What do you think?
Rate this book
INTIMATE STRANGER: What Goes Wrong in Relationships Today-and Why
Explains the psychological and developmental factors in the difference between women and men and their effects on adult relationships, discussing intimacy, sexuality, dependency, work, parenting, and other crucial issues of being together
Hardcover
First published January 1, 1983
2 people are currently reading
114 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
August 14, 2010
I have to remind myself that 1983, the year Intimate Strangers was published, was a long time ago. So why am I reading this book from 27 years ago? Since it is about social psychology, we know that a lot has changed in those years. But I find that it still has something to say to me, a man who was a househusband in 1978 with a professional wife and two young sons when Ms. Rubin was urging Americans to work toward fathers having a co-equal role with mothers in nurturing infants and young children.
We were (and are) shifting from a country where "Women and men each had a place - a clearly defined, highly specific set of roles and responsibilities that each would fulfill. She'd take care of home and hearth; he'd provide it. She'd raise the children; he'd support them. She'd subordinate her life to his, and wouldn't even notice it; her needs for achievement and mastery would be met vicariously through his accomplishments and those of the children" It seemed fair at the time. Now in 1983, we're not quite so sure.
Lillian Rubin writes about a changing society, new roles and new rules, the child within, the approach-avoidance dance, the sexual dilemma, dependency, combining love and work in the two job household, and raising the children together. Intimate Strangers is not quite a text book although it has plenty of footnotes and an index. It is not quite a self-help book although it has plenty of suggestions for change. As Lillian always does, there are plenty of facts and the verbatim words from plenty of men and women in research and therapy seeking a way to achieve intimacy. She believes, as I do, that Knowledge is Power so the first part of social change is to impart knowledge. This book does that with most of the information being quite accessible. (Although some psychoanalytical pages were a bit much for my brain.)
What is her solution? Well, if you read page 204 of Intimate Strangers, you can get the short version. But the really short version is: "It wouldn't take some ideal world to resolve the differences between us - only one in which children have two parents to nurture them from the moment of birth."
My major criticism of the book is its failure to deal with how gay and lesbian couples fit into this plan. Lillian was focused on woman's liberation in those times of the Equal Rights Amendment. She is light on gay awareness, something that I believe is true of most of her writing.
We were (and are) shifting from a country where "Women and men each had a place - a clearly defined, highly specific set of roles and responsibilities that each would fulfill. She'd take care of home and hearth; he'd provide it. She'd raise the children; he'd support them. She'd subordinate her life to his, and wouldn't even notice it; her needs for achievement and mastery would be met vicariously through his accomplishments and those of the children" It seemed fair at the time. Now in 1983, we're not quite so sure.
Lillian Rubin writes about a changing society, new roles and new rules, the child within, the approach-avoidance dance, the sexual dilemma, dependency, combining love and work in the two job household, and raising the children together. Intimate Strangers is not quite a text book although it has plenty of footnotes and an index. It is not quite a self-help book although it has plenty of suggestions for change. As Lillian always does, there are plenty of facts and the verbatim words from plenty of men and women in research and therapy seeking a way to achieve intimacy. She believes, as I do, that Knowledge is Power so the first part of social change is to impart knowledge. This book does that with most of the information being quite accessible. (Although some psychoanalytical pages were a bit much for my brain.)
What is her solution? Well, if you read page 204 of Intimate Strangers, you can get the short version. But the really short version is: "It wouldn't take some ideal world to resolve the differences between us - only one in which children have two parents to nurture them from the moment of birth."
My major criticism of the book is its failure to deal with how gay and lesbian couples fit into this plan. Lillian was focused on woman's liberation in those times of the Equal Rights Amendment. She is light on gay awareness, something that I believe is true of most of her writing.
January 11, 2017
I read this compelling book in my teens and it was both revealing and shockingly surprising at the same time. It answered so many weird behavioural traits of women and men together and the title of the book really says it all
A must read for any man and woman.
A must read for any man and woman.
November 3, 2008
One of the best books I ever read about the differences in men and women. The author explains things in a sociological/psychological way and none of the mumbo jumbo of men are from mars; women are from venus.
Both my husband and I read this many years ago and felt more connected to each other afterward! It helped us both see the each others perspective(s) and is a book I will never part with.
Both my husband and I read this many years ago and felt more connected to each other afterward! It helped us both see the each others perspective(s) and is a book I will never part with.
