An odd observation about Women

[Pumblechook]

Pumblechook's assertion about female preference is quite true, IF he's only referring to a one-night stand or fling. Most girls wouldn't tolerate that kind of passive bullshit over the duration of a relationship.

That said, most relationships have one even slightly more dominant partner that exerts more control over the other. It's almost unavoidable, but there's a certain equilibrium where the less dominant parter reverses the process once the more dominant partner exceeds a boundary. A relationship is almost like a governing body, and a lot more complex than most people give it credit.

I personally prefer relationships where very little effort is needed to keep them stable, and both partners are open-minded and temperate in their emotions. I like to keep a relationship light-hearted, but make sure its based on a strong foundation. If that foundation has been compromised by either an outside or inside force, there's not much that can be done to repair the situation (such that stress cracks don't rip those repairs apart), and chances are, it's over.

What I said had nothing to do with one night stands at all? Perhaps you quoted the wrong person??? Being a jerk and dominant is the flingy stuff, not being cooperative.

Other than misquoting me, you have a lot of good stuff said there. Especially the latter part that "very little effort is needed to keep [relationships] stable," since that is how mine tend to work. But again, I think it has a lot to do with you and your partner. I.E. if you have a dominance that needs to be fulfilled or your partner does or both of you do, well you pretty much are not going to be able to avoid having dominance issues in the relationship. Even so, there would have to be some kind of balance of dominance for that kind of combination to work.... which is much like a cooperative relationship between non-dominant people, just with a bit more contention.

I'd say with the girls I've dated that I was probably the more dominant one, although that is not dominant at all. Like I said, I like to keep a relationship balanced, so everyone has input. So, as you said with a "governing body," it is more like although I may be a more dominant person, I choose not to exercise any kind of oppression upon a girlfriend. So like a country with a good ruler, no one is held back and everyone can get the most out of everything.

 

[BobLeeSwagger]

You end up with the partner you deserve. Don't act like someone other than yourself.

 

[JustAsking]

...It takes a lot of working in ourselves 1st to enter in relationships.

But this struggle power stuff maybe bags we carry inside of us not dealth before relationships..I think.

Yes indeed Gisella. We bring a lot of this to relationships as part of our own insecurities. It is common for insecure women to exhibit submission and it is common for insecure men to exhibit dominance. But that being common doesn't make it right or healthy.

The extreme form of this is a physically or emotionally abusive relationship. How many of those are you familiar with? I bet you just can't understand why the guy is such a sadistic jerk, and why the woman just puts up with it and keeps going back. In this kind of relationship, they are both victims of their respective insecurities.

As for one night stands, I guess I can see how the power charade can fit into that. But I am willing to believe that at least half of the time, it is just a one night version of what I am saying in general.

Sorry for pouncing on you like that, Loki. It just struck me that there was something wrong with the question in that it suggested that one or the other partner had to be or was inevitably the dominant one.

 

[Gisella]

Yes indeed Gisella. We bring a lot of this to relationships as part of our own insecurities. It is common for insecure women to exhibit submission and it is common for insecure men to exhibit dominance. But that being common doesn't make it right or healthy.

Yeh JustAsking we carry insecurities bags..and about bags we learn at home and our own personality traits? Well..I learned with my Dad to be, and we talk passionately about issues to some more passive and calm personalities is to much as we are intense or fighting, but we were not, was the way we communicate and we felt revigorate as doing that too... and we are people that express emotions I love my Dad we are much alike . Of course I can speak polite :tongue: but I dont mind confrotation and not scare about that. Funny I can be sweet sensitive and very strong minded too.

For sure I need organization as files things in my mind, to be more rational ( what I hate but I need some amount of that ) and others improvements known and unknow in me.

 

[Nitrofiend]

What I said had nothing to do with one night stands at all? Perhaps you quoted the wrong person??? Being a jerk and dominant is the flingy stuff, not being cooperative.

Other than misquoting me, you have a lot of good stuff said there. Especially the latter part that "very little effort is needed to keep [relationships] stable," since that is how mine tend to work. But again, I think it has a lot to do with you and your partner. I.E. if you have a dominance that needs to be fulfilled or your partner does or both of you do, well you pretty much are not going to be able to avoid having dominance issues in the relationship. Even so, there would have to be some kind of balance of dominance for that kind of combination to work.... which is much like a cooperative relationship between non-dominant people, just with a bit more contention.

I'd say with the girls I've dated that I was probably the more dominant one, although that is not dominant at all. Like I said, I like to keep a relationship balanced, so everyone has input. So, as you said with a "governing body," it is more like although I may be a more dominant person, I choose not to exercise any kind of oppression upon a girlfriend. So like a country with a good ruler, no one is held back and everyone can get the most out of everything.

Yes, you're right. I snagged the wrong username, me sorry :redface:.

