Questions for the Women

[kaetic]

kaetic, I am so sorry for what happened to you. It's scary to think that there are guys out there who just consider women as a means to an end, and that they take advantage of the good nature those who give them the benefit of a doubt. I have met my share of creepy ********, but that story just takes the cake. I wish that there was some sort of semblance of justice for these situations, but who knows? You are very strong to have gone through that and I hope that that never happens to you again.

Thank you, wallflower. I didn't really want to share that, because I thought it might come across wrong. All of this happened in text. It probably would have been worse if I had met some one face to face and they acted this way, because my reactions to face to face confrontations are much different than they are when I only know some one through words on a screen.

 

[user 139760]

kaetic, I am so sorry for what happened to you. It's scary to think that there are guys out there who just consider women as a means to an end, and that they take advantage of the good nature those who give them the benefit of a doubt. I have met my share of creepy ********, but that story just takes the cake. I wish that there was some sort of semblance of justice for these situations, but who knows? You are very strong to have gone through that and I hope that that never happens to you again.

Thank you, wallflower. I didn't really want to share that, because I thought it might come across wrong. All of this happened in text. It probably would have been worse if I had met some one face to face and they acted this way, because my reactions to face to face confrontations are much different than they are when I only know some one through words on a screen.

I'm sorry too. I personally am not surprised it happened because the internet allows it practically without consequences. I assume if he did that it's because it's work before (kind of like with a child, whatever works on the parent they'll try again, they aren't stupid).
It sucks when your good will is abused like that. Here's hoping you don't go through something like that again. I personally stick to the face to face, easier to get punched that way ;-)

 

[Seosa]

Here's a question I've pondered for a number of years, though recently I've seen casual examples that provide somewhat of an answer;

Do women actually love men?

It's a very genuine question. The stereotype is that women are the more romantic of the two genders, but I've examined society through life and genuinely wondered whether women actually do love men. I'm very much of the belief that men very much love women, but I'm not so sure whether its the case the other way around. Again though I have seen recent examples to suggest that women DO love men, but the question still persists.

I'm not trying to be controversial or argumentative here, by the way. It's a very genuine observation.

 

[TheRealCallie]

I don't love all men, but I have loved some of them.

 

[PurpleStar]

There's one I love

 

[Xpendable]

Weird, I'm sure there was a comment of mine here a few minutes ago.

 

[user 139760]

My observations tend to me conclude that men do love women and women do love men, but most of them suck royally at showing it.

 

[DarkSelene]

Males are good assets, that's the reality. Women probably do love men, some as much as males love women, but a lot of them also pick males that are good assets to their lives, which is something that you don't see a lot of males doing... Except for dudes with like trophy wives.
But I'm sure that doesn't mean they don't love, just means they're expecting more of males and they have to be worth more to be loved.

But that's mostly a very superficial idea. Yeah, there are big differences in the way men and women choose their partners, but does that last? Is everything a sham? No.
The majority of people are out there looking for someone they really want to be with forever and that's not a gendered search.

 

[Seosa]

Looking at that pic in the "I'm getting married" thread...

That's a woman lovingly gazing at her man. Very natural, very real. Just one picture, but it may have gone someway to answering my question.

 

[ardour]

But that's mostly a very superficial idea. Yeah, there are big differences in the way men and women choose their partners, but does that last?

Something has to begin for it to have a chance of lasting. Most people pair up in their 20's and 30's, right, so initial criteria matters as it determines who's in relationship during the most important years of life. After 15+ years together, relationships might start to change into an altruistic 'companion' thing, but that has little to do with why they started, what initially drew people to each other.

 

[DarkSelene]

But that's mostly a very superficial idea. Yeah, there are big differences in the way men and women choose their partners, but does that last?

Something has to begin for it to have a chance of lasting. Most people pair up in their 20's and 30's, right, so initial criteria matters as it determines who's in relationship during the most important years of life. After 15+ years together, relationships might start to change into an altruistic 'companion' thing, but that has little to do with why they started, what initially drew people to each other.

It doesn't take 15+ years for it to be less superficial. What I was saying is that the way to choose partners is different, but they don't last 15 years as partners if they only have the magnetism, it's more than that and it shifts quite quickly.
My point is that regardless of the way women choose partners, doesn't mean that they don't love men... regardless if it's more practical/superficial, they're still looking for someone to be a partner, to be with them forever. (yes, there are exceptions, but I'm not talking about those)
I never said initial criteria doesn't matter, but there's a reason why you call it initial criteria.

 

[ardour]

My point is that regardless of the way women choose partners, doesn't mean that they don't love men... 

You wouldn't say that about men who chose their gf's/wives primarily because of appearance.

 

[ardour]

Certain criteria preclude genuine love and companionship from developing. I wouldn't consider it likely for a woman who chose a man on the basis of his assertiveness, stoicism and social status to quickly transition into loving him in a genuine way where he could be vulnerable; no more than a man who wanted a trophy wife or someone who was 'fun' is likely to start appreciating her for more than this.

 

[Xpendable]

Men and women love each other for what they can offer, too bad men have to evolve to express their worth in material things, while women in more abstract things.

