What Do Women Want?

[Peace&Freedom]

All I can add to all the above is the below article from Craigslist:

http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/van/152468438.html

 

[orafi]

i know it's a popular fantasy for guys to be raped by a bodacious set of curves. mmmph!

 

[The_Orlonater]

The whole article is BS, everyone knows that women want MONEY!

Federal Reserve Notes, eh? I guess I got to call up Bernanke.

(Ok, I was joking. I'm not funny )

 

[Mini-Me]

i know it's a popular fantasy for guys to be raped by a bodacious set of curves. mmmph!

Yeah, but somehow I think we'd have to define "rape" reaaaaaaaaaaally loosely in that case. I mean, if it's really rape, that implies wanting to put up some kind of a fight...and any real fight includes donkey punches and such, not just fake resistance.

EDIT: Actually, I just decided to finally look up what a donkey punch actually is, and it appears I was misusing the term. I was thinking in terms of something more along the lines of a horse punch...

 

[Acala]

Dude . . .

This paradox is ridiculous. Here's my perspective:
Any woman who would take advantage of me, or who would leave me simply because taking advantage of me would be easy to do (and she wants someone "tougher"), is simply too cold and heartless to really deserve my attention in the first place. I can't be the confident, almost "indifferent" manly man all the time, because what good is a relationship if you're not allowed to actually open up emotionally, be human, and above all, actually be honest about your own feelings instead of playing childish, selfish, and manipulative games revolving around power and dominance?

I don't want anything to do with the kind of shallow woman who wants the perfect, dominant caricature of a man with unassailable confidence and no emotional needs or vulnerabilities. Of course, if I make my view clear and treat women that way right from the start - as if I wouldn't really go out of my way for them and as if they don't really mean that much to me (or that the relationship doesn't) - then I'll instantly become desirable to them...however, that's exactly what I don't want! You said, "Once you really have that attitude and LIVE it, you will have all the women you want. It is one of those paradoxes in life - the second you realize you can be happy without a woman, you don't have to be." I can't help but think the sentence continues, "...because from that point forward, all of the wrong kind of women will be showering you with attention!"

Deep down, at least as far as long-term relationship material goes, I want to turn off those kinds of women, precisely because they're not worth my time, and I'd be miserable with them, constantly having to act like someone I'm not...plus, acting that way would turn off the kind of women who I am interested in: I'm interested in the kind of women who actually view men as equal human beings and treat them with consideration by default - not just because the man is tough and assertive enough not to ever put up with shit, but because the woman is too good of a person to ever try it in the first place. I don't want a woman who will walk all over me or leave me in "disgust" at some vulnerable moment or during a rough time; I want the kind of woman who will be there for me during those times (especially considering rough times are already, by definition, rough), just like I would be there for her when she needs it. She should do this not just because I'm dominant enough that she'd be afraid to do anything else (lest she lose me), but because it's just the right thing to do...and that's on top of the whole idea that she should care about me in the first place, just as I presumably would care about her.

Still, I can't trust someone who wouldn't take advantage of me just because of who I am or how I act with them, or even because they care about me specifically (although that part helps a lot); I can only trust someone who wouldn't purposely hurt anyone at all, simply because they're too good of a person to do so. Deep down, it's an absolute requirement for me that I be with a compassionate, morally consistent person...and it's unfortunate that you can't really figure out if someone measures up until long after you develop feelings for her that are hard to let go of, no matter how much you want to or know you should.

This is different from the confidence aspect, but there's a parallel: I wear decent clothes when I go out, but I don't obsess over it. My sister asked me recently why I don't care about dressing fashionably and keeping up with the latest trends...the answer is, while I care about looking moderately attractive, I purposely want to avoid the shallow kinds of women who will write off a guy just because he's not cosmopolitan or trendy enough. It's a different situation, but it's the same idea...I'm "supposed" to dress/act in a certain way to be desirable, but if I did, I'd attract the wrong kind of women.

Back to the main topic though:
I'm always hearing women say something to the effect of, "Women want confident guys who are strong and dominant and who aren't easy to walk all over." You know what men like me want? Men like me just want women who are completely above playing manipulative emotional games in relationships. Sadly, it seems like those kind of women are quite rare...so that means I'll either get lucky and end up with one, or I'll end up lonely after a string of disappointments. I've been single for quite a while now (years), so at this particular moment I can't really be bothered to care all that much...but I imagine a lot of guys feel the same way in terms of what kind of woman they're looking for and unable to find.

Dude,

Listen to me [grabs you by the shoulders]. You have been brainwashed. You have been brainwashed by the MSM and MS entertainment and by your "education" into thinking that men and women are the same. They aren't. You have been brainwashed into thinking that what women want - or what women SHOULD want - is a sensitive, vulnerable guy who is always nice, showers them with praise and attention, accommodates them in every way, and won't take the lead. You have been brainwashed into believing that women want this. They don't. At least the women who are worth being with don't. Even if they SAY they do.