August 19, 2025
A SOCIOLOGIST LOOKS AT PSYCHOLOGICAL REASONS FOR MALE/FEMALE DIFFERENCES
Lillian Rubin (1924-2014) was a professor of sociology at Queens College (CUNY). She wrote in the first chapter of this 1983 book, “‘I love you.’ … Once, not so long ago, we heard those words and thought about forever. Once, they… meant that we would marry and live happily ever after. Now, we’re not so sure… the dream of that earlier time seemed a simpler one. Women and men each had a place---a clearly defined, highly specific set of roles and responsibilities that each would fulfill. She’d take care of home and hearth; he’d provide it. She’d raise the children; he’d support them… her needs for achievement … would be met vicariously through his accomplishments or those of the children. It seemed fair then---a tidy division of labor… It was, after all… in the nature of women and men---what they expected of themselves, what they expected of each other. Now, we’re not so sure.” (Pg. 1)
She continues, “as the world changed, it became clear that the old dream didn’t work so well for most people most of the time. Marriages staggered under the burden of these role definitions… Most women simply couldn’t give themselves and their needs away so readily… The men faced an equally difficult set of tasks… In an economy that is almost always short on jobs… making it in the world of work is no less problematic---especially when a man’s accomplishments are supposed to do for two.” (Pg. 2)
She adds, “The new dream, then, is not a simple one… We know that the old ways are not for us, but have no clear picture yet of what the new ones will be. We know there’s a new version of masculinity and femininity, but can’t figure out how it fits each of us… We talk about equality between women and men, then ask ourselves: What does it mean? We say we want intimacy, companionship, sharing, but don’t always know just what we’re looking for… We go to therapists to work on our relationships, but can’t say what we really want from each other.” (Pg/ 8-9)
She goes on, “For over a decade, feminist scholars of both genders have labored to put before us a new vision of the nature of men and women and of the differences between us… the old questions bedevil us with haunting persistence. We… [are] unable to understand why what we believe doesn’t always match what we see; why despite our best efforts at nonsexist childrearing, our daughters are still preoccupied with dolls, our sons with trucks… Over the last fifteen years, I have watched as women and men (my husband and I among them) struggle to change… And always the questions loom: Why? Why is it so hard? Does it have to be this way?’” (Pg. 9-10)
She explains, “I am concerned here not just to spotlight the present realities… but to explain them as well. The central task I have set for myself is to show how certain characteristics of male and female personality come into being, why they persist, and how they affect the most basic issues of our relations with each other… I depart from traditional socialization theorists in that I believe we must look beyond learning theories or theories of role modeling to understand the pervasiveness and persistence of these characteristic differences between us… Instead, I will insist that while certain developmental imperatives exist for children of both genders… the tasks that confront a girl and a boy are quite different, resulting in different patterns of personality for each of them. These are the differences which, on the one hand, are at least partly responsible for the attraction between men and women and, on the other, create so many of the problems that exist between us.” (Pg. 12)
She continues, “My argument, then, is that the large social changes of our time affect us all… Our class situation will define the ways in which we approach these changes, and… it will limit the solutions that are possible for us… the hunger for something different in our relationships is profound and widespread… On the pages that follow I shall present the experiences of people living in committed relationships… The question that guided this work throughout was: Why is it that change comes with such difficulty? It’s in pursuit of the answer that we look first at people who… are in the vanguard of the struggle for change yet who have found that---even when determination is high, even when good intentions are beyond question---changing old ways of doing and being is hard indeed.” (Pg. 14-15)
She recalls about her own marriage, “we agreed that the time had come for him to change careers, to try to make his way as a writer. We knew he would earn little money for a while, maybe forever… After a month or two of exquisite, never-before-experienced relief, my husband fell into a 6-month long depression, and I into an equally long struggle with my anger… for the first time, I was in the position that men know so well… Now it was no longer voluntary but necessary to pay for the bread and the rent. And I hated it… He struggled with his sense of failure, with the fact that his very manhood had been damaged. I---the liberated, professional woman---was outraged that he wasn’t taking care of me any longer… I knew these feelings came from some very deep part of myself … And I knew, also, that I didn’t want such thoughts and the feelings they brought with them… His depression passed, as did my anger, but not without plenty of psychological work for both of us.” (Pg. 22-25)
She states, “‘Mothering’ is an all-embracing word. To be mothered is to be nurtured in a most elemental sense---to be cared for in all the ways we might wish or need, from the physical to the psychological. But what does ‘fathering’ mean? It’s a much more segmented role, isn’t it? It’s hard even to think about what it means to be fathered… there’s no larger vision that immediately springs to thought, no yearnings that are stirred by the idea of being fathered as they are by thoughts of being mothered.” (Pg. 42)
She asserts, “The cultural sources of masculine and feminine personality have been given wide attention in recent years… To understand how and why it works that way, we must take a short journey into psychological theory… The journey starts with Freud… Freud gave us the first clear expression of the fact that the adult personality rests on early childhood experience… We must look to childhood if we are to understand certain central elements of adulthood.” (Pg. 44)
She suggests, “When a boy who has been raised by a woman confronts the need to establish his gender identity, it means a profound upheaval in his internal world. Despite the fact that other connections are made during the early months of life---with father, with siblings, with grandparents, even with babysitters---if mother has been the main caregiver, the attachment and the identification with her remain the primary ones. Now, in order to identify with his maleness, he must renounce this connection with the first person outside self to be internalized into his inner psychic world---the one who has been so deeply embedded in his psychic life as to seem a part of himself---and seek a deeper attachment and identification with father. But this father with whom he is expected to identify has, until this time, been a secondary character in his internal life, often little more than a… sometimes troublesome shadow…” (Pg. 55-56)
This book may interest those seeking social psychological approaches to relations between the sexes.