 

[Pumblechook]

Yes, you're right. I snagged the wrong username, me sorry :redface:.

No problem. It was funny because you were actually saying somewhat similar things to what I said, but started off as if refuting me lol :tongue:

 

[Kevin_uk]

As someone once told me "Treat them like dogs and they come running"
or "Treat them mean to keep them keen"

Mr nice guy will appear weak and boring

 

[transformer_99]

I've found that if you're not yourself and do what you want to do, yet at least make the effort to communicate with your partner and at least work with them on it. You wind up resenting having to miss out on what you wanted to do. The relationship turns to sh*t because of it and dies off anyway. After a while or when you get old enough, you might be surprised to find out, that your partner is relieved you want to do something else, provided they have the same reciprocity.

 

[Pumblechook]

As someone once told me "Treat them like dogs and they come running"
or "Treat them mean to keep them keen"

Mr nice guy will appear weak and boring

That is pretty true when it comes to first encounters. I often come off pretty boring (that is unless I'm in a comfortable environment and they catch some humor from me) at first, because I don't really believe in things like "making a good first impression" and "putting your best foot forward."

What I've learned is that the few people who take the time/effort/care to get to know you, in spite of the fact that you didn't blow them away with your presence initially, are the ones who end up loving you and thinking so highly of you as a person in their lives.

If you always take a shotgun and blow someone's head off with all of the best things about you right off the bat, you have nowhere else to go but down. Think about it. You've already revealed all the great things about you - what else is there to discover? Over time you gradually get worse and worse.

If you are great, but hidden, you are able to allow other people to discover the best parts of you over time as you get to know each other more and more. This way you are always getting better and there is nowhere to go but up. This doesn't mean to make a bad impression, it means remain neutral... which really comes down to being yourself. If others are wise enough, they will get to know you. If not, they simply will not. There is no magic, certainly no trickery, to it.

That's something for everyone to think about when they have to interview someone and that person doesn't come in their best suit of clothes.

Reminds me that just last month my club was arguing over whether to require students to wear certain types of clothes for an interview process we had (nothing serious, we already knew all the people and stuff, more like practice really). And they were all talking about, "well what if someone not interviewing saw us interviewing in non-interview clothes?" (gag). I said I'd take the person who came naked but was still a good enough person to pull off the interview.

 

[B_Hickboy]

I want a man that stands up for what he believes in... but I don't want a man that I have to fight with all the time either.

Yes, you fucking well do, and you know it.

 

[Lordpendragon]

Men wear the pants. But women choose which pair.

Only joking - I want my match in all respects.

 

[SassySpy]

Your wit, LPD, is difficult to match.

 

[B_big dirigible]

If others are wise enough, they will get to know you. If not, they simply will not.

Expecting others to be wise enough to spot your hidden virtues? You're asking rather a lot there. It sound like a formula for being a hermit.

 

[B_big dirigible]

They always say if women ruled the world there would be no war, and i agree.

Who is this "they"?

Women are viscous when let loose. Fortunately they're not often let loose, so some don't realize it. Margaret Thatcher wasn't called Attila the Hen for nothing. Margaret Mead believed that putting women in combat roles in the military would be unwise, as it's difficult to get them to stop after the enemy has surrendered. She hypothesized that it's because women are not generally raised within a chivalric tradition, part of which involves refraining from massacring your enemies when you have the chance to do so. And when Kipling wrote

"When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,"

he wasn't whistling Dixie.

 

[B_Bette]

I totally disagree.Act like a dick around me, and you're not likely to have one attached for much longer, I can't/won't tolerate dick like behaviour.

That's you, but most women flock to dicks. The original poster is right.

Personally, I don't want a dick (lol wait, I want dick...just not A dick), but if a guy doesn't have edge to him, he's just boring like melba toast.

Also, he can't just have edge on the surface and be all mushy on the inside. If I wanted that, I'd be with a woman. There's a guy I was very interested in, but having seen the real him...I'm no longer interested. He turned out to be a total dork, and weak-minded. I no longer have any attraction for him.

Just be who you are.

 

[wifeofalargeman]

That's a big 10-4. I don't even know where to start on this. What happened to two people going through life together sharing the joy and the pain, and helping each other become what they ought to be? A relationship is all about the dynamics of shifting needs and support, loving and being loved, etc. Its not about dominance, submission and mind games. Any generalizations about who should "have the power" has no meaning when it comes to a mature and healthy relationship.

I totally agree and have found as I get older I don't have the time or need the hassel of a bunch of emotional, mental games from friends or my husband and thank God they feel the same. There is something to be said for the loving support of people who truely care about you and the fullfillment one feels when reciprocating.

 

[Ethyl]

Women are viscous when let loose.

So you're saying we're sticky? Glutinuous? What does that have to do with anything? :tongue:

Fortunately they're not often let loose, so some don't realize it.