I don't know you, and I have no clue about your situation, but I'll bet I can describe it pretty well.

You meet a girl you like, you become friends with her. Maybe she has an asshole boyfriend she is trying to get away from. You console her and listen to her talk and go out with her. You fall in love with her. You really care about her and want her as a lover. You are all of the things you have been brainwashed into thinking she wants - sensitive, accommodating, complimentary. She tells you what a nice guy you are and what a good friend you are. But when you make a pass at her, she pushes you away and tells you she just wants to be friends. And then she either goes back to the asshole she has been with or finds a new asshole. And you are left standing there saying "WTF?" And she gives you a look as if to say "I wish it wasn't this way. Why won't you save me?"

By being all the things you THINK a woman should want you to be, you turn her off at a level she probably doesn't even understand. It is very primitive. But she can't control it. She KNOWS intellectually that you are a nice guy, but sexual attraction is not an intellectual process.

Dude, you say you don't want to be this way or that way. That is like a polar bear wanting to be a vegetarian. Men and women have different roles in relationships as a matter of inherent nature. Dominance is not a "game" it is the way of life. Take a look at nature. Wolves don't 'play" at dominance. Chimps don't "play" at dominance. It is hard wired in them AND you. You can't change male/female sexual wiring. You have to deal with it.

I was like you.

I was the guy standing on the sidelines watching the great girls go with the arrogant assholes who seemed to me to be treating them badly. Of course some of them WERE treating the girls badly. So why would a girl prefer to be with a guy who sometimes treats her badly than a nice guy like me who would treat them nice all the time? Because she is WIRED that way. Not that she wants to be treated badly, but that she wants a guy who takes charge and it seems that the guys who convey that naturally are often assholes. I have theories as to why, but won't go into it here.

It took me years of frustration and a failed marriage to figure this out. Except for the sick, controlling bitches, women WANT you to be dominant. They WANT you to be your own man. They WANT you to be in charge. They don't want you to be an asshole, but they would even choose an asshole over a fawning windsock. They want you to TAKE them, not meekly try to talk them into loving you by being a nice guy.

By taking your natural role as a dominant man, you are doing the women around you a favor! They WANT that from you at a deep level. And because you aren't an asshole, you can be the best that manhood has to offer - a dominant, confident man who is also a decent person and not an arrogant dick.

I am not saying that you must be some kind of Chuck Norris hard ass that never sheds a tear or shows a moment of uncertainty. No woman worth a crap is going to dump you for that. But that needs to be the exception rather than the norm. You can be a warm and kind person without being a wimp.

If someone had explained this to me when I was a young man, my life would have been so much better. And the lives of the women around me would have been better too. Please take this to heart.

You owe it to yourself and the women you love to find your manhood. It will change your life.

 

[M House]

Well, I don't know what to say about this after my experience last night. So one of my female friends I haven't talked to in nearly a year just called me up, picked me up, and took me to dinner last night. Haha, women need to perform more of this badassness.

 

[SWATH]

Dude,

Listen to me [grabs you by the shoulders]. You have been brainwashed. You have been brainwashed by the MSM and MS entertainment and by your "education" into thinking that men and women are the same. They aren't. You have been brainwashed into thinking that what women want - or what women SHOULD want - is a sensitive, vulnerable guy who is always nice, showers them with praise and attention, accommodates them in every way, and won't take the lead. You have been brainwashed into believing that women want this. They don't. At least the women who are worth being with don't. Even if they SAY they do.

I don't know you, and I have no clue about your situation, but I'll bet I can describe it pretty well.

You meet a girl you like, you become friends with her. Maybe she has an asshole boyfriend she is trying to get away from. You console her and listen to her talk and go out with her. You fall in love with her. You really care about her and want her as a lover. You are all of the things you have been brainwashed into thinking she wants - sensitive, accommodating, complimentary. She tells you what a nice guy you are and what a good friend you are. But when you make a pass at her, she pushes you away and tells you she just wants to be friends. And then she either goes back to the asshole she has been with or finds a new asshole. And you are left standing there saying "WTF?" And she gives you a look as if to say "I wish it wasn't this way. Why won't you save me?"

By being all the things you THINK a woman should want you to be, you turn her off at a level she probably doesn't even understand. It is very primitive. But she can't control it. She KNOWS intellectually that you are a nice guy, but sexual attraction is not an intellectual process.

Dude, you say you don't want to be this way or that way. That is like a polar bear wanting to be a vegetarian. Men and women have different roles in relationships as a matter of inherent nature. Dominance is not a "game" it is the way of life. Take a look at nature. Wolves don't 'play" at dominance. Chimps don't "play" at dominance. It is hard wired in them AND you. You can't change male/female sexual wiring. You have to deal with it.

I was like you.