Lillian Rubin (1924-2014) was a professor of sociology at Queens College (CUNY). She wrote in the first chapter of this 1983 book, “‘I love you.’ … Once, not so long ago, we heard those words and thought about forever. Once, they… meant that we would marry and live happily ever after. Now, we’re not so sure… the dream of that earlier time seemed a simpler one. Women and men each had a place---a clearly defined, highly specific set of roles and responsibilities that each would fulfill. She’d take care of home and hearth; he’d provide it. She’d raise the children; he’d support them… her needs for achievement … would be met vicariously through his accomplishments or those of the children. It seemed fair then---a tidy division of labor… It was, after all… in the nature of women and men---what they expected of themselves, what they expected of each other. Now, we’re not so sure.” (Pg. 1)
She continues, “as the world changed, it became clear that the old dream didn’t work so well for most people most of the time. Marriages staggered under the burden of these role definitions… Most women simply couldn’t give themselves and their needs away so readily… The men faced an equally difficult set of tasks… In an economy that is almost always short on jobs… making it in the world of work is no less problematic---especially when a man’s accomplishments are supposed to do for two.” (Pg. 2)
She adds, “The new dream, then, is not a simple one… We know that the old ways are not for us, but have no clear picture yet of what the new ones will be. We know there’s a new version of masculinity and femininity, but can’t figure out how it fits each of us… We talk about equality between women and men, then ask ourselves: What does it mean? We say we want intimacy, companionship, sharing, but don’t always know just what we’re looking for… We go to therapists to work on our relationships, but can’t say what we really want from each other.” (Pg/ 8-9)
She goes on, “For over a decade, feminist scholars of both genders have labored to put before us a new vision of the nature of men and women and of the differences between us… the old questions bedevil us with haunting persistence. We… [are] unable to understand why what we believe doesn’t always match what we see; why despite our best efforts at nonsexist childrearing, our daughters are still preoccupied with dolls, our sons with trucks… Over the last fifteen years, I have watched as women and men (my husband and I among them) struggle to change… And always the questions loom: Why? Why is it so hard? Does it have to be this way?’” (Pg. 9-10)
She explains, “I am concerned here not just to spotlight the present realities… but to explain them as well. The central task I have set for myself is to show how certain characteristics of male and female personality come into being, why they persist, and how they affect the most basic issues of our relations with each other… I depart from traditional socialization theorists in that I believe we must look beyond learning theories or theories of role modeling to understand the pervasiveness and persistence of these characteristic differences between us… Instead, I will insist that while certain developmental imperatives exist for children of both genders… the tasks that confront a girl and a boy are quite different, resulting in different patterns of personality for each of them. These are the differences which, on the one hand, are at least partly responsible for the attraction between men and women and, on the other, create so many of the problems that exist between us.” (Pg. 12)
She continues, “My argument, then, is that the large social changes of our time affect us all… Our class situation will define the ways in which we approach these changes, and… it will limit the solutions that are possible for us… the hunger for something different in our relationships is profound and widespread… On the pages that follow I shall present the experiences of people living in committed relationships… The question that guided this work throughout was: Why is it that change comes with such difficulty? It’s in pursuit of the answer that we look first at people who… are in the vanguard of the struggle for change yet who have found that---even when determination is high, even when good intentions are beyond question---changing old ways of doing and being is hard indeed.” (Pg. 14-15)
She recalls about her own marriage, “we agreed that the time had come for him to change careers, to try to make his way as a writer. We knew he would earn little money for a while, maybe forever… After a month or two of exquisite, never-before-experienced relief, my husband fell into a 6-month long depression, and I into an equally long struggle with my anger… for the first time, I was in the position that men know so well… Now it was no longer voluntary but necessary to pay for the bread and the rent. And I hated it… He struggled with his sense of failure, with the fact that his very manhood had been damaged. I---the liberated, professional woman---was outraged that he wasn’t taking care of me any longer… I knew these feelings came from some very deep part of myself … And I knew, also, that I didn’t want such thoughts and the feelings they brought with them… His depression passed, as did my anger, but not without plenty of psychological work for both of us.” (Pg. 22-25)
She states, “‘Mothering’ is an all-embracing word. To be mothered is to be nurtured in a most elemental sense---to be cared for in all the ways we might wish or need, from the physical to the psychological. But what does ‘fathering’ mean? It’s a much more segmented role, isn’t it? It’s hard even to think about what it means to be fathered… there’s no larger vision that immediately springs to thought, no yearnings that are stirred by the idea of being fathered as they are by thoughts of being mothered.” (Pg. 42)
She asserts, “The cultural sources of masculine and feminine personality have been given wide attention in recent years… To understand how and why it works that way, we must take a short journey into psychological theory… The journey starts with Freud… Freud gave us the first clear expression of the fact that the adult personality rests on early childhood experience… We must look to childhood if we are to understand certain central elements of adulthood.” (Pg. 44)
She suggests, “When a boy who has been raised by a woman confronts the need to establish his gender identity, it means a profound upheaval in his internal world. Despite the fact that other connections are made during the early months of life---with father, with siblings, with grandparents, even with babysitters---if mother has been the main caregiver, the attachment and the identification with her remain the primary ones. Now, in order to identify with his maleness, he must renounce this connection with the first person outside self to be internalized into his inner psychic world---the one who has been so deeply embedded in his psychic life as to seem a part of himself---and seek a deeper attachment and identification with father. But this father with whom he is expected to identify has, until this time, been a secondary character in his internal life, often little more than a… sometimes troublesome shadow…” (Pg. 55-56)
This book may interest those seeking social psychological approaches to relations between the sexes.
