Forgive me if I am misunderstanding you, but one point you appear to be making is that men have lesser power in relationships than in previous generations because women are no longer completely dependent economically.

Well this is indeed the case, but you then appear to leap from lesser power to no power at all, and this certainly flies counter to all current research.

Check out Dr John Gottman's work. As it happens, women are in fact much more inclined to accept influence from their significant others than are men, and the greatest predictor of divorce is the unwillingness of men to accept influence from the woman in their lives.

Greater economic independence does not correlate with the unwillingness of women to see the masculine pov. It does appear to correlate with the unwillingness of women to accept the masculine pov as the "standard" by which relationships are evaluated and maintained.

Women continue to view their relationships in terms of "us" and NOT "me."

You appear to be viewing intimate relationships as a zero sum game whereby compromise and cooperation translate into masculine powerlessness. Solid research contradicts this point of view.

I'm not sure your interpretation of that study is right, I know the part about men being unwillling to be influenced as a predictor of relationship failure was right but was there an affirmative finding that women WERE influence or was it just assumed that because there was no finding that resistance to being influenced was causing breakups that women were being influenced when in fact it was also possible that women were NOT being influenced but that that was not causing the relationships to break up. Once both parties have a big investment both parties care, where the biggest change has come in due to changes in women's independence is in average men's ability to get a foot in the "door". I've actually seen it happen more than once that women are shocked to find their new SO disagrees with them about ANYTHING, since he had to hide the fact in order to get anything going to begin with.

but was there an affirmative finding that women WERE influenced or was it just assumed that because there was no finding that resistance to being influenced was causing breakups that women were being influenced when in fact it was also possible that women were NOT being influenced but that that was not causing the relationships to break up

This is actually a good question, largely because I'm going six different directions with it. Briefly:

Because the layman's news blurbs do not (and cannot) lay out methodology, I did follow up my initial interest in Gottman's "press," and my layman sense is that the methodology is sound.

It seems to me your question would fall under the heading of "tracked variables" and had your suggestion of "uninfluenced women make for solid relationships" carried any water, I'm pretty sure Gottman would have been all over it. He's meticulous that way.

Investigate his research. I may disagree with some of his viewpoints, but the research is sound.

Your basic notion appears to be that men will put up with all kinds of shit for the sake of sex, and that women will not. What you appear to be missing is that women will put up with a great deal of shit for other, usually entirely rational, reasons.

Not so much now as in the past...women largely remain the responsible party in terms of monitoring the health of the relationship. Perhaps what you are seeing is more a balancing of "power," whereby women are FORCING negotiation and cooperation.

Women are not stupid, anon. We know that the very best outcomes for our children are predicated on the quality of Dad, and his relationship with Mom. And despite economic advances, we know how vulnerable we are once we have children...(we can get tight-assed right quick). For the last...oh what, 300 years?...women's publications have focused pretty much solely on what women should be doing for their husbands and their children.

That tradition continues today, and generates all kinds of revenue. So no, anon...I'm not buying your "theory." Women continue to seek to please.

without some sort of standard it's difficult to distinguish one persons "power to force negotiation" and "power to defend their rights" from another persons "power to decide everything important uniliaterally" and "allow only trivial matters to be subject to cooperative discussion"

would you please tell us all, coherently, what your point is? is it that you think men have less power than women? what do you base this on? what the hell are you saying? i have read through your responses and half of them are about how we aren't getting what you're saying, but your other responses don't clear it up. so what's the problem here? perhaps you could explain with a little story. Man asks Woman on a date. Woman says....

chance she will hop to it and entertain him and buy him a bunch of stuff. Not too good. Woman says to man I might sleep with you if you entertain me and buy men stuff. Chances he will do it, much better. It has always been and always will be this way. In the past men had other kinds of social, economic, cultural etc. power to even, or far more than even, the score. Now they don't.

without some sort of standard it's difficult to distinguish one persons "power to force negotiation" and "power to defend their rights" from another persons "power to decide everything important uniliaterally" and "allow only trivial matters to be subject to cooperative discussion"

So give us the standard, anon: one that works for men and women alike.

We are finally getting somewhere

man says to woman: I will have sex with you if you spend a lot of money entertaining me and buy me a bunch of stuff.

chance she will hop to it and entertain him and buy him a bunch of stuff. Not too good. Woman says to man I might sleep with you if you entertain me and buy men stuff. Chances he will do it, much better. It has always been and always will be this way. In the past men had other kinds of social, economic, cultural etc. power to even, or far more than even, the score. Now they don't.

Good Lord, anon! This really is all about not being able to boink the women who don't want to boink you!

Because in modern times as in times past...the average man may actually have to settle for the average woman...men are now powerless? Please.