I was the guy standing on the sidelines watching the great girls go with the arrogant assholes who seemed to me to be treating them badly. Of course some of them WERE treating the girls badly. So why would a girl prefer to be with a guy who sometimes treats her badly than a nice guy like me who would treat them nice all the time? Because she is WIRED that way. Not that she wants to be treated badly, but that she wants a guy who takes charge and it seems that the guys who convey that naturally are often assholes. I have theories as to why, but won't go into it here.

It took me years of frustration and a failed marriage to figure this out. Except for the sick, controlling bitches, women WANT you to be dominant. They WANT you to be your own man. They WANT you to be in charge. They don't want you to be an asshole, but they would even choose an asshole over a fawning windsock. They want you to TAKE them, not meekly try to talk them into loving you by being a nice guy.

By taking your natural role as a dominant man, you are doing the women around you a favor! They WANT that from you at a deep level. And because you aren't an asshole, you can be the best that manhood has to offer - a dominant, confident man who is also a decent person and not an arrogant dick.

I am not saying that you must be some kind of Chuck Norris hard ass that never sheds a tear or shows a moment of uncertainty. No woman worth a crap is going to dump you for that. But that needs to be the exception rather than the norm. You can be a warm and kind person without being a wimp.

If someone had explained this to me when I was a young man, my life would have been so much better. And the lives of the women around me would have been better too. Please take this to heart.

You owe it to yourself and the women you love to find your manhood. It will change your life.

Yes. My friend you have learned a hard fought lesson. I dare say I had to learn the same lesson. Even my own father encouraged me very early on to be the pussy all the time, be nice at all costs, if someone hits you run away type of bullshit. It is really no wonder his entire life has been an absolute dismal failure with marriage and relationships with woman in general. Instead of being apprehensive and taught to fear your gender it is time to recognize your gender and fucking grow a pair. I wish so much that this had been instilled in me much younger, but some of us had to learn it the hard way. It's as if the brainwashing is suggesting to you subconsciously to feel that because you are man you should always be wary of it because it's like walking around with a loaded gun, and that no one should walk around with a loaded gun so you had better hide it and be fearful of it.

 

[phill4paul]

Yes. My friend you have learned a hard fought lesson. I dare say I had to learn the same lesson. Even my own father encouraged me very early on to be the pussy all the time, be nice at all costs, if someone hits you run away type of bullshit. It is really no wonder his entire life has been an absolute dismal failure with marriage and relationships with woman in general. Instead of being apprehensive and taught to fear your gender it is time to recognize your gender and fucking grow a pair. I wish so much that this had been instilled in me much younger, but some of us had to learn it the hard way. It's as if the brainwashing is suggesting to you subconsciously to feel that because you are man you should always be wary of it because it's like walking around with a loaded gun, and that no one should walk around with a loaded gun so you had better hide it and be fearful of it.

My uncle on my mommas side always carried a side arm. Always. This was in '70s Alabama. No man even thought of foolin' with his woman. They had a long and fruitful marriage, God rest their souls.

 

[Deborah K]

I'm not interested in reading the whole article based on the excerpt the OP posted. But lemme ask this, as far as women being malleable, is it mentioned anywhere that Heche and the Ethriche's partner might be bi-sexual?? Wouldn't bi-sexuality play a role somehow?

As far as rape fantasies go, those statistics seem waaaay too high.

 

[Mini-Me]

Dude,

Listen to me [grabs you by the shoulders]. You have been brainwashed. You have been brainwashed by the MSM and MS entertainment and by your "education" into thinking that men and women are the same. They aren't. You have been brainwashed into thinking that what women want - or what women SHOULD want - is a sensitive, vulnerable guy who is always nice, showers them with praise and attention, accommodates them in every way, and won't take the lead. You have been brainwashed into believing that women want this. They don't. At least the women who are worth being with don't. Even if they SAY they do.

I don't know you, and I have no clue about your situation, but I'll bet I can describe it pretty well.

You meet a girl you like, you become friends with her. Maybe she has an asshole boyfriend she is trying to get away from. You console her and listen to her talk and go out with her. You fall in love with her. You really care about her and want her as a lover. You are all of the things you have been brainwashed into thinking she wants - sensitive, accommodating, complimentary. She tells you what a nice guy you are and what a good friend you are. But when you make a pass at her, she pushes you away and tells you she just wants to be friends. And then she either goes back to the asshole she has been with or finds a new asshole. And you are left standing there saying "WTF?" And she gives you a look as if to say "I wish it wasn't this way. Why won't you save me?"

By being all the things you THINK a woman should want you to be, you turn her off at a level she probably doesn't even understand. It is very primitive. But she can't control it. She KNOWS intellectually that you are a nice guy, but sexual attraction is not an intellectual process.