February 27, 2015
Based my 1991 journal entry:
I've been reading Rubin's Intimate Strangers which is bugging me because I think she is close to the truth, but it is mixed with a lot of questionable assumptions. She begins her book by citing the shift in attitudes due in a large part, she claims, to women entering the work field. She discusses why men and women see life so differently, citing two major factors: men have trouble with intimacy due to fear and lack of knowledge on how to obtain it; women have trouble maintaining separateness or boundaries since they tend to merge and emphasize personal relationships.
In my experience, women often enter the work world looking for those boundaries, as well as the financial and emotional rewards of working. The problem is that we also continue to merge and nurture personal relationships in the work world as well, which results in being overwhelmed and exhausted.
People have said that I kill myself off with all the activities I take on. Actually I am trying to find a piece of myself to hang on to.
When I am boundry-less, I become overwhelmed and depressed; If I reserve space for myself, I feel guilty. So I try to appease both sides and fail again and again and again.
I've been reading Rubin's Intimate Strangers which is bugging me because I think she is close to the truth, but it is mixed with a lot of questionable assumptions. She begins her book by citing the shift in attitudes due in a large part, she claims, to women entering the work field. She discusses why men and women see life so differently, citing two major factors: men have trouble with intimacy due to fear and lack of knowledge on how to obtain it; women have trouble maintaining separateness or boundaries since they tend to merge and emphasize personal relationships.
In my experience, women often enter the work world looking for those boundaries, as well as the financial and emotional rewards of working. The problem is that we also continue to merge and nurture personal relationships in the work world as well, which results in being overwhelmed and exhausted.
People have said that I kill myself off with all the activities I take on. Actually I am trying to find a piece of myself to hang on to.
When I am boundry-less, I become overwhelmed and depressed; If I reserve space for myself, I feel guilty. So I try to appease both sides and fail again and again and again.
October 27, 2014
Although Rubin places way to much stock on trying to explain biological process through the psychology of social constructs in gender, she comes away with the same conclusion that women have a maternal instinct while men like to compete in more of the global outside world. Her whole argument behind gender roles stems from the primary caretaker being women. Men are more independent b/c they were rejected by their mothers when they were small as being targeted as the other while women tend to be more relationship oriented b/c the lines between them and their mothers are blurred. I will give this book a 2.5.
Rubin is writing in age at the cusp of social societal change from the ideal of family life of 1950's today's world where both men and women work in order to keep pace with the ever increase in the standard of living. She tells of the increase effects of serial monogamy that people undergo now. She cites the fact that people are living longer and birth control as factors that have changed how we plan for our lives and the dissolution of the necessity of living in a nuclear family from teenage yrs to now. With it, adulthood has transformed from a destination to a process. Although I agree with her main thesis that family life is a dynamic process and each one is individualistic, I disagree with her conclusion that most gender roles are by their nature psychological. She stress the family as the main determinants of what shape us and how we look at gender roles. Rubin saw couples who did not know why they wanted to marry just that it seemed like the next step in their journey in life. She states that people are discontented only when they see that their lives do not necessarily have to be the way it is. She says she was surprised by the way she did not like working in her "dream job" when she was thrust in the unfamiliar role as the primary bread winner instead of simply helping out. In the '80's, masculinity was defined as being independent and taking care of himself and his family. From the book, I realize how women pioneers really have to work against the grain in order to push boundaries from their current status quo. The book talks about the age in which rapidly changing gender roles is rocking the culture and how the culture is still stuck in an age in which inequality in gender pay is still the norm.
Rubin states that the childhood impulse for both separation and unity will continue through out his life playing out in relationships in being wanting to be with the lover and independent from her. "We long for closeness and connection with another, and that we feel unaccountably uncomfortable when we get it---that, without warning, we begin to feel anxious in some ill-defined and indefinable way." She states that gender identification starts early as mothers teach their male kids that they are male and therefore the other while girls are united in their gender to their mothers so feel more secured with being taken cared of my their mothers. She says this explains men's violence towards their women and their taken in their sense of independence earlier on while girls develop a sense of self later in life b/c they relate to their mother more and thus she will have more empathy since she sees a continuation b/w her and her mother. She also says the early "abandoning" of the mother of his male child explains the male jealousy when he has a child and the woman wants to mother the new child @ the exclusion of the husband. The difference of how mothers treat their male and female children shows why male's have traditionally had the difficulty in wanting to be unified by a female b/c the mother pushes him away early on in life while a female has difficulty remaining independent b/c of her deep identification with her mother.
