Why do male adventurers not take their female partners along?

[Earl Gilbert]

I'm sensing a little bit of Xena, Warrior princess role-playing?

[Anonymous]

.

[Paul Wagner]

So two things here;

1. We go backpacking to have fun and see stunning places. We don't really look for risky activities or life-challenging adventures. And I will bet we are not alone in that. So the basic assumption, that backpacking is a risky behavior that separates men from boys and women, is pretty darn flawed in my book. We always backpack together, and we love it.

2. We have often taken other people along on our hikes, but my wife is by far the best hiking partners I've ever had. Yeah, I am faster on the trail…so I carry more of the weight. And at least once a summer she has stopped me and said: "I don't want to do that, or go there. It either looks too hard or too uncomfortable." So we go other places, and do other stuff.

It's worked for about forty years now (37 of marriage) and I do feel a little sorry for men (or women) who don't get to share these experiences with their spouses.

[David Thomas]

BPL's own Erin McKittrick and her husband Hig do some pretty amazing expeditions: Washington State to the Aleutian Islands all human-powered (4,000 off-trail miles in a year). 800 miles last year with two toddlers. Numerous other far-northern treks. She's written some BPL articles and several books about these treks.

Another author, Jill Fredston ("Rowing to Latitude: Journeys Along the Arctic's Edge"), brings her husband Doug Fesler along on 2,000 to 3,000 – mile rowing trips (think racing shell more than row boat) along coastlines and rivers at high latitude. 3 months of dehydrated food and a shotgun for the polar bears.

My wife did more extreme trips than I had – the Inca Trail, trekking way off the beaten path in Nepal, she's been 4,000 feet higher than I have on mountains. We were just backpacking in New Zealand last week (with the kids). I do longer road trips and "death marches", but she uses her passport more and tolerates adverse conditions better.

I'll note that all of those women live in Alaska. They've also all know me, but I suspect Alaska is the more valid correlation.

[Larry De La Briandais]

My wife loves the outdoors but it not interested in a challenge. I love a challenge. She is getting back into shape and we are going to go backpacking together again. She has been a few times with me, but did not like anything resembling a challenging hike. So, next trip is to May Lake in Yosemite. My 10 year old daughter is coming with us for the first time. I figure I can drag along enough extra stuff on such a short hike to keep my daughter happy and comfortable. This will also make it easier to go as we don't have to find someone to watch my daughter.

So, for me, I will be changing what kind of hikes I do so I can get my wife and daughter to come with me. Not everyone is willing to do that. It's not that big a deal to me, but for some the "simple" trips just wouldn't be enjoyable. There are a lot of different types of backpacking, if couples both like different "styles" it can create problems even for those that both like backpacking.

[Larry De La Briandais]

"Me and my guy friends have a tough skin, we don't sugar coat our opinions between each other. When our wives (1 wife per guy haha) are along, they get stressed out from our heated debates and think we are fighting or hate each other. That's just how me and my guy friends talk, straight forward no fluff, and no political correctness. It's no big deal for one dude to say to the other that's he is fat from all those beers. that's just friendly-guy talk, but not comfortable for our ladies hearing this. "

I have this problem in normal life, not just backpacking! I think this is summarized with a cute quote I heard, "Men insult each other and don't mean it, women complement each other and don't mean it." Fits the people I know quite well.

[Valerie E]

>> "Men insult each other and don't mean it, women complement each other and don't mean it."

Larry, you made my day! How is it even possible that I never heard that one before?!? Perfect.

Edited to add: See Kat's comment, below vvvv, for more humour!!! LOL

[Kattt]

">> "Men insult each other and don't mean it, women complement each other and don't mean it."

Larry, you made my day! How is it even possible that I never heard that one before?!? Perfect."

^^^^but did she mean that? We'll never know…..

:)

[L H]

I'm a little late to this thread…
The kind of backpacking that I do isn't what I would call a high risk activity. So, there isn't any caveman/cavewoman instinct kicking in telling me to protect my spouse. However, I have done some 3rd-world international travel that has taken me way out of my comfort zone and involved an elevated level of risk.

When I travel with my family under difficult conditions, I feel the added weight of responsibility for my entire family. When I travel alone or with unrelated groups, I'm only responsible for myself, and that is somewhat liberating.