Dude, you say you don't want to be this way or that way. That is like a polar bear wanting to be a vegetarian. Men and women have different roles in relationships as a matter of inherent nature. Dominance is not a "game" it is the way of life. Take a look at nature. Wolves don't 'play" at dominance. Chimps don't "play" at dominance. It is hard wired in them AND you. You can't change male/female sexual wiring. You have to deal with it.

I was like you.

I was the guy standing on the sidelines watching the great girls go with the arrogant assholes who seemed to me to be treating them badly. Of course some of them WERE treating the girls badly. So why would a girl prefer to be with a guy who sometimes treats her badly than a nice guy like me who would treat them nice all the time? Because she is WIRED that way. Not that she wants to be treated badly, but that she wants a guy who takes charge and it seems that the guys who convey that naturally are often assholes. I have theories as to why, but won't go into it here.

It took me years of frustration and a failed marriage to figure this out. Except for the sick, controlling bitches, women WANT you to be dominant. They WANT you to be your own man. They WANT you to be in charge. They don't want you to be an asshole, but they would even choose an asshole over a fawning windsock. They want you to TAKE them, not meekly try to talk them into loving you by being a nice guy.

By taking your natural role as a dominant man, you are doing the women around you a favor! They WANT that from you at a deep level. And because you aren't an asshole, you can be the best that manhood has to offer - a dominant, confident man who is also a decent person and not an arrogant dick.

I am not saying that you must be some kind of Chuck Norris hard ass that never sheds a tear or shows a moment of uncertainty. No woman worth a crap is going to dump you for that. But that needs to be the exception rather than the norm. You can be a warm and kind person without being a wimp.

If someone had explained this to me when I was a young man, my life would have been so much better. And the lives of the women around me would have been better too. Please take this to heart.

You owe it to yourself and the women you love to find your manhood. It will change your life.

This advice probably would have been great for me back in high school...but I really already learned that lesson the hard way, just like everyone else. I understand it on a level, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. That's why I deal with that truth by preferring being single rather than changing who I am. I'll explain why, and it really has nothing to do with conforming to the expectations of the stereotypical "sensitive relationship guy:"

In general, the people I most want to be around are the kind who are completely trustworthy (in the morally consistent sense) and do the right thing just because it's right...in addition to treating people right because they care about them, as well. Not everyone really measures up to the first standard, but I like people who at least try. Now, I'm not just referring to romantic relationships - I'm referring to interpersonal relationships in general! I don't have any interest in seeking out a friendship with an untrustworthy person, nor do I have any interest in seeking out a friendship with someone who won't really give a damn about me. Neither really seem like worthwhile endeavors.

Now, I mentioned a lot of other stuff about wanting someone who doesn't play games with people: The fact is, if anyone I care about (anyone - male or female friend, family member, or a girlfriend) really wants to manipulate me into doing something for them, they'll find it's pretty easy, at least for a while. Why is this? I'd bend over backwards for pretty much anyone I care about, because that's just who I am. It just feels like the right thing to do, and unless there's some particularly compelling reason why it would majorly inconvenience me, I'm not going to turn someone down when they ask something of me. I want to give them the benefit of the doubt that they'll appreciate it, and so I'll oblige without hesitation. This could be something as little as doing some chore (and I want to make sure I pull my weight as well, because more than anything, I don't want to take advantage of someone else), or it could be some larger favor. In any case, it's not really a problem in my daily life, because the people I love and care about tend to know and appreciate the way I'm there for them...and besides, just about all of them would bend over backwards for me as well (and/or already have). Honest, up-front people are the kind of people I like to be around in general. If someone made a habit of taking advantage of me, I'd eventually catch on and be pretty pissed off about it. I'm accomodating when I think people are being reasonable, but that doesn't mean I'm a whipping boy or okay with being walked over. Sometimes it can take a while before you recognize someone's being unreasonable and taking advantage of you though, and until that becomes clear, I'm personally the type that likes to give people I care about the benefit of the doubt.

However, there's an annoying snag here when we make the switch over to "romantic relationship" territory: Although I'm a flexible, accomodating, and helpful guy in general, that's somehow a no-no in romantic relationships. Most women apparently see that as a sign of weakness in a boyfriend, either on the subconscious instinctive level or on the conscious, manipulative level. Because most women are instinctively seeking out that strong, dominant, take-no-shit-from-anyone mate, it's like they're always sniffing out vulnerabilities in a guy, like some kind of treacherous serpentine predator waiting for the right moment to strike the killing blow. All of a sudden, if I want to be with that kind of woman (and the whole point is, I DON'T), I have to purposely and uncharacteristically act less accomodating towards her than I would towards anyone else...otherwise, what I consider common courtesy is something she'll see as a sign of weakness. I guess there are two basic types of such women here:

1. The first type desires a dominant man and wants to assume a submissive role. If her boyfriend isn't enough of an alpha, she'll get confused, lose interest, and move on, possibly without really understanding why.
2. The second type desires a dominant man and wants to assume a submissive role, too...but if she notices a man isn't particularly dominant, she'll take complete charge and assume the dominant role - but in an abusive and sneaky way - and take advantage of him for a while just because she can. This kind of woman is formally known as a "total bitch with no conscience," or "manipulative leech," and the only reason she'll ever treat someone right is because the other person forces her to.