Yeah, it's true. Men are not known for their bloodthirsty ways.

And when Kipling wrote
"When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,"
he wasn't whistling Dixie.

Some of us like to keep a clean house, is all.

All kidding aside, i'll agree. Women can be just as depraved and savage as men given the right circumstances. It's all in the execution (no pun intended).

 

[DC_DEEP]

Many many issues all rolled into one here. I won't make a sweeping generalization (mainly because my female friends do not fit this description... I tend to choose stronger women as friends) but there are an alarming number of women who, even though they deny it, seek out the "bad boy" type, and reject men who treat them "too well." I have worked with and gone to school with too many for it to be coincidence. Then they wonder why they aren't happy, or feel controlled or trapped. It's really sad. If they would acknowledge their tendencies and deal with them, they could have much healthier relationships. And there are men who fit that description, too.

Sadly enough, most people do not reconcile the difference between what they think they want in a partner with what they really need in a partner. It isn't unhealthy to be in a relationship with someone who complements you; it is unhealthy if you get into that type of relationship while still maintaining that you are equals. Some people are naturally just more submissive, some more dominant. Understanding and accepting that, and setting ground rules, can make a seemingly unequal relationship more balanced. Allowing appearances to force you into uncomfortable space is a recipe for disaster.

And by the way, MercurialBliss, I think you make a fabulous thick liquid. Viscosity becomes you.

 

[tripod]

Is everybody ready for a lesson?

Well... let's see... Homo Sapiens Sapiens appeared about 100,000 BC. It wasn't until about 90,000 years of complete prehistoric life that we developed cities and agriculture and laws and such. So, we have been "civilized" for only about 12,000 years, and only about 1000 of those years spent as modern humans. Women were savagely beat and repressed for about 90% of our existence on this earth. In order for a woman to survive, she relied upon the hunting skills of the males (I have no idea how this developed because women make excellent hunters and the female species of animals are usually better hunters than their male counterparts). The males who were the MOST clever, had the best success at hunting and keeping their clan safe from threats. Cleverness became the ONE trait that was valued above ALL others, you could be big and strong, but if you weren't clever, there was not much of a chance for your survival, all woman wanted to pass on the "clever" gene to their children. Clever men are not by any means "nice" men. They were competitive men and controlling men, and they were prone to bursts of explosive violence. These traits were valued by women for the survival of our species for about 90% of our existance on this planet.

Okay... fast forward to the "modern age", and you will find that our attitudes and surface thoughts have changed, and we look a bit more cool than our prehistoric forebearers, but we are physiological carbon copies of our ancestors. We are nothing but less hairy (some of us) cavemen and cavewomen. Women STILL are biologicaly drawn to mate with the most clever male (regardless if he is an asshole, controlling, or violent). That is just a biological urge and has nothing to do with our conscious enlightenment, which allows us to see violence and control as NEGATIVE things. We are still struggling with our lives, with one foot in the prehistoric age and the other in the conscious enlightenment that we have enjoyed as man for the last 1000 years or so. The women who are drawn to men who are jerks and who mistreat their women, are just playing out a scenario that has taken place for thousands of years. Clever men and women have been the impetus for our development and we can thank those genes for the modern society that we all enjoy right now.

This is all good and well, but as man, we need to weed out the violent and controlling genes that we share as clean shaven cavemen and women. These genes are, at this point in our development, not needed any more. The genes that we need more of are the cooperative and empethatic ones. So, the women that are drawn to assholes are just a liitle prehistoric, and women like Kotchanski and Mercurial Bliss are the future of our planet. If you women want to go out and get pregnant by some asshole and divorce him when the baby is old enough to walk and think for himself, then go right ahead. Just know that you are clogging up the world with your fucking bullshit offspring that wanna oppress others and come out on top. We need more people that want to cooperate and share. The world's resources are dwindling, and we are headed for an energy crisis that threatens to undue all of the advances that man has achieved in it's some 100,000 odd years of struggle with the environment and themselves. Ladies... kick the assholes to the curb and find yourselves an intelligent, caring man.

 

[DC_DEEP]

<...>
So, the women that are drawn to assholes are just a liitle prehistoric, and women like Kotchanski and Mercurial Bliss are the future of our planet. If you women want to go out and get pregnant by some asshole and divorce him when the baby is old enough to walk and think for himself, then go right ahead. Just know that you are clogging up the world with your fucking bullshit offspring that wanna oppress others and come out on top. We need more people that want to cooperate and share. The world's resources are dwindling, and we are headed for an energy crisis that threatens to undue all of the advances that man has achieved in it's some 100,000 odd years of struggle with the environment and themselves. Ladies... kick the assholes to the curb and find yourselves an intelligent, caring man.

:biggrin1: Tripod, I think I love you!