No, Men Are Not Stupid!

Admit it, we’ve all been guilty of thinking that men are stupid on more than one occasion. But, the reality is that men are wonderful creatures who simply are different than women. Different is not right or wrong, value judgment only muddies the waters and disempowers everyone. Different is just different. We‘re wired differently and so we behave differently. Understanding and acceptance can help empower us to create harmonious relationships.

Both men and women certainly have characteristics commonly described as masculine and feminine. But, in general what motivates us is distinct. This terrain is vast, but for now let’s look at one of the source distinctions that differentiate men from women instinctively.

Imagine, for the sake of argument, that men are the hunters and that women are the gatherers. Let’s look at how men and women think, process information and communicate.

Hunters are typically single focused. Their objective is to produce a desired result, for instance, catching a buffalo or some other animal. Their focus is linear, aimed at producing result after result after result. Hunters are internally motivated, deciding on what to produce and then producing that result. These characteristics coalesce as the ability to track moving objects.

Contrastingly, Gatherers possess diffuse awareness, the ability to focus in multiple directions at once. Their objective is to complete many tasks in no particular order. Motivation is most often external, resulting in the experience of being drawn to everything in the environment which requires a response. These characteristics fuse into the ability to quickly scan a wide area and gather information.

Think about the last time you sent a man into a room to bring back an item that was in plain view yet surrounded by other things and he came back with the report that the item was not there. You followed him and of course, the item was right where you said it was. You concluded that he just didn’t look. And he didn’t look just to get on your nerves or alternatively, he was just too stupid and careless to see what was right in front of him.

Or what about the last time you tried to get a guy to focus on you while he was watching his favorite television show? You think he was watching the game and ignoring you. In reality, he is just watching the game. Ignoring you would be doing a second thing.

So, what’s the point? The point is that this is but one of the ways that we are different from men, but it is a key difference which causes many communication breakdowns. We naturally view things from our own perspective; everyone does. But in order to interact harmoniously, we have to step back and see things from another vantage point.

What male behavior can you view from another vantage point?

Your comments are always welcome. Email them to me at Chat (@) relationship-recruiters.com. I’ll write back as time permits.

Love Blocks

What’s blocking your love? Something I frequently hear from my clients, single professional & executive women, is that there is a shortage of men. They say that there is a shortage of eligible men in their age group, income bracket, etcetera.

My response is that there is no shortage of men. Men are everywhere. There is a perception that there is a shortage of men because we typically repeat the same relationship behavior that we’ve perfected over the years. This type of habitual perspective clouds our vision, blocking our view of the many eligible men who don’t fit our love block pattern.

For example, let’s take Jane (who’s name has been changed to protect her privacy), a beautiful, single professional. She is intelligent, a prolific writer and excellent conversationalist. Jane is the mother of three who are now adults. She has been married and divorced twice.

When I began working with Jane she lamented the possibility of finding a guy who appreciated her and who would cherish her. Jane described her ideal match as being someone intelligent yet sexy, someone with whom she had chemistry, someone who enjoyed close family ties because she is very close with her children. Jane said she wanted a man who was financially secure, someone to take care of her in the traditional since.

Jane inevitably sabotaged the connection when introduced to men who met the vital criteria on her list: willing to take care of her, loved family, intelligent, financially secure. She would say there was no chemistry or that he looked liked Woody Allen. Possibly the guy was no Adonis, but the real reason for Jane’s inability to connect was buried far below the surface in herself.

Jane is the product of abusive parents: her father beat her and her mother did nothing to stop it. Jane’s love block is that she doesn’t feel worthy of her heart’s desire. She doesn’t feel worthy of the man she describes as her ideal. Therefore, when confronted by anyone who might fit the bill, Jane finds herself rejecting the man before he rejects her. Contrastingly, Jane attaches to unavailable, misogynistic men or men who are not interested in a long-term relationship. According to Jane there are no men…and especially no good men out there.

Jane is just one example of someone who is suffering from love blocks. Love blocks are really just boundaries that no longer serve a positive purpose in our lives.

Some examples of love blocks are poor self esteem, the feeling that you don’t deserve to be loved, shame/guilt, inability to let others get close to you emotionally/physically, unexplained/uncontrolled anger, and the inability to deal with your feelings appropriately.

Is something blocking your love? Examine your relationships across the board, not just your romantic ties, for the answer.

Just Songs

It's 4:55 a.m. CST and I've been up working all night. During the wee hours I've discovered some exquisite music to add to my soundtrack and maybe to yours. Nick Mundy has created Just Songs a cornucopia of sounds to delight the mind, body and soul. He skillfully blends Pop, R&B, Jazz & Rock to concoct a delicious, satisfying Mundy stew.

Check it out here: http://www.myspace.com/daatman

It's available on Itunes. I like it. I hope you will.

Freedom in Death

On Sunday I attended the opera Margaret Garner, written by Toni Morisson. The story reimagines the real life tragedy of a female slave runaway near the turn of the last century. When found by her slave owner Margaret chooses to end the lives of her family rather than return to slavery. In the opera Margaret succeeds in killing both children; in reality she only succeeded in taking the life of one child, thus sparing her from a life as a slave.

The opera raises many questions as did the real Margaret Garner. Should she be tried for murder or stealing the property of her slave owner? What is the moral implications of taking the life of another, particularly that of your child?

For me, watching the opera unfold I felt overwhelmingly that death is to be prefered over a life of slavery. Death frees the soul, the spirit to return to the formlessnes from whense it came. Surely this must be the sweetest ecstasy. I think Margaret Garner was a brave woman in full possession of the knowledge of her own divinity and thus her right to create which is the twin of the right to destroy.

Still, all philosophical and moral points aside, I think opera sung in English suffers from the lack of melody in the sound of the English language. If anyone can make the language sound poetic, it is the extraordinary Denyce Graves and her fellow cast. See it if you can. The run ends 11/9.
http://www.margaretgarner.com/

What's in a name?

My given name is Leah. My middle name is Chanelle and my surname is Young. I've always liked my name except that when participating in things alphabetically organized, I am inevitably last. Hence my joy in high school, mid year, when Ivana Zelankovich came to my school. Nevertheless to be forever young is no small feat.

My Father insisted I have my Godmother's givenname. Leah, a beautiful name to be sure. My Godparents are Jewish and the origin of my name is from the Hebrew meaning delicate or weary. Admittedly, I sometimes feel both delicate and weary, more often than I care to acknowledge. But to my delight when I was pondering the value of affirming weariness, I discovered that Leah has a Chaldean origin as well, meaning mistress or ruler. I like both of those much better...these fit my persona snugly.

Armed with this more pleasing data, I moved on to uncover the meaning of my middle name. Chanelle, a derivative of the French surname Chanel meaning pipe or flow. Now I'm really on to something. Leah Chanelle Young, mistress of the flow forever young. That's me. Add to that the word unlimited.

According to answers.com, unlimited is to have no restrictions or controls, to be infinite, without qualification or exception; absolute.

To live in the divine flow that is me forever, wow! What a challenge. The illusion of limits is the limit itself. Since my childhood I have endeavored to be all I could conceive, for sure falling into some pits along the way. But, the pits have only inspired me to reach for more. Leah Unlimited is my declaration to run my course at full power. Come along if you like.