Because it seems ridiculous and unnatural for me to purposely act less accomodating in a romantic relationship out of fear of losing the relationship, I'd rather just say, "Screw those kinds of women," especially the latter...but really the former as well. Still, it's depressing that some guys are literally expected to change their basic personality types to fit into some predetermined role, merely because most women approach their romantic relationships like dogs approach pack relationships...with primitive dynamics of dominance as a priority. Besides, changing your entire personality or faking an alternate personality just to be with someone isn't exactly a healthy way to go about things, and in the ways that count, it's a much weaker, less confident, and more emotionally dependent kind of behavior. Seriously, what kind of confident manly man changes his basic personality to please his girlfriend anyway? There's a catch 22 here.

Seriously, is it truly so unusual to want to be with an considerate, accomodating human being, who treats you like a human being rather than solely as a gender role and appreciates your natural tendency to be accomodating as well? Is it really impossible to have a romantic relationship with relatively equal power dynamics, where nobody actually feels a consistent need to dominate or be dominated (or "test" and evaluate the other's dominance)? Surely I'm not the only person who wants some balance! I sure as hell don't want to be dominated or take anyone's shit, and I'll stick up for myself when I notice it needs to be done, but at the same time, I consider it a huge waste of effort and authenticity to purposely go out of my way to act dominant for the sake of keeping a relationship based on a lie.

Make more sense?

 

[Acala]

Understand

This advice probably would have been great for me back in high school...but I really already learned that lesson the hard way, just like everyone else. I understand it on a level, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. That's why I deal with that truth by preferring being single rather than changing who I am. I'll explain why, and it really has nothing to do with conforming to the expectations of the stereotypical "sensitive relationship guy:"

In general, the people I most want to be around are the kind who are completely trustworthy (in the morally consistent sense) and do the right thing just because it's right...in addition to treating people right because they care about them, as well. Not everyone really measures up to the first standard, but I like people who at least try. Now, I'm not just referring to romantic relationships - I'm referring to interpersonal relationships in general! I don't have any interest in seeking out a friendship with an untrustworthy person, nor do I have any interest in seeking out a friendship with someone who won't really give a damn about me. Neither really seem like worthwhile endeavors.

Now, I mentioned a lot of other stuff about wanting someone who doesn't play games with people: The fact is, if anyone I care about (anyone - male or female friend, family member, or a girlfriend) really wants to manipulate me into doing something for them, they'll find it's pretty easy, at least for a while. Why is this? I'd bend over backwards for pretty much anyone I care about, because that's just who I am. It just feels like the right thing to do, and unless there's some particularly compelling reason why it would majorly inconvenience me, I'm not going to turn someone down when they ask something of me. I want to give them the benefit of the doubt that they'll appreciate it, and so I'll oblige without hesitation. This could be something as little as doing some chore (and I want to make sure I pull my weight as well, because more than anything, I don't want to take advantage of someone else), or it could be some larger favor. In any case, it's not really a problem in my daily life, because the people I love and care about tend to know and appreciate the way I'm there for them...and besides, just about all of them would bend over backwards for me as well (and/or already have). Honest, up-front people are the kind of people I like to be around in general. If someone made a habit of taking advantage of me, I'd eventually catch on and be pretty pissed off about it. I'm accomodating when I think people are being reasonable, but that doesn't mean I'm a whipping boy or okay with being walked over. Sometimes it can take a while before you recognize someone's being unreasonable and taking advantage of you though, and until that becomes clear, I'm personally the type that likes to give people I care about the benefit of the doubt.

However, there's an annoying snag here when we make the switch over to "romantic relationship" territory: Although I'm a flexible, accomodating, and helpful guy in general, that's somehow a no-no in romantic relationships. Most women apparently see that as a sign of weakness in a boyfriend, either on the subconscious instinctive level or on the conscious, manipulative level. Because most women are instinctively seeking out that strong, dominant, take-no-shit-from-anyone mate, it's like they're always sniffing out vulnerabilities in a guy, like some kind of treacherous serpentine predator waiting for the right moment to strike the killing blow. All of a sudden, if I want to be with that kind of woman (and the whole point is, I DON'T), I have to purposely and uncharacteristically act less accomodating towards her than I would towards anyone else...otherwise, what I consider common courtesy is something she'll see as a sign of weakness. I guess there are two basic types of such women here:

1. The first type desires a dominant man and wants to assume a submissive role. If her boyfriend isn't enough of an alpha, she'll get confused, lose interest, and move on, possibly without really understanding why.
2. The second type desires a dominant man and wants to assume a submissive role, too...but if she notices a man isn't particularly dominant, she'll take complete charge and assume the dominant role - but in an abusive and sneaky way - and take advantage of him for a while just because she can. This kind of woman is formally known as a "total bitch with no conscience," or "manipulative leech," and the only reason she'll ever treat someone right is because the other person forces her to.