"Intimacy. we hunger for it, but we also fear it. We come close to a loved one, then we back off." She terms this the approach-avoidance dance. She defines intimacy as having someone one can take off ones social mask off with but she also states an anger rails up when this happens b/c the person reflects a mirror of our weakness. She describes a typical man's situation in that he is very reticent to share his thoughts and feelings b/c when asked he more likely doesn't have any. She states that men are trained to camouflage their feelings under cover of an exterior of calm, strength, and rationality; thus causing a huge communication gap b/w men and women. I think this book is dated as men today except the fact they have to open up to their loved ones. She states that while women need men to express their feeling through talking, men only need proximity to his beloved to feel emotionally secure. She says that a conversation for adults involves intimacy---the wish to know another's persons inner life along with the ability to share one's own. It is the expression of sadness, his fear, his dependency the fact his exposing his own vulnerability that makes a man close up and shut down. She says that while nurturing personality can hinder intimacy when a person hides behind being nurturing in order to avoid bearing ones soul in an intimate relationship. For women, Rubin states b/c a woman has a continuous relationship with her mother, her issue in intimacy is setting boundaries between her and the beloved. In this, a friendship is better than a marriage b/c physical and psychological distance is sometimes required whereas in a marriage the spatial boundaries disappear.
Rubin says that sexuality b/w the sexes gets complicated b/c whereas men need sex to feel an emotional connection, women need intimacy via conversation in order to feel emotional enough to have sex. A general rule is women need face to face contact in order to feel close, men need the action of comradeship to feel close to someone. She again goes back to maternal attachment b/w boys and girls to show the difference in sex drive. For boys, she states b/c they are encourage to separate themselves from a maternal bond, then they have suppress emotions while for girls the emotional bonds are intact while the erotic is suppressed so that she can have attraction to men. Furthermore, she says the reason men masturbate more than women is due to the suppression of the erotic life or it can be explained via testosterone in men vs women. The men she talks to are afraid of sex b/c it brings into their life an uncontrollable intimacy that they fear. She attributes this fear of intimacy b/c the mother dissed him @ an early age by saying that they are different. She says that sex for women is based on emotional needs even for women who are sexually promiscuous they hunger emotionally. Sex for women are frought with the need to establish boundaries; thereby sex dropping off as the marriage progresses b/c they need to establish a strong sense of self. Furthermore, Rubin states that women need an emotional connection to orgasm. She also states that women get a high when they feel sexual control over the man.
Whereas in the '80's independence had a negative connotation for women of a lonely divorce women, now it means freedom just like it does for men. The idea of independence for men is dangerous since they will not want help when they need it. Rubin says the reason why men think of independence as good is that they think about it in terms of how they see themselves in relation to the world and their vision of themselves in it whereas for women they think of independence in terms of relationship thus they are more ambivalent towards the word. Although men do not think of independence in terms of relationships, they would marry again quickly after they lose their wife b/c for them relationships confer significant advantages while for women they would not want to marry again b/c they felt that their were significant costs associated with it in terms of losing themselves to being a house wife. For men, they wanted co-habitation over marriage b/c they wanted the togetherness minus the financial responsibility besides the fact that they have more independence in cohabitation relationship rather than a marriage.
Rubin states that "the economic independence of men has been mistaken for their emotional independence, while women's economic dependency has been taken to signify their emotional dependence". B/c of significant friendships, women who become a widow are not affected by it while windowerhood effects men unless they immediately marry again. Rubin confirms Cole's class that men have less of an emotional support system than women b/c while men have friends to do things with they usually reserve the deep emotional feelings for their wife while women like talking to each other about their feelings. That is why, I usually have a close male friend like Jaydeep whom I did stuff with but @ the same time bounced ideas off while reserving my deep emotional life with Renita. The issue here is how does a married man share his feelings with other women that is not his wife without the potential attending consequence of cheating on her? Men want a relationship with his woman to fulfill all his emotional needs while most women do not need their men to fulfill most of her needs. She states that while men experience bonding with each other, they experience intimacy with women.
Letting their guard down is more difficult for a man than a woman, b/c they are judged by the woman by how independent he is thus disincentivising his desire to be vulnerable towards her. I need a wife who will allow me to be completely vulnerable to her so I can be strong towards the world. She states that the economic dependency of a woman's life leads to emotional dependency so a woman is treated like a child. She states that little girls relationship with their father gives them a sense of independence b/c she sees him as the other. While emotional attachment means 2 people are attached to each other, she states that it is different from the financial dependency that women have on men. She believes that men want women to be independent and women to be dependent on them so that the men would not have to feel the dependency they felt when their mother's rejected them. Rubin states that men fear that their women's independence might grow so much that they no longer need him but paradoxically it is that independent spark that initially attracted him to her.
In the '80's, a man's identity revolves around what he does for work, and a women's identity when she has a relationship revolves around being a wife and mother. I guess this is the reason why men die after they retire b/c they lose their sense of identity unless they can transfer their identity into a new source. Rubin shows a biological imperative in women to care what is going on with the kids while men simply tune out. Although some couples yearn for the wistful years where traditional roles of marriage were in enforced, they do not like how things turned out for their parents in which the man had nothing to do with family life while the wife only stays at home and seemed empty in terms of personal responsibility. Rubin says that the pluses of this way of the world is that men get to raise their children @ the same time she decries the lack of paternity leave that blocks social and structural change in the workforce. I would be more apt to support equal work for equal salary pay if their was a generous paternity leave that matches maternity leave. Women worry of the prestige that their man would lose if they succumb to her desire to have a family life at the expense of a greater professional visibility. Men compare themselves with other professionals so they feel bad when they do not make as much as their friends so women worry too b/c a man self-esteem will indirectly effect their relationship. While men will choose work over love when they have to choose, women will choose love over work.
