) to let go of (to forgive myself). That's why I try to avoid letting anger get the best of me. However, I'm only human, and sometimes I do make mistakes. I don't always control my anger when I should, or manage it in productive ways.

I think it's a mistake to assume that all women don't question their own emotions, or question their own behavior or motives. In fact, I think if anything, women probably (in general) attempt a great deal of self-understanding, and put a lot of effort into trying to understand the opposite sex. They also seem quite interested in understanding the dynamics of a healthy vs. unhealthy relationship. They seem capable of a great deal of introspection. They also have a tendency to want to help fix other people's problems. (Nature and nurture at work here, I think), Truthfully, how often have you ever really noticed a men watching the "Dr. Phil" show (bad example, I suppose, but you get my drift)?...or reading a self-help book? (I'm sure there are men who do, but really, haven't you seen more women do this?) If two people (in a relationship) are in a huge argument, who is it (most often) that you'll see trying to "resolve things"...even to the point of not always allowing the man to have his own space to cool down in?

Both genders have a tendency to blame others when they are upset with them. (Nature and nurture probably both play a part. ) Psychologists continuously debate how much people's behavior is influenced by the two. (Is it genetic or is it learned?) I have to say, I lean more toward the "learned" theory. You inherit certain tendencies (personality traits), yes, but our environment, esp. when you are young, is a crucial time in our lives for learning to manage these tendencies: to learn what is socially acceptable, and what is not, and to learn adaptation skills and coping mechanisms. Our environment, then, is something that definitely shapes those tendencies, one way or another, by means of reinforcement (or lack of), and punishment (or lack of).

Hope this answers your question!

Answer 6

My Dad's punching me and beating me did no longer seem to electrify my attitudes in direction of sexual orientation in any way, a minimum of any measurable way. in reality, i've got confidence it has made me greater comfortable in direction of how I cope with women, that's under 'gadgets' and greater as people. yet there is a few thing approximately seeing/observing/'having' 2 women (lesbian or no longer) that seems a turn-on for adult adult males, myself (unashamedly) lined. Why? perchance this could be a area of the seek, the Conquest, the perfect mattress room Trophy, and thanks to the very taboo-ness of the difficulty! (unusual, sure; actual? maximum probable). i don't comprehend who mentioned this, whether it grow to be a stand-up comedian: "i'm purely a lesbian trapped interior a guy's physique!" are not all of us? ; ) you're oriented the way you're, even in the adventure that your ideas is under pressure from start, or from environmental factors or too many Twinkies as a toddler. Who can fairly way? And does it certainly rely? (you comprehend I won't decide you, yet i will settle for you as who you're regardless.) "You is who you is", to paraphrase a favourite spinach ingesting sketch sailor guy. thank you for the finished question! Peace to you, as consistently! Blessed Be! T.

Answer 7

Your example is not true to life. If a couple fights, it is more likely that the man thinks something like, "Women! They are impossible to understand." And the woman is more likely to think, "What did I do wrong?"

Answer 8

Mike, your observations, though interesting, might come more from the impressions you got from the media than from the reality....What do you think?....Human responses to the situation like you stated may be varied and may not gender-related in this case....Both men and women can react in both ways....I think...

Answer 9

You are generalizing by stating women as all women and men as all men.

In the first paragraph, in order to begin an argument one must ask the other individual, "What did I do now? or What did I do to upset you?" In your statement the man is thinking not asking, therefore one is able to determine the girlfriend or wife is ignoring the boyfriend or husband or the girlfriend or wife is acting in a manner, in which her actions show she is upset or angry.

In the second paragraph, it is the same, one must ask the other individual, "What did I do now? or What did I do to upset you?" Again this is an individual thought process.

There is a communication problem. The girlfriend or wife is not communicating the problem. If the boyfriend or husband is acting in a manner of as you state, "acting stupid and behaving like a jerk, acting immature, or as a jerk" and the girlfriend or wife confronts the boyfriend or husband, what would his argument be?

If the cause is how the girlfriend or wife is acting the boyfriend or husband is not communicating this to the girlfriend or wife.

In this argument who would or rather should accept the accountability once the debate begins and comes to a conclusion.


Accountability
Accountability is a concept in ethics with several meanings. It is often used synonymously with such concepts as answerability, enforcement, responsibility, blameworthiness, liability and other terms associated with the expectation of account-giving. As an aspect of governance, it has been central to discussions related to problems in both the public and private (corporation) worlds.


An argument is a set of statements known as the premises, and another statement known as the conclusion in which it is asserted that the truth of the conclusion follows from the premisses. Such an argument may or may not be valid.

Note: in Logic declarative sentences are either true or false (not valid or invalid); arguments are valid or invalid (not true or false).

Contents
Validity
Proof
Validity, soundness and effectiveness
Argumentative dialogue

Validity
A valid argument is one in which a specific structure is followed. An invalid argument is one in which a specfic structure is NOT followed.

The validity of an argument does not guarantee the truth of its conclusion, since a valid argument may have false premises. Only a valid argument with true premises must have a true conclusion.

The validity of an argument depends on its form, not on the truth or falsity of its premises and conclusions. Logic seeks to discover the forms of valid arguments. Since a valid argument is one such that if the premises are true then the conclusion must be true it follows that a valid argument cannot have true premises and a false conclusion. Since the validity of an argument depends on its form, an argument can be shown to be invalid by showing that its form is invalid because other arguments of the same form have true premises and false conclusions. In informal logic this is called a counter argument.


Proof
A proof is a demonstration that an argument is valid (see Proof procedure).


Validity, soundness and effectiveness
Some authors define a sound argument is a valid argument with true premises (see also Validity, Soundness, Truth.)

Arguments can be invalid for a variety of reasons. There are well-established patterns of reasoning that arguments may follow which render them invalid; these patterns are known as logical fallacies.

Even if an argument is sound (and hence also valid), an argument may still fail in its primary task of persuading us of the truth of its conclusion. Such an argument is then sound, but ineffective.

An argument may fail to be effective because it is not scrutinizable, in the sense that it is not open to public examination. This may be because the argument is too long or too complex, because the terms occurring in it are obscure, or because the reasoning it employs is not well understood. The validity and soundness of an argument are logical properties of it, known as semantic properties. Effectiveness, on the other hand, is not a logical notion but a practical concern.

In argumentative dialogue, the rules of interaction may be negotiated by the parties to the dialogue, although in many cases the rules are already determined by social mores. In the most symmetrical case, argumentative dialogue can be regarded as a process of discovery more than one of justification of a conclusion. Ideally, the goal of argumentative dialogue is for participants to arrive jointly at a conclusion by mutually accepted inferences. In some cases however, the validity of the conclusion is secondary. For example; emotional outlet, scoring points with an audience, wearing down an opponent or lowering the sale price of an item may instead be the actual goals of the dialogue. Walton distinguishes several types of argumentative dialogue which illustrate these various goals:

Personal quarrel.
Forensic debate.
Persuasion dialogue.
Bargaining dialogue.
Action seeking dialogue.
Educational dialogue.

Answer 10

You could find more convincing examples of this if thought it out more and posted this question again

Answer 11

Actually many women do think "What did I do to cause this?" "How can I make him happy?" and some men do think "She is just such a *****."
You are generalizing too much.