Because it seems ridiculous and unnatural for me to purposely act less accomodating in a romantic relationship out of fear of losing the relationship, I'd rather just say, "Screw those kinds of women," especially the latter...but really the former as well. Still, it's depressing that some guys are literally expected to change their basic personality types to fit into some predetermined role, merely because most women approach their romantic relationships like dogs approach pack relationships...with primitive dynamics of dominance as a priority. Besides, changing your entire personality or faking an alternate personality just to be with someone isn't exactly a healthy way to go about things, and in the ways that count, it's a much weaker, less confident, and more emotionally dependent kind of behavior. Seriously, what kind of confident manly man changes his basic personality to please his girlfriend anyway? There's a catch 22 here.

Seriously, is it truly so unusual to want to be with an considerate, accomodating human being, who treats you like a human being rather than solely as a gender role and appreciates your natural tendency to be accomodating as well? Is it really impossible to have a romantic relationship with relatively equal power dynamics, where nobody actually feels a consistent need to dominate or be dominated (or "test" and evaluate the other's dominance)? Surely I'm not the only person who wants some balance! I sure as hell don't want to be dominated or take anyone's shit, and I'll stick up for myself when I notice it needs to be done, but at the same time, I consider it a huge waste of effort and authenticity to purposely go out of my way to act dominant for the sake of keeping a relationship based on a lie.

Make more sense?

I understand exactly what you are saying because I am the same way by habit. When it comes to other men, I am almost totally non-compettitve. I don't compare myself to other men and have very little ambition to succeed by any "objective" standard, although I am a success by most such standards. I just don't care. If people want to cut in front of me in line or cheat or play "status" games or "one-up" me, whatever, fine. That's their problem. I set my own standards. So in that way I am no Alpha male.

And when it comes to women, my habit, my first impulse, WAS to be as accomodating as possible. Let them have their way. But the result was that the only girls I ended up with were the ones who wanted to wear the pants and enslave me and I ended up not being happy with that. And when the pain got bad enough, I did some soul searching and discovered the error of my ways. Now nobody tells me what to do or what not to do unless they are signing my paycheck.

When you refuse to be accomodating in a romantic relationship, and instead take control, you are not changing your personality to please a woman. You are, by definition, doing what YOU want rather than doing what SHE wants. And if she doesn't like it, she knows where the door is because you have SHOWED her where it is. So it is really a question of taking the rudder in your own life and relationships. You become the captain of your own ship. There can't be two captains. You can have a trusty first mate, whose advice you listen to, and who you look out for. But in the end YOU have to be the captain or you will be the cabin boy.

But here is the beauty. Once you make it clear that you are in charge and will not take any shit, then it is easy because most women aren't going to fight you for control. The ones who want control will go find some wimp they can run. The ones who stick with you will be fine with it. They will like it, in fact, and most will not test you all the time. If you get involved with one who tests you all the time and it gets to be a hassle, tell her to fuck off.

With most women, once you establish dominance at the beginning of the relationship, THEN you can be the nice guy you want to be. Then she gets what she wants - a nice guy who is also in control and therefore sexually attractive - and you get what you want - a great companion who digs you AND you get the freedom and self-respect that comes with being captain. It is a good feeling. You will honestly feel like a new man.

By the way, when you say "screw those kinds of women" meaning women who like their man to be in control, you are saying "screw nearly ALL women". It is my opinion that the only women who DON'T want their man to be in control have been messed up by twisted feminist brainwashing (and are usually bitter and frustrated) or are psycho bitches from hell.

Let me give you an example: You pick a new girlfriend up for a dinner date. She says "Where are we going?" You say: "The Tonga Hut" She says "I would rather go to Joe's Crab Shack" You say "Maybe another time". You just made it clear that you are captain and have the rudder. She will either pitch a fit, in which case you turn around and take her home and be glad that you saved some money and didn't waste time on an unworthy woman. Or she will submit and go to the Tonga Hut and have fun. Now here comes the part you will like. The next time you take her out, without being asked, you take her to Joe's Crab Shack! She will melt in your arms. You took control and then you used your control to take care of her.

It is a big responsibility to be the captain, unless your a dick. You need to protect and concern yourself with the needs of your crew. But by being captain, you can be BETTER at serving others. And you also have a kind of freedom you will not know otherwise. Try it!

But if you choose to leave dominance ambiguous in romantic relationships, you are cutting yourself out of the vast majority of romantic opportunities. You may really want a relationship free of gender roles and dominance patterns. Unfortunately, you have been incarnated into the wrong life form for that.