Rubin believes that the mother-infant bond is a pure ideological psychology not based on scientific facts. One only needs to look @ nature of mammals to know it is in fact a biological imperative for moms to take care of their young not the fathers. A remedy she proposes to fix this is to have flex time for both men and women so both with be involved in parental care. While women have conflicts about the division of time b/w working and parenting, a man has no such quandaries. For him, parenting enhances his quality of life in relation to his worklife. Whereas men compete in their worklife, women compete for the affection of their children. Again, Rubin places to much stock on psychological process to explain biological phenomenon of women wanting to be the primary caretaker for their children.
She believes to have lasting change the personal belief should line up with institutional change or else the personal change will not truly change the global thinking. She says one of the ways this new way of thinking helps people today is that men no longer take for granted what women do at home. She also states for an idea to become reality: the idea must be first into common discourse as words without action, only when the idea becomes commonly accepted can the next step in the movement begin. Although she believes the psychological underpinnings of gender behavior has at its root a sociological structure, I believe it is evolutionary biology that underlies the psychology of gender.
Rubin is writing in age at the cusp of social societal change from the ideal of family life of 1950's today's world where both men and women work in order to keep pace with the ever increase in the standard of living. She tells of the increase effects of serial monogamy that people undergo now. She cites the fact that people are living longer and birth control as factors that have changed how we plan for our lives and the dissolution of the necessity of living in a nuclear family from teenage yrs to now. With it, adulthood has transformed from a destination to a process. Although I agree with her main thesis that family life is a dynamic process and each one is individualistic, I disagree with her conclusion that most gender roles are by their nature psychological. She stress the family as the main determinants of what shape us and how we look at gender roles. Rubin saw couples who did not know why they wanted to marry just that it seemed like the next step in their journey in life. She states that people are discontented only when they see that their lives do not necessarily have to be the way it is. She says she was surprised by the way she did not like working in her "dream job" when she was thrust in the unfamiliar role as the primary bread winner instead of simply helping out. In the '80's, masculinity was defined as being independent and taking care of himself and his family. From the book, I realize how women pioneers really have to work against the grain in order to push boundaries from their current status quo. The book talks about the age in which rapidly changing gender roles is rocking the culture and how the culture is still stuck in an age in which inequality in gender pay is still the norm.
Rubin states that the childhood impulse for both separation and unity will continue through out his life playing out in relationships in being wanting to be with the lover and independent from her. "We long for closeness and connection with another, and that we feel unaccountably uncomfortable when we get it---that, without warning, we begin to feel anxious in some ill-defined and indefinable way." She states that gender identification starts early as mothers teach their male kids that they are male and therefore the other while girls are united in their gender to their mothers so feel more secured with being taken cared of my their mothers. She says this explains men's violence towards their women and their taken in their sense of independence earlier on while girls develop a sense of self later in life b/c they relate to their mother more and thus she will have more empathy since she sees a continuation b/w her and her mother. She also says the early "abandoning" of the mother of his male child explains the male jealousy when he has a child and the woman wants to mother the new child @ the exclusion of the husband. The difference of how mothers treat their male and female children shows why male's have traditionally had the difficulty in wanting to be unified by a female b/c the mother pushes him away early on in life while a female has difficulty remaining independent b/c of her deep identification with her mother.
"Intimacy. we hunger for it, but we also fear it. We come close to a loved one, then we back off." She terms this the approach-avoidance dance. She defines intimacy as having someone one can take off ones social mask off with but she also states an anger rails up when this happens b/c the person reflects a mirror of our weakness. She describes a typical man's situation in that he is very reticent to share his thoughts and feelings b/c when asked he more likely doesn't have any. She states that men are trained to camouflage their feelings under cover of an exterior of calm, strength, and rationality; thus causing a huge communication gap b/w men and women. I think this book is dated as men today except the fact they have to open up to their loved ones. She states that while women need men to express their feeling through talking, men only need proximity to his beloved to feel emotionally secure. She says that a conversation for adults involves intimacy---the wish to know another's persons inner life along with the ability to share one's own. It is the expression of sadness, his fear, his dependency the fact his exposing his own vulnerability that makes a man close up and shut down. She says that while nurturing personality can hinder intimacy when a person hides behind being nurturing in order to avoid bearing ones soul in an intimate relationship. For women, Rubin states b/c a woman has a continuous relationship with her mother, her issue in intimacy is setting boundaries between her and the beloved. In this, a friendship is better than a marriage b/c physical and psychological distance is sometimes required whereas in a marriage the spatial boundaries disappear.