 

[DarkSelene]

My point is that regardless of the way women choose partners, doesn't mean that they don't love men... 

You wouldn't say that about men who chose their gf's/wives primarily because of appearance.

I never said appearance and, yes, I would. It'd be very hypocritical of me to believe that appearance is important and that no one can be judged for having standards in regards to that... To then say that people who are first attracted by appearance can't develop feelings.
The way someone shows themselves to the world will always be attractive if that's what made you interested at first, but the love part is exactly about being able to see them be vulnerable, how they feel and loving to know that it's just for you to see. For you to care for them... I look for assertiveness and confidence in guys because those are the things I lack the most, those are good qualities to possess, why would one not develop feelings for people with good qualities? Because they have other sides too? As far as I know, we're talking about humans, and no human is that one-dimensional.

What do I have to look for then, to be able to develop real feelings?

 

[ardour]

If those are inherently good qualities, isn't it a little hypocritical to expect what you personally can't bring to the table? If you're going to argue men and women have the right to expect entirely different things, then I reserve the right to call such arrangements 'transactional'.

A strong preference for confidence and assertiveness would at the very least imply men need to be careful about expressing their other side (vulnerability, insecurity, etc.) IMO.

 

[Paraiyar]

If those are inherently good qualities, isn't it a little hypocritical to expect what you personally can't bring to the table? 

On a physical level, heterosexual attraction is already this way inherently so I don't think it's such a stretch to see that applies psychologically as well.

 

[DarkSelene]

If those are inherently good qualities, isn't it a little hypocritical to expect what you personally can't bring to the table? If you're going to argue men and women have the right to expect entirely different things, then I reserve the right to call such arrangements 'transactional'.

A strong preference for confidence and assertiveness would at the very least imply men need to be careful about expressing their other side (vulnerability, insecurity, etc.) IMO.

There are other good qualities besides that... I would only be able to date people that don't think confidence is important, maybe people that even like how insecure I am. Most people don't want to date themselves, most people do look for things they lack. Everyone will bring to the table what they have, and if a woman has qualities that fit his preferences and his qualities fit hers, I don't see why it's so outrageous... Men and women have always expected different things from each other.

Confidence and assertiveness will help me be more confident, and my caring side will help him know that he should be more vulnerable around me, if he can't do that at first. Again, humans are not one dimensional, everyone has confidence in something about themselves, everyone has insecurities and go through periods of feeling vulnerable.

For you this might be a math equation and look unfair, for the person that prioritize entirely different qualities in whoever they want to date its simple quality you like + quality I like = being attracted to each other.

 

[ardour]

If those are inherently good qualities, isn't it a little hypocritical to expect what you personally can't bring to the table? If you're going to argue men and women have the right to expect entirely different things, then I reserve the right to call such arrangements 'transactional'.

A strong preference for confidence and assertiveness would at the very least imply men need to be careful about expressing their other side (vulnerability, insecurity, etc.) IMO.

There are other good qualities besides that... I would only be able to date people that don't think confidence is important, maybe people that even like how insecure I am. Most people don't want to date themselves, most people do look for things they lack. Everyone will bring to the table what they have, and if a woman has qualities that fit his preferences and his qualities fit hers, I don't see why it's so outrageous... Men and women have always expected different things from each other.

Confidence and assertiveness will help me be more confident, and my caring side will help him know that he should be more vulnerable around me, if he can't do that at first. Again, humans are not one dimensional, everyone has confidence in something about themselves, everyone has insecurities and go through periods of feeling vulnerable.

For you this might be a math equation and look unfair, for the person that prioritize entirely different qualities in whoever they want to date its simple quality you like + quality I like = being attracted to each other.

Hyper-pickiness over typically masculine traits like confidence just doesn’t sit well. It requires monumental effort to develop from nothing, is influenced by how stable a family background someone has, whether they experienced bullying, social exclusion and so on.  I understand your points, but it doesn't change the fact that any male who’s experienced significant blows his self-image isn't likely to meet these sort of requirements.

 

[kamya]

I think you are confusing confidence with self esteem.

One is how you feel about yourself and one is how you feel about your abilities. They are similar but very different. I would say self esteem is much more tied to environmental factors.

Confidence is something that is built over time. I really like Tim Ferriss's concept of uninformed/ informed confidence. Informed confidence being the only true confidence. 

Uninformed confidence is mostly just blind faith and optimism. Being sure of yourself that you can do something whether you have any experience or not.

Informed confidence is confidence that is developed by doing things. Practicing, and developing the necessary skills and experience to succeed at whatever it is you are wanting to accomplish. 

Basically, real confidence is developed by doing. It's not really tied to environmental factors as much.

If you are trying to do something new then you naturally won't have as much confidence. If you bring a partner along who has done it before, then they have that "informed confidence". You can rely on them somewhat to help you along. It will make things easier. Then, once the task or goal is successfully completed, you now have some experience of your own. Your now have your own "Informed confidence" for the next time the situation comes up.

This is one of the reasons why it might be such a desired trait to seek out in a partner for someone without much confidence of their own.