With regard to group backpacking, travelling with a spouse does change the group dynamics. A couple's first obligation is to each other (as it should be), and the group comes second. When everyone is w/o significant other, people engage with the group more readily. One is not necessarily better than the other, it's just a different dynamic.

[Katherine .]

to corroborate: I've done four group trips. One had two couples, the other three did not. The one w/the couples had the least degree of camaraderie, and I suspect that was a big part of it.

Also, of those three: one of my group trips was mostly men, one was all women, one was almost evenly split. The mostly men and the all women trips had more camaraderie than the more co-ed one.

small sample, but interesting to note.

[Valerie E]

VERY interesting (and true) point about how a "couple" changes the group dynamics.

Back in the '90s, when I was adventure racing, my team's previous makeup included a "couple", and that was seen as a problem, precisely because the couple's priorities were:

1. Each other; and
2. The team.

Not the best dynamic for racing… so the couple went on to other things, and the new team members were all individuals with no such relationships.

[Anonymous]

.

[Anonymous]

My only two experiences of hiking with a couple did not work out very well for me. In both cases, it was just me and the couple, and a party of three does not usually make for good group dynamics. The fact that the other two were a couple just intensified the imbalance, to my detriment. Both trips were long ones, 15 and 9 days, respectively, in beautiful country, and I grieved over the loss of quality time in such beautiful surroundings; to the point where I vowed never to hike with a couple again, or even in a party of three. The only exception I have made to that rule was in 2013, when I walked with our own Craig Wisner and Adan Lopez. That turned out to be a wonderful trip, but then they were not a couple, even if they were homies. The group dynamics on that trip were very cool, so I guess it can be done. But then, maybe the exception does prove the rule?

[Dean L]

Hike solo, group dynamics are moot. There is however that safety factor.

[Nick Smolinske]

That's a great quote about men insulting and women complementing. But I haven't found it to be true. Maybe I'm just good at finding the right people, but I went on three backpacking trips last year, with couples, and there was plenty of jest and fake insults going around, from all parties. Those were some of my favorite trips of the year. One of the couples was actually an ex-couple who were way too informative about their past relationship, leaving the rest of us in stitches.

As for a partner, there aren't too many things that I feel are an absolute requirement for me, but enjoying the backcountry is one of them. I don't need my partner to go on really crazy adventures, but the backcountry is such a big part of my life that she needs to share it to some degree. I mean, I did nearly 60 nights in 2014, for example. …Actually, maybe that's why I'm still single?

[Jim Colten]

Hike solo, group dynamics are moot.

Maybe … maybe not … at least not according to my brother.

The first time I took him into the BWCAW we had a short chat with a solo canoeist who passed by our campsite on his way out of the backcountry. He had been out for two weeks.

Once he was out of earshot my brother commented: "I could handle talking to myself for two weeks but I don't think I could tolerate losing the arguments" :-)

[Bob Shaver]

My wife used to backpack with me, but hasn't lately. She got plantar faciatis for awhile, but that is cleared up now. Some of her married women friends have expressed to her amazement that she lets me go on week long backpacks, some of them co-ed. I guess they have better control of their husbands. I guess that is why I'm not married to any of them.

[David Thomas]

>"Some of her married women friends have expressed to her amazement that she lets me go on week long backpacks, some of them co-ed. I guess they have better control of their husbands."

I would conclude that her friends DON'T have control over their husbands – hence their fears of wilderness hanky panky (and that the husbands don't have themselves under control).

[Dean F.]

I would take my wife on a long-term adventure in a heartbeat, if she were capable of it and could keep her sanity. (I maintain to this day that she misrepresented her opinions of wilderness activities while we were courting…) But she has back problems, would prefer a spa, and is generally miserable without room service, and her misery translates into an attack of not-very-nice. I know this, she knows this, and we agree that it is best that she not participate in my trips.

If I tried to go on a trip alone with any other woman she'd have a fit, no doubt about it. For a flaming pinko liberal she can be downright old-fashioned about some things. I think she'd better handle a group that included a couple (e.g. a woman who is already spoken for) but I'm not entirely certain. When she objects to my solo hikes I offer to find a cute Boulder coed to accompany me "for safety" and she backs down. This seems to work well, so I'm sticking with it.

So her nonparticipation is driven entirely by her. She's just not interested beyond dayhikes, and even those have to be short.

Someone upthread mentioned third-world expeditions, and I'll agree that's a different issue entirely. There absolutley are places in this world that I would enjoy visiting BY MYSELF, but where I would never even consider bringing my wife or daughter. Most of Africa comes to mind, as does a decent chunk of South America. There may be some caveman involved, there- it's definitely an issue of my feeling protective in what I perceive as a high-threat environment. But the outdoors in general? No.

[Kattt]

Why would you want to take anyone "along", particularly on an adventure? Unless it's a joint venture with excited, capable and willing partners…why bother?
The title itself answers the question.

[James Marco]

I do, or rather, I did. Till she developed bad knees and feet and wasn't comfortable doing 10 miles on a trail anymore. (She is still "thinking" about surgery.) She still likes to go on various canoe trips…much easier on her legs.

Before we were married, well over forty five years ago, we would sneak out on backpacking excursions whose primary goal was to have sex. Later on we had two kids who would go with us (car camping or short hikes.) Later on we went out far more and let the kids "sneak" out on us. Now our kids are in middle to late thirties, and they still drag me out with them on canoe trips/hiking trips, the wife cannot really handle any type of hiking. But, we are back in the routine of going car camping three or four times a year with the grand-kids. I still head out every other weekend for a week (solo) or longer for 3-6 week trips. After a couple or three weeks the wife will usually arrange a meeting to resupply and spend a couple days together, somewhere.

Nope, I never dragged her along, she was always (well mostly) my best friend. Never really thought about it that way…I don't think she would ever say not to go except for the one period for a couple years when I cracked a vertebrae.

[Virginia Craft]

My other half and I have been on many adventures together. It definitely takes a certain dynamic to spend such intimate time in nature with another person, regardless of your relationship to that person.
I also confidently know that we have the freedom to go off and do things separately if we desire.

There is no recipe or general outline that explains everyone's particular situations; each person has their own reason and will and narrative.
Sometimes, however, those things align and shared adventure is born!

[Brendan Hole]

I am lucky enough to have a counterpart who wants to be in the woods as much as I do.
If I ever want to go solo, it has nothing to do with her being a female. Only that there is something about being alone in the woods for a few days. it is hard for her to accept the fact I want to go alone, but it works out.
I would be worried if she went alone. I would only fear for her being a female alone in a secluded area. She is 5'5 125lbs, she would be an "easy target".

So I have no issues with my female backpacking with me, her going alone, that's another story.

[Kattt]

"She is 5'5 125lbs, she would be an "easy target". "

I understand your concern, mainly because I have a daughter about to travel abroad and that can be scary. However…. Size is not necessarily what makes a woman an easy target. There are plenty of "bigger boned" easy targets out there and plenty of smaller women that don't get messed with. A woman that lets a man make the call whether she should go out alone or not, is bound to be an easy target. This latter was a statement in general, not addressed to you Brendan; I hear it often enough that guys, husbands don't "let" their ladies go alone.
Edited to add…same the other way around: "letting someone go" "taking someone along" should be reserved for kids or grown ups that agree to such relationships; not to be extended to other adults.

[Virginia Craft]

"A woman that lets a man make the call whether she should go out alone or not, is bound to be an easy target.
[…] same the other way around: 'letting someone go' 'taking someone along' should be reserved for kids or grown ups that agree to such relationships; not to be extended to other adults."

Completely agree with you, Katharina!

Being in a situation where someone feels they are 'taking me along' or 'letting me go' would warrant not wanting to go at all.
Herein lies an answer, I believe: A shared adventure, regardless of whose idea it was in the first place or who is more experienced, should have no notions of superiority/inferiority. If a woman, for example, is made to feel she is merely being taken along or that she could not be sufficient on her own (e.g., being made to feel she's 'an easy target' if she were to be alone), may be enough to deter her from wanting to go out in the first place. Instead, cultivating a relationship with grounds in patience that allows for confidence-building if she's inexperienced is extremely important. From there, a mutual adventure-sharing experience becomes alive; from there, fun is to be had and possibilities proliferate!

[Author]

Posts