Rubin says that sexuality b/w the sexes gets complicated b/c whereas men need sex to feel an emotional connection, women need intimacy via conversation in order to feel emotional enough to have sex. A general rule is women need face to face contact in order to feel close, men need the action of comradeship to feel close to someone. She again goes back to maternal attachment b/w boys and girls to show the difference in sex drive. For boys, she states b/c they are encourage to separate themselves from a maternal bond, then they have suppress emotions while for girls the emotional bonds are intact while the erotic is suppressed so that she can have attraction to men. Furthermore, she says the reason men masturbate more than women is due to the suppression of the erotic life or it can be explained via testosterone in men vs women. The men she talks to are afraid of sex b/c it brings into their life an uncontrollable intimacy that they fear. She attributes this fear of intimacy b/c the mother dissed him @ an early age by saying that they are different. She says that sex for women is based on emotional needs even for women who are sexually promiscuous they hunger emotionally. Sex for women are frought with the need to establish boundaries; thereby sex dropping off as the marriage progresses b/c they need to establish a strong sense of self. Furthermore, Rubin states that women need an emotional connection to orgasm. She also states that women get a high when they feel sexual control over the man.
Whereas in the '80's independence had a negative connotation for women of a lonely divorce women, now it means freedom just like it does for men. The idea of independence for men is dangerous since they will not want help when they need it. Rubin says the reason why men think of independence as good is that they think about it in terms of how they see themselves in relation to the world and their vision of themselves in it whereas for women they think of independence in terms of relationship thus they are more ambivalent towards the word. Although men do not think of independence in terms of relationships, they would marry again quickly after they lose their wife b/c for them relationships confer significant advantages while for women they would not want to marry again b/c they felt that their were significant costs associated with it in terms of losing themselves to being a house wife. For men, they wanted co-habitation over marriage b/c they wanted the togetherness minus the financial responsibility besides the fact that they have more independence in cohabitation relationship rather than a marriage.
Rubin states that "the economic independence of men has been mistaken for their emotional independence, while women's economic dependency has been taken to signify their emotional dependence". B/c of significant friendships, women who become a widow are not affected by it while windowerhood effects men unless they immediately marry again. Rubin confirms Cole's class that men have less of an emotional support system than women b/c while men have friends to do things with they usually reserve the deep emotional feelings for their wife while women like talking to each other about their feelings. That is why, I usually have a close male friend like Jaydeep whom I did stuff with but @ the same time bounced ideas off while reserving my deep emotional life with Renita. The issue here is how does a married man share his feelings with other women that is not his wife without the potential attending consequence of cheating on her? Men want a relationship with his woman to fulfill all his emotional needs while most women do not need their men to fulfill most of her needs. She states that while men experience bonding with each other, they experience intimacy with women.
Letting their guard down is more difficult for a man than a woman, b/c they are judged by the woman by how independent he is thus disincentivising his desire to be vulnerable towards her. I need a wife who will allow me to be completely vulnerable to her so I can be strong towards the world. She states that the economic dependency of a woman's life leads to emotional dependency so a woman is treated like a child. She states that little girls relationship with their father gives them a sense of independence b/c she sees him as the other. While emotional attachment means 2 people are attached to each other, she states that it is different from the financial dependency that women have on men. She believes that men want women to be independent and women to be dependent on them so that the men would not have to feel the dependency they felt when their mother's rejected them. Rubin states that men fear that their women's independence might grow so much that they no longer need him but paradoxically it is that independent spark that initially attracted him to her.
In the '80's, a man's identity revolves around what he does for work, and a women's identity when she has a relationship revolves around being a wife and mother. I guess this is the reason why men die after they retire b/c they lose their sense of identity unless they can transfer their identity into a new source. Rubin shows a biological imperative in women to care what is going on with the kids while men simply tune out. Although some couples yearn for the wistful years where traditional roles of marriage were in enforced, they do not like how things turned out for their parents in which the man had nothing to do with family life while the wife only stays at home and seemed empty in terms of personal responsibility. Rubin says that the pluses of this way of the world is that men get to raise their children @ the same time she decries the lack of paternity leave that blocks social and structural change in the workforce. I would be more apt to support equal work for equal salary pay if their was a generous paternity leave that matches maternity leave. Women worry of the prestige that their man would lose if they succumb to her desire to have a family life at the expense of a greater professional visibility. Men compare themselves with other professionals so they feel bad when they do not make as much as their friends so women worry too b/c a man self-esteem will indirectly effect their relationship. While men will choose work over love when they have to choose, women will choose love over work.
Rubin believes that the mother-infant bond is a pure ideological psychology not based on scientific facts. One only needs to look @ nature of mammals to know it is in fact a biological imperative for moms to take care of their young not the fathers. A remedy she proposes to fix this is to have flex time for both men and women so both with be involved in parental care. While women have conflicts about the division of time b/w working and parenting, a man has no such quandaries. For him, parenting enhances his quality of life in relation to his worklife. Whereas men compete in their worklife, women compete for the affection of their children. Again, Rubin places to much stock on psychological process to explain biological phenomenon of women wanting to be the primary caretaker for their children.