 

[xyz123]

Umm, I'm going to assume two things when interpreting this

1. The guy has to be really attractive, perhaps more attractive than the women. In which case, the guy wouldn't need to rape people to get laid in the first place.

and / or

2. By 'rape', most of them mean just playing out the rape fantasy with their boyfriend. Its rough sex that is not really against her will, she pretends to resist and he pretends to be a rapist.

Or maybe their just mentally disturbed, and like the abuse.

3. They want to have sex without worrying about the consequences of their choices. Paradoxically, lack of physical freedom grants one freedom from responsibility.

 

[cheapseats]

What Do Men Want?

Besides SEX and the desire to be secure in freedom, is there ANY attribute, action, characteristic, desire or foible by which ANY man on this board feels he can be casually lumped with all the other men, apparently on earth?

WHAT TYPE OF WOMAN IS ANSWERING THE BIZARRE "SURVEY" QUESTION?

Let's say I go into a Porn Shop or a Strip Bar and conduct a survey as to how many of the male patrons have ever fantasized about forcibly raping a woman who, mid-rape, caves to desire for the manly man's manliness. If most of them cop to the desire, can we infer that a significant percentage of all men dream of raping a resistant-but-not-too-resistant woman?

 

[xyz123]

I'm not interested in reading the whole article based on the excerpt the OP posted. But lemme ask this, as far as women being malleable, is it mentioned anywhere that Heche and the Ethriche's partner might be bi-sexual?? Wouldn't bi-sexuality play a role somehow?

As far as rape fantasies go, those statistics seem waaaay too high.

I read the article. The whole article. The OP, unfortunately, has taken certain words way out of context. For one thing, the focus of the article is not just on survey results.

The article is about the 'forest' that the question "what women want' leads to and how the researchers are doing their best to, well, research. They're just simply reporting the data they've gathered. No one has concluded that "women want to be raped".

But it's always good to question the data gathering methods.

It took me years of frustration and a failed marriage to figure this out. Except for the sick, controlling bitches, women WANT you to be dominant. They WANT you to be your own man. They WANT you to be in charge. They don't want you to be an asshole, but they would even choose an asshole over a fawning windsock. They want you to TAKE them, not meekly try to talk them into loving you by being a nice guy.

This implies that 'sick, controlling bitches' are somehow uncommon. How do you know that they don't make up a significant part of the female population?

 

[cheapseats]

This implies that 'sick, controlling bitches' are somehow uncommon. How do you know that they don't make up a significant part of the female population?

Look no further than Washington to verify that we also have a surplus of sick, controlling bastards.

 

[RickyJ]

What Do Women Want?

Not me.

 

[cheapseats]

I point to the Consumer Craziness that underpins the Greed that underpins the Crisis in suggesting that MOST PEOPLE don't really know what they want.

Hence, all the grabbing at straws.

Also all the manipulation that Politicos and Executives are able to pull off year after year after year after year.

 

[M House]

Obviously, after hanging out now twice with my old female friend, I'd say they don't make a shit of sense on anything. I think the only you can give them anymore is tolerance.

 

[cheapseats]

Obviously, after hanging out now twice with my old female friend, I'd say they don't make a shit of sense on anything. I think the only you can give them anymore is tolerance.

I have an idea, if you're game.

You say "obviously," whereas I have no idea what is obvious or why it is obviously so. I "know" you to be a board member in good standing -- we have crossed paths in a thread or two. It might be enlightening, again if you're game, to review what actually occurred to leave who I presume to be a Good Guy with such a bleak estimation of All Women.

Why, for instance, did you agree to again keep company with someone who, apparently, at least one of you previously thought made an unsuitable companion for you?

 

[Mini-Me]

I understand exactly what you are saying because I am the same way by habit. When it comes to other men, I am almost totally non-compettitve. I don't compare myself to other men and have very little ambition to succeed by any "objective" standard, although I am a success by most such standards. I just don't care. If people want to cut in front of me in line or cheat or play "status" games or "one-up" me, whatever, fine. That's their problem. I set my own standards. So in that way I am no Alpha male.

And when it comes to women, my habit, my first impulse, WAS to be as accomodating as possible. Let them have their way. But the result was that the only girls I ended up with were the ones who wanted to wear the pants and enslave me and I ended up not being happy with that. And when the pain got bad enough, I did some soul searching and discovered the error of my ways. Now nobody tells me what to do or what not to do unless they are signing my paycheck.

When you refuse to be accomodating in a romantic relationship, and instead take control, you are not changing your personality to please a woman. You are, by definition, doing what YOU want rather than doing what SHE wants. And if she doesn't like it, she knows where the door is because you have SHOWED her where it is. So it is really a question of taking the rudder in your own life and relationships. You become the captain of your own ship. There can't be two captains. You can have a trusty first mate, whose advice you listen to, and who you look out for. But in the end YOU have to be the captain or you will be the cabin boy.

But here is the beauty. Once you make it clear that you are in charge and will not take any shit, then it is easy because most women aren't going to fight you for control. The ones who want control will go find some wimp they can run. The ones who stick with you will be fine with it. They will like it, in fact, and most will not test you all the time. If you get involved with one who tests you all the time and it gets to be a hassle, tell her to fuck off.

With most women, once you establish dominance at the beginning of the relationship, THEN you can be the nice guy you want to be. Then she gets what she wants - a nice guy who is also in control and therefore sexually attractive - and you get what you want - a great companion who digs you AND you get the freedom and self-respect that comes with being captain. It is a good feeling. You will honestly feel like a new man.

By the way, when you say "screw those kinds of women" meaning women who like their man to be in control, you are saying "screw nearly ALL women". It is my opinion that the only women who DON'T want their man to be in control have been messed up by twisted feminist brainwashing (and are usually bitter and frustrated) or are psycho bitches from hell.

Let me give you an example: You pick a new girlfriend up for a dinner date. She says "Where are we going?" You say: "The Tonga Hut" She says "I would rather go to Joe's Crab Shack" You say "Maybe another time". You just made it clear that you are captain and have the rudder. She will either pitch a fit, in which case you turn around and take her home and be glad that you saved some money and didn't waste time on an unworthy woman. Or she will submit and go to the Tonga Hut and have fun. Now here comes the part you will like. The next time you take her out, without being asked, you take her to Joe's Crab Shack! She will melt in your arms. You took control and then you used your control to take care of her.

It is a big responsibility to be the captain, unless your a dick. You need to protect and concern yourself with the needs of your crew. But by being captain, you can be BETTER at serving others. And you also have a kind of freedom you will not know otherwise. Try it!

But if you choose to leave dominance ambiguous in romantic relationships, you are cutting yourself out of the vast majority of romantic opportunities. You may really want a relationship free of gender roles and dominance patterns. Unfortunately, you have been incarnated into the wrong life form for that.

I think the problem here is that there's a fine line between dominant and selfish/controlling. On one hand, you have the guy who always puts the girl first, who gets walked all over or dumped for being "too nice." On the other hand, you have the guy who is so selfish and controlling that he always puts himself first and makes his partner's wants and needs seem unimportant...leading his partner to either depression and low self-esteem or the, "We always do what you want to do!" blowup, depending. It just seems difficult to be dominant without being selfish.

The ideal situation would be for two almost entirely unselfish people to be attracted to each other. That way, each person will generally go along with the first idea that comes up, but whenever either person really insists on going to one restaurant over another, going to a certain play, movie, etc., or doing whatever else, their partner will know, "They're usually very flexible, so this must be important to them," and oblige. In that sense, two almost entirely unselfish people seem like they'd be perfectly compatible with each other...but I guess it usually doesn't pan out in terms of sexual attraction? It's unfortunate, because two selfish people are obviously incompatible, and while a selfish and an unselfish person are compatible, that kind of situation will lead to the long-term subjugation and resentment of the unselfish person.

I like your Tonga Hut vs. Joe's Crab Shack example, because it seems to walk the line between dominance and selfishness pretty well. After all, by wanting to go to the Tonga Hut, you're being no more selfish than your date wanting to go to Joe's Crab Shack. In fact, by trying to turn down your idea (the first idea) and suggesting her own instead, your date is presumably being a bit more selfish, so there's not really anything wrong with saying, "No, maybe another time." Still, I have my own problem here in that I generally give people the benefit of the doubt and assume they're generally unselfish like me: I'm ordinarily so flexible that if I ever said, "I would rather go to Joe's Crab Shack," it means I really, really, really want to go to Joe's Crab Shack instead. In other words, if I suggest going to the Tonga Hut and my date wants to go to Joe's Crab Shack, my first instinct is to think, "She must have a much stronger preference for Joe's than I have for Tonga Hut...and Joe's is good too, so hey, let's go there." If this became some kind of habit, I'd realize, "Wow, my girlfriend is selfish as hell," and I'd get rid of her, unless she's already dumped me. I suppose the ideal kind of girl/woman* is the kind who is unselfish but isn't submissive to the point where she'll let you dominate her into depression without ever letting you know she's unhappy.

After your example though, I suppose I do see a workable solution: As a man, it's a good idea to always come up with the plans first. If your girlfriend rarely objects and offers alternatives, it must mean it's important to her when she does, so you should acquiesce and go along with her ideas instead. However, if she does this early on in the courting process, it's best to say, "Maybe another time," and keep her idea in mind for the next date...and if she butts heads with you, it means she's selfish, so steer clear. Of course, this "dominant but not selfish" solution only works for making plans, not other situations like favors, but...it's a start.

* You know, I'm having trouble with these nouns - at 24, it's a bit hard to know which to use, because "girl" seems like it's for teenie-boppers, and "woman" seems like it's for 40-year-olds with kids of their own.