She believes to have lasting change the personal belief should line up with institutional change or else the personal change will not truly change the global thinking. She says one of the ways this new way of thinking helps people today is that men no longer take for granted what women do at home. She also states for an idea to become reality: the idea must be first into common discourse as words without action, only when the idea becomes commonly accepted can the next step in the movement begin. Although she believes the psychological underpinnings of gender behavior has at its root a sociological structure, I believe it is evolutionary biology that underlies the psychology of gender.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 4, 2023
A fascinating investigation of the intricacies and dynamics in contemporary marriages can be found in Lillian B. Rubin's book Intimate Strangers. Rubin dives into the private lives of couples with her perceptive and thought-provoking analysis, bringing light on the conflicts and paradoxes that frequently surface in these relationships. The author gives a detailed portrait of the emotional landscapes that couples travel, emphasising the ingrained anxieties and desires that drive their interactions. She draws on her considerable study and clinical expertise.
Intimate Strangers is a book that both academic and general readers will find delightful because Rubin's writing is both clear and captivating. The book is chock full of interesting case studies and first-person stories that humanise the abstract ideas presented. Readers are able to relate to the experiences of the couples depicted in the book thanks to Rubin's compassionate and nonjudgmental style, which promotes a greater comprehension of the complex dynamics at work.
A thought-provoking and enlightening book, Intimate Strangers provides helpful insights into the challenges of contemporary partnerships. This is a must-read for anyone interested in learning about the inner workings of intimate relationships because of Rubin's knowledge and sympathetic writing style. This book will give you a deeper understanding of the difficulties and benefits of love and companionship, whether you are in a long-term relationship or are simply fascinated by the subtleties of human connection.
Intimate Strangers is a book that both academic and general readers will find delightful because Rubin's writing is both clear and captivating. The book is chock full of interesting case studies and first-person stories that humanise the abstract ideas presented. Readers are able to relate to the experiences of the couples depicted in the book thanks to Rubin's compassionate and nonjudgmental style, which promotes a greater comprehension of the complex dynamics at work.
A thought-provoking and enlightening book, Intimate Strangers provides helpful insights into the challenges of contemporary partnerships. This is a must-read for anyone interested in learning about the inner workings of intimate relationships because of Rubin's knowledge and sympathetic writing style. This book will give you a deeper understanding of the difficulties and benefits of love and companionship, whether you are in a long-term relationship or are simply fascinated by the subtleties of human connection.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 27, 2020
Zeer verrassend voor me: dit boek dateert van 1983, maar de materie is bijna 40 jaar later nog steeds zeer herkenbaar; bij mijzelf, mijn vrouw, hoe wij van tijd tot tijd met elkaar omgaan. En misschien kan ik, hoogopgeleid op mijn 62e en met bijna 30 jaar huwelijk, met enig recht spreken. Over de inhoud zal in andere reviews waarschijnlijk ruimschoots geschreven zijn, daaraan niets toe te voegen. Maar een persoonlijke ontboezeming als hiervoor wellicht wel. Dat lijkt me een bevestiging van Rubins voornaamste conclusie; we denken en willen wel anders, maar dieper in ons begraven liggen sterke(re) krachten die daadwerkelijk veranderen, in gedrag, met wederzijdse vrede en ontspanning, belemmeren. En omdat maatschappelijke veranderingen waarschijnlijk sneller gaan dan psychologische structuren, zou dat wel eens een constante kunnen zijn. Dat doet me denken aan een gezegde dat meer en meer populair werd: we zijn nog steeds verward, maar wel op een hoger niveau ;-)
November 27, 2018
"Intimate Strangers" is a book about the intimate dynamics in relationships between men and women, why they fail and the reasons for it. Lillian B. Rubin is a psychologist and makes a good case for her point of view, and that makes this book a strong one and not too subjective. Where needed she adds notes on homosexual and lesbian dynamics too. There is also the backdrop of second-wave feminism looming around, and Rubin seems to be a part of the movement but not swayed by it as much of the more modern feminists are. Written first in 1984 this book, although still very interesting, is a book of its time and could need an update. I found it solid.
February 22, 2024
This book is 215 pages and I learned 215 new things. I read this book around 2012 and am re-reading it over a decade later because of all the insight and wisdom I was unable to retain in one read, and sorely missed all those years. The answers to the struggles men and women continue to have, decades after this book was published is a testament to how rich every chapter is.
March 27, 2023
changed how i approach every new relationship with a man.
August 28, 2015
What a tremendous book, with very well constructed thoughts and information. It offers insights into relationships between men and women that I found fascinating. I first read it over 20-30 years ago. My copy has been read so many times by myself and people I have loaned it to that it is now held together by a rubber band. I finally did a search and now have a second copy.
If you are married or are in a relationship, I would be amazed if you are not enlightened by many of the author's theories and conclusions.
If you are married or are in a relationship, I would be amazed if you are not enlightened by many of the author's theories and conclusions.
August 8, 2010
Every so often I order 2 or 3 copies to give away when friends or family members are confused about their loving relationships.
Read
September 7, 2011This deals with a woman's need for closness and a man's need for seperation. How similar so many couples are and the little voices in our heads are pretty universal.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews