Why Don’t Men Like Smart, Strong, Successful Women?
Hi, Evan.
I’m 41, happy with my rounded self, smart, direct, and articulate.
I’ve been told that my lack of dates is due to:
1) Men don’t like smart, direct women, and
2) I’m centered, which sends the message that I don’t need anyone.
Are men really that insecure? I’m certainly not going to be less than I am just for someone else’s insecurities.
Tell me honestly, Evan – are there any good men out there who appreciate a woman who knows herself?
Michelle
Hi, Evan:
I don’t know what is going on and why I’m lacking luck in finding Mr. Right. I am educated, refined, and a self made millionaire by age 34. I am good looking. Many men, women, elderly, and children of all ages have told me so. People also told me that I am one of nicest and sweetest people they have ever met. Even though I am 36, most of the people I meet would think that I am only 26. Unfortunately, I have been through all kinds of online dates in the last two and a half years. CEOs, doctors, lawyers, hedge fund mangers, business owners, professional athletes, actors, etc… When I am not interested in them, they work for the relationship day and night. When I am committed to them and act nice and devoted, they start to look elsewhere. Anyway, in short, I need some serious help and hope to hear back from you soon. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Catherine
Great letters. Important question. But first I want to start off with a hypothetical email from a man.
Dear Evan,
I’m what you’d call a “nice guy.” I make a good living, I’m pretty attractive, and I treat women well. In fact, all of my female friends comment on what a great catch I am. But then I see those same women dating jerks. Yet they would never consider going out with me! So what do you think? Am I cursed to be alone just because I know how to be kind to women? Isn’t being nice a good quality? What’s wrong with women these days? Please let me know.
Jason
It’s not BECAUSE a guy is “nice” that he’s not attracting women.
Men reading this might empathize with Jason. Women reading this may feel bad for him, yet also want to him to know that it’s not BECAUSE he’s nice that he’s not attracting women. It’s because he’s doesn’t have masculine energy. It’s because he constantly seeks the approval of others. It’s because he’s not sexually aggressive. It’s because he sacrifices his personal power to be conciliatory. These are common attributes of nice guys, yet nice guys think that women don’t like nice guys BECAUSE they’re nice.
Not true. Women want nice guys – nice guys with opinions who stand up for themselves and know how to take control.
Smart women are very much like nice guys.
“I’m intelligent, I’m direct, I’m successful, yet I can’t seem to find a quality guy who appreciates me.”
Men like smart women. I do. My male coaching clients do as well. So how is it that all these successful men are not connecting with all these successful women?…
 |
Why He Disappeared is the smart, strong, successful woman's guide to understanding men. If you want to learn how men think, and rediscover how to have meaningful relationships - all from a man's point of view - click here to learn Why He Disappeared. |
Do You Want to Attract the Partner of Your Dreams?
If so, sign up for my free dating and relationship newsletter and receive my free eBook, The 5 Massive Mistakes You're Making In Your Love Life - And How to Turn Them Around Instantly. Simple and effective advice to jumpstart your love life.
591 Comments »Filed Under Dating
Shari 1
Hi Evan!
I discovered what you’ve written through taking a self evaluation test. I got these lists of great traits for myself: persuasive, risk taker, competitive, pursues change, confident, socially skilled, inspiring, open & direct. Then on the next page were what you label downfalls, or what the test said was the way people who don’t think exactly like me may see me: pushy, intimidating, overbearing, restless, impatient, manipulative, abrasive, reactive & dominating. Those were some hard words to swallow. It was hard too facing the fact that though I didn’t see myself that way, some others did.
I think it’s not that these smart, successful women are exactly those things either, but they are perceived that way by some – not all – of the men they come in contact with. The trick to that is knowing how the man you’re with is perceiving you, and being able to tone down or turn off the traits he might find as reason to dump you for someone more agreeable.
I used to think this was dumbing myself down, or playing to the masses, being fake, or not true to myself. But what I realized is there’s a reason they call this the dating “game” and if you want to play, you have to learn the rules.
This doesn’t mean I’m not who I am around men, it just means that I use the same skills in my personal life I learned to use in my professional. There are some meetings I can go into and run the show, and others where I have to be subordinate. So I knew if I could learn how to do that professionally and make a success of myself, that I could learn that personally too.
BeenThruTheWars 2
In Washington, where testosterone is found in the air in greater parts per billion than oxygen, the word “bitch” is an acronym. It stands for, “Boys, I’m Taking Charge Here.” And that’s what happens when women try to “take charge” in a romantic relationship in the same way that they take charge in the workplace. They can’t seem to find any worthwhile men who will stick around long enough to appreciate their many stellar qualities… because they are behaving in a man’s eyes like one of the other dudes he has to spend all day doing battle with. How tiresome. Like it or not, a different approach is called for in the romantic arena. (“Men are different than women” — repeat as necessary.)
Ladies, it’s not a matter of giving anything up, or altering who you are in any fundamental way. It’s a matter of accepting that “He wants to be the boy” on dates, and letting him, for the sake of nurturing that spark that’s so critical to success in romantic relationships. We female go-getters work alongside men all day long — taking tons of initiative, being aggressive and competitive, putting out fires and ruling our little corner of the world with unswerving confidence and aplomb. But when the 5 o’clock whistle blows, it’s time to switch roles… if you want to be in a happy, peaceful, compatible, long-term relationship with a masculine energy man. Find your own feminine energy reserve and embrace it. Learn to compartmentalize! Try it. What do you have to lose? Remember that famous quote about “the definition of insanity… ”
If you want to go on “being the man” regardless, hey — more power to ya. Date guys who are dreamers and have no drive, who like to nest and pick out wallpaper (or sit home and drink all day and watch sports on T.V. instead of working for a living). They will savor be taken care of while you go out and slay those dragons to put meat on the table. If you truly are a masculine energy woman, things should work out great. If not… at some point you will burn out, feel drained and start resenting your man for not slaying a few damn dragons himself once in a while. Yes, you can kill your own spiders in the bathroom at 3 a.m., you’ve done it forever, but doggone it, wouldn’t it be nice if someone ELSE took over sometimes? Unfortunately, that’s the point at which conflict starts… it’s not what either of you signed up for, so you both wind up miserable.
I found your remarks so telling, Michelle: “When I am not interested in them, they work for the relationship day and night. When I am committed to them and act nice and devoted, they start to look elsewhere.”
I know Evan is not a fan of “The Rules,” but… what you are describing is the classic push-pull male/female dynamic that is so aptly described in that series of books. When you make the man do most of the work to capture you, he pulls out all the stops. He feels challenged and alive. You’ve given him a job to do! And by golly, he’s gonna do it. He’s going to win over the fair maiden. When we pursue men or present ourselves on dates as their equivalents, and advertise our many accomplishments instead of looking, smelling and sounding pretty and graciously accepting what THEY have to offer US, the opposite happens. We take their jobs away from them. They don’t feel that spark, they feel like they’re out with one of the boys, so they go off in search of someone who will make them feel strong and noble and good about what they have to offer a woman.
If you want to really understand why your successful career strategies don’t carry over into the romantic realm, study Patricia Allen’s “Getting to ‘I Do.’” I think you’ll recognize yourself (painfully so) from the very first chapter. There’s a lot of food for thought in her approach, which is all about the masculine vs. feminine energies Evan so aptly described, presented with ways to identify which you truly are, deep down, and adjust your dating strategies accordingly.
I was in your shoes. Completely and totally. Over-the-top bright, successful, financially set, my career life an embarrassment of riches. All those things are still true of me… but it wasn’t until I completely overhauled my dating approach that I found the love of my life and true happiness in a wonderful marriage. I still have to work at it every day; I find myself trying to be the leader, telling my husband what to do and how to do it. I have to bite my tongue and let him at least have a turn sometimes.
I don’t view it as being submissive or giving away pieces of myself; instead, I am giving him a wonderful gift: letting him be HIS truest self with me. (And not nagging him. That, too, is a gift!)
Paul 3
I think in this context women are reaping a little of what they have been sowing. You really hit the nail on the head when you said it is pretty difficult to be a man these days when there are a whole generation of women asking “why do we need men”. It’s a shame. This isn’t exactly the age of the man, it’s the age of the woman if anything. Excuse me if I sound a little resentful, I admittidly am. Over the last 50 years or so our roles have gotten reversed and our society is suffering for it, and so are these women. We’ve got a whole bunch of men who are afraid to be real men, and women who are afraid to be real women. It could be said that they are getting exactly what they wanted; independance, careers, etc and these are the by-products of that movement. Much of what women have acheived are what WE are supposed to be out there acheiving! We are the ones who are supposed to be out there slaying the dragons for you ladies! For every woman making $50K +,there is a man who is not, and trying to support his family. Do women really want Mr Mom? Deep down they don’t. Not really. It’s not natural. But being a strong leader type is not exactly politically correct or honored in todays culture is it? Either is being in charge, yet that is what we as men are wired for, that is why we would rather have a woman who agrees with our opinions rather than have a bunch of her own. In the end, woman want and need to be loved unconditionally, and men want and need to be respected unconditionally. If we could get back to that, we’d all be a lot happier in our relationships.
tom 4
Count me against the men who ADORE strong, independent, intellligent women. But also count me as someone who finds many of them can’t get out of their professional shells when dating. From my own experience a reasonable number of professional women have a tough time letting their hair down and when with them seem to feel as if I were attending a 24 hour Martha Stewart festival. Now, the professional women who are genuine, authentic, intelligent, DOWN TO EARTH, affectionate, caring, nurturing, supportive and fun to be with…that’s an irresistible combination in my view! Heck, ANY woman with those qualities is worth keeping!
I’m every bit as successful as Michelle and so am very comfortable around money and success. But in the final analysis the size of the pocketbook, the position in the boardroom, the model of the car does absolutely nothing to make a woman appealing. Is she fun? Does she let her hair down? Is she open to actually getting her jeans dirty during a vigorous, picturesque hike? Does she relish it when I play with her hair, or moan it’s no longer perfect? Does she set aside some time to actually listen to me, or is she answering her email, texts and cell phone calls constantly? Is she affectionate, or is she always in professional form even when away from the office? Is she secure enough in herself to date men who may not fit her “ideal” as far as their own professional stature, weight, height, etc., is concerned, or does she limit her choices to men with very narrow external preferences? Is she open to more than the missionary position and mind blowing oral sex and great fun in bed, or mechanical and routine?
Will she at least pretend she loves giving oral sex and moan every once in awhile, or is she real quiet and making it obvious it’s a chore?
Can she handle it when I am being just a guy, or judgmental on every small detail? Is she incessantly reminding me about my flaws, or actually gets a kick out of them? Does she realize sex is a great way to get intimate with a man, even through we know intimacy is a great way for a man to have sex with a woman, but will indulge me nevertheless since sex is on our minds 23.99 hours of the day? Is she on a constant search for clothes and material improvement, or will she actually attend an event with me she may not like?
I empathize with these two women. Yes, there are men who are very insecure around successful women, but there are hordes of quality guys who are very secure around successful women and I suspect Catherine and Michelle have been too narrow in their search for the right guy. Most of the “right guys” have a flaw or two or more (maybe an extra 10/15 pounds, maybe they are short, maybe they work in jeans instead of a suit and tie) and it is because of these “flaws” they are often written off, for some successful, professional women, in my experience, deceive themselves, as Ev rightfully hit the nail on, that because those attributes are traits making a man appealing, it makes them appealing as well. It doesn’t. Men want to spend time with women who still have a little girl in them, occasional mothering (we love our mothers and still need a little TLC from time to time and that’s not being insecure, it’s just being a guy), and who admire them for the men they are regardless of the professional status of either party in the relationship. And like Ev said, and maybe most importantly, we don’t want to be judged, that’s the quickest ticket for a lady to be out the door, whether we are successful ourselves or not. The ladies who are successful with men are usually those who are the least bit judgmental (I realize my own hypocrisy when making this statement for we are all making judgmental statements whenh making a comment on this excellent forum).
Speaking from personal experience, I suggest both of these ladies should enroll with Evan. It’s helped me immensely.
Kitty 5
Evan,
Well said and congrats on being able to use yourself as an example. I have def put myself into the “I’m such a catch, what’s wrong with all the men who are intimidated by my superior intelligence” catagory. Recently I’ve begun leaving my professional self behind and thinking about being more feminine and nurturing and not having to be such a smarty pants…and it seems to be working.
Keep up the honest work Evan.
Kitty
Jules 6
Evan, I think that you offer some really good insights and really hit the nail on the head with this post. I could see a lot of myself in Michelle and have a tendency to really enjoy talking business with men. I have been told by a girl friend that this sometimes puts men off, especially when I can contribute intelligently to a conversation we are having about their job/career. After reading your post, I could see how my ‘intelligent, direct and successful’ demeanor can come across as something different to guys. I think this happened with one guy I dated last year where eventually our conversations about work became a turn off to him.
Anyway, while keeping myself from being a shrinking violet, I have been learning to let my guy be the man or let him feel like he is in charge. I am certainly not acting submissive, but I’ve been learning how to let him take the reins and steer. I don’t always have to be the one driving. So far it’s working a lot better for me.
Naomi 7
Evan,
Your response to Michelle and Catherine may be empirically true to some extent — that is, that strong, successful women are not as attractive to some men because these women display traits that are turn offs to guys and lack traits that some guys are looking for. However, your proposed solution — that women should tone down undesirable traits and work on developing more desirable ones — is what I take issue with. Instead, why not propose that men should work on being okay with a woman who is his equal in terms of power, opinions, intelligence, and status, and, indeed, that we all should work towards bringing more gender equality to our personal relationships? This approach has been taken over the last several decades with success in education, employment, and other public arenas, and we continue to work on making more progress in these areas. Why should women have to change to accommodate outmoded male preferences born out of stereotypical, traditional gender roles?
And of course I would make the same suggestion regarding your advice to “nice guys” who feel as though they have trouble dating. Instead of men like Jason working on beefing up their masculine traits, perhaps the women who reject them should work on accepting men who are conciliatory and don’t feel the need to dominate them.
The personal is political; as long as sex-role stereotyping plays a role in personal life, it will continue to limit options in public life.
Naomi
krzysztof 8
Naomi,
I agree with you that its unfortunate that some men are turned off by strong and successful women. But your advice, and the comparison to public life it is drawn from, are both misguided.
You suggest that we handle the issue of men being turned off by successful women by convincing men to be turned on by successful women. Sure, but if that were feasible we likely wouldnt be having this discussion. And how exactly should men go about working on changing what they want in a partner?
The personal in this case is not political; it iswell, personal. That is why the analogy to reforms in the public arena is off: the public arena, being public, must weigh everyones preferences equally. It is not surprising, moreover, that such reforms are achieved through legislation. I am not sure that the equivalent means of approaching mens sexual preferences would be all that desirable… In other words, standards in public life are driven by considerations (fairness, equality, justice) that are absent from sexual preferences. The reason why sexual preferences remain personal (and why they should) is because they dont affect the collectivity in the way that say, education opportunities do.
One thing that I do think (and hope) will happen is that the very reforms you mention in education and employment (and one might add politics), will slowly drive a change in sexual norms and mens preferences.
Until then, women who find that their success drives men away are left with two choices: tone down those traits, as Evan suggests, or keep looking for someone who will appreciate them. The latter may be healthier. And men attracted by strong, successful women exist (Im one of them).
krzysztof
Moxie 9
I’ve received similar advice letters like this and always have one standard response.
“Do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?”
Any time I hear a female client say that she thinks that she “intimidates” men due to her education, career, demeanor or looks I can immediately pick out at least 5 other, more tangible, reasons for why she has a hard time connecting with men.
Hear this: Men are NOT intimidated by a strong, independent, successful and/or outspoken. They are, however, completely turned off by a ball buster. Many women failt to see that line between being outgoing and aggressive, confident and arrogant, outspoken and opinionated.
” However, your proposed solution that women should tone down undesirable traits and work on developing more desirable ones is what I take issue with.”
Stop right there. See what you’re doing? You’re debating. You’re arguing. In your first sentence you agree with what Evan said, then you turn around and pick apart his argument and turn it into “but why should I compromise who I am?” Nobody is suggesting you lower your standards. What we’re suggesting is that you should try to increase your options. Do you want to be right? Okay, then don’t complain when every guy who comes within a foot of you quickly tires of your 24/7 dominant personality. The key to any good relationship is a willingness to be vulnerable and to submit. It’s the key to flirting. Somebody has to lead or else you’ll both be stepping on each other’s toes throughout the whole song. As an alpha female myself, I can tell you that even my female to female relationships require that oen of us be willing to bend and acquiece at times. We do that because we care about each other and prefer to avoid conflict. I’ll bet you do that with your female friends, no? So then why is it compromising if you do it with a man?
There’s a reason why two magnets, when positioned the same way directly at each other, repel and why, if you turn one of the magnets 180 degrees, they click.
Women with a distinctive male energy often confuse men. Sure, they can visually see she’s a female, but all of her non-verbal cues (posture, facial expressions, tone of voice) are distinctly male. That confuses the male brain and can trick the brain into treating you and “seeing” you as a male. The sam ecan be said for women when dealing with a “nice guy.” They’re “seeing” his female energy – the submissive, demure, vulnerable part of him. That’s why we’re not attracted to them usually.
At least that’s what I think.
Evan Marc Katz 10
The primary reason, Naomi, that I advise individuals to tone down their individual traits, is because that’s a realistic solution. Change starts on a personal level, yet most people are always screaming for everyone else to change. That’s not how it works. If a man asks me for advice, I’m going to tell him what HE should do differently – not what WOMEN should do differently, and vice versa. Would the world be a better place if men and women truly embraced equality in all of its forms? Sure. But I’m not going to make that happen. Let’s work on taking care of what we can do as individuals instead of screaming for tens of millions of people to change years of societally ingrained behavior.
NML 11
Evan, I read your blog every day but I must say that this has been my favourite post so far. One of the particular reasons why I like your posts is because coming from a male perspective, you’re refreshingly honest.
Every day I explain to women that much of the issues that we have going with men are our own projections. Yes there are men out there that do feel threatened by some of the qualities that these women mentioned, but these women are focusing on these qualities as if it’s all that encompasses them, and that their looks and these qualities make up for any perceived ‘negatives’. I always ask “What could you be doing differently?” It doesn’t remove what someone has done but it lets you have the responsibility of change because we’re the only people that we can control.
The issue of ‘needing’ men is a fundamental, hardwired requirement that is unlikely to change. Needing or wanting a man and even leaning on him a little doesn’t make you less of a woman, or less independent. It’s called life and relationships.
It takes the ability to look past the surface, resume type stuff and take a deeper look at ourselves to know what we’re really putting out there. I used to think I was unlucky in love with the same qualities that those women spoke about but on further reflection discovered that I was commitment-phobic, aloof, and I had sh*t taste in men!
Men and women have ideas about what they think are the perceived qualities and characteristics for being an optimum partner but we are often wide of the mark. We need to get back to basics and be real.
Thanks for a great read this morning!
Bev 12
I see the true problem here. Not that I’m smart at all but thru life, I have realized that women are being stronger in more masculine ways simply because men have not done their part and we have HAD to take over. We didn’t want to, honest to God. In my last relationship, the guy was at my house 90% of the time. Would he ever notice that the pool needed cleaned or even keep his bathroom clean? NO!! It caused great resentment because I had added pressure from this and the good stuff was too minut to overcome it. Result: better off without him.
Andrea 13
Moxie: Your comment “Women with a distinctive male energy often confuse men. Sure, they can visually see shes a female, but all of her non-verbal cues (posture, facial expressions, tone of voice) are distinctly male. That confuses the male brain and can trick the brain into treating you and seeing you as a male.” resonated with me. Something clicked. I get it.
After the last guy I dated told me “it” wasn’t there for him I wondered if I wasn’t “girlie” enough, if the fact that I like ‘guy’ movies, sometimes drink beer, act like one of the guys and got along well with his guy friends were turn offs in a sense even though I’m very girlie in a visual/physical way. This experience framed how I interpreted your comment. This is good. Sometimes I forget to “tone down” certain characteristics even though I know that I need to.
Baggage Reclaim - Dating, singles, relationships, sex tips and advice blog for men and women. » Who do you think you are? 14
[...] at Advice from a Single Dating Expert, Evan responds to a few readers who want to know why men don’t like strong, successful women. [...]
mrs. vee 15
If I may offer up one alternative perspective from my personal experience…
It seems people are drawing a strong correlation here between women who are strongly critical of the men they date and those Type As who turn off men with their success and masculine energy. So, before anyone goes any further conflating the two issues, lets separate them.
1) Its an issue for a woman to constantly berate the man in her life and make him feel hes a disappointment to her. This type of behavior is NOT limited to professionally successful, masculine energy type of women. I know plenty of girlish mothers, aunts & girlfriends of all tax brackets, who suffer from this issue. In fact, I suspect its more a problem with the female communication style in general than with relative degrees of gender-specific success.
2) Its a different (but occasionally related) issue for a woman to expect her suitors to be captivated by her Curriculum Vitae and then explain away a failed date with: He was just intimidated by me.
To preface my story, I too, once fancied myself as a bit of a prize – cute and well-educated. I set high goals for myself and reached them. My professional life came surprisingly easy to me, and thus I generally walked around very impressed with myself.
So anyway, in my late twenties, I found myself seriously involved with a man who wanted to marry me. He was charismatic and funny, intense and intelligent. There was only one small problem, though: I couldnt stop finding things wrong with him that I wanted to change. He was tactless. A mamas boy. He had obnoxious friends. He was poor. He was vain. He was afraid of being misunderstood, so he talked incessantly. His constant anxiety had an effeminate energy to it, and so conversely, his bawdy tendencies (i.e. flirting with/ogling other women) seemed incongruous and compoundingly off-putting.
We spent the last months of our relationship in battle. Im sure I was driving him nuts because to his credit he was trying to improve himself for me and consequently walking on eggshells all the time. And I was driving myself crazy because, instead of focusing on the poor guys positives, it was like I was forever meditating on his faults.
When it ended, I was a complete mess. I didnt like the nagging shrew Id become in the relationship. Id totally lost sight of why we were together in the first place. And because Im the self-reflective type, I took perhaps more than my share of the blame for the demise of our relationship. I concluded Id been too Type A, and needed to tone it down for the next guy. For all the reasons people are talking about here, I decided I should have spent my time loving and supporting him, and not challenging his shortcomings. Id felt that perhaps my personal accomplishments had only amplified his insecurities and vowed to keep them tucked away next time.
My point is that it turned out I was making the same error in thinking that I see running through this discussion thread. People are unnecessarily connecting the dots between a woman being proud of her success and being overbearing/critical. Theyre conflating Issue #1 and Issue #2.
Heres what I learned: My conclusions were wrong. After I broke up with the man in my story, I had about two other boyfriends before meeting the one I married. Since Story Man, I found I didnt have to conceal my (*eyeroll*) personal power from the men I dated. Not one of them elicited from me the desire to nag or correct them. It wasnt my high income or forwardness that led to problems. Today, my lovely husband earns a little less than me, but he wins about every other argument. He never felt threatened by my tax bracket or the property I owned. He tears down and rebuilds the deck, mends fences, assembles bikes for me, dominates us athletically, provides valuable input for all decisions we make as a family, but he still encourages my successes (because theyre OUR successes, really). He was right for me. He was easy. And just like Evan deserves an easy girlfriend, so do we all, no matter how gender-bendingly successful we may be.
Looking back, with Story Man, I dont say to myself I wish Id toned it down and hadnt nagged him for the sake of the relationship. I just shouldnt have nagged him PERIOD, and gotten out of the relationship as soon as I realized I couldnt accept his flaws unconditionally. We could have saved months of heartache. With no disrespect to him, Im glad I broke up with Story Man, because I believe hes happily involved with someone else now, and it ultimately paved the way for me to meet the dreamboat love of my life.
Its not that I disagree with the advice given in this discussion thread. If you are a forceful, accomplished woman who attributes her relationship failures to male insecurity, then please do sit up and take notice of the valuable advice dispensed here today.
If however, you are a successful woman, currently with a partner you often find yourself frequently fighting with and wishing were somehow different if your relationship is characterized by a struggle to suppress your critical thinking faculties well, yes perhaps youre letting your Type A tendencies rule your perspective on the relationship and you could choose to try toning it down a bit. But consider also that some men are close, but quite right for you (and some genuinely do need to change
), and you could choose to simply move on. The solution isn’t always to suck it up and persevere 100% of the time. From my experience, having faith, an open mind, the courage to let go of a bird in hand, and a LOT of patience will lead you to a loving man whom you wont want to change a thing about.
Susan 16
Evan,
What a great blog! And, as always, it’s interesting reading everyone’s comments. When I first read the two letters that opened this post, I definitely felt a jolt of recognition. But as I read further, and then all these comments, that feeling has faded.
You see, that whole “men are intimidated by your intelligence” thing is something I’ve been told by well-meaning friends my whole life. But I don’t buy it. Honestly, I’m probably reasonably up there on the intelligence scale, but mostly I’m just a very curious person. I read constantly. I go to physics lectures for fun. I’m very cultured. I persue very “intellectual” pastimes because I’m interested and curious. But I’m not well-educated, particurally successful, wealthy, or aggressive in relationships.
I don’t nag. I don’t criticize. (I’m far too insecure to be a difficult woman.) Also, I’m very, very feminine, i.e. long hair, dresses and skirts every day, loves to cook, and extremely affectionate. So, yes, some folks might think I’m a brainiac, but I still read the occasional Dean Koontz novel. I’m hardly an intimidating person. My point is, not all intelligent women are Type A individuals. We’re not all any one thing. I think Evan’s advice is good, but he still hasn’t told me that secret advice that fixes my whole life. I’d better keep reading the blog.
Moxie 17
” (Im far too insecure to be a difficult woman.) ”
And therein lies your challenge. If you can see and identify your insecurity, then you can bet that your non-verbal communication and non-verbal cues reveal that to whomever you’re talking to. Lack of eye contact, posture, soft voice, rapid rate of speech (inquisitive is great, just don’t fire off questions.)
MollyB 18
“Just someone who makes his life EASIER and more pleasant.”
Are women allowed to want this as well? Mis-match on this front seems to be the real problem.
Most of the men I know value strong, successful women. Complaints to the contrary sound legit, but IMNSHO mask the woman’s own fear of commitment.
Camilla 19
In my relationship, I desire nothing more badly than to be able to turn off the type-A switch at night. Running a company, being my own sole source of support, paying a mortgage, and staying up on home repairs by myself is *exhausting.* I really miss feeling protected and loved, and would adore a man that wants to lead much/most of the time. To surrender and let go a bit would really balance me out. I *crave* that.
That said, I find that many of the men I meet aren’t as strong at leading as I need. I find that they either want me to lead (turn-off for me) or they want a woman who is weaker than they are.
So while I agree that strong women sometimes need to turn the leadership off, that alone seems like half the solution. For me, I’m also looking for someone who is naturally strong. I can tone down my own alpha-tendencies, but not to a level that is even weaker than some of the passive men I’ve been meeting.
I’m a strong woman that is silently begging to be led.
JimmyE 20
Camilla. the kind of men who want to lead are by definition ones who want a woman who is weaker then they are.
Camilla 21
JimmyE: Gotcha. I think I just need to find a man can be stronger than me. Then we’ll both be happy!
Ruth 22
After reading this thread, there is more confusion than ever. The successful men you know who are partnered, do they have partners who fit the descriptions mentioned in the article and responses?
Area they all in easy relationships? Are all, or even most, of their partners lacking in the traits listed above as undesirable? Do their partners make them feel superior, allow them to always lead and protect their egos? Not in my experience. That means there may be something else at work that is not being addressed.
I am 50 and ,like Camilla, would cherish a fella who appreciates who I am, and who recognizes that I appreciate who he is, too.
All successful single women are not bulldozers outside the workplace. Isn’t it interesting that is the automaic assumption, but a successful single man is not attached with any such prejudice?
Another question, Why does leading involve a weakest link? In most personal relationships, leaders change with the circumstances, depending on what one is good at. Some are better at driving, others better navigating. Why/how is it emasculating to share leadership based on who has is the most capable in a particular area?
I am involved in several male dominated groups, and the one consistent factor is, the ones who are married or in committed relationships are not partnered with their equals, typically ‘marrying down’. Yes, there are a few equally partnered, but the percentage is in the single digits.
The thing they privately (meaning not in the company of the partner)complain about is also consistent, the women spend too much money, don’t understand the man, and there isn’t much they can talk about once they exhaust the kids/house/checkbook issues. When asked why they stay in what sounds like mostly unfulfilling relationships, the reaction is either astonishment at the thought, or they can’t answer and give a blank look. Some of my male friends have actually asked me why their partners can’t be more like the women in our group!!
The flip side of that is, most professional women I know are also not partnered with their equals, also ‘marrying down’, with similar complaints as the men above. However, when asked why they stay in the relationship, the answer most often given is, there isn’t a better choice, they would love a more fullfilling relationship but it’s better than being alone.
This is not intended to sound arrogant or self grandizing and is difficult to write with the tone intended. Certainly none of us are without faults and weak spots, but I have had relationships with men who admit that I am what they thought they wanted. They have many compliments, and no big complaints. But, in moments of honesty, they admit they need someone who needs more fixing (an actual quote).
I don’t know if this is a generational issue, but most of the successful men I know are partnered with women who’s issues are much more intrusive than what has been described in this blog as undesirable. I have even been told, “You are great catch, I am just not ready yet.” And then they married someone whom they could complain about. I have considered that was said as just an excuse, but enough time has passed and subsequent conversations that doesn’t seem to be the case.
Just like men, sucessfull women mostly want to the appreciated for who they are. The message running through this blog subject seems to be that is the perogative of men, but women have to adjust to the man’s perception of what a relationship looks like or be alone.
Since there are so many more choices for a partner for men then for women, it seems the women are ones who will have choose between playing the game of changing or hiding who they really are, or being without a partner.
Hadley Paige 23
Why don’t men like smart strong successful women?
Speaking only for me >> smart I find attractive, strong I’ve got a problem with if strong means challenging me on everything. I get plenty of “challenging” at work from my male coworkers. What I seek in a woman for an LTR is kind, nurturing, feminine, fun, thoughtful, sexy, etc. I don’t need or want strong.
I believe that there is an inverse correlation ( to what degree is debatable) between women & their degree of “success” and the likelihood of finding the qualities I most value in a woman. Of course I am willing to take every woman as the individual they are but over time I have found the above observation to be largely true. I suppose its unfortunate for successful women if I represent the majority male view.
There are many mutually exclusive choices that we must make in our lives. I believe that this is one of them for women who wish to be in successful LTRs. (of course there may be a significant minority of experiences to the contrary.)
Bottom line for me is I want to be supported emotionally not “challenged”. It exhausting.
HS 24
Just so I understand:
Strong Man – admirable as a leader, someone to respect
Strong Woman – a challenger who makes men uncomfortable and is less feminine, nurturing, sexy etc because she has a bunch of her own opinions and is independent
Men – to be attractive to women can be kind, nurturing, masculine, fun, thoughtful, sexy, etc, strong and have opinions
Women – to be attractive to men must be kind, nurturing, feminine, fun, thoughtful, sexy, etc . . . but NOT strong, independent or have opinions
Men – Can be nurtured and emotionally supported and still be successful in their careers
Women – Must choose between career or to be nurturing and emotionally supportive to a man – but not both – also cannot be nurtured or emotionally supported if it doesn’t fit the man’s definition of masculine support/nurture.
Men – Get to have partners who agree with their opinions and not have “a bunch of their own”
Women – Get to be partnered only if they agree with their partners opinions without having “a bunch of their own”
Men -Don’t have to choose between being themselves and having a loving, commited relationship
Women – Have to choose between being themselves and having mutually loving, commited relationship
Guess that about sums it up!
Camilla 25
HS: You’re smart as a whip! *lmao*
Hadley Paige 26
To HS:
Having your own opinions is fine. Expressing repeatedly every preference that you can identify or “point you need to make” regardless of how small, stupid or inconsequential they are is not fine.
Women don’t have to choose between a career and a man, they have to choose between being opinionated, argumentative and independent (vs appreciating the qualities that men are about & being a woman who complements these qualities rather than mirroring them) and a man.
Freya 27
In my opinion, I don’t think women should have to “hide” or “tone down” traits. I can see it would make life “easier”, but only if you are looking for a return to times when the search for fulfillment of an idealised relationship was a social expectation.These days I think we can be more honest with ourselves and not have to feel pressured to try to fit in with expectations … though that honesty is a social learning curve, as is this forum … and one consequence of living in such times being that it should not be an issue of a comparison of traits between men and women per se, so much as an honest look at what each of us really finds attractive in a partner. In other words, a comparison of traits you have, and traits you crave in another, regardless of whether you are a man or a woman.
This may make it hard to find a perfect fit, but then if you are busy “hiding” traits you certainly won’t get off to a great start to find someone that truly suits you! The trick is to use your intuition as a guide rather than be critical of the potential partner … accept that no one is perfect anyway, but do not compromise to the degree that you are hiding traits hard won. There are many shades of grey, and I myself am an example of a woman who both embraces very feminine qualities, but also is proud of the fact that I have a great survival instinct, and have developed more “male” skills that have enabled me to get through life to date. In fact, not just get through … but thrive on my own terms!
As a consequence, I am not looking for a man I can project those hard earned traits onto, pretending they are not mine (I don’t like to play games) but am actually attracted more to sweeter, gentler, quieter guys. After reading all the posts above, I realise I’m looking for the same traits men apparently are in a woman, yet I’m heterosexual. I actually have had a long term relationship with a guy like this, and was very happy! Pity he ended up falling for an even more aggressive female!
My point is, this issue is not black and white, and so the solution is not one thing or the other, but simply an honest questioning of what traits, traditional or otherwise, you are looking for in a partner of either sex, and being open to finding that.
gsh 28
I keep seeing the word “nuturing” crop up in terms of what men want out of women. If I understand the implication correctly, men are looking for a non-judgmental support system, a cheerleader, if you will.
Here’s the thing, however: lots of women have spent their entire lives fighting expectations for and opinions on their ability to do. . .well, pretty much everything. Women have learned to succeed because they believe they can–they have formed strong, internal support systems.
As you might imagine, this takes up an enormous amount of energy. So is it at all surprising that being expected to dole out further energy to support and nuture men might make us the tiniest bit frustrated?
I mean, my god, if we can support and nuture ourselves, then so can men. My ideal would be to find someone who can deal with his own issues, who is able to see that he can do whatever he wants and does not need external approval and coaching. I don’t want to be a coach, a mother or a cheerleader–I want to be a peer, a partner.
Julie 29
I’m an incredibly smart, strong, successful and attractive 27 year old woman. At first I was distraught at the lack of long term relationships, and thought there may be something wrong with me.
However, I have come to realize that while yes, it is true that most men cannot and/or don’t want to date me, this does not mean that I actually have any desire to ever change, adapt, or be “nurturing”, “gentle”, or “let him be the man”, for any man. I never want to be the lesser sex in any relationship. This does not mean that I won’t make sacrifices or compromises for the relationship, but I can’t ever sacrifice my most treasured personality traits for anyone. I cannot have a boyfriend if it means he will shadow my brilliance.
I accept myself completely for who I am, and will not change just so I can be in a relationship where I am not completely myself. I wish more women like me would also keep up their self respect and not become some “little girl” just so that they can find a boyfriend.
I will gladly live alone on my own means. My multi-millionaire and hopefully before I’m 40 – billionaire – means.
Ryan H 30
What kind of man wants to date a Hillary Clinton? Not me!
Who wants to date Donald Trumps daughter? I do
Success is relative are you the corporate kiss ass who climbed the ladder or are you the successful business owner?
How many 0000′s are in your bank account?
If you want that entitlement then you will be perceived that way. SHOW THE LIGHTER SIDE OF YOU. If your not going to show that side then your obviously still too focused in a career not a relationship.
Have you reached the peak of your career and looking for man to come into your life? All these complaints is because these men are in it for short term not the long haul which is what your probably looking for.
BOTTOM LINE: Don’t search for it because it will be like a numbers game but just go with the flow and the right guy will come. It bothers me that women whine, complain, over analyze about why this guy is that way towards them.
Have you noticed how many men sold their porsches for a minivan the roles have changed quite a bit
Ryan H 31
1) Men dont like smart, direct women, and
there are men out there that like to be told what to do.
2) Im centered, which sends the message that I dont need anyone.
stability? your sitting on thousand feet of concrete?
if you knew what you wanted you wouldn’t worry about the ‘lack of dates’
i don’t believe the first letter too general and conclusive. There is no objective. I beleive there are more deep issues with the one who wrote that letter.
To the 2nd letter: It’s a dating game you have to play it to win it. People want to work for something. It’s like segments of negotiations before getting to an actual commitment. It’s full of cat and mouse games and take aways with a trap like tom and jerry
it’s an art form that is mastered through experience.
3rd letter: Nice guy is the worst positive insult I’ve ever heard in my life. It’s the total opposite of what a real woman wants except for the personality traits that she would want from you. Women thinks about a brad bit exterior with a sensitive trustworthy nice guy(which he is) too bad he’s got one of the hottest chicks on the planet!
verbosity 32
Here is my hypothesis – the smart, strong, uber-successful woman wants a man who is smarter, stronger, and more successful than she. Remember, this woman is still raised (by family media, etc.) with the belief that a man should be there to take care of the woman’s needs (look at other posts elsewhere). These smart, highly motivated women will not be happy with a man who earns less than her, who is not assertive, and who is more traditionally feminine, for lack of a better term. These women will therefore look for men who are more ‘man’ than her.
The sad thing is this hypothesis has a negative result for women. I say this because the vast majority of very successful men do not want women to challenge them in every little facet of their personal lives. Very successful people of both sexes often spend long days in high conflict, high pressure situations. The successful men I know and have as clients desire partners that help to temper that aspect of their lives. So, with an ever-shrinking pool of men who are willing to date these uber-motivated women, you find that women are frustrated.
It would therefore seem that some of these women could benefit from a paradigm shift.
As an attorney, I will not date other attorneys, doctors, or other ‘hard-charging’ occupations. Why? having dated the whole gamut, I have found that almost universally, conversations are only about work, getting ahead, and competitive. I seek warmer traits in women I date. That is my preference.
Every time this subject comes up I am reminded of an argument I got into with an ex-girlfriend of several years, another lawyer. We were in Costco (where I didn’t like going) when she said to me, “I hate the way you push the cart.” WTF?
One man’s opinion….
Jacky 33
to Verbosity…
more man than her… very interesting!
Megan 34
Oddly enough I feel like I am the opposite of what is described here. At work I am aggressive, I stand up for myself, I don’t sugarcoat my opinions and I’m very focused. However when it comes to men I am very nurturing, I give them EVERY bit of myself, my time, my heart, my affection you name it. Of course i’m not a total doormat but more often than not looking back I see opportunities in the relationship that I should have been more like my work self and stood up for my opinion or position in a situation. Then eventually the guy gets sick of me giving giving giving and its over. Who is to say whether standing up for myself along the way would have changed the outcome but my point with regard to this article is that its about balance. Don’t leave your witty, articulate, powerful and determined self at work just to please a man because ultimately he probably won’t please you and most importantly you won’t please yourself. I pride myself on being outspoken and aggressive in life (I am 4’9″, 105lbs I have to be aggressive) so when I look back on instances when I let things go that normally would have got me going it makes me dissapointed and always wondering “what if”. What if I were a better balance of standing up for myself and my opinion and a little less appeasing to his manly ways? What if I were a bit less nurturing all the time, would he have wanted/appreciated me more? etc.
I Love You, Let’s Meet » masculinity and its discontents 35
[...] first my online dating guru rival weighs in on Maureen Dowd’s question of why fabulous successful women can’t get dates [...]
J NYC 36
wouldn’t life be wonderful if men and women could get to know each other as friends? wouldn’t it be great if relationships could be about intellectual companionship as opposed to a battle of egos, agendas, and superiority? wouldn’t life be interesting if women were real people with complex personalities, instead of being predictable collections of stereotypes? what if men sought women with the qualities they seek in their male buddies and had relationships with women of comparable closeness? what if “making life easier” meant finding fulfillment in the honest exchange of ideas as opposed to unconditional approbation? wouldn’t this then be the best of all possible worlds?
Christine 37
I totally agree with what Evan has to say. And i’ve been trying to “minimize” talking of my successes when I go on a date with someone new. But how much do I have to hide?
I’ve had too many men focus on asking me about work, or something of the sort and it’s becoming tiresome to keep changing the subject. If they don’t want to hear it, then they need to stop asking me about it.
So what do men ask women that are not a “catch” about? I’m curious.
LS 38
I believe where ever possible when dating we should (both men & women) try and leave work behind. It seems (well for me anyway) to generate a better connection where possible.
My last date shook my hand and said I will let you know.
Well that’s what the interviewer said to me at my last job interview.
I would prefer a date where the man behind the desk stays there and real man steps forward. Its a date not a job interview.
Phillygirl 39
I love this blog. Each comment written here makes sense to me. I have one question for the group though! How does a successful, bright, articulate attractive woman have the ability to show the men that are intimidated by these strengths that she is indeed warm, nurturing, loving, kind, jeans and the no-makeup type over weekends type of gal?
I have that exact problem and I am not prepared to underplay my achievements. However, I have a very soft edge, very loving, caring nurturing side and will even share that in words on a first date. I am STILL a “turn off” to most men due to my energy and positive attitude when they meet me…HELPPPPPP
Greg 40
Evan- right on man! I am glad that SOMEONE finally intelligently articulated this concept. This is the same reason why many business deals take place on the golf course, or in the strip club, or at the upscale bar….because strong, successfull, intelligent men do not want to do business with people who can never turn the sales “schtick” off. These places allow guys to connect as people, away from the business environment where everyone is trying to impress, stroke their egos, compete, and blow smoke at everyone else. We want to know the real person we are going to be doing business with, which may result in a long-term business relationship. Same thing goes for women. Who wants to date a woman who doesn’t know when to turn it off? Leave the schmoozing, manipulating, ego stroking, best-foot-foward tactics at the office and try to connect as a real person. This is a skill that many successful, strong, intelligent women have not mastered. For this reason I have dated many economically disadvataged and sometimes uneducated women, many of them immigrants. Why?.. becuase what’s important to me are the values and principles concerning relationships they bring to the table. Most people who do not know me well, when they observe this they think that it is because I prefer subservient women whom I can control and manipulate easily. Not so! I just realized they if what is most important to me in a relationship is warmth, caring, sensitivity, well defined roles, etc., that I need to look at the real person, not their financial achievments and professional skills. Here’s a thought: Could it be that many highly educated, intelligent, successful people be emotionally ignorant?
Hadley Paige 41
to Phillygirl
You wrote “How does a successful, bright, articulate attractive woman have the ability to show the men that are intimidated by these strengths that she is indeed warm, nurturing, loving, kind, jeans and the no-makeup type over weekends type of gal”
Sucessful women keep saying men are intimidated by sucessful women. I guess thats a way of consoling yourselves with you accomplishments. Its not that that sucessful women are intimidating, its that the traits linked to sucess are not, broadly speaking, the traits that most men want.
As for me when you say you can be a “weekend” type of girl. I think if I was in a relationship with a person such as yourself I would be waiting for the other shoe to drop.
Steve 42
Wow, this was an insightful article and I am impressed with the authors tact.
I was also impressed with the first comment. I too had the thought that it is best to be yourself, even if that turns people off, since that will happen eventually anyway. Better to see it on a first date rather than after you become attached to someone.
However, I don’t think acting differently isn’t being yourself.
I think it comes down to treating your romantic interest as nicely as you would treat a good friend or an acquaintance.
The article gave the example of how men might not like “direct and honest” women if that translates to blunt uninivted criticism. Yet how many people would be blunt, harsh in telling a good friend or a business associate something they need to hear? They would be themselves, they would just adjust the way they talk to fit the situation.
It comes down to your romantic interests being deserving of the same kind of gear shifting.
Phillygirl 43
Hadley Paige,
Thanks for your response. It was hardly helpful. I don’t think any man has the answer to my question of how to change the male mindset that ALL successful women have the “let’s wait and see if the shoe drops” attitude. I was asking how to break that mindset but it is becoming obvious to me that it’s not possible. It is just not fair to a person like myself who detests taking success and business “to bed at night”. Why should I be stigmatized when in fact, my success is based on my passion in the health care industry to “make a difference” to those less fortunate than myself. My success is not driven by my desire to “one up” a man or to inflate my ego, nor to prove anything to anyone.
I guess I can’t change and won’t change. There has to be one guy out there that will fall for me despite my success. It takes an emotionally “up and operating” man to recognize the traits of a woman without being threatened by her ability to make a living.
Thanks for your input.
Phillygirl
Phillygirl 44
Evan,
Very interesting post. I guess you are a good example of a guy who refuses to believe that “successful women can be emotional”. You questioned it in your last sentence. You talk about choosing women beneath you, I find that very interesting. I wonder if you have a low self esteem? Anyway, this is not meant as a hit at you at all. YOur post is just very biased and actually quite ignorant in certain respects. Yup you’re probably saying “see she’s too direct and that’s why men are scared away”. That may be, but ignorance is tough to deal with.
Phillygirl
Buster 45
Well after having read this, my conclusion is : that : s
People who are obsessed by their own achievements are a) very often boring b) wrong (confusion between SUCCESS and HAPPINESS c) because of a) and b) they are not at all attractive. This observation is valid for MEN and WOMEN.
downtowngal 46
I can’t agree more with Christine et al who are often asked about work while on dates. In NY, where everything is about work, this is what a lot of people talk about. I’m asked on dates what I do – I try to keep it general an change the subject, but if the guy is in a similar field to mine (banking) – which is common in NY – he suddenly starts shifting the conversation to shop talk an the romantic buzz goes away. So I try my best to change the subject, smile and say, ‘oh, let’s not talk about WORK – so your profile had a photo of you on a kayak – where’d you go’? or something like that. This is why I find it easier to meet guys when doing stuff I enjoy – hiking, travel, etc.
There are lots of guys who like women with opinions, they don’t want someone who will agree with them 100% or they’ll get bored. My last 2 boyfriends were like this. And there are guys who are the opposite. A successful woman wouldn’t be happy with the latter but regardless I think it’s the way a woman comes across – competitive instead of engaging in a challenging conversation.
And I read Maureen Dowd’s excerpt in the NYT Magazine and can’t disagree more. I know many successful women who are happily married and many successfuy guys who are married to successful women. So go figure.
Phillygirl 47
Thanks for all the comments and again to Evan, I was not taking a direct hit at you although it came across that way. I think your articles and blogs are phenomenal and it’s just the “nature of the beast”. It’s a matter of women are “damned it we are and damned if we aren’t”. I have to admit though that reading ALL these posts has made me realize that perhaps my passion for the work I do (has nothing to do with how successful I am which is a result of my passion) must bleed out (sorry I’m a nurse had to use that word) during conversations on a date and from now on, I will totally underplay what I do. I guess men are also “damned if they do and damned if they don’t”. I appreciate our Venus/Mars differences and don’t believe that either sex has it easy with respect to the single and dating world. I am probably too passionate about my field/work and need to remember all of your posts above when I go on my next date. I have a “disadvantage” in that I’m an attractive petite woman too and forget that men are visual and “hungry” and when they meet women that are appealling to the eyes (guys please don’t yell at me and accuse me of being egotistical, I’m telling it just like it is without any arrogance or self righteousness), they don’t want to hear about entrepreneurship and success. SO in this longwinded message, I’ll end it off by saying that I thank you all for “helping me” to realize that I’m a victim of my own passion and behavior. Hope this all makes sense.
Lost in Philly
Steve 48
This article is a great companion piece to Evan’s sage essay:
Why Nice Guys Are Losers
http://heartless-bitches.com/rants/niceguys/niceguys.shtml
Steve 49
I grew up in a liberal household. All of the women in my family, extended family and the women among my parent’s friends were 70′s era feminists.
To this day the idea that men and women aren’t the same ( even though they are equal ) seems, palpably, sacrilegious to me.
If you want to live successfully in this world at some point you have to see it how it really is and deal with it accordingly instead of insisting that reality should conform to your view of it.
In my life time of experience I have seen that men and women, while being equal, are not the same and do not want exactly the same things. If that observation makes me a sexist or a bad person, then so be it.
As Grouch Marx said
“Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes”
If you want something better out of your life sometimes you have to accept a truth you don’t like so you can deal with it and make progress. I think that is where Evan’s opinions fit in.
To use another quote, this time from Dr. Phil
“Do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?”
Why Don?t Men Like Smart, Strong, Successful Women? - Personal Development for Smart People Forums 50
[...] What never occurs to some women is that: They?re being evaluated on far more than their most ?impressive? traits. These traits sometimes come with a significant downside that is painful to acknowledge. Take me, for example. I?m a reasonably bright guy. I make a fair living. I can write a decent joke. These are my good traits. But right behind my good traits are a series of bad traits. Anyone reading this blog can see that: The flip side of being bright is being opinionated. The flip side of being analytical is being difficult. The flip side of being funny is being sarcastic. The flip side of having moral clarity is being arrogant. The flip side of being entrepreneurial is being a workaholic. The flip side of being charismatic is being self-centered. Again, not EVERY person who is bright is opinionated, and not EVERY person who is funny is sarcastic. But there?s enough anecdotal evidence to suggest a strong correlation. And I?m just talking about MYSELF here. And if my good qualities come with bad qualities, have you considered that yours might as well? So when I hear a woman talk about how ?direct? she is, the first thing I think is: ?She?s tactless.? I wrote about this in an article for Match.com entitled ?Are You Honest? Or Overboard?? Self-proclaimed ?direct? people often tell their dates what they think about them even if the date didn?t ask. They often try to change partners who have no desire to be changed. When the partner pulls away because he doesn?t want to be with someone so critical, the ?direct? person concludes that he couldn?t appreciate her ?honesty?. Read the rest at: Why Don’t Men Like Smart, Strong, Successful Women? [...]
Phillygirl 51
I have come to the conclusion that all you men that post on this blog are intimidated and afraid of women who are successful. It’s called “self inflicted emasculation”. Attitude and mindset is 3/4′s of the problem here.It takes a strong, emotionally centered male to be able to be with, enjoy, romanticize and have intimacy with a successful strong woman. You mean to tell me that you’ve never seen a couple together who are both on equal footing in every way? Perhaps you’ve all been burned by choosing the wrong women time and time again, versus it being every successful woman’s problem?
Interestingly, I am in healthcare and find that many health care professionals are arrogant, self centered, tough and difficult. Does that mean that if a caring, loving, giving, kind healthcare professional who is not a loser comes along, will I stereotype him and turn him away.
I’m sorry that you’ve all been “affected” by women who may bring in a higher paycheck than you do.
shellacked 52
Phillygirl-
Why are you pissed off and reactive/judgmental about people you don’t even know? By my experience, anytime you start to paint groups of people (i.e. men; men who post on this blog) with as broad a brush as you did, you close yourself off a little more to the possibility of finding someone great.
Besides, no one likes a know-it-all. No guy wants to be approached by a woman who smugly believes she knows him better than he knows himself.
Seriously, please look at your posts and ask if you’re coming off as a person anyone would want to date.
I don’t want to sound harsh, but am responding with the same level of force that you’ve been using in your last posts.
You said it yourself: Attitude and mindset is 3/4s of the problem here.
Phillygirl 53
Shellacked,
My responses are purely a reaction to the ongoing “bashings” that the males on this blog throw out at us women. It goes right back to the fact that “successful women have no emotions”. Ironically, these ongoing nasty postings have evoked strong emotions of sadness in me…NOT egotistical reactions. It really hurts Shellacked! Please read the postings of your friends, they are not “warm and fuzzy”. I’ve had at least 3 relationships whereby men have said to me “you appear to be so tough on the outsidek but I’m happy you “let me in as you’re actually a very sweet and loving woman”. I hope you understand where I’m coming from.
There is a stigma attached to “my type” and it hurts.
Phillygirl 54
I have to add that even my screen name is not indicative of a “ballbuster”….I don’t call myself Philly woman do I? LOL…..Gloria Steinman would hit me “upside my face” as we say in Philly…after all, am I a girl? Yes the last time I looked, I still was!
Jan 55
I cannot believe that I never thought of this before, but if I had treated my girl friends the way I treat my men – I WOULD BE FRIENDLESS. Okay Evan, I was almost prepared to hate you. Thank you for putting yourself out there to help protect us from ourselves.
I could not figure out why I never stayed in a relationship. I would like to say that I think I am beautiful, but I don’t think so. I think it is the energy and fun loving spirit that I give off. It is this that attract men and I really am amazed that I still attract so many men at the age of 50. I also have a lot of other qualities that should make me a great catch. But woe to the poor man that pursues me. When I finish being the power house that I am at work, they are usually left in a heap.
I am not saying that men are not without their problems but I will stop looking for every fault and then pointing these out to them. I don’t recall me doing the same thing to my girl friends. Anyway, I have recently started dating someone whom is usually on the verge of depression after every date with me. I will be more understanding and supportive, who knows he may look forward to seeing me.
TheObserver 56
You are not fair.
You generalize the entire male population.
I admit most white american men do not like intelligent women, especially one that is a supporter of racial equal rights and a environmentalist. these two things tend to get at their nerves some how.
But date more diversly and you will find large groups of men who only seek intelligent women.
sheseizereason 57
Observer -
Awwww. You’re so right. How awful it is to generalize about all men.
But how sweet it is of you to take a stand against over-generalization by generalizing about WHITE men. You’ve really made your case on this one.
hunter 58
to phillygirl,
I would like to meet more women with a bigger paycheck than mine…hhhmmmhh…yes…the one or two I meet every 10 years or so, doesn’t help….
hunter 59
…hhhhmmmhh…there is a silence….
verbosity 60
Hmmmmm. This thread is similar to the one about women who earn more than men and the men who supposedly resent them.
Many of the sentiments are the same. In general, I do not see men bashing (meaning ad hominem attacks) that much, if at all.
i would like to kindly state Phillygirl, that you posit a no-win scenario for yourself and men in general. First is your assumption that men are intimidated by strong, successful women. Then, upon receiving refuting commentary to the contrary, you simply dismiss it out-of-hand and stick with your assumption that men are intimidated by women. Aside from indirectly calling men cowards, your position shows a lack of respect for the points many men posted here. You are correct in that attitude and mindset is part of the issue…
Am I the only who sees the basic insanity of this thread’s theme? That being, men are intimidated by strong, successful women. So men, just listen to us strong, successful women and stop being intimidated. As if kowtowing to this demand will instill respect.
IMHO, respect is lacking from the female perspective on this, in that many (not all) female posters simply refuse to acknowledge the points many men posted, thereby showing disrespect by not listening and acknowledging what they are saying.
My buddy says most women are like radio towers….great at transmitting, not so good at receiving.
verbosity 61
A lull in the action…
Mo 62
Why are men turned off by smart, successful women? I think the answer comes from back in high school days boys it seems like would get turned off when the girls would start to brag about how good they were and say things like I got a better grades than you and have this catty attitude that they are better than anyone else. It seems like girls back in the high school days would rub it in and I think it turned the boys off that it stayed with them even after high school and can’t stand that cattiness attitude.Even if women don’t mean to use the I’m better than you/cattiness attitude in the adult lives when getting an MBA/graduate degree I think it still comes across to men that the women that get MBA /graduate degree or are naturally “smart” just rubs men the wrong way. To some men when they hear a lady say I just finished with my MBA/Graduate degree there is just simply something in our brans that naturally turn us off and some men when they hear that they got these graduate degrees or naturally “smart” some men’s brains just turn and think ohh she was one of “those women” and those men would rather walk away cause they can’t stand that cattiness or the “I’m better than you” type attitude. I don’t think it’s necessarily that you are smart or have a grad degree or MBA or whatever but I think a lot of it is the tone of voice when women say they have their graduate degree MBA. I think the tone of voice just comes off wrong and turns a lot of men off.
I think it’s a natural fear men have built up and have seen it starting in high school days and also in the work force like when women are even catty to other girls and not necessarily to the men it just comes off wrong to men.
hunter 63
to Mo,
Successful women I have met(and I haven’t met many) like to put me down, in public, and I don’t enjoy that….
hunter 64
to Mo,
But of course men make mistakes, we can still talk about it in private.
Delia 65
Real Men don’t have to prove themselves. And Real Men are proud of women who are strong and accomplished. There’s room enough for all of us Male AND Female to be all that we can be. Women who use a Certain Tone of Voice when boasting about themselves would be annoying, however I DO agree with you on that!
Some guys are very proud of successful women. And certain women are deserving of that pride.
Mo 66
To Delia,
Yes Real men and women still do have to prove themselves especially in todays world with such a hard economy. I my self is a real man and have strong accomplishments and proud of successful women but just saying that there are just some men out there that simply turn them off. But then there are some of the smartest men and women that have gotten the best degrees enter the “real world” and fall flat on their face because they are good in the academic world but for the life of them can’t get going and struggle in the real world for a job.
m 67
“To some men when they hear a lady say I just finished with my MBA/Graduate degree”
Jeez. If this is what constitutes bragging to men, you all are even more fragile than I thought you were.
It’s a mere statement of fact.
HOW is that BRAGGING?
Does it never occur to you “women should ONLY stay in the kitchen and raise babies” types that in order to even BEGIN to afford the babies, both you and your wife are going to have to work? At good jobs with advancement potential? At actual careers? Careers frequently requiring advanced education, particularly for the woman (since men are more frequently hired with less education than the woman for the same job, and women still make only 76% of what men make)? BOTH of you??
Or are you just in complete denial about the fact that absent meticulous financial planning from, like, your own birth, only the very upper echelon of working men — SVP- and EVP-level, senior-equity-partner-level — can begin to afford to have their wives stay home?
When was the last time any of you tried to run a household and put children through college on a single salary?
[We're not even going to get into the MEN who yammer on for, like, HOURS about their accomplishments and what they have and who worships them and where they've traveled -- never mind that these men are apparently completely clueless about how this behavior MAGNETIZES the "gold diggers" to them that they purport to loathe -- never mind that these men are clueless that the woman they're talking AT (not "to", because that would *gasp* require her actual participation in the conversation) is BORED TO TEARS by their little recital.]
“I think it still comes across to men that the women that get MBA /graduate degree or are naturally smart just rubs men the wrong way.”
Oh, OK.
Then please do us a favor, Mo.
Stick a sign on your forehead so that women who are “naturally smart” will know who you are and can just stay away from you.
Then, neither you, nor they, will have to be bothered.
*smh*
Michael Ejercito 68
I have no problems with women bring smart, strong, or successful.
In fact, I am willing to date someone who is four inches taller than me.
Hadley Paige 69
M writes: “only the very upper echelon of working men SVP- and EVP-level, senior-equity-partner-level can begin to afford to have their wives stay home?”
Where does this statistic come from? I doubt it is true. It is quite possible to live on most husband’s salaries. One need only to not fall into the trap of endless material desire. Just live in a more modest home in a more modest heighborhood with a more modest car, go on more modest vacations and have less crapola.
I think M’s statement is a rationalization on M’s part to justify career women to men who would rather not have a carrer woman as a spouse.
I for one would rather have my wife stay at home and deal full time with the home & home making & kids and would happily live with less stuff. Kids need sane, calm, loving, unstressed moms more than they need the latest $100 sneakers or $200 electronic device or $100/mo cellphones.
m 70
“…a rationalization on Ms part to justify career women to men who would rather not have a carrer woman as a spouse.”
Um, no.
That’s not what I’m saying at all.
1) First, it’s not about “forcing” someone to want someone they don’t want. (Yeah, that would be a real positive relationship.)
It’s just about questioning yourself and determining whether your preferences are realistic. It’s one thing to live with “less stuff”, as you say — it’s another to try to live without a place to live.
2) It’s not about buying excess cellphones and sneakers and blah blah blah. It’s about the cost of a mortgage when the subprime market is imploding, about retirement funds when 401Ks are being gutted by unscrupulous investing, about college education for your kids when Pell funds are being yanked and college loans are 5+ figures with rising interest rates due to increasing defaults.
Even the current Administration has finally admitted that the economy is *cough* slowing down. :rolleyes: George Soros admits that we’re in a recession likely to become a full-on depression.
Have you looked around at the economy lately, Hadley? Are you just going to try to snag some poor wide-eyed girl who doesn’t know any better and force her and your new family to try and live on what you make by yourself? What if you get laid off after you’ve just had your first baby? What’s your family supposed to live on at that point?
Do you even have any idea what constitutes a realistic set of expectations?
Have you even thought it through?
Hadley Paige 71
to M:
1. 2nd request for factual backup rather than opinion. Where did you get the following “fact” that you stated in post #67 only the very upper echelon of working men SVP- and EVP-level, senior-equity-partner-level can begin to afford to have their wives stay home?
I think that you want you “fact” this to be true. Why? If men believed the argument you advance (namely that no family can live on one salary) then it follows that men who believed it would be more likely to take a career woman as a spouse. Which it appears that you think is the only good arrangment for the woman. I do not share that opinion.
2. M states: First, its not about forcing someone to want someone they dont want.
Where does this come from? Only you were talking about forcing. It seems you see this arrangment as inconceivable unless the woman is forced. Obviously, it doesn’t appeal to you. But can you not conceive of a relationship where this is a voluntary & welcome arrangement? Perhaps not.
3. M states: Its one thing to live with less stuff, as you say its another to try to live without a place to live.
I agree. Obviously, if one’s family is faced with living on the street two salaries are better than one. However, just because you identify an extreme case does not prove the point you advanced that “only the very upper echelon of working men SVP- and EVP-level, senior-equity-partner-level can begin to afford to have their wives stay home.
4. M states: “Are you just going to try to snag some poor wide-eyed girl who doesnt know any better and force her and your new family to try and live on what you make by yourself?”
No, but its fine to try to find a fully informed woman who knows what she wants and wants this arrangement. “forcing”? “poor wide-eyed girl”? as you said “Yeah, that would be a real positive relationship”.
m 72
Yammer, yammer, yammer, Hadley.
When someone starts talking about “stats” — which any mathematician knows can be manipulated to prove any point on either side of an argument — then I know they’re reading waaaaaay too literally to have a real discussion with (second piece of evidence of that was your second comment. I did not say you LITERALLY said anything about “force”. It was implied, gleaned, a conclusion that could be drawn by any reasonable person conversant with the English language and American culture that read what you said. Look up the concept.)
So at this point we’re not talking to each other; we’re talking past each other.
So never mind.
*smh*
vino 73
I noticed in the whole Hadley-m exchange that Hadley is rather respectful. m is not.
That speaks volumes.
m 74
Everybody clearly defines “rather respectful” in his/her own way here, vino.
When someone starts talking past me, refusing to even acknowledge what else is being said, and is insistent on establishing their POV and shouting me (or anyone else who appears to disagree with their premise) down, that’s not necessarily my definition of “respectful”.
YOUR definition of “respectful” appears to be something along the lines of “women are required to defer to men on substantive issues, no matter how prima facie absurd the man’s assertion is, no matter what”.
Any independent comments on make about the actual issue on the table?
Or are you just content to slyly harass those who (acknowledging notwithstanding that the plural of anecdote is not data) actually observe something other than the traditionalist viewpoint espoused?
m 75
You know what, never mind.
I promised myself I wasn’t going to engage when I’m not even being heard.
:rolleyes:
Forget it.
m 76
As or HP and his ostensibly desperate, slavering need for studies to explain, oh, EVERYTHING, Mark Morford makes the case much better than I:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2008/02/01/notes020108.DTL%20
p.s. Thanks, jonquil
vino 77
I’ve come to this site as a means of trying to understand dating and its challenges after a LTR.
I took the time to read not only this thread, but others on this site as well.
Plenty of male posters directly answered the question of “Why Dont Men Like Smart, Strong, Successful Women?” Plenty of female posters chimed in with their perspective as well. Many have something valuable to say on both sides of the gender aisle.
I think the best posts on the subject are Evan’s original reply, Evan’s #10, Moxie’s #9, Been’s #2, and verbosity’s #60. It’s insane to demand that others change to suit one’s preferences.
To m,
I do not wish to argue with you, and won’t. I do not think it will be productive in the slightest. I do not see where Hadley shouted you down at all, just an accusation you are being shouted down. I do see where he asked very direct clarifying questions regarding your posts. I also noticed that in #67, you took part of a sentence to create facts with no basis in reality to insult Mo (“Stick a sign…”). The use of the partial quote also ignored the 4 lines of clarifying text following Mo’s quoted part.
Also, your post of “yammer, yammer…” does nothing to answer Hadley’s clarifying questions to you. I suspect he’s asking you questions about statistics to see what is representative of the real world, not the conjured-up hypotheticals whose facts (‘forcing’ and ‘SVP,’wide-eyed girl’) change from post to post. you also characterized him as having a ‘desperate need’ for statistics.
So MY definition of respectful has nothing to do with deference to men, no matter what. Sex doesn’t matter. It has everything to do with using quotes within their context, and not to insult others. It has everything to do with answering clarifying questions asked without creating more facts. It has everything to do with withholding accusations and assumptions such as women are required to defer to men on substantive issues, no matter how prima facie absurd the mans assertion is, no matter what.
I also read the sfgate article referenced. My paraphrase – beware of relying on every little societal study as they may be false, misleading, or not representative.
However, here is the best part, the thrust, of the article:
“This, then, is the danger: Despite the frequent inanity, despite the insulting silliness of much of the information, we’ve been led to believe that it is only through a relentless obsession with tiny, data-driven studies that we can obtain real knowledge, real understanding of what we’re about and how we should eat, sleep, screw, breathe.”
I don’t think you obtain ‘real knowledge’ or ‘real understanding’ by these studies referenced, nor do I think they are about how to live. However, I do think they are representative of people’s experiences, and therefore may or may not apply to all readers. So, if someone says 60% of men/women cheat, this means that 40% don’t. But it also means that the person citing this study is saying that the majority of people she/she deal with cheat, or more often than not.
It’s not about how using how we “should eat, sleep, screw, breathe.” It’s about how we DO “eat, sleep, screw, breathe” to determine how we could or should “eat, sleep, screw, breathe” going forward.
I also noticed there’s nothing in the article refuting anything Hadley or other posters have cited re: stats & surveys. Simply questioning the use of stats doesn’t invalidate them.
vino 78
During commute yesterday, I heard a segment about this on Tom Lykis show. While many do not like what he says or how he says it, there is something valuable in the show.
I think there’s a podcast about it. I’ll post some brief summary when & if I find it for discussion.
vino 79
Here’s the link
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/HomeMortgageSavings/TooSuccessfulForAMate.aspx
Some choice article quotes:
“I have this crazy belief that I have the right to expect my potential partner to be at least as successful as I am, and to have as many things to offer as I do,”
“Then there’s the issue of time. Most highly successful people work crazy hours . . . “The person I’m trying to find is just as busy as I am,” says Mohr, 29. “If we’re both that busy, when is the time when we’re going to meet?”"
“Experts say that the divorce rate is one factor contributing to the trend. Another is a tendency among better educated, more secure women to postpone marriage.”
Some Leykis responses:
“What Man is intimidated by a successful woman? This has nothing to do with intimidation. I know women love, especially these women who love to think that they are intimidating men. They’re not intimidating men. I am not intimidated by a woman who has a strong career aspirations, works hard, makes a lotta money.”
“I just wouldn’t be in a relationship with her. The reason is not because I am intimidated. The reason is because if I were stupid enough to get involved in another living together relationship of any kind, what would be the purpose of it if I got into a monogamous relationship with someone who is so intense about their career, they’re never home and when they are home they bring home their laptop and their portfolio, and they’re typing & reading and working all the time . What is the point of all of that for me?”
No intimidation involved. All you career-oriented gals who make a million dollars a year or more I’ll tell you what – I’ll be happy to date you. Call me when you’re not busy. I’ll come over. i’ll service you. Then I’ll get the hell outta there.”
“We’re not intimidated by successful women. WE DON’T WANT TO MARRY THEM (emphasis on audio, so caps added). We don’t want to live with them. We don’t want to have monogamous relationships with women who have no time to EFF us! How do you read that as intimidation?”
____________________
More to follow…
vino 80
More Leykis quotes:
“These are ball-busting bitches who are excited they are moving up in the company, or their businesses are making all this money. BTW, I’m excited about the same things in life. but the last thing I’d do is if you’re that busy, let you move into my place, then have to come home at night and have to drum my fingers when I want to get laid, because you’re on the road doing business, you’re traveling, you’re working when I’m there, you have a headache, you’re stressed out, you’re tired.
“Here’s what you do. Keep your own place . . .work your ass off. When you’ve got time, call me and tell me to come over. ”
“The last thing I would do is commit to you, only to find out later that you don’t have time for me.”
“Why would I need a monogamous relationship with someone who has no time for me? That’s doesn’t mean I’m intimidated. It means I’m smart.”
“Notice when women want to postpone marriage, notice when women are ambitious, notice when women are avaricious, when they want to make money and be more & more successful, it’s “you go girl! that’s fantastic.”
“And when guys are like that we’re selfish, we’re self-centered, all we care about is work, all we care about is ourselves? But isn’t it great when women want to become more educated, and they want to postpone marriage? That’s Fantastic. Men are little boys. They fear commitment, but when women want to postpone marriage, that’s great.”
____________
Any thoughts or comments? I find it interesting.
Evan Marc Katz 81
You realize, Vino, that you’ve now stifled debate and scared off all the women? Good work!
vino 82
SORRY! Not intent at all!
Thought the quotes were funny & worthy of discussion!
cinnamon 83
Vino,
You said not everybody likes the style in which Leykis forwards his points. I guess I’m one of them.
Could you put it in your own words?
vino 84
I guess I’d paraphrase it by saying that very successful, career-oriented women are poor choices for most guys for marriage or LTR’s because of several factors. I’d say they were time, attention (which goes with time, and other opportunities.
Time – This article quote sums it up – Then theres the issue of time. Most highly successful people work crazy hours . . . The person Im trying to find is just as busy as I am, says Mohr, 29. If were both that busy, when is the time when were going to meet?”
I’m a busy professional also. I don’t want to play a far, far second-fiddle to her 60-90 hours per week job. Because between my 60 hour a week job and hers, it’s just not worth it. Not to mention there’s never time for anything spontaneous. I also realize my work is an impediment also, BTW.
Attention – I’d say this would also be likened to “quality time.” If when we are together, you are reading & sending emails, yakking on the phone, traveling tons for work, stressed from all of the work in general, discussing it with me in the few minutes we are together, tired from it every night….you can’t give me any quality attention, I don’t want to be with you.
Other Opportunities – People who travel for work, or who work in jobs that demand long hours in and out of the office for socialization are exposed to far greater opportunities for infidelity. I don’t have any statistical cite, but believe this to be true.
If you even take the sex out of the Leykis comments, he has a point. I agree with that portion of his opinion, BTW. But for me, it comes down to this:
If someone is so busy with work where it consumes them so much daily and it is clear that I am not going to be a priority for even an hour a day, then I deem her poor wife or girlfriend material. If I’m going to be the potential husband then I better damn well be the priority.
I experienced this and vowed it would never happen again. I’m worth more.
cinnamon 85
Thanks, now I see where you’re coming from. Maybe I’m in a different cultural context, but I have not met many women whose work week comes up to 90hrs per week. I guess we must be talking about a very small fraction of women professionals.
You can be both educated and professionally accomplished without letting your job take up 99,9% of your life. In my surroundings I can see many women who succesfully combine professional life and family. Therefore I’m very alarmed by statements like “men don’t like smart women”. If someone, a man or a woman, wants a committed relationship it could be SMART to find time and energy for it.
vino 86
Yes, it isn’t the issue of smart. It isn’t the issue of intimidating. It’s whether our needs, which I don’t think are many, are met. I don’t want to go out with someone dumb as a box of rocks…
Because of the reasons I stated before I won’t go out with lawyers, or doctors or anything else where 75% or more of their waking hours is work. My preference. one many seem to share.
cinnamon 87
I also think for a big number of women the priorities naturally change as the relationship progresses and becomes more committed. Isn’t it the essence of the word committment?
vino 88
Maybe for some. But, the relationship is with work, not the guy…
Selena 89
Vino wrote:
“If someone is so busy with work where it consumes them so much daily and it is clear that I am not going to be a priority for even an hour a day, then I deem her poor wife or girlfriend material. If Im going to be the potential husband then I better damn well be the priority. ”
I feel the same way. Why would I want a boyfriend/husband who had no time for me? That would seem to be a *relationship* in name only. And I wonder also, why someone who spent so much of their life involved with their work would even seek a relationship? A status thing to tell their colleagues? If you don’t have time to have a close, intimate relationship with someone you love, why bother?
RSL 90
This discussion strikes me as very interesting- and a little concerning. I am 28-year-old single woman and am currently working on a PhD. In all honesty, for a long time I’d hoped that this time of my life would be spent buidling a relationship and beginning a family in the next few years. But, that’s not how things worked out, so I’ve made the best of it and pursued a career that I may not have otherwise. Although I work hard, when I am finished, I will be in a position to have some flexibility in choosing a job, and plan on choosing one that won’t comsume my life because I would like to have plenty of time for a marriage and family. However, at this point, although it’s not all-comsuming, I certainly work hard and long. Vino, a comment like your concerns me- that you won’t date lawyers and doctors- because I wonder how many men are writing me off in much the same way because of my current position. How can I portray that although I work hard and love what I do, I do not plan on it always being the center of my life? Especially in online dating situations or others where I am just getting to know someone? It’s a bit discouraging…
vino 91
RSL wrote:
“How can I portray that although I work hard and love what I do, I do not plan on it always being the center of my life? Especially in online dating situations or others where I am just getting to know someone? Its a bit discouraging”
I don’t mean this to sound without empathy. I empathize greatly. However, if your career and education is the center of your life now, perhaps it isn’t the best time to actively search a a mate or ‘the one.’ I don’t know that it’s fair for someone to wait an indeterminate period of time until you are ready to ‘settle down.’ Perhaps date for fun, but without expectations for ‘a relationship’ that is ‘the one.’
Sometimes we simply need to prioritize out activities for what we want where we are at certain points in life. So if work/school is the priority, then maybe worrying about establishing a deep, committed relationship with the work involved isn’t in your best interest right now.
hunter 92
to vino,
You won’t date lawyers/doctors/professional women because they have no spare time? Please, let me know where to meet such a jewel, I can be their parttime lover any day!…
vino 93
FYI – Among the reasons I won’t date lawyers is that everything’s an argument, and they are skilled at lying. Who wants that? I also find doctors to be too cerebral, without passion, and with mini-God complexes. There are more good exceptions regarding doctors. I’ve found pitifully few with lawyers. Those just go along with the reasons I already stated.
cinnamon 94
RSL,
You put very nicely what I was also about to write. I have early in my career chosen to start on a second MA in parallel to work because on the private plan things did not go the way I wanted, and I preferred the university environment than watching soap operas. The thought behind it was that this will give me more options and flexibility with respect to work later on when I need time it for the famility. There wasn’t a single choice with respect to my career path since high school where I did not consider the needs of a future family.
Even though I absolutely agree with Vino, I would find it disheartening to find out that a man has made any assumptions before actually taking the topic up with me…
Ruth 95
It’s interesting that Vino and Leykis have such a double standard. For decades, women have married men who are comsummed by their work and brought it home with them, have raised the children from those men, mostly by themselves, while the man takes equal credit. Often the “old” wife is left for a younger, better looking mate after the kids are grown.
Now, the men think (Vino admitted he worked 60 hrs a week) that is an okay schedule for a woman to live with if she is partnering with a man, but that same schedule makes a woman an undesireable ball busting . . well you can read it above.
There is no clearer example of duplicity.
This whole thread has the men emphasizing over and over again about getting their needs met. Put that with the example above of the decades of men living for themselves and the wife living for the man, and the message is pretty clear. Gals:
1-the fellow has to be your priority, but you won’t be his
2-The man can brag about his career accomplishments and you must help him celebrate them, but if you can work, but keep mum about it
3-The fellow can spend his time with you on the cell with his office or buddies, just stay off yours . . . and quality time with you means going to his company or career or sporting events, not yours
I’ve read this thread a couple of times through, and the message is the same.
The problem is, as stated in my earlier entry, the men who are successful in their careers and partnered, don’t have the kind of partners described as desirable here. The partnered men don’t have anymore nurturing, their needs met or have the selfless sacrificing partnering that is described here as what men want.
Why, then are “smart, strong” women singled out as being non-nurturing, noncaring and more undesirable?
Interesting . . . . and telling
BTW- my sons are in their early 30′s, and prefer smart, independent, strong women. When they were dating, they were not interested in the kind of stepford wife described by the men in this thread. The fellows of the Generation X seem to be looking for a different kind of parnter than their fathers and grandfathers were. Cool!
vino 96
Ruth brings up some interesting issues…
First, we’re talking about successful go-getters who likely make a good income. $200k+
Ruth wrote: “For decades, women have married men who are comsummed by their work and brought it home with them, have raised the children from those men, mostly by themselves, while the man takes equal credit.”
For those decades, those women did not work and were able to live a life of relative luxury. So, in subsidizing her ability to not work and be the primary child caregiver, assuming no nannie help, etc, he can take equal credit. Also, in divorce court wife still get 1/2 of everything, fault or no. Revisionist history can be pretty convenient.
Ruth wrote: “Now, the men think (Vino admitted . . . but that same schedule makes a woman an undesireable ball busting . . well you can read it above.”
Not to chide you, Ruth, but the ball busting quote was from Leykis, not my words at all. Please don’t try to imply I said that when I didn’t. Also, I don’t think the schedule makes someone ball-busting, either. Notice I didn’t say there weren’t challenges for schedules.
The msn article mentioned how a greater % of very successful men choose to partner with women who aren’t nearly as accomplished, if at all. My theory, shared by Leykis, btw, is simple – these guys choose someone who will be there for them when they need it, even though their time is limited. In turn, these ladies get more comforts than they otherwise would have had.
verbosity said it above – The rub for very successful women is that unlike the guys, they in general detest having someone less accomplished as their partner. I’d look above for his explanation. If I’m a woman, it makes me uncomfortable, but I have a hard time assailing the logic.
Ruth wrote: “This whole thread has the men . . . getting their needs met.”
What in the hell is wrong with having your needs met? They aren’t many, btw.
Ruth wrote: “1-the fellow has to be your priority, but you wont be his”
- Not at all. Caveat emptor. If you get in a relationship with anyone very successful and driven, you know what they are like out of the gate, male or female. The article seems to indicate that more less accomplished women are willing to compromise to be with someone who isn’t home at 5:15 every night. your gripe is that men don’t want to be second banana. You can bet your ass the super successful one will demand to be his priority more often than not.
“2-The man can brag about his career accomplishments and you must help him celebrate them, but if you can work, but keep mum about it”
- Who in the hell said that? I didn’t read that.
“3-The fellow can spend his time with you on the cell with his office or buddies, just stay off yours . . . and quality time with you means going to his company or career or sporting events, not yours”
- Again, who in hell said this? I didn’t read that, nor do I think it’s a reasonable synthesis of everything posted. As far as staying off of phones, etc in your partner’s presence, that goes both ways. It’s simple respect for the other person & their time. The occasional call , etc I can understand, but not with frequency. I don’t do it to people I’m with and they’re gone if they do it.
Actually, the men have said anything but what Ruth has written. I wonder sometimes if we are reading the same language.
Ruth wrote: “The problem is . . . described here as what men want.”
- This could be it’s own subject for Evan. Maybe the guys chose poorly, maybe the number of non-nurturing, caring women is so prevalent, who knows? Maybe some of both with other things…It’s too much to respond to here.
Ruth wrote: “Why, then are smart, strong women singled out as being non-nurturing, noncaring and more undesirable?”
- That’s not what’s being said at all. You’re forgetting successful, which necessitates lots of time, effort and energy. The msn article specifically mentions lack of time. Please don’t make the point earlier and ignore this crucial aspect in this part of the post. They are less desirable specifically because they’re not around. FYI – they’re often not very emotionally available either. Same critique you leveled above.
Main point is that a strong, successful driven person of either sex often isn’t the best choice for a deep connection as a partner. Verbosity gave the most logical explanation of why above. See #32 and #60
hunter 97
to vino,
A female lawyer skilled at lying and arguing? Isn’t that in a womans nature? But women don’t call it that, when they are not testing you, they are manipulating you, to get you to do something…hhhmmh…LOL!
hunter 98
to vino,
Female doctor passionless, with mini-god complexes? Try not to let this cloud your mind, find ways to romance her!…Keep asking people that know about relationships, and, study human behaviour/relationships…
hunter 99
to vino,
As the great guru on mount Tibet once said, “men are out to conquer and compete.”
vino 100
hunterApr 3rd 2008 at 11:41 pm 98
to vino,
“Female doctor passionless, with mini-god complexes? Try not to let this cloud your mind, find ways to romance her!Keep asking people that know about relationships, and, study human behaviour/relationships”
Not worth the effort. Makes more sense to spend energies on places & people with greater likelihood of success, not trying to pound square a peg into a round hole.
schlockdoc 101
Heh. I frequently come off as an ‘alpha female’ but I’ve been having to beat the guys off with a stick since I was a teenager.
I think men are pretty simple actually. Basically, if you’re attractive and not too b1tchy, you’re good. And if you’re really attractive, even the b1tchy thing becomes negotiable.
Sure, there are some guys who don’t want to date/marry successful women; but there are so many others who are happy to that I wouldn’t even worry about it.
hunter 102
on post #101,
Almost sounds as if you have the world at your feet, lucky you!…..
Michael Ejercito 103
Why is being smart so important when it comes to sexual compatibility?
vino 104
It absolutely isn’t Michael. In fact my colloquial evidence says the exact opposite.
Julia 105
Hi, regarding your comment on professional women, well, i became single 5 years ago. i was in the same relationship for most of my 20′s and when I became single, I was very lost. trying to figure out the whole dating scene. I was nervous about getting hurt and stuff. but I was also examining my friends and asking questions, reading the net, books on advice and everything you said is all the stuff I thought at some point. I am successful and a professional and I figured I needed to change or something to please a man and guys would tell me I was strong, opiniated, etc. but I am really sweet…so finally, I discovered that eventually, without changing, with your same character, you do meet someone who does take you on and decides to either tame the horse or go up that hard to reach mountain. someone will think it is worth it to digg deeeper and to allow you to let your guards down. someone will love you long enough to learn to know you, understand you and love you. and eventually, you will have also taught him how to love and he would have grown and evolved with you. you will both compliment each other. you need to be patient and eventually, you will meet that person. both of you will find each other. every pot finds it’s cover.
Hot Alpha Female 106
Evan.
I have not heard this issue so well articulated. Thank You.
This has inspired me to do a post about it. Esp if i go by the name Hot Alpha Female.
This usually brings up a lot of topics and lot of controversy which you just addressed here.
I think you are absolutely spot on that women today pride themselves with strength yet in doing so emasculate the man.
Keep you updated
Hot Alpha Female
rick lynn 107
Men are not afraid of successful women. They are afraid of abuse toward them by society, including women who may perceive men to be weak in some way. The nineteenth century belief Males should be strong allows aggression toward Males who appear weak in some way. Society provides love, honor, respect, support, etc. (the essentials for feelings of self-worth only on the condition of sufficient achievement, money, power, status, and image. Those Males who do not have sufficiency are not only given less love, honor, and respect, they are allowed upon them more aggression by society. This makes men very competitive for they feel they must achieve in order to have those things. Added the nineteenth century belief Males should be strong that allow much more aggression toward Males and also the denial from day one of mental, emotional, social support from day one (for fear of coddling the Male) and you have Males falling behind Females mentally, emotionally, socially, academically, and economically.
Women, due to the nineteenth century belief woman should be protected are given love, honor, and respect simply for being women. The nineteen century belief they should be protected also allows for much mental, emotional, social support, to only “appear to mature faster than Males”. By differential treatment Females are surging ahead. In addition that very overprotection by society allows women to give verbal, silent abuse, and hollow kindness or patronization with impunity. The combination of allowed aggressions upon Males who appear weak in some way, lack of support for Males, more than adequate support for Females, and the protected freedoms of various allowed verbal and nonverbal abuse by women makes a Male who appears weak in some way quite vulnerable to more abuse from successful women and more also from society.
Drahma 108
This has been interesting reading. Im 37, single, fairly successful, and havent been in a relationship for 6 years (4 of which was by choice and I got back in the game again 2 years ago). What Ive found fascinating about the whole game is the double standard. I went on a date that outlined one of my problems. I just started working for myself and the guy I was with was still with a company. He told me I wouldnt have time for a relationship because I was starting up a business. I told him that was presumptive if the right guy came along, I would make time in the same way that I make time for my friends (and made time for seeing him that night). Come to find out, he was starting up a business as well on the side. I immediately asked him what he was doing on a date because, quite frankly, how does he have time for anything (especially when he judged me right off the bat)? This isnt the only time Ive experienced this. I refrain from talking about all of the activities Im involved in because the guy will think that I wont have time for him (and being in these activities is part of me so in a way, Im depriving the guy from getting to know me by saying nothing). The catch I am involved in all those activities BECAUSE I dont have someone to come home to and I refuse to stay home to sulk and complain about my status.
Further, how I spend my time in those initial dates is MY business. I dont question a guy and how he spends his time until we have a commitment and are seriously involved, thats HIS business (and even after the commitment, it is still his business). On the date that evening, we are sharing an evening and potentially could share a second, third or forth evening or even more. Thats all dating is initially its testing the waters for more.
There was a great line in the movie Somethings Gotta Give about how women as they get older get more interesting because they fill in their time with activities when they dont have dates or a relationship. Its very true. Ive found that its the time that men ANTICIPATE that I wont have that causes the problem. Now this gets even more interesting in the logic so if I make time to have a date with a guy, that means I am making time in my life for him right now, and I would probably do so in the future if its something I want to do. I would think that is a turn on, however, a guy will often discount me because Im making time for him. I dont get that. So I guess I need to be sitting at home, by the phone, pathetically waiting for the right offer. Fascinating because in the next breath men comment that they dont want that either. So whats a girl to do?
hunter 109
Lighten up, it was the first date, people say things they are not supposed to…
Drahma 110
So just curious and just for fun, how would you have handled it if something similar happened to you (either questioning your time or money or whatnot – just a general similar situation)? Would you have continued seeing the person? And what would your expectations have been?
Side note – that wasn’t the first time I have experienced something like what I described. I have heard similar types of comments on the first or second date and let them go only to regret not walking away sooner.
Ellyn 111
Interesting discussion and HNY to all. My discussion mostly revolves around two people who have an initial strong attraction to one another that quickly goes by the proverbial wayside. I think that when many people first meet they tend to prejudge each other according to their own preconceived notions regarding externalities, resumes, labels, and whatever else they have gathered up about the person. This leads to projecting onto them all of one’s preconceived notions, favorable and not so favorable, which is dangerous in and of itself. If it doesn’t work out, they can fall back on these notions or belief systems which may continue to operate as a runaway train in other relationships as well as impede the process of actually taking the time to get to know who a person is underneath it all. We live in a very disposable society and people tend to judge very quickly and if they don’t like what they see perhaps too early in the dance, they become scared and concerned and end up dancing right out the door often without any real dialogue as to what just transpired. That’s fine and I believe in free will and perhaps they do have accurate enough insight into forming an opinion that that person is a no go for a relationship with them. Most people do not like conflict or confrontation so they feel like they made an “easy escape” and are done often leaving the other person at a loss as to what transpired and the opportunity for growth of both people is diminished. I see some here imposing definitions or translations of smart strong successful women that may in fact have little relevance to the “real” person under all those layers of labels. So, like some have said the perception is what becomes the reality. I think internet dating really fuels this fire.
I am dual-graduate degreed, feminine looking and value the arts over business but am also strong and assertive which I value as positive qualitites. However, I found that in a recent on line experience the positive became the negative pretty early on when I “spoke out” about something and it became apparent that the individual backed away. I went back in and clarified that my goal was not to hurt or shut him down and he came back out of his shell so to speak. I explained or chalked it up to individuation vs teamplay and that my expression of myself was primarily intended to further communications about who I was which unfortunately eventually became a threat to who he was and what he was looking for. Immediately though after the initial experience, he applauded my sensitivity and things heightened to the point that I was raised to this ideal woman standard of sensitivity and one of higher consciousness which I knew I could never fully live up to. While I consider myself very sensitive and evolved, I was uncomfortable with this early on set of projections without both of us really doing the work which is what it takes to get to know someone and evolve a relationship, if ever. I harped on this to deaf ears. Thereafter, I pulled back because I was starting to feel uncomfortable and he sensed that and did the same. Eventually, the “perfect” relationship was destined to doom because we had both in some way shut down. I think women and men do best regardless of labels when there can be created an environment of emotional safety and security for both that allows for vunerability in opening up without fear of judgment. I failed because I leapt up at things he was communicating and to some extent as what I perceived as an expression of myself became an attack, criticism, judgment, analysis of him which led to a done deal. I was also trying, unsuccessfully, to open up the lines of communication. However, I also believe that he could and should have, and he had every right to, speak up at the time or shortly thereafter processing the various exchanges about his own thoughts and feelings concerning our communications. I like to think of myself as sensitive, bright and tough enough to have handled anything that he sent my way and my goal was to further our intimacy not break it down. So, I consider communication key here and if you are truly interested enough in who is standing before you, then hopefully you can muster up the words and speak them to the other person. I feel that it is only “fair” at that time (after reasonable exchange) and according to what you get back to form a judgement about who the person is. Why is it that so many men empowered in their careers are so disempowered in personal relationships and literally expect (us to read their minds) an ongoing perfect flow to the relationship. Isn’t stepping on toes and conflict eventually inevitable – the key being how it is resolved – mutually, respectfully, etc. where you land up on the other end learning more about yourself and the other person and hopefully strengthening the relationship potential. I don’t think anyone should have to walk on eggshells and we are all imperfect in actualizing the qualities that are talked about herein. There is enough talk about “men who don’t talk” or who are not particularly tuned into their emotions which I think, for me, is a key to why I have a problematic relationship or not. Yes, I do need to be more aware of and act on what men may be perceiving as pushy, intimidating, overbearing, impatient, abrasive, reactant and dominant. I would love to meet a man who as some have said recognizes and truly gets my sensitive and nurturing soul and can go the distance and do his part in the relationship to break through and vice versa. If he does not, I tend to interpret it as someone who just was not interested enough in knowing me despite how strong he came on at the outset. Perhaps because I do not wear these feminine qualities enough on my sleeve or lose touch of them at times it is a deal breaker which goes back to the difficulties that many strong career women face in balancing their career and personal lives. But I think that any woman, no matter how smart or successful she is, is eventually going to say something that raises a red flag to the guy that signals danger and may or may not be correctly and accurately interpreted but which unfortunately leads to the guy feeling that his only way out is through the back door. To further the damage when this person stopped communicating, I jumped in and took over the reins and imposed my own assessments on him (right or wrong) because I felt like I was on a sinking ship. So, smart, strong, successful women, perhaps we need to allow for the man to lead at the very least himself and not feel shut down by us. I also think that we need to pay careful attention not to transfer control or power struggles into the realtionship because most of us are looking for partnerships. Because so many of us are used to being in charge and having the answers, we stifle the natural evoluton of what just might be the chance and opportunity for a great relationship.
hunter 112
I heard this at a singles seminar, “Working women must learn to leave their balls, by the door, as they exit their work place, at the end of the day”.
Seductress Within 113
Hunter, that is a good quote. Some women try so hard to prove how capable, independent and strong they are that they forget or resent their soft feminine side, the side men love.
I realize men also like a woman’s strength, but it can be so overdone. When I was in corporate America, I worked with women everyday that if I were a man, I sure wouldn’t want to *blank* them.
vino 114
To take Seductress’ #113 point a step further…
“Some women try so hard to prove how capable, independent and strong they are that they forget or resent their soft feminine side, the side men love.”
- The disquieting thought is that maybe they don’t have a soft feminine side, the side men love.
Ellyn 115
Thanks Hunter; I see your point although I think that it also comes down to a matter of fit between the two people and how the woman uses her strength. Strength can be a very nurturing trait.
Vino, Im not sure of your purpose here, but frankly you come across as a misogynist. At least I took a look at my behavior and moved forward. The truth is that it takes two to tango or not and I was not the emotional cripple who ran away without uttering a word after he put up every red flag that there is in the book. I guess he was so enamored with my little ol feminine self that he became obsessive, demanding, pushy, oppressive, controlling, and ultimately commitment phobic to the point of not being able to utter one word. I did not deserve that.
Perhaps you should stop blaming smart, strong, successful women for the failure of some relationships as it seems your only alternative is engaging in a relationship with stupid, disempowered, loser women that make you feel more secure, wanted and in control. If your only expressions of self are put downs of women, its no wonder that you and too many other men find themselves alone or longing for substance if you know what I mean. Ever heard of the ability to express yourself to a real woman besides can I go to bed with you, will you wash and darn my socks, and yes, I do need that done. Please dont directly respond. Ive made my point and I already got yours.
I also dont think that it really furthers the discussion to make blanket assumptions about smart women not having a soft side or any particular asset or hindrance and the generalizations support my earlier point re preconceived notions that can lead to a misinterpretation of what the root causes of the problem are in a particular situation.
In my own scenario, I chose to examine the role that this particular dynamic played in how things progressed or not. I chose to express myself and sure, I can see some things that I might have done differently, but any healthy male who is interested in a relationship vs. possessing an object is going to have to develop some social skills that evidence emotional well being. I am not in the business of fixing, curing or rescuing anyone from their own apparent issues nor am I in the business of being less than who I am or walking on eggshells.
Sara Reed 116
Fantastic post. Great comparison to the whole ‘nice guys finish last’ complaint. So true as well, there are many “dating experts” who argue that women really don’t like men who are nice and really do want a man who mistreats them – what a load of donkey $#&*…I always say, it’s not that women don’t like or want a nice guy, it’s that nice guys often lack the element of excitement, confidence and passion that women often crave. Then I turn around and look at myself, a successful, intelligent woman who can fix things around the house, even renovate a little when I want and wonder if I’m man repellent because of it.
Your article game me some clarity here. 
Sara Reed´s last blog post…Little Things
Sayanta 117
Ellyn- post #115 is awesome! You said it, sister.
hunter 118
Nice guys are boring, so, I am told.
ellyn 119
Thanks Sara and Sayanta!
It takes a secure and emotionally evolved man to get it. Best wishes to the both of you:)
Karl R 120
Ellyn and Sara, (#111, #115 & #116)
Last year I dated an extremely bright and successful woman, so I will try to offer some insight into my thoughts.
I met this lady at a dance studio. I was immediately attracted to her because she was intelligent, funny, attractive … and a very good dancer. I later learned that she was a MD and a professor at a medical school (so she earns double or triple what I do, is much better educated and has a more prestigious job). She had started college at the age of 16 (proving that she was more intelligent than me). She’s at least as physically fit as I am (we both exercise at least 5 days a week). And she’s better looking than me.
I have good self esteem. This may be related to the low importance that I place on status symbols. (I’m aware that others place more importance on them, so they may judge me by my apparent lack of such symbols … but that has nothing to do with the way I view myself.)
However, it didn’t take me long to start wondering, “What on earth does she see in me?” After thinking about it for a bit, I realized that something about me was clearly attractive to her. As long as that was true, I didn’t have to worry about what it was that attracted her. I’m guessing that most men don’t make that realization.
Even though this lady was better paid than I was, she wasn’t happy with her job (due to an unsupportive administration). On the other hand, I love my job and work with a great team. At one point I commented that it could be argued that I had more job success than she did. She replied that, in her opinion, I did. I was somewhat surprised that she agreed with me, and I was very happy to learn that she defined “success” in a manner similar to me.
A lot of successful women are ambitious (which is how they become successful). A lot of them want a partner who is also ambitious. I’m not ambitious, and I don’t want a partner who is pushing me to become more ambitious. Therefore, I rarely date ambitious women.
This relationship fizzled after a couple months. Since she was unhappy with her job, she was looking for another job … and all of her prospects were in other states. It’s also possible that she wasn’t sufficiently interested in me to make time in her (very busy) schedule.
But back to the topic, I realized that this kind of relationship requires two things:
1) It requires that the man be comfortable with his own level of success.
2) It requires that the woman be comfortable with the man’s level of success.
Not only does the man need to be secure and emotionally evolved, but the woman needs to be secure and emotionally evolved as well.
————
On a related note, Ellyn mentioned problems arising from: “what I perceived as an expression of myself became an attack, criticism, judgment, analysis of him.”
I love intellectual debate, and I’m usually very outspoken about my opinions. I have learned that I have to dial this tendency down a lot in relationships (especially at the beginning). I try to qualify my statements to be perfectly clear that I’m discussing my perspective, my opinion, my experiences, etc … and that I like to hear about the lady’s perspective, opinion and experiences.
It’s actually easier to get to know a woman who is equally outspoken and debate oriented, since then we’re accustomed to playing by the same rules.
Sayanta 121
Karl R- A very thoughtful post- I especially agreed with the following two statements:
“But back to the topic, I realized that this kind of relationship requires two things:
1) It requires that the man be comfortable with his own level of success.
2) It requires that the woman be comfortable with the mans level of success.”
What it comes down to is being content with yourself and with someone else.
What I did question though, is the fact that you said you rarely date ambitious women. You’re entitled to date whomever you’re attracted to, of course. But what do you mean by ‘ambitious’? I ask because that word gets as misused as the word ‘feminist’ does.
If a woman (or man) wants to make as much of a positive contribution to the world with her or his talents, that’s ambitious to me. But I can’t possibly fathom how that would be a bad thing. I think everyone would be much happier if that’s exactly what they did.
I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but are you worried that an ‘ambitious’ woman wouldn’t have time to invest in the relationship? If that’s the case, there are career couples who’ve had lengthy and happy marriages. Also, I think it’s sad that it’s never the men have to choose between furthering their professional lives and marriage/family. It’s always us women who have to choose between one or the other.
hunter 122
Some women are so busy, that, they have little time for relationships with men.
Sayanta 123
“Some women are so busy, that, they have little time for relationships with men.”
Like I said- the same goes with men- but those men are somehow never lacking for girlfriends.
Karl R 124
Sayanta, (#121)
I would define an ambitious person as one who strongly desires to achieve wealth, fame, power, success, or some similar goal. To me, it’s the opposite of “being content with yourself”. And it usually doesn’t lend itself to being content with your partner … especially if your partner has no interest in wealth, fame, power, etc.
By contrast, I would say that Mother Theresa made “as much of a positive contribution to the world with her talents” as she could. She pursued her dreams. It consumed all of her time. But I would never say that she was ambitious.
But the statement that you made which lept out at me was: “I think everyone would be much happier if thats exactly what they did.”
Ambitious people are happier because they’re pursuing wealth, fame, power, and/or success. And they tend to assume that everyone else would be happier if they were doing the same thing.
If I was doing that, I would be miserable. I could set a goal of becoming wealthy, but I’d rather be content with the modest income than go through the steps it might require to become rich (pursuing a career that I wouldn’t enjoy, working with people that I dislike, working a lot more hours, etc). And I was pursuing wealth, I wouldn’t even feel that I was making a positive contribution to the world.
Or to give a different example:
I spend a bit of my time dancing. I’ve set some goals to learn more styles of dancing and to improve the styles I already know. I like being a good dancer, and I’m constantly trying to become a better one. A number of people have asked me if I’m interested in competing. I always tell them, “Hell no.” I like being good. I like showing off. I’d even enjoy performing in front of a crowd. But if I was trying to become recognized as “the best”, I would lose everything I enjoy about being very good.
I really lack ambition.
I expect a woman to pursue a job that she enjoys. I expect her to want to be good at her job. I expect her job will consume a fair amount of her time. (A typical week for me is 50 hours, a hard week exceeds 70 hours, and I understand that my date’s job may be more time-consuming than mine.) If we’re interested in each other, we’ll make the time … even on the busy weeks.
But if a woman believes that I would be happier if I would get a degree, get a “better” job, get promoted, earn more money, etc … then we’re never going to get along.
Sayanta 125
To Karl, Post 124:
“I would define an ambitious person as one who strongly desires to achieve wealth, fame, power, success, or some similar goal. To me, its the opposite of being content with yourself.”
I have to disagree here. It’s possible to strive for all of the above, but still have enough healthy detachment from the goals to enjoy life moment to moment (which is what I meant by the ‘content’ sentence). Any Hindu or Buddhist might tell you that (I’m the former).
“By contrast, I would say that Mother Theresa made as much of a positive contribution to the world with her talents as she could. She pursued her dreams. It consumed all of her time. But I would never say that she was ambitious.”
Why not? Mother Theresa was a great woman, but if you read detailed bios of her she wanted to strive for a certain success just like anyone else.
I think the trouble is that because our society has become SO materialistic, the words ‘wealth,’ ‘power,’ and ‘fame’ and ‘success’ have become red flag words among certain people. But these things are good to have, AS LONG AS you don’t become emotionally crippled from your striving to pursue them. THAT’s where most people go wrong. Is it hard to strive for all (or some) of these things and still remain sane and content? Of course. But it takes work to be a well-rounded individual.
“Ambitious people are happier because theyre pursuing wealth, fame, power, and/or success. And they tend to assume that everyone else would be happier if they were doing the same thing.”
I partly agree with the first sentence. Not the second one. Somebody who tries to change someone else is doing so because s/he is not happy with him/herself. Period. So these ambitious people might APPEAR to be happy to others, but if they’re going around trying to change others, they’re living in an illusion about their own happiness.
“If I was doing that, I would be miserable. I could set a goal of becoming wealthy, but Id rather be content with the modest income than go through the steps it might require to become rich (pursuing a career that I wouldnt enjoy, working with people that I dislike, working a lot more hours, etc). And I was pursuing wealth, I wouldnt even feel that I was making a positive contribution to the world.”
Well, this all comes down to personal belief, but I’m sure the Beatles and JK Rowling love their careers. And if you make a lot of money, you can always contribute a lot of that money to worthy causes.
“I spend a bit of my time dancing. Ive set some goals to learn more styles of dancing and to improve the styles I already know. I like being a good dancer, and Im constantly trying to become a better one. A number of people have asked me if Im interested in competing. I always tell them, Hell no. I like being good. I like showing off. Id even enjoy performing in front of a crowd. But if I was trying to become recognized as the best, I would lose everything I enjoy about being very good.”
I’m curious though, you say you ‘enjoy performing in front of a crowd’ and you ‘like showing off.’ It’s not ‘fame’ exactly that you’re talking about, but it IS recognition. If you enjoy performing in front of a crowd and showing off, there’s that spark of ‘fame hunger’ in you as well.
BTW, I’m not writing any of this to attack you, just to give my POV as well. I find that many of the things we condemn are desires that lie deep within us. Case in point, when I was in college, every time I saw a couple making out or even holding hands, I’d get disgusted. I thought- these people should be saving the world with their time instead of reveling in their sex-fests- as for me, I was in Amnesty, Save the Earth campaigns, and Women’s Alliances- I didn’t have time for all that romance crap. Then I realized that I did want that crap very much. I was DYING for romance and pissed that I hadn’t found it, so was taking it out by laughing at those couples.
I’m not saying you’re thinking the same way I was, but I’ve noticed that when people have strong dislikes against something, there’s something in there they are actually attracted to.
And- I’m not a dancer, but if were putting myself in your shoes (no pun intended), I would probably want to compete and see if I can top everyone else. AT THE SAME TIME, I’d maintain a sense of fun about it and not kill myself or anything if I didn’t win. I realize most people don’t do this, and that’s why I go back to my previous statement of how it’s necessary to be a balanced person, and how that takes WORK in our modern society.
“But if a woman believes that I would be happier if I would get a degree, get a better job, get promoted, earn more money, etc then were never going to get along.”
I fully agree. But see my above sentence on why I don’t think a person who is both genuinely content and ambitious would act that way.
Joe 126
Just because Karl likes to show off when he is dancing, that doesn’t make him ambitious–he’s not ambitious for personal recognition. I’m sure he wants to be the best dancer he can be, but the way he wants to do so is in a way where he’s the only one who cares about his progress, rather than comparing himself against a standard someone else has set.
Karl R 127
Sayanta, (#125)
Before answering your question (in #121) about what I meant by “ambitious”, I went to dictionary.com and looked up the definition of “ambitious”.
I would agree that it may be possible to strive for wealth, fame, power and success while remaining dettached enough to be content. However, I would say that when you strongly desire these things, you lose that dettachment. If you want to describe “ambition” as a more moderate version of the way I define the word, that’s fine. But at that point we’re discussing two different words.
Given your comments about Mother Theresa, I’m really curious about how you define the word “ambitious”. Could you clarify that for me?
(My understanding of Hinduism is limited, but I am familiar with how Buddhists describe “contentment” and “dettachment”. Specifically Buddhists teach that in order to end suffering and achieve contentment, you have to free yourself from desire, or become dettached. My initial usage of the word “content”, however, was based more on Epicurus’ teachings than on Buddha’s teachings.)
As you noticed, I like fame. I also like wealth. I really like to succeed. And I think power is useful. But part of contentment is understanding when you have enough of what you need. I have nothing against people having more wealth/fame/power/success than they need, but I always try to remain aware of what price I’ll have to pay in order to get more of any of them. (Usually the price is my time, which is a finite and valuable resource.)
Like you, I also maintain balance in my life, and I’ve found a way to do so that requires a lot less work. That gives me more time and energy to pursue other goals and passions.
If a woman has achieved balance and contentment in her life (regardless of how goal-oriented she is), I am more likely to pursue a relationship with her. That kind of woman is more likely to accept/respect/tolerate my values and lifestyle.
hunter 128
Balance and contentment? I think the kind of woman you describe is, and will stay married.
hunter 129
Some men have money to spend, that maybe why they are never lacking in girlfriends.
A-L 130
With this whole discussion I think it’s all in the eye of the beholder. I think people view ambition as trying to achieve more than what they consider is “normal,” and therefore depends largely on where they come from.
I earned excellent grades in college, went to a prestigious grad school, and am trying to attain what I consider to be moderate financial goals (for retirement). For many of the students I teach who come from predominantly low-income families with no post-secondary education (many with no high school education), I am very ambitious. In comparison with many of my friends and family (who are generally college educated with more lucrative professions), however, I’ve chosen a relatively low-earning profession, live in a small house, am not concerned about completing my postgraduate education, applying for various fellowships and awards, etc. They don’t consider me a slacker, but ambitious would probably be one of the last words they would use to describe me.
And I have to agree with Karl that it’s really fame, power, and money that we’re talking about. I don’t think most people consider a social worker or teacher who works seventy hours a week to improve the lives of others as ambitious. But if they were working all those hours so they could gain positions within administration, be recruited by other organizations and earn renown, then they could be considered ambitious.
All this to say that one shouldn’t judge someone else based on our own perceptions. There are white-collar professionals with a nice job title who may not be that ambitious (in the overly ambitious sense) and have a sense of how to maintain a well-balanced life. And just because someone else has a job title that isn’t as immediately impressive doesn’t mean they don’t have ambition. They might be a customer service rep, and then end up becoming one of the foremost dating experts. You never know until you give them a chance.
drahma 131
In the profession I work in, most people are working insane hours daily. Most of the guys on the teams I am on are married, as are many of the women. I’d say the individuals at my client sites are ambitious – in some cases very. However, they are able to make time for their loved ones – by leaving early some nights, not working the entire weekend, or taking time off in the middle of the day. I don’t see ambition as a bad thing and actually, it helps a relationship stay fresh with new interests and possibilities.
I agree with A-L – “All this to say that one shouldnt judge someone else based on our own perceptions.” You really do have to get to know a person to see if they aren’t able to achieve balance or make time in their life for someone new. And sometimes after starting a date a new person, your own ambition levels can increase because you want something different.
I guess love hits and then the results just vary.
Sayanta 132
“They might be a customer service rep, and then end up becoming one of the foremost dating experts.”
Sayanta 133
“I dont see ambition as a bad thing and actually, it helps a relationship stay fresh with new interests and possibilities.”
Yes! Thank you.
hunter 134
Where are these ambitious women?
drahma 135
Ambitious women are all over the place – the problem is that most of them are so focused on projects and things that they don’t pay attention to romantic interest all the time. They need some coaxing. I would recommend vacation spots (when they are unwinding), spas and such, coffee places, bookstores. At yeah, it sounds like many of the general places women go, but by having a conversation you can find out what these women are up to in their lives and what makes them tick. Ambitious people are people at the end of the day – all looking for human connection.
Sayanta 136
Sorry guys, but I just had to post this link here- an article from yahoo saying (GASP) ambitious people lead longer, healthier lives.
http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/health/your-happiness-these-two-personality-traits-may-lead-to-a-longer-and-happier-life-343421/
A-L 137
Sorry, Sayanta, but I’m not quite sure this article proves your point. It talks more about conscientiousness and discipline than about ambition the way it’s being discussed in this thread. It refers to paying your bills on time and studying for a test…studying may be more of a sign of ambition, but not necessarily so. But thanks for the link!
sayanta 138
Yeah- I actually posted it more to point out how one word can mean such different things to different people.
drahma 139
You’re right – ambition and success can mean different things to different people based on an individual’s value system.
hunter 140
It may have different meanings, but for most practical purposes, women that I have heard of using the termn “successful” in reference to a man, are trying to say that the man has “money”, is “financially secure”, “very well off”.
Ann Duckworth 141
Men are not afraid of successful women. They are afraid of abuse toward them by society, including women who may perceive men to be weak in some way. The nineteenth century belief Males should be strong allows aggression toward Males who appear weak in some way. Society provides love, honor, respect, support, etc. (the essentials for feelings of self-worth only on the condition of sufficient achievement, money, power, status, and image. Those Males who do not have sufficiency are not only given less love, honor, and respect, they are allowed upon them more aggression by society. This is displayed in the media every day. This makes men very competitive for they feel they must achieve in order to have those things that society provides women for being women. Added the nineteenth century belief Males should be strong that allow much more aggression toward Males and also the denial from day one of mental, emotional, social support from day one (for fear of coddling the Male) and you have Males falling behind Females mentally, emotionally, socially, academically, and economically.
Women, due to the nineteenth century belief woman should be protected are given love, honor, and respect simply for being women.
The nineteenth-century belief they should be protected also allows for much mental, emotional, social support, to only “appear to mature faster than Males”. By differential treatment Females are surging ahead. In addition that very overprotection by society allows women to give verbal, silent abuse, and hollow kindness or patronization with impunity. The combination of allowed aggressions upon Males who appear weak in some way, lack of support for Males, more than adequate support for Females, and the protected freedoms of various allowed verbal and nonverbal abuse by women makes a Male who appears weak in some way quite vulnerable to more abuse from successful women and more also from society.
Sayanta 142
Ann Duckworth, post 141-
Maybe I’m not smart enough, but I really don’t understand what you’re saying.
Is it that WOMEN aren’t respectful to men? I don’t know- I’m just trying to figure out your post.
Karl R 143
Ann Duckworth, (#141)
The information in your post is interesting. Could you direct me to some research or articles that support it?
Assuming your information is correct (and it sounds plausible), how is it useful? Any indictment of society, even if it is 100% correct, is of limited usefulness. Society isn’t going to change quickly enough to affect my dating life. So how does anyone (male or female) make use of this information in their personal life?
On a personal level, this automatically affects me (as a member of this society), but I don’t have to fall prey to it. I don’t buy into the status symbols that most people use to define their self-worth. I don’t treat people better because they have them. I don’t allow myself to be treated worse because I don’t. That means I don’t have to compete as hard to achieve, since my self-worth isn’t based upon it. And since I treat people as if they’re my equals, they frequently treat me as if I’m their equals (regardless of status symbols).
Second, I spend most of my time in environments where I’ll receive respect, support, love, etc. just for being who I am and excelling at the things which I naturally excell at. For example, I’m a good dancer. When I go out and dance, lots of women want to dance with me. I receive constant reinforcement that I am a valuable individual. (As a bonus, I have fun, exercise and meet women at the same time.)
It’s easy for me to maintain my self-worth when it’s so strongly reinforced three nights each week. I can’t change society, but I can sidestep the rules when I need to.
My final question for you: how can/should a smart, successful woman sidestep this societal rule?
Ellyn 144
RE Post #141
I’m with Sayanta. Perhaps, although I do not want to speak for you, you are referring to societies/cultures which equate the expression of emotion by males as a sign of weakness or potential weakness. Granted, many boys are told that they are sissies if they are “too” emotionally sensitive or effeminate traditionally speaking and will receive messages that if they express themselves emotionally or say cry, they will not grow up to be “real” men and may become proverbial doormats with women and women want strong men. For me, the key to healthy connection is all about the emotional connection and without men and women expressing themselves emotionally or being comfortable emotionally, problems will ensue. Emotions are strength. If one can really authentically be in tune with ones’ and others’ emotions, be respectful, establish healthy boundaries, and recognize that noone can do anything to us we don’t allow them to, then I think we would find our own strength and establish healthier connections. It is complex and challenging.
A person’s worth should not be measured by their status, academic achievements or how much money they have in the bank (for example), despite the harsh realities of what society often defines as “successful”. I see it as a problem if one’s self worth is based on those things you point out as they do not really bring internal happiness in and of themselves or self esteem, but rather may be substitutes that can soothe an otherwise insecure person.
For me, self worth is an internal process impacted by various environmental factors like family of origin and significant interpersonal relationships. We all choose who we are or want to be and noone, not even society in some way or the way that I perceive you are using it, can necessarily make or break someone’s sense of self concept or worth (although I’m sure there are arguments and examples to the contrary). Attaining and actualizing healthy self worth is an ongoing journey and one with the capacity for unlimited learning.
As far as women and society, I think of the women’s movement and what women have had to and continue to “fight” for in the way of so-called equality. Pay is still disparate between the sexes and chauvanism is rampant. Women, until not so long ago, were considered “property” of men legally and I also think about the rule of theumb; a man could leave a mark on a woman as long as it wasn’t larger than a thumb print. Society protected men and refused to hold them accountable; battering was considered an intrafamilial matter.
I think of traditional stereotypes of males and females and find those self limiting in some way. While I might think that it is admirable for loved ones to want to protect each other, I am unsure as to your defintion of “protection”. I want to be all that I am and can be and not be treated differently because I am a woman in certain matters, although I recognize that there are differences between men and women and different relationships treat these differently. I want people to call me on my stuff and not walk on eggshells because I am deemed too frail or too fragile because I am a woman. I certainly don’t want or think that I need overprotection from anyone; that would be stifling among other things. I also don’t think that anyone here condones abuse of any kind by either of the sexes.
Finally, I am assuming that you are a female by your name, yet I can’t wrap my brain around you post which in some way is hostile or in some distorted toward men and against women and seems to depicts women and society as abusive towards men when every statistic bears out otherwise. Most of us women have had to work very hard for what we have and make alot of sacrifices that perhaps men did not have to make. I prefer to embrace them rather than dis them in the name of “society”. Bravo to evolved men as well!
Ellyn 145
Sorry, last paragraph should read
…yet I can’t wrap my brain around your post which in some way is hostile toward women and seems to depict women and society as abusive towards men when every statistic bears out otherwise.
As an aside, isn’t it some men who patronize women? And aren’t wars, to me the ultimate aggressive act, usually started and fought by men, the ultimate in power and control??? (Sorry, perhaps I digress.)
Ann Duckworth 146
I think women like men, reflect their lives upon each other, not realizing the very large differences in treatment that begin from birth onward. For Males there is a continued increased feeling to misguided help to make the Male strong by using more force, more aggression, and more cautiousness or neglect of close, mental, emotional, social, – support, knowledge, and interaction due to not wanting to sissy or coddle Males. Since Females like Males (both have this problem) do not understand how the much close and open, mental, emotional, social – support, knowledge and skills have helped them, they are unable to appreciate any differences in treatment. Women believe all are treated the same and with the same supports. This becomes a part of the growing gulf between men and women. Also the much allowed freedom of expression for women to give more subtle and even more open hollow kindness and even patronization with impunity, makes communication between men and women that much more difficult. It is not so much disrespect as it is much overprotection for many years that has naturally made the woman’s words, tones, and inflections less rich, more tinish, or hollow. When the woman tries to then cover this by sounding more strong, instead of sounding more rich and compassionate in tone and inflection their more assertive words appear to be more aggressive even abrasive for there is insufficient history of suffering from the confrontations the Male has faced from early years onward. Then the combination of boh freedom of expression by women; the lack of equal appreciation of hardships showing up in the voice; the false belief in genetic ability and effort; along with the allowance by society in general to give more aggression to Males who appear weak in some way (society’s antidote for weakness in Males) all then work together to create more hardships for Males who are conversing with women where the woman feels to have an advantage. The message cannot help but come out in various ways and accumulates in harm over time.
Yes, differential treatment is created differences in mental/emotional growth, not genetics. Only by understanding this and reaching out from both sides to appreciate this will men and women be able to communicate more effectively.
So, it is not a matter of disrespecting Males as it is truly believing their natural expressions along with all of the other societal beliefs regarding Males that then leads to much harshness in treatment of Males who appear weaker. The media has been a very strong model of just how society treats Males who appear weaker in some way. While such treatment is allowed and seems comical to the viewer, it is accumulating much long-term harm to Males.
Ann Duckworth 147
To Karl and other responders, my learning theory will go to all on request by e-mail at mayfieldga@bellsouth.net
To many persons see themselves today in terms of treatment defined by hiring, job pay, allowances for positions, etc. I am talking about the many very subtle and some very open and continuous treatment differences that affect Male and Female children and later adults from birth onward.
When it comes to how a person should treat another person: We all need to begin freeing ourselves from the genetic models of Males and Female and the behaviors and skills usually attached. We need to help ourselves and others begin to realize that Male ane Female are very equal in all abilites (such genetic differentiation is being used to justify a caste system placing Males in more physical areas) and treated differently over time. We should not be concerned with how society will respond but for now, our own mental/emotional health and the health of those close to us. Again, my learning theory is for all on request at mayfieldga@bellsouth.net
Ann Duckworth 148
to Ellyn
yet I cant wrap my brain around your post which in some way is hostile toward women and seems to depict women and society as abusive towards men when every statistic bears out otherwise.
from Ann, Women, especially those more successful women truly believe in society’s belief regarding genetics and effort as to success. Society beliefs regarding treatment of Males to make them tough, not coddling Males, and using more power to Males who appear weak, of which Females have learned through much modeling to believe is the correct way to be, can only be expected to follow those guidelines.
As an aside, isnt it some men who patronize women?
from Ann; Yes, aggressiveness knows no bounds whether they be Male or Female. In this discussion we are talking about gross differences in treatment over time that has led to much difference in many mental, emotional, social, and academic skills that has now transferred into the real earnings. With the current false beliefs regarding simple genetics and effort “without regard to environment”; the false but understood reflecting of treatments toward Male and Female children from birth onward as equal; and the allowance by both individuals, the media, and society in general to use more forms of aggression toward Males who appear weak in some way, makes Male who appear weaker prime targets from society and more successful women. Also since this much differential treatment has led to some very subtle and some very open differences in voice, tone, and inflection by women who speak from power “without having faced the same continued agression as Males have faced from day one. This leads very a very different social language that can be interpreted either incorrectly or correctly to be patronizing to Males. Note: from observation you can see the Male ego being developed in young Male children. This is not a normal trait but a defensive front set up by very young Male children to protect them from the aggressions they have experienced in their lives. You do not usually see this trait in Female children to due much more support and protection given them.
And arent wars, to me the ultimate aggressive act, usually started and fought by men, the ultimate in power and control??? (Sorry, perhaps I digress.)
From Ann Yes, it is sad that Males are raised to believe they must be strong or run over. You see women are given love, honor, and respect simply for being Females from a very young age onward. They do not need to prove themselves to receive that love for they are women who not supposed to be strong and therefore there is no problem with giving love, honor, and respect to Females from a young age through adulthood.
As for men and yes, little boys, there is the belief Males should be strong. They are not given protection and support; that would be considered coddling Males. They are given more aggression to make them tough to be good little warriors. They are given love, honor, and respect only on condition of sufficient achievement, money, power, status, image, etc. This love, honor, and respect that women receive for simply being women are the essentials for a person to have “feeling of self-worth”. This not providing Males this goodness is not by accident but is designed by society to help make Males more competitive to the point of even giving their lives in war for tid bits of love, honor, and respect from society. So those little boys who play football and get in fights at school and put on that defensive front are desperately attempting to get those essentials of love, honor, and respect from society, the essentials of self-worth. Those Males who do not have sufficient will receive more aggression from society.
Evan Marc Katz 149
Hey, Ann, I appreciate your contributions here, but please don’t hijack the forum with three consecutive long posts.
Most people don’t have the patience to read that much and such posts dissuade participation from others. Many thanks.
hunter 150
Ann, my applause for the masters “Thesis”. Bravo!..
drahma 151
Ann, just a couple of questions/comments to the thread….
I don’t fully understand what you are referring to regarding girls being more sheltered. There is a different social response when someone sees a girl baby vs a boy baby, however, there are studies that show that girls are actually more destructive to each other over time than boys who whack each other around. Also, there are some girls who are raised without a very nurturing background at home and aren’t really protected, proven by the number of women who are in abusive homes – many do end up in that situation because they never changed certain life patterns learned in childhood or who are abusers themselves. I think that you are making an overgeneralized statement – but that’s just me.
For the communication style aspect of your theories, from my perspective and experience, many times there are social expectations around women’s communication. From what I have read and experienced, I don’t need to yell to make my point; being blunt works just fine and I get the same effect as a man raising his voice. Women in power positions usually don’t need to yell to make a point and if they do, they aren’t in that position for very long and are perceived to be hysterical and out of control and not worthy of power.
Women do experience aggression from other women – to a GREAT degree – different from men, but it’s still aggression (I could give a number of examples of how women are cruel to each other and most men would punch a guy for the same behavior or comment) and it is expressed subtly. Let’s face it – women are expected to be the more emotionally together sex. But if a man punches a whole through a wall (and MANY of my alpha male friends have done that to prove a point) – it’s threatening but it’s considered to be OK behavior in general by society. I guess my view on this is that it is less about how people are raised, and more about social expectations. Another example that relates to childhood — friends of mine who have young sons have very masculine boys, but these boys are the clingiest things going, constantly looking for hugs and kisses and support in the home (actually, looking for more support than the supposed protected daughters who never ask for a hug or anything). They aren’t being shown toughness by these moms, but these same boys will go hang out with friends and punch each other in the gut to be cool, accepted, and one of the boys. I think it really is more the social expectation on how we think people from a gender should act than how they really do act or act in private.
I think the challenge these days is if women are reaching or surpassing men in power positions in the workplace or otherwise, then what is the role of men in society, nevermind a relationship? A successful woman throws that fact in his face DAILY if he is dating her, just by being there. What man really wants to be reminded that the fears he has about being useless (if he is an insecure man) really may be true?
Sayanta 152
Hey Evan- How come Ann got a sweeter response than I did about the consecutive post thing? ;-p
Michael 153
When it comes to dating, why should it matter if the woman is smart, strong, or successful?
How is that relevant to how well a man gets along with her or how much fun he can have having sex with her?
drahma 154
Michael – Totally agree with you!
starthrower68 155
This reminds me of one of the topics in a class I just completed. We discussed gender bias as a social problem, which it is. Women walk a fine line these days. On one hand, we’re expected to go out, earn a good wage, and be able to provide just as nicely for the family as men. Then we come home and we’re expected to just shift gears immediately into the epitome of femininity. It’s difficult at best. Here I am, chief cook, bottlewasher, and breadwinner in my house; its up to me to be the protector and the provider as well as the nurturer. My situation now is not really any different thant when I was married except I make the only income and there’s no spouse. And for me, as I continue on in life without a significant other, it’s more and more difficult to be completely in touch with my feminine side. When you’re spending day after day making sure your family has what they need, femininity kind of takes a back seat.
vino 156
Michael brings up a good point….
How much fun. . .
Staying on the smart, successful topic and not the master’s thesis, my anectdotal (sp?) evidence is that the vast majority of very smart successful women aren’t that fun. They’re too busy doing for their careers (BTW – guys are too, it’s just that more women accept this as the cost of being with a successful man), and are not that fun in their personal lives, as there is all too often no ‘off’ switch re: work. That isn’t a criticism so much as an observation.
After all, shouldn’t dating be fun on some level?
starthrower68 157
LOL! Vino, you ask a great question! But with all the rules, and each person trying to be this and trying not to be that, fun is incidental.
hunter 158
Michael, go out with smart, strong, successful women and report back to us. Do that, if you can get them away from work, and family.
Starr 159
Yes, men are threatened by a successful well educated women, because our society has trained men to think that they have to be more educated than their significant other, since way back men have always provided for their wives and women always thought that they had to stay home and provide for thier husbands and that education was not important for a women, but now that women are starting to get higher paying jobs men are feeling threatened, To prove that women are becoming higher educated and well payed, even more than men these days, we almost had a women president and that would have made men fell very threatend by women our our socity.
Karl R 160
Starr said: (#159)
“men are threatened by a successful well educated women”
“we almost had a women president and that would have made men fell very threatend by women our our socity.”
Starr, there were millions of men who voted for Hilary Clinton. Obviously, they weren’t feeling threatened by the thought of a woman being president.
Some men do feel threatened by smart, strong, successful women. I can’t dispute that. But men are not a unified block of people who all think the same way. Some men feel threatened; some men don’t.
Sayanta 161
on that note- some WOMEN feel threatened by other successful women. The human ego is a fragile thing, regardless of gender.
hunter 162
Smart, strong, successful women, like to humiliate/disrespect others in public, that is the only problem I have, with this type of woman.
Maria 163
I believe most men want a strong successful mate. I am a professional woman, graduate degree, many licenses and certifications. I think it helps me to attract quality men. Having said that, it is not the only thing- or even the first thing a man will notice or comment on. Therefore, prior to leaving the house on a first date, I wear something tight. Oh yeah, and fun heels (not the boring heels I wear to the office.) I talk and laugh about what happened to me that day, whatever I found humor in. He then knows I am living in the moment and not wrapped up in my 10 years of accomplishments which are impressive, but oh so boring. Works every time!
Karl R 164
Hunter said: (#162)
“Smart, strong, successful women, like to humiliate/disrespect others in public,”
Hunter,
All the women I date are smart, the majority are strong, and a couple have been financially successful. None of them humiliated or disrespected anyone in public (that I was aware of).
How do you keep encountering women who do this to you?
Sayanta 165
Karl, #164-
Thank you!! I was wondering the same thing. Maybe Hunter’s making comments to these women that bring on fighting words? I don’t know- I’m just saying…
Joe 166
You know, I think Maria has it right. Guys do like “successful,” but you gotta lure them in with “fun” first!
hunter 167
Karl…see these women(both, one at at a time) that are smart, strong, and successful, one on one, on a boyfriend/girlfriend basis, approximately, 3-6 months, be on your best behaviour(as per Sayanta) and report back.
Sayanta 168
#167, Hunter-
Huh?? I have no idea what you’re saying.
A-L 169
I think what Hunter’s saying in #167 is that once women get comfortable with their guy (3-6 months) that they stop being on their best behavior and that their negative qualities become more apparent. I’d say that this phenomenon occurs in both women AND men.
(Note: I’m not agreeing with Hunter’s contention in #162 that smart/strong/successful women like to humiliate and disrespect their men in public. Just clarifying what I think he’s saying as it related to #167)
hunter 170
I was asking Karl, try not to make comments to these women, that bring on fighting words.
Michael 171
I was wondering.
Is it easier to get together with a woman with low self-esteem than one with high self-esteem?
Karl R 172
hunter, (#167)
Here’s the report:
Woman #1: (pediatrician, professor & researcher)
Always fun, outgoing and friendly. We dated for 1 1/2 months, but she couldn’t make enough time in her schedule to sustain a relationship, which eventually caused things to end. I ran across her a couple months later at a dance, and her biggest concern was that I might be upset/hurt by how things ended (I wasn’t).
Woman #2: (veterinarian & researcher)
Fun and affectionate. We briefly went out last year. We recently resumed going out this year. We’ve been friends (and seen each other a couple times per week) in the interim (about 8 months). I’ve watched this lady be civil (though not friendly) to a woman who poached a boyfriend from her, then bragged to her face about how good the sex was. If my friend can remain polite in public after that, I think she can manage ordinary circumstances.
_________
So to repeat my question, how do you keep ending up in relationships with women who like being disrespectful to you and others in public?
hunter 173
Michael, yes, you can be a bad boy around a woman with low self esteem, and she will stay with you for years, in some instances, for life.
hunter 174
1 and 1/2 months won’t do it. You have to get past the “perfect period”. The first 3 months, everything is hunk-dory.
You saw the second one as “friends”. That doesn’t qualify either. You must penetrate her.
Michael 175
Michael, yes, you can be a bad boy around a woman with low self esteem, and she will stay with you for years, in some instances, for life.
Cool.
Of course, women with low self-esteem often try to pretend otherwise.
Sayanta 176
Hunter-
From your posts it seems like you get a high from being a ‘bad boy’ with women. I repeat, it just seems this way from your posts.
Perhaps you behave that way with ‘successful’ women and when they won’t put up with it, they’re suddenly considered to be ‘humiliating’ you?
Karl R 177
Hunter,
You’ve managed to indirectly answer my question. I now understand how you end up with women who humiliate you in public … and I never do.
_________
Michael asked: (#171)
“Is it easier to get together with a woman with low self-esteem than one with high self-esteem?”
Yes … if you’re into that type.
A similar dynamic applies for women who date men with low self-esteem.
Sayanta 178
A person with high self-esteem will NEVER date someone with low self-esteem. So, Michael and Hunter- the fact that you’re even discussing this scares me. IMHO, you should probably work on self-esteem issues first before you hit the dating scene.
Michael 179
A person with high self-esteem will NEVER date someone with low self-esteem.
Why not?
People with low self-esteem can be fun to hang around with. And they do have an advantage of being easier to keep, if a few posts on this blog are any indication.
hunter 180
Karl, I stay with women longer than a month and a half.
Karl R 181
Sayanta said: (#178)
“A person with high self-esteem will NEVER date someone with low self-esteem.”
That’s like saying an attractive person will never date an unattractive person, or a rich person will never date a poor person.
It will happen sometimes. It just means that the person with low self-esteem has something else working in his/her favor.
____________
Michael asked: (#179)
“Why not? … they do have an advantage of being easier to keep”
There may be other drawbacks. About 15 years ago, I had a fling with a married woman. (She and her husband had an open marriage, so technically it wasn’t “cheating”.) At one point she admitted to me that she had self-esteem problems, and having sex with lots of men helped her “feel loved”.
People with low self-esteem tend to stay in lots of unhealthy relationships that they should get out of (not just romantic ones). They’ll continue to work for tyrannical bosses that underpay them. They’ll continue to help friends and relatives who leech off them.
There is a trade-off that comes with “easier to keep”.
Sayanta 182
“People with low self-esteem can be fun to hang around with.”
Jesus…what is this, The Twilight Zone???
Sayanta 183
“Thats like saying an attractive person will never date an unattractive person, or a rich person will never date a poor person.”
I disagree with this analogy- self-esteem isn’t superficial like looks or money. Perhaps, INITIALLY, a person with high self-esteem will go out on one date, maybe even two, with someone with low self-esteem. But very soon, the characteristics of a person with low self-esteem will irritate someone who’s secure with him/herself. And the more self-aware the secure person is, the sooner he or she will be able to catch the other person’s extreme insecurity, and the less likely the whole thing will even evolve into dating…
And Karl- you’ve pretty much said that you had a fling with a woman with low self-esteem. Perhaps your own self-esteem issues have changed for the better now, which is great- but don’t you think, at that time, maybe you had security issues yourself to go out with a woman with a history like that?
hunter 184
Sayanta, I never saw Twilight Zone, do they have people on there with low self esteem?
A-L 185
People who have self-esteem issues aren’t necessarily insecure about all areas of their life. Someone may be very confident about their job, intelligence, etc, but feel insecure about their appearance. Or someone might feel feel very secure about their appearance but less so about their intelligence, or their relationship skills, or their bedroom habits, or any number of things. Most people feel insecure about some area of their life. In dating someone, you just make sure you can live with their particular insecurity.
Sayanta 186
A-L-
That’s a good point- I should clarify: I was speaking more about insecurity to the point where someone gets into unhealthy situations in relationships.
Hunter-
Yes they do- and they usually get whacked on the head by talking dolls.
Karl R 187
Sayanta said: (#183)
“Perhaps, INITIALLY, a person with high self-esteem will go out on one date, maybe even two, with someone with low self-esteem. But very soon, the characteristics of a person with low self-esteem will irritate someone whos secure with him/herself.”
I think you’re assuming that a relationship between equals is the desired result. (You and I prefer relationships between equals, but that’s not the goal of everyone in this world … or even this country.) If you want to be “The Boss” in the relationship, you’ll need to date someone with lower self-esteem.
And even if the situation is more benign, there are shallow people who would tolerate low self-esteem if it would get them a relationship with someone who was more attractive or wealthier.
Sayanta 188
“If you want to be The Boss in the relationship, youll need to date someone with lower self-esteem.”
I’ve never thought about that (for the reason you mentioned)- sadly, I know many women who get a high out of criticizing and humiliating boyfriends/husbands who adore them (and no Hunter, these aren’t necessarily ‘smart, successful’ women as defined by previous posts). Now I know why these women stay with those men.
Wilhelm 189
I read most of these posts , and 99% of them miss the point. Rick Lynn laid out part of the problem that there is NO equality to begin with. Women are put on a pedestal from day one, because THEY HAVE OUR CHILDREN! Women are allowed to be, do, or say in a personal relationship whatever the hell they want with impunity! They hold ALL the social equity cards in divorce and marriage, yet they falsely pretend not to. Even in business situations they can castigate men soundly without fear of reprisal, yet men can only go so far or they may get punched in the nose, if they get too personal with another male. GET REAL PROFESSIONAL WOMEN! You are born and reared with all the politically correct advantages in pursuing a chosen career, with the one exception that denying or postponing marriage has a personal cost to it for you! YOU AS QUEEN have bought the lie that you can have it all by femanism.
The true power brokers wanted you to have careers because it takes you away from reproduction, which is what THEY wanted. And they perceive that NO REAL threat will come from a woman getting everything she wants if they step out of line; whereas a man may threaten another man with bodily harm if his career and personal world is threatened. You are taught that you have moral superiority to men, so you act accordingly with them. There is always a cost to great achievement and women are paying it also. Will they end up in middle-age with open heart surgery like Robin Williams, Dana Carvey, Letterman, or Schwartzeneggar? or just drop dead like anchorman Russell? What will it all cost you?
Sayanta 190
Wilhelm-
Dude, you’re bitter. The thing about bitterness and anger is they’re both forms of temporary insanity- which is probably why your post makes absolutely no sense. Breathe, my brother.
Michael 191
There is a trade-off that comes with easier to keep.
The important thing, of course, is to measure up to other people, to prove yourself as good as others. That is one of the reasons to be in a relationship.
Having a relationship with someone of low self-esteem may be a way to keep up with family, friends, and others whom you have grown up with.
Sayanta 192
Michael-
I’ve got to know- are you for real with your posts?
A-L 193
Michael,
I will have to say that many of your last posts have been a bit disturbing. Since your past posts (like from several months ago, and back) didn’t have this effect on me, you might want to think about if there’s something going on in your own life that has caused you to have a more pessimistic/pressured point of view on dating and relationships. Though I’ve never met you, the change in the tone of your posts is significant enough that I think you should have some major introspection, and possibly counseling. Just my $0.02.
Michael 194
Of course. Why should we not measure up to others?
Sayanta 195
Not to gang up on anybody or anything- but I’m going to have to agree with A-L’s post about you, Michael.
Unless- your posts are some kind of really bizarre joke? It’s just that I don’t understand a grown man having this obsessive mentality about needing to measure up to others- there’s something about your posts that make it seem that 1) You’re either not introspective AT ALL (which seems unusual, since you’re on this blog), or 2) You’re just pulling everyone’s leg to see their reactions to your posts
Karl R 196
Michael said: (#191)
“The important thing, of course, is to measure up to other people, to prove yourself as good as others.”
If you’re having to do this, then I would say you have very low self-esteem. If you have good self-esteem, you generally don’t need to prove yourself to others (unless it will affect your income or something else tangible).
“That is one of the reasons to be in a relationship.”
How does that prove anything? My brother first got married when he was in his early 20s (to a 3rd generation welfare mother). He’s now on his 3rd marriage. I’m in my late 30s, and I’ve never been married.
My brother would say he’s better at relationships than me, because he’s found three women willing to marry him. I would say that I’m better at relationships with him, because I won’t stoop to marrying the women he marries.
Neither one of us cares what the other one thinks.
Michael said: (#191)
“Having a relationship with someone of low self-esteem may be a way to keep up with family, friends, and others whom you have grown up with.”
So this would be something like the concept of a trophy wife? Except instead of getting someone who might qualify as a “trophy”, you would select someone who feels inferior to other people (possibly because she is less attractive, less intelligent or less successful than other people)?
Doesn’t that strike you as blatantly counterproductive to your stated goal?
Michael said: (#194)
“Why should we not measure up to others?”
Because it’s either trivially easy or impossibly difficult, depending how you do it.
It can be trivially easy:
I’m fair-skinned, so you probably have a better tan than I do. I don’t own a car, so you probably have a nicer car than I do. You’re better than me in at least two ways. Wasn’t that easy?
It can be impossibly difficult:
I’m a very good dancer. I have a innate sense of the beat, I learn new moves quickly, I have a smooth lead, and I have an excellent memory for moves I’ve already learned. I’ve taken dance classes for several years, and I’m out dancing 3-4 nights each week. Do you think you could measure up to me in dancing? And if you could, do you think you could also measure up to me in all the other things that I’m very good at? Almost everyone in the world has something that they’re good at, and almost all of them will be better than you in that niche.
If you’re trying to “measure up” to others, you’re either able to do it without trying, or you’re unable to do it no matter how hard you try. Therefore, what’s the point in doing it?
Michael 197
What about succeeding where everyone else has succeeded?
If you fail where everyone else has succeeded , should you feel anything aside from shame?
drahma 198
It depends on how you define success and who everyone else is. I think the whole relationship game is very subjective and it all depends on what you want and expect from life. There are some incredibly dysfunctional relationships out there that work for people yet I personally don’t see those relationships as successful. At times I’d rather fail, so to speak. It comes down to what you want and what you are looking for.
Sayanta 199
#197-
Everyone else? You realize, of course, that there are 4 billion people in the world -feel free to correct my exact number if I’m wrong….A-L? ;-P. How do you know ALL these people have succeeded where you have failed (whatever you mean by ‘success’ and ‘failure’) ?
I’m going to repeat what A-L brought up- you really need to do some serious soul-searching here. You also seem to be ignoring the advice everyone is giving you- usually this is a sign that someone is stuck in a ‘misery rut’ so to speak. Seriously, I would at least take a vacation somewhere exotic, if you can manage it, to at least clear your mind.
Karl R 200
A-L,
It’s closer to 6.8 billion.
Michael said: (#197)
“What about succeeding where everyone else has succeeded?”
Let’s say you’re referring to your siblings and closest peers (maybe 2 dozen people, instead of everyone).
If all of them had jobs and you didn’t, would you be a success or failure? What if all of them had jobs at McDonalds and Wallmart, while you were unemployed because you were still in law school?
I’d rather take the extra time and get the great job. I’d rather take the extra time and get a relationship with a terrific woman. And in either case, I’m not doing it to impress my peers. I’m doing it because I want a terrific job and an amazing girlfriend.
And in the case of my current girlfriend, that means a smart, strong, successful woman.
vino 201
Aren’t we a bit off-topic of why men supposedly don’t like smart, strong successful women?
A-L 202
Michael
We discussed the whole “measuring up” thing a bit in the Why You’re Still Single Thread (http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/why-youre-still-single-in-2336-words/) and I still believe that there’s a purpose in looking to see where others are who have the same goal as you. But all that does is give you one part of the picture. Are their standards different? What extenuating circumstances are there? As Drahma, Sayanta, and Karl have all noted, there are many reasons why a never-married person might be considered to be in a better position than a married one. Knowing someone’s marital status isn’t the whole picture. I really do have to recommend that you take some time to contemplate what it is you value and want, as well as how your self-esteem fits into that picture. And this may not just be related to romantic relationships here either.
Karl and Sayanta
I think Karl’s about right with the 6.8 billion, but I’ll have to get back to you after we find out the number of births and deaths today.
Vino
Actually, we aren’t off topic as we’re discussing why some men are more interested in women with low self-esteem rather than smart, strong, successful women. We’re just looking at it on a micro level rather than a macro one.
Michael 203
And in the case of my current girlfriend, that means a smart, strong, successful woman.
Karl,
What do you like about smart women?
drahma 204
I think one of the challenges in selecting a mate or date is that the person selected in some ways is an extension of how you view yourself (just an observation I’ve had of late.)
Karl R 205
Michael asked: (#203)
“Karl, What do you like about smart women?”
They’re my equals.
vino 206
A-L’s 202
“Actually, we arent off topic as were discussing why some men are more interested in women with low self-esteem rather than smart, strong, successful women. Were just looking at it on a micro level rather than a macro one.”
Not to argue, but it looks like it’s moving to low self esteem women from smart strong successful ones, and therefore a tangent.
I agree with Karl R’s 205. I’d have to add that different people are going to have different measures of ‘successful.’ I’d have to say that my definition of that includes someone who works 60+ hours per week, building and maintaining their career. However, this often necessitates a degree of self-centeredness vis a vie work. I love smart women. The super-successful career ones are fine to date here & there, but I’d never commit to them. Between my work schedule and theirs, it’s not worth it to commit to someone who isn’t there. I’d say that cuts both ways, btw.
I re-read the original poster’s letter (Michelle). I’d have to say that her inability to find a decent guys is expressed in her statement “Are men really that insecure?” Aside from the broad brush treatment, perhaps she repels men because she’s so quick to try and insult and belittle. Maybe the men she meets are making good choices to stay away from her based upon that. Just a thought.
Sayanta 207
Karl-
Michael’s next question will probably be, “Why do you want a relationship based on equality?”
Prepare your argument.
hunter 208
Vino, A-L may be quick to insult and belittle, but women don’t like to call it that, I think they call it, “Intimacy.”
vino 209
Actually hunter, I didn’t see A-L’s 202 as insulting & belittling. Now Ellyn’s 115, calling me a misogynist…. there’s a perfect example. I simply mentioned the possibility the super-successful women who don’t show their softer, more nurturing sides may not have them, and get called a misogynist. BTW, that’s a favorite tactic on these boards frequently… Oh well, you have to be prepared to get called names if you dare question certain paradigms, as they seem to be working so well… (sarcasm).
On a more positive note, can anyone offer why strong, successful (monetarily speaking in particular) generally don’t pair up with men less successful than they (monetarily speaking)? Or why men don’t pair up with them in general? How about we try to limit the reasons to what people DO, refraining from name calling.
A-L 210
Vino
Don’t worry, I’m not afraid of a discussion with opposing viewpoints. Past threads have shown (I think) that we can have differing opinions and not take it personally.
That being said, I disagree that [low] self-esteem isn’t relevant to a discussion about smart, strong, successful women. As you noted yourself, one of the OPs feels that men aren’t interested in her because of their insecurities. What is insecurity but another way to say self-esteem? These women who are describing themselves as smart, strong women have high levels of self-esteem, perhaps too much, which is why Michelle felt comfortable saying, “Im certainly not going to be less than I am just for someone elses insecurities.” They’re asking why men aren’t interested in them, and Michael has been answering why for himself: he wants a woman with low self-esteem.
Hunter
Though I might later regret asking this, I would like to know where you think I’ve been insulting and belittling. Since I make an effort to be the opposite of that, I am curious to know which statements I made were interpreted to be that way.
Steve 211
I remember this thread when it first came out.
I think Evan nailed it on the head back them with his thought that some women make the mistake in thinking that the qualities they want in men or the qualities that are rewarded in the work world are the same qualities that men look for in social situations with women.
A-L 212
Vino wrote, “Can anyone offer why strong, successful (monetarily speaking in particular) generally dont pair up with men less successful than they (monetarily speaking)? Or why men dont pair up with them in general?”
I’ll answer these questions in reference to the two OPs. In regards to Michelle, she sounds like a bossy know-it-all. When she says, “Im certainly not going to be less than I am just for someone elses insecurities,” she’s saying that she’s not willing to be accommodating to anyone, for anything. Who wants a relationship with someone like that, be it a romantic or platonic one?
As far as Catherine’s letter, I think she doesn’t have Evan’s mirroring technique down. When she’s not interested the guys think she’s elusive and hard-to-get, therefore more valuable. When she’s interested she’s probably intiating more contact with them and possibly smothering them, scaring them off and/or making them think that she’s too easy (am not referring to being sexually easy).
And Vino, I’m glad you didn’t think I was insulting and belittling.
Drahma 213
One of the challenges I have is that I often get discounted if I reveal too much about my work life and guys make a lot of assumptions about me based on that. And being shy, I’m not one for exposing vulnerabilities right away to make myself appear more feminie. I don’t have any obvious needs for a guy to fill (I don’t need a sugar daddy, I can figure most things out for myself, and often I’m looking for a friend first to get to know the guy to have a long-term relationship). I think it’s sometimes hard to figure out how to relate to a guy without getting put purely into the friend/peer category or the romantic category. When I get put into the romantic category, usually I get moved to friend/peer when we discuss my job (unless the guy is in a significantly senior job role). Now if I’m in the romantic category and we never talk about my work – well, honestly, does the guy really know what I’m like? It’s a hard balance and a hard game to play.
This is probably why I’ve mostly given up and thrown it all to fate. It’s a full time job just to figure out how to position myself so the assumptions about me are more accurate.
vino 214
A question for A-L –
How on earth do you do the bold text? Afraid I am not the tech wizard.
I think I’ve previously agreed with Evan & Steve on Steve’s 211 sentiments, but it merits mention. Perhaps the things most women value in men (dating-wise) aren’t what most men value in women (dating-wise).
On the self-esteem tangent –
I just see it as nonsensical. Here’s how. Depending on who you talk to, too much self-esteem could lead to OP’s type of comment, but depending on who you talk to such bravado is rooted in too little self-esteem, causing over compensation or any other innumerable behaviors. That’s why I think it is a tangent. It can be anything to anyone.
vino 215
A-L,
Oh, I can see when someone’s being a name calling, shoot-the-messenger sort, just because they don’t like a potentially contradictory message. You haven’t done that here to me.
Can’t say the same for others, though…
A-L’s 212:
- On OP Michelle – Agreed.
- On OP Catherine – A different take. I don’t know nothing ’bout no mirroring technique…
However, when it comes to acting nice & devoted, maybe it is possible she is really just acting, and they pick up on it.
Dhrama’s 213:
Unfortunately assumptions are a built-in part of dating, borne out of what occurs more often than not. And they cut both ways. Sometimes being overly analytical about yourself (not to say you are) in dating is telegraphed to people you date, and they don’t ever know if they are really getting you, or the overly analyzed package you think you should be.
A-L 216
Vino
To do bold or italics you put with the letter B or I in between the two arrows in front of whatever word(s) you want to be bolded/italicized. After you finish with the part you want emphasized you do with the B or I after the slash. This is basic html stuff so you can also look it up online if my description isn’t that clear.
I’ll try to put an example here but I don’t know if it will work or not.
Example (Remove the periods and then “Example” would have been bolded.
In terms of the self-esteem issue (I won’t call it a tangent) I agree with you how people could take Michelle’s statement and see it shows too much or too little self-esteem, but won’t go so far as to say Michael’s issue wasn’t related to the original topic.
I’m not as cynical about Catherine, though it’s possible she was just acting, but I think most people are better than they’re given credit for.
In respect to mirroring, Evan’s talked about it in a couple of different posts. Basically, the woman should just follow the guy’s lead in terms of the pacing/involvement in the relationship. He discusses it further in these two threads:
What To Do When the Guy You’re Seeing Won’t Commit http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/what-to-do-when-the-guy-youre-seeing-will-not-commit/
The Most Important Dating Advice You’ll Ever Hear: Don’t Do Anything http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/the-most-important-dating-advice-you%E2%80%99ll-ever-hear-%E2%80%93-don%E2%80%99t-do-anything/
The second link isn’t the one I was looking for (I thought Evan brought up mirroring again in a recent thread but I can’t find it) but his whole “say yes” thing is sort of related to mirroring.
Also, out of curiosity, why are you seeking a successful woman (which you’ve defined as one who works 60+ hours a week)? Could it be that women with similar backgrounds/jobs as yours feel the same way that you do?
hunter 217
A-L, I retract my statement, you didn’t say that.
A-L 218
Vino
The part of my post on HTML was totally incomprehensible since the website took out all the key parts when it was posted, so trying going to this site http://www.pageresource.com/html/textags.htm which shows you how to do it.
Hunter
Thanks for the clarification.
vino 219
Thanks for the html tutorial. I appreciate it. And thanks for the info about mirroring, though I admit the notion sounds gimmicky in that you are being other then who you are. That is a knee-jerk 1st reaction only to your summary. Nothing more. I reserve my right to change my opinion should I read something that not only disproves it, but also that you are not being ‘fake’ in doing so.
Without going into why (or even if) I seek any woman, successful or no, I think the topic is interesting. Here’s how – There seems to be this notion by many, if not most women, that men should value them in dating (and marriage in the end, presumably) for their career and educational accomplishments, their strength (this is another word than can mean different things to different people in this context particularly). These are things my anectdotal evidence ( I suppose I could go find something more empirical) says the vast majority of women seek in men.
Here are a few issues as I see it. Underlying assumptions. Other posts on this blog and most other sources would agree (I’m not going to research it now, at 6:40 am) that women generally assume men should not only pay for most things in dating, but also earn more than them. The reasons are varied and there are other threads on this, but the main point is a very successful woman with these basic assumptions (which I think most have), necessarily has a very small pool of men. If you make $200k/yr, you are already in the top 2% of wage earners, so doing the math, there isn’t a majority of the populace fitting your criteria, maybe 1% of it.
Some of the other issues are fleshed out above – time, personality traits, etc.
But I see a basic hypocrisy in the approach. That men should value these uber successful women for the traits women generally value in men (career, $, education, etc), yet still assume (and I think most do) that men should have preferably more success, strength $, etc, than they do. I can explain a bit further, but this is getting too long.
vino 220
I wrote “I reserve my right to change my opinion should I read something that not only disproves it, but also that you are not being fake in doing so.”
I should rewrite that to be, “I reserve my right to change my opinion should I read something that not only disproves it, but also that one isn’t being fake in doing so.”
Perfect example of unclear pronoun use. That sentence wasn’t to apply to anyone in particular.
Karl R 221
vino said: (#219)
“mirroring … sounds gimmicky in that you are being other then who you are.”
It’s not about being anybody other than who you are. It’s about tailoring your actions to the circumstances.
Let’s say you’re chatting with a cute, funny and friendly lady at a party. Things are going rather well. Then a male friend of hers arrives. Upon seeing him she throws her arms around his neck and gives him a big kiss on the cheek.
Is this the right moment to ask her for her phone number?
You probably still find her just as cute, funny and friendly as before. You don’t need to pretend otherwise. But you won’t have much luck in getting a phone number while this other guy is the center of her attention (even if he’s just a platonic friend).
Similarly:
If a man doesn’t return a woman’s last two voicemails, it’s not a signal that she needs to call four more times. If she keeps calling him, it will be counterproductive.
A-L 222
Vino wrote, “Women generally assume men should not only pay for most things in dating, but also earn more than them.”
My recollection of the previous threads about who should pay was that the majority of women (though not all) felt that men should pay for the first few dates, or even the initial courtship phase, but that after the first few dates (or until exclusivity is reached) that the women split the costs with them. Basically, a nod to tradition and then converting to some of the more gender equality that is sought in the 21st century.
As far as earning more than them, well, women were all over the map. You could find any type of woman on this one, though I’m not sure if any one type has a majority of women belonging to it.
And no arguments that if a woman earns $200k and wants a guy to make at least as much as she does, then she’s looking at a very small dating pool.
Vino wrote, “But I see a basic hypocrisy in the approach. That men should value these uber successful women for the traits women generally value in men (career, $, education, etc), yet still assume (and I think most do) that men should have preferably more success, strength $, etc, than they do.”
I think that these uber successful individuals have a high degree of self-motivation, self-esteem, knowledge about how the world works, discipline, perseverance, etc. They’re seeking someone with similar amounts of those qualities that they themselves possess. Yet none of those traits are specific to one gender over the other.
Basically, the uber successful who are seeking an uber successful mate are applying a very strict filter on their dating pool. But that doesn’t change the fact that they are (probably) looking for someone to fulfill the traditional gender roles. Essentially, the woman is seeking a man who can protect her and make her feel feminine while the man is seeking a woman who makes him feel strong and masculine. Just because each person in the relationship earns a great deal of money doesn’t mean that that they want to change the traditional relationship dynamic between a man and a woman.
vino 223
Here’s where I disagree with A-L’s POV –
“But that doesnt change the fact that they are (probably) looking for someone to fulfill the traditional gender roles. Essentially, the woman is seeking a man who can protect her and make her feel feminine while the man is seeking a woman who makes him feel strong and masculine. Just because each person in the relationship earns a great deal of money doesnt mean that that they want to change the traditional relationship dynamic between a man and a woman.”
I disagree with the characterization. Where’s the translation from a strong, successful woman to being protected and feminine? Ever notice the logic train switches tracks here from smart, strong & successful [usually objective criteria] to being ‘protected?’ By that rationale, a $200k+/yr attorney should be perfectly fine with a $45k/yr burly lumberjack. That simply doesn’t happen very often, if at all.
Sorry, it just looks as a tortured justification for this thought – “I want someone who can/will take care of me in the manner to which I am accustomed.”
Here’s the hypocrisy – I’m going to boil it down to this statement by expressing it this way, and think I’ve done so before – If men applied the same criteria to women as women apply to them, by dating on those who make the same or more, there wouldn’t be much dating or marrying. BTW, if you are touting smart, strong & successful as the criteria, it should be applied equally.
“Theyre seeking someone with similar amounts of those qualities that they themselves possess. Yet none of those traits are specific to one gender over the other.”
- They aren’t but, I find it curious more of a certain gender seek those qualities in the other, yet would howl in protest if applied back to them.
I’ve been told you know something is unjust when the person would not apply the same criteria to themselves as they demand from others…
Karl R 224
vino said: (#219)
“I see a basic hypocrisy in the approach. That men should value these uber successful women for the traits women generally value in men (career, $, education, etc), yet still assume (and I think most do) that men should have preferably more success, strength $, etc, than they do.”
I don’t see this as hypocritical. These women may be making two incorrect assumptions, but I don’t see hypocrisy in either belief.
I think we can agree that men and women are drawn to physical attractiveness. If we’re attractive, we can reasonably expect that others will be drawn to that trait. However, we’ll still want to be with someone who is attractive … preferably more attractive than we are. Is that hypocritical in any way?
But any woman who makes the assumptions you mentioned is wrong on two accounts:
Men don’t highly value those accomplishments:
Women value those traits in men. But as Evan pointed out in a recent newsletter, a man primarily wants a woman who will make him feel good about himself when he’s with her. A smart, strong, successful woman can still do this, but her ability to do this is unrelated to her ability to be professionally successful.
Seeking someone smarter, stronger and more successful is not a good strategy:
If you’re a genius seeking someone smarter than you, your dating pool is going to be very small. As A-L (#222) pointed out, the same is true if a you earn $200K/year and seek someone who earns more.
Shrinking your dating pool more than necessary is not a good strategy.
But I don’t see how these counterproductive strategies are hypocritical (individually or combined).
vino said: (#223)
“Ever notice the logic train switches tracks here from smart, strong & successful [usually objective criteria] to being protected? By that rationale, a $200k+/yr attorney should be perfectly fine with a $45k/yr burly lumberjack.”
Let me rephrase it more clearly. Women want an alpha male. They want someone they can take to the company Christmas party who will be respected by her peers. A group of oil company executives or cardiologists would be unlikely to view a lumberjack as an “alpha” or an equal. But they might view a NASA engineer as one, even if he earns substantially less.
vino said: (#223)
“Ive been told you know something is unjust when the person would not apply the same criteria to themselves as they demand from others”
Really? What’s your bra size?
A-L 225
The smart, strong, and successful (women and men) are just fine being judged by their degree of being smart, strong, and successful because they’d come out ahead. People would be all over them. Because these are qualities that women value, the men that possess those qualities are considered a real find. Since men don’t tend to value those qualities as much, these women aren’t particularly sought out. They’re not necessarily avoided, but they will have to attract the men with something else (something the men value).
But I’d be willing to wager that the majority of men say they want to be viewed as the protector. And when we’re talking about protection, we’re talking physical and financial. Though we always talk about the short guys have trouble getting a date, tall women (5’10″ and above) also have that problem. And on another blog the men were commenting saying that it was because they didn’t feel as masculine/strong when they were with a taller woman. And the same thing often happens when the financial dynamic is reversed (see the thread How Do You Convince a Poor Guy That You Really Do Like Him? http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/how-do-you-convince-a-poor-guy-that-you-really-do-like-him/).
This is not to say that women will never go for the poorer (or shorter) guy or that guys will never go for the richer (or taller) girl. It’s just that it’s not the traditional way that male-female relationships have been set up, and many are not comfortable with that.
I can guess what you’re going to say already, and that it’s a hypocritical double-standard for women, and I’ll just go on ahead and say fine. But realize that the way that (most) women feel about finances is how (most) men feel about appearance. How many below-average looking guys will only contact the best looking women on dating sites? And it’s far likelier that you will find a good-looking woman with a not-so-good-looking man than the reverse. The same way that you’re far more likely to find a wealthier man with a poorer woman than the reverse.
vino 226
I’d say that karl is putting a different spin on my conclusion, that the smart, strong very successful (I’d throw in independent also) women choose incompatible (I’d say hypocritical – see below) strategies.
I’d note Webster’s definition of hypocrisy – “a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not”
“A group of oil company executives or cardiologists would be unlikely to view a lumberjack as an alpha or an equal. But they might view a NASA engineer as one, even if he earns substantially less.”
- They MIGHT, but it is unlikely (again, what is more likely than not). In either scenario, if he earns less, she would most likely not be with him.
I’m going to question what is meant by Alpha male. I have no idea what specifically that means. I am not going to guess at the definitions, for I suppose 10 different people will propose 10 different definitions. Sorry to be such a stickler on language sometimes, but when certain words lack clear definitions, particularly if key to the point someone’s making. Since we’re talking about smart, strong & successful and possible hypocrisy, I do not know what karl means regarding alpha. What does ‘socially dominant’ (Webster’s definition) in a group of animals mean?
_______
A-L brings up protection, which again, means more than simply physical protection. It includes financial. Sorry, that’s often the code for ‘protection’ I’ve found, which is why I asked clarification. I’m going to stick to the strong, smart & successful subject for the moment, keeping aside the other subjects of looks, height that both karl & A-L raised, for it’s a bit off-subject.
A-L wrote: “But Id be willing to wager that the majority of men say they want to be viewed as the protector.”
- My point is whether smart, strong, successful women are being hypocritical, not whether a potential majority of men would like to be viewed as a protector.
Here’s the crux of it then – if these women are so smart, strong and successful, seeking the protection (defined as supervising or supporting one who is smaller and weaker), kinda flies in the face of being so smart, strong & successful. See hypocrisy definition above – “feigning to be what one is not”
Maybe women in general do want to be taken care of, whether they care to admit it or not.
BTW, I agree with A-L regarding this as an all-or-nothing discussion. It’s not all-or-nothing. My point is that more often than not, or more likely than not, this little double standard applies. But not every time. See the other threads regarding resenting boyfriends for not pulling their weight, etc.
I’m trying to decouple the financial discussion from the one regarding looks, but in reality they are linked. That’s perhaps best explored in another thread.
Drahma 227
Just my 2 cents on how I view a protector as a successful woman….
I don’t really care how much money the guy makes – in fact, I think most executive types are arrogant and annoying. I’m looking for someone who has a good heart, cares about my feelings and my welfare, and lets me be me at the end of the day. I don’t want to have to come home to prove myself like I do every day at work. I want to be able to express an emotion or two (cry, even) with someone there to hold me and console me or be happy with me. I see an alpha male as someone who can do that, but at the same time has enough “balls” to tell me when I’m wrong, not let me boss him around (I’ve broken up with guys who let me call all the shots – that’s just boring), let me console him when he’s having a rough time, and tells me the truth whether I want to hear it or not. He takes the initiative on plans in general – he doesn’t have to pay for them if that’s an issue – but he pushes forward the plan. He may also help solve my problems and take charge of them and sure, I’ll listen to his advice and do what he recommends if I agree it’s a good idea.
A woman is still a woman at the end of the day, and although she may not need money, she still has a need for the other things a man provides. Personally, I want someone balanced – not a pushover who is too easy to manipulate and make into a pet rather than significant other.
hunter 228
Drahma, I think, the man that you describe exists, but in a narrow pool of available men. Most men don’t like telling a woman she is wrong, ’cause their is a good chance we will get something thrown at us. If you need to hear, what you say, you need to hear, see a therapist…
A-L 229
I’m with Karl on NASA engineer issue. I can’t think of anyone who wouldn’t think that a NASA engineer was darn cool and impressive. And if someone chose to make an issue over his reduced income, then I can only imagine it would be the witchiest, shallowest, person alive.
—————————————————————————
Let’s take the word strong out of this discussion for a second. Let’s just say smart and rich. If you are smart and rich, is it hypocritical for you to want someone who is your equal or greater in terms of smarts and riches? I’d say no, it’s not. Yeah, you can pay for your own dinner at a fancy restaurant, but it’s nice if someone else can pick up the tab too.
If you want to apply this criteria to your dates, go for it. You can apply whatever dating criteria you want, regardless of how your dates feel about it. Short guys don’t like the fact that many women filter them out, but it’s not hypocritical of the women. Same way that you can filter women out who don’t make at least as much money as you do. How your dates feel does not make you hypocritical, whether they use the same criteria or not.
—————————————————————————
Going back to “strong” now. Since you’re into definitions, I’m picking the 2nd definition from the New Oxford American Dictionary (1st definition was having the power to move heavy weights or perform other physically demanding tasks, and I think we’re all in agreement that most males are physically stronger than most females, and hence not the strong we’re talking about).
Ok, on to the definition I’m using of strong: Able to withstand great force or pressure. We’re talking about people who aren’t going to cave at a little (or even a lot) of stress, or in other problematic situations. Just because a woman’s seeking someone who is as strong or stronger than her doesn’t reduce her own strength
—————–
And to the other piece, protection . Well, my dictionary gives the following definition of protection: a person or thing that prevents someone or something from suffering harm or injury.
Nowhere does it indicate that the person being protected is smaller or weaker. If I push my boyfriend out of the path of a speeding car, I just protected him. Does that mean he is now smaller and weaker than I am? No. If I serve as a buffer between him and an intimidating family member of mine, trying to deflect some of their verbal assaults, does that mean he is smaller and weaker than I am? No. Being protected does not reduce your own size or strength.
Therefore, a woman is not being hypocritical by saying that she is strong yet she still wants to be protected by her S.O.
As far as the alpha issue goes, maybe someone else will respond, as this post is already too long as it is. If not, I’ll try to respond later.
Karl R 230
vino said: (#226)
“Im going to question what is meant by Alpha male. I have no idea what specifically that means.”
Watch Cesar Millan the dog whisperer. He talks about social dominance and alpha males all the time. Human males establish a social hierarchy in a way that’s similar to dogs. And you’re not going to get a crystal clear definition of either term, since they’re never clearly defined in real life. A lot of social dominance is based on attitude, body language and bluffing. And unlike dogs, we generally can’t “fight” to settle the issue.
Example:
If you’re convinced that a woman will prefer a richer man in every (or almost ever) circumstance, then your body language will reflect that belief every time you’re around someone who earns more than you. If you’re both pursuing the same woman, you’ll be convinced that you’re already destined to lose, so you’ll appear less confident. That allows the other man to achieve social dominance over you in this situation.
The NASA engineer, on the other hand, is probably convinced that he could have become a cardiologist or a corporate executive if either career interested him. He chose to forgo a more lucrative career in order to pursue one that he’d enjoy more. Since he believes that he’s at least the equal of the wealthier man, his body language will reflect that belief.
hunter 231
Generally speaking, the Apha male, will be VERY persistant/charge/be all over/ARRRGH!…the woman he wants.
vino 232
3 people can’t even define it….the term is therefore useless as a frame of reference
Karl R 233
vino said: (#232)
“3 people cant even define it.the term is therefore useless as a frame of reference”
You might want to avoid making sweeping statements about whether particular words are useful. At least three people disagree with your definition of “hypocrisy”. You seem to have difficulty understanding the meaning of “mirroring”. And earlier in the thread you acknowledged that we’re using many different definitions of “successful”.
If we limited our discussion to terms that you felt we had a common definition, we wouldn’t have much of a conversation going on.
Many of us find the term “alpha male” easily understandable and useful. Feel free to skim over any sections of the forum that discuss it.
Evan said: (in a recent newsletter)
“In general, women want men to be leaders. They want someone tall, masculine, intelligent, and decisive. They want him to be a passionate captain of industry – a man who can hold a room with his charisma, tell a story that makes your sides split, and can bring home the bacon as well.
That alpha male is very attractive…”
Does that help, Vino?
hunter said: (#231)
“Generally speaking, the Apha male, will be VERY persistant/charge/be all over/ARRRGH!the woman he wants.”
That type of behavior is unnecessary for an alpha male. As Evan said, women are attracted to an alpha male. He has options.
He doesn’t have to be all over one woman. Instead he can split his attention among five (or ten or twenty), then wait for the woman he wants to start competing with the others for more of his attention.
hunter 234
Karl, yes, how true, most men that can do this are good looking. I have seen my wing man operate, he is quiet, most of the time, doesn’t say much, other than show women his blue eyes, yet women find him “charming”.
Bob 235
First- Us men are NOT INTIMIDATED by “strong, outspoken, independent, successful women”.
What we are is TIRED of hearing about how “great” you are, how “outspoken” you can be. Honestly, I don’t care. (Actually I do, get away from me-you come across like every other arrogant person who believes their ideas are better than anyone else’s.)
As others have pointed out, we don’t want a competitor when we come home from work where we’ve had to fight all day. We want a COMPANION, a PARTNER, and so should any “smart” woman.
The old feminist line is “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”. What the OUTSPOKEN, overbearing woman is saying is “I don’t need you” to the man. If that’s so, then why are we there?
If a woman is so self-reliant, then what JOB does a man have in her life?
Bottom line: Some women who complain that men are “intimidated” by them, are just pushy and overbearing. So men walk away rather than deal with that.
Steve 236
@235
The old feminist line is a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.
I think Gloria Steinham wrote that. Years ago I remember reading a magazine article about how she married a super rich old guy.
Bottom line: Some women who complain that men are intimidated by them, are just pushy and overbearing.
That is pretty much what Evan wrote, just more diplomatically.
I agree with you, these women come across as excessively “look at me!”
drahma 237
Wow – those seem like pretty angry posts (at least that’s the tone I’m reading). I know when I come home I’d like to be around a guy who takes on that traditional role (as would I) and I’d personally like to be as supportive to him as he is to me. I don’t want to be supportive to someone who is angry and doesn’t appreciate any of my achievements. In the past I have come home and squashed any of my excitement from the day so I could be supportive for my man – I’m kind of done with that. I’d like to share my happiness and sadness and frustrations too. In general, I prefer being around positive people who are happy for others and their successes (male or female). I think that goes for anyone who is successful. Maybe this is an article more for people to find more positive people?
Steve 238
@237
Its not about not wanting to share the happiness of success with someone whose company you enjoy. Sign me up.
Its about ending up on dates with someone whose company you don’t enjoy because they are pretentious and sometimes narcissistic. Evan’s article was about giving such a people a diplomatic clue as to why they are not doing as well with dating as they could.
drahma 239
I see your point and agree to a point…..however, just to clarify my perspective – there are narcissists who are not successful and pretentious people who can barely get by in life. I think my point is that if you are yourself and you have some traits that may cause contention, agreed, it is harder to find someone. But at the same time, you can’t judge someone because he or she has some level of success (I just felt a lot of judgment from reading your post, and I may be wrong in my assessment of what you were writing). Not all successful women brag or throw achievements in someone’s face, but sometimes people may think that because a woman mentions a huge achievement and the other person (male or female) is feeling insecure with their own lives. Self-perception has a huge impact on how you view someone else. A good friend of mine likes to debate political issues and will really challenge you if you don’t agree with him (I personally find it refreshing). His girlfriend couldn’t handle how he discussed issues and found him to be too argumentative. Go figure. Some people have told me I’m just looking for attention because I like to dance and have a good time with close friends – mind you at large parties I tend to hide in the corner and talk to 2-3 people. Depending on who you talk to and how they view themselves and what’s acceptable or not makes a difference in the end perception. So in a way, yes, it’s about the diplomatic clue; but in another way, it’s about finding someone who is ok with your quirk.
Steve 240
@drahma, #239
It seems like success, personality traits, dating and some of other things are getting conflated.
If you haven’t, read Evan’s original article for this thread.
The woman who wrote into Evan stated, more or less, that she had a great resume, a decent appearance, yet was having trouble finding someone.
Evan’s response was mostly on two points.
The first point he made was that while it might be a generalization and a bit dated, men in general don’t get excited about a date’s resume as a primary focus. Traditionally, it is women who have been excited about dating doctors, lawyers and business owners.
The second point he made was that personality traits that bring rewards in the business world don’t always work well on dates. Men have been warned about this for years. Women as a group haven’t learned this yet and mistakenly write it off as men not liking strong, successful women. It isn’t success or strength that is the problem.
The “if he doesn’t like me it must be because he can’t handle how wonderful I am” attitude is itself a bit pretentious.
When combined with boring work talk, not being curious about the other person and having a “work place personality” on a date you get a woman who is not going to get another date.
You also get a number of people who have been on those dates with those type of people chiming in with “amen”s. I can’t speak for the other commentators, but that is where I am coming from.
I’m sure when you are with your girl-friends you talk in a manner that expresses your emotions but when looked at word for word you wouldn’t want to say it represents who you are.
Guys don’t have girl-friends to dish too, so you will find a few strongly worded “amen”s from men in the anonymous comments sections on dating blogs.
It doesn’t mean they are out in the world bent over with anger.
Heather Ferreira 241
Evan, boy does this topic speak to me. A couple years ago I was a careerist hard-line feminist, and a bit of a racist, too: get this – a black woman who would not date black guys, owing to a sexual assault experience back in the Eighties that all black guys should not be blamed for. I have now learned this, after dating some of New York’s most truly wonderful fellows of all races. But I digress. Anyway, I treated relationships like combat and saw men as my enemies. After all, why not, I reasoned? Sure, they might look at my chest and not my face, but then ignore my of course it’s so jaw-droppingly fantastic resume, fail to be impressed by my oh so glamorous so-called career, take a peek at super career me but then move on – or force me to move them on – to softer, rounder girls whom at the time I considered weaklings, Stepford throwbacks, doormats. And then they would marry these girls!
Why was this happening? I even poured up a heaping mugful of liquid hate for a very good author who wrote a book attempting to counsel other career girls like myself so we could keep a man interested, and maybe see one fight to snag us. In that article I said some pretty dumb things.
But now flash forward to me a couple years later, happily dating and positively besieged by handsome, smart, funny, available and interested guys. How did this happen? Did I change overnight? Was it moving to New York City where I will admit men are a little more outspoken when interested than in other cities? Nah; more to the point it was realizing men want different things from a date than women do, and remembering I was a girl, not a boy.
As a date conversation topic, my own career began to bore me. About a year ago, I stopped wearing black suits and pinstripes outside the studio. I started wearing frilly dresses with lace, and wearing more bright colors. I stopped hiding my chest and legs. I took my hair down out of its bun and let it fall on my back and shoulders. But more importantly I think, something within me had shifted. I began enjoying being a girl – a real change for a lifelong tomboy. This resulted in me laughing and smiling more, especially in public; talking a little softer, not using profanity as much, and just softening up inside. I started noticing I LOVED MEN! Long a feminist, I instead began observing how society is often cruel to little boys and to men, and began feeling sympathy and admiration towards them. Men became my best friends.
I was then positively besieged by men!
On subways. In hallways. At restaurants. Leaving a meeting. Going to one. On W. 47th. On E. 12th. In the elevators. The freight loading docks. The bus. The doctor’s office. Like the song, it began “raining men”! I’m now dating actively – not aggressively, notice, but actively; I don’t seek out men or dates, they just show up and come to me, and I’m asked out all the freaking time. Now my job is to glow gently, smile, accept, say yes, enjoy, then go home and evaluate. How did I like this date? How did he make me feel? Does he make me smile, make me happy? And men LOVE putting women in the position to ask these things. They perform, they provide, then we sit back and gently, lovingly evaluate. This is the best job ever!
So this is a long and somewhat rambling note, Evan, to say I stopped by your website this morning to click a topic I would have clicked with a gnarly frown two years ago, looking for yet more “evidence that men do not like a successful woman”. Today, with a nice date behind me last night and another date scheduled this evening, I can read all this with a smile because I know it isn’t accurate; more accurate is that men care if you are happy with yourself while at your career, not whether you are successful at it. They want to know not whether you are a successful woman, but instead if you are successful at being a woman, and can therefore make him happy he is a man.
I have figured this out and offer a really dumb once woman’s apology to all the men I hurt with my actions, the women and men I hurt with my comments, the innocent black dudes who never got a chance with me because I was dumb (see aforementioned really dumb onceness), and to all the readers here wondering when this post will end!
Well, yes it will: right here!
Thanks for a fun website, Evan… men are not the enemy. I get it now.
kirsten 242
Both of these related articles are amazing. I don’t like the tone some of the comments have regarding typical gender roles. However, I understand completely that at times at I can be overbearing (take-charge) etc.Those are qualities I wouldn’t want to have with anyone. That doesn’t mean I can’t get things done, I just need to be aware of the people around and their feelings. This includes men, women, family, friends, children, anyone. To me it’s not about altering myself for a man, but altering how I’m perceived by everyone.
.-= kirsten´s last blog ..Portland Girls == New York Girls =-.
Terry 243
‘Women with a distinctive male energy often confuse men’
No, I’m sorry – this isn’t correct. Its a common myth – along with ‘Men don’t like strong women’.
Men like strong women, just not strong men who used to be women, but have taken on every male personality they can find.
Smart, Strong, Successful Women are often ugly, demanding, angry and boring.
I’m a guy, if want to spend time with a man in a skirt, there are lots of bars where I can get that – without buying all the drinks.
The only man who wants to come home to an aggressive, competitive, demanding woman is not worth marrying.
Feminism sold women short, it sold a lie. Like Communism, it was a great ideology that didn’t work. Successful women need to ask themselves – do they want the career and all the perks, or a marriage. The two don’t often go together.
Don’t believe me? Go to any dating website and count the number of professional women in their 40′s desperately seeking but never finding.
WithLove 244
Been Thru Wars….I am so glad I read your blog comment. I went and purchased Patricia Allens book Getting To I Do. I can’t thank you enough for mentioning the book! Did it open my eyes!!!!!!!!!!!! Not mention my brain like a pinata! Amazing. The big light bulb went on and then the tears came…realizing the damage I had done to a very special relationship I wish so much I could fix especially with what I know and realize now about MYSELF. I know there will be
Thank you!
arguments against this and the Rules…but for me it makes sense. Again, thank you so very much….it was just what I needed to go on knowing that next time I will be much more equipped to be a great woman for myself and and fantastic woman (hopefully wife) for a great man!
starthrower68 245
Wow. That’s all I can seem to say to the above statement is wow. There is some real anger and hostility there.
Steve 246
Wow.
Terry 247
All I can say about the above statement is wow. There is some real projection and bad psychic mind-reading there.
There was no anger or hostility in my post. Perhaps in the reply.
But for 40 years, anyone who has dared to question the fundamentalist beliefs of Feminism has been attacked.
Well, lets see what the result of this marvelous change has brought.
I live in a city full of successful, professional women who have successful careers and will never marry or have children. Perhaps they should be the ones being angry and hostile.
starthrower68 248
I don’t think that militant feminism has done women a whole lot of favors either, but to just make blanket statements about 40-year-old unmarried professional women is quite unfair, and I must say kinda mean. But hey, whatever gets ya through the night, man.
Brett 249
I don’t have any problem with successful women at all, I love smart successful classy women. From my experience though successful women are extremely picky and will only date white collar professional men. A lot of successful women say they’ll only a date a man that makes at least as much money as her. So I think a lot of men don’t bother with them because they think she wouldn’t be interested in him even though he’d love to spend time with her and woo her.
WildLilly 250
Wasn’t Michelle saying that men disappear when she is sweet and nice and are only interested when she’s playing hard to get?
WildLilly 251
I read it wrong – that was Catherine, not Michelle.
Ruby 252
Are there really guys out there who prefer dumb/uneducated, bland, unsuccessful women?
Hadley Paige 253
RE: Ruby @252 Are there really guys out there who prefer dumb/uneducated, bland, unsuccessful women?
———-
YES Ruby, but not as you choose to characterize it. The way you have asked this question suggests you have an ax to grind here.
The fact that men may not prefer super or extremely smart women does not mean they prefer dumb ones. With respect to education, to many men the education level of the women they are considering to be the father of their children while being a factor is not as important as other qualities, such as sanity, the desire and ability to be a good mother, interests, goals and desires consistent with being a good wife & mother; absence of interests, goals and desires not consistent with being a good wife and mother.
Being, as you say, an unsuccessful woman, suggests failure, but viewed differently lack of (I assume you mean business) success paves the way for success in other areas which are inconsistent w business success.
I want a successful woman for my LTR but not a business successful women bc her priorities are not the priorities that I want. I seek a woman who is successful in non-business areas. Why?–I can provide the $$, I want a women who has complementary success not similar success.
Ruby 254
#252
I don’t have an ax to grind, but I think it is a spurious question, to some extent.
Yes, there is more than one way to define success, and certainly being successful in business (or any career) and the ability to be a good mother are not mutually exclusive. I know many successful (and smart and strong) women who are great moms, too, as well as some who aren’t interested in motherhood. Also, I think smart men want smart women because they want intelligent kids. My male friends aren’t threatened by these qualities in a woman.
Hadley Paige 255
RE: Ruby @254 — ” I know many successful (and smart and strong) women who are great moms.”
1. Your definition of great mom is likely different from generally accepted definitions;
2. Your anecdotal experiences of knowing many great moms (setting aside the issue of whether or not they are in fact great moms) doesn’t disprove the statement that being a successful business women is generally inconsistent w being a good mom; and
3. I don’t know how you can be a great mom (much less an adequate one) unless you are there for your small children. Who are your children with when you are busy being a “successful business woman”? Someone else is being the mom. Small children need their mommies and they need their mommy’s full attention. More loving, patient, available, present (mentally & physically >> not on the blackberry) mom is better than less. There is no way around that.
Ruby 256
# 255
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 53.7 million married-couple families in the United States in 1998. In over half of them, both the husband and wife were employed. These dual-worker families accounted for 53.1 percent of married-couple families. Families in which only the husband worked for pay comprised 19.2 percent of all married-couple families. In 5.3 percent of families maintained by married couples, only the wife was employed.
It sounds like you are saying moms shouldn’t work at all, no matter what their level of success. Clearly, the majority does not agree. You can work in a factory and have to put in long hours, without being able to afford extra help or a Blackberry.
Hadley Paige 257
RE: Ruby @ 255 “dual-worker families accounted for 53.1 of married-couple families.” “It sounds like you are saying moms shouldn’t work at all, no matter what their level of success. Clearly, the majority does not agree”.
————————-
Ruby, You suffer from an error in logic deduction. You conclude that women don’t agree that what is best for small children is for mom to be with them by observing their actions rather than by inquiring into their beliefs.
Most Americans are overweight or obese, does that mean that they don’t agree that being in shape is a preferable state of existence– of course not. Likewise, the fact that most moms work, (and even that they think it is a good idea for them as women), does not make it not true that mommies working doesn’t have detrimental effects on small children.
Lets get back on track here, this post is about why men are not interested in “successful women”. Speaking as a man and what I want as a man, I want a women who is going to be a good wife & mother. I think that is beyond debate that for small children, having the mom present is preferable to having her absent. Since I want my children to be raised with the greatest chance of success, I want (among other qualities in her) a women who WANTS to be a mother and will stay home with the children until they no longer substantially need her loving, caring presence. If you are a “successful business woman” what you want for you is not what I want from you. Ergo, I am not interested in you as a wife. While “successful business women” may be fun, attractive & stimulating for dating purposes, I don’t believe they are good marriage material.
Ruby 258
#257
“Likewise, the fact that most moms work, (and even that they think it is a good idea for them as women), does not make it not true that mommies working doesnt have detrimental effects on small children.”
There is no hard evidence that this is true, HP. Of course, if you believe that it is, you are entitled to choose whatever type of wife suits YOU best.
Sayanta 259
HP-
You forget that most kids, starting when they’re small, spend 8 hours in school, add a couple of hours for after school activities That’s a very large part of the day when they don’t need (or maybe even want) Mommy’s sweet presence.
Sayanta 260
oh- I forget to add- a school day coincides with the hours of an average work day. Win-win!
A-L 261
When Hadley says, “I want (among other qualities in her) a women who WANTS to be a mother and will stay home with the children until they no longer substantially need her loving, caring presence,” I suspect he thinks that once kids are school-aged that they no longer substantially need her loving, caring presence. My guess is that he doesn’t want his kids in daycare, but rather wants them to be taken care of by mom.
Not saying I agree or disagree with his position, just that I think this is what his position is.
Sayanta 262
A-L-
A-L
ok- that’s possible. But there are ‘successful businesswomen” who take of a couple of years to be at home with their kids and go back to work, businesswomen who work from home, and all other kinds of arrangements.
My problem with HP’s post is that he’s making character judgments on an entire group of people without paying attention to specific circumstances of different women. From the general tone of his posts, it seems that he’s got issues with women’s independence, in general, based on his particular worldview. His worldview is limited- this is true for everyone of course, since we tend to generalize based on what we’ve personally experienced.
Perhaps there will be a woman who’ll be happy to stay at home with the kids while HP supports her. That’s fine- I also don’t have a particular viewpoint on this position. But I think HP should also consider whether he’s likely to find a woman nowadays who would willingly give up her financial independence to him.
So HP- it’s better for me to ‘talk’ to you directly instead of about you, as above. You’re a professional, can you imagine what it would be like to not have a paycheck (yes, yes, I know if housewives were paid for their work, they’d be making a lot of money, but that’s not the reality- yet), your own bank account, a way to have a means of financial self-support in case some emergency were to happen?For example, your husband decides to leave you for a younger woman (or man) and gives you hell about spousal support/chils support, and now you’re stuck with no money, job skills, etc. That’s the position women have always been in, until recently. It can be a scary situation- as someone who’s done divorce law, i can attest to that.
I think it would do you good to just imagine what your life would be like if you were a woman in the above situation. Are you capable of that kind of empathy? I sure hope so…in your quest to search for what you want, I’m not sure you’ve thought about what women want. Maybe you have- I don’t know. But I can tell you this- women want a man who has empathy and compassion, not one who’s always walking around with a list in his head of ‘how his little wife should behave.’
drahma 263
Depending on how you define successful, some successful women have the ability to have a more flexible schedule so they can work during nap times and school times only or late at night (I believe George Sands wrote at night so she could spend time with her children during the day) and in some cases switch their work environments to the home. They can also move their schedules to accommodate a child’s activities.
I think it depends on what you want – you can have everything you want all if you balance things and know what you want, knowing children require the lifetime commitment.
Brett 264
See the thing is the women that are successful and say they can’t find a man need to look no further than at themselves. It has nothing to do with men at all, but the type of men many of them pursue. Read the original letter Catherine wrote to Evan.
Sayanta 265
Brett-
So waht kind of men should these women be pursuing?
Michael 266
Men with pleasing personalities and bodies, of course.
Helen 267
Hadley Paige #257: If you care so much about the well-being of your future children, have you considered that YOU might stay home with them? Why does it have to be your wife? Your wife could be the one working, and you could stay at home till they are “of age.” That would give you a much broader base of women among whom to choose. And since you’re the one who cares so much about your kids having a stay-at-home parent, it makes sense that you consider doing it yourself.
Sayanta 268
Helen-
He’s pretty much spelt it out- man go hunt, woman stay home and cook big mammoth.
Helen 269
Sayanta: hee! Love it! But in all seriousness now…
Imagine a woman saying this: “I need to choose a husband based on what’s important to me: having someone stay at home with my children while they’re in their formative years. Therefore, I only want to marry a man who will be a good dad and stay at home with them till they go to grade school.”
Surely this comment from a woman would make people go: “Uhhhh…” followed by: “If you want someone to stay home with your kids, do it yourself! Don’t marry someone just so THEY can do it!”
Yet if a man makes that same comment, about wanting to marry a woman who will stay home to take care of his children, far fewer people bat an eyelash.
Seriously: whether you’re a man or a woman, if having someone to be a stay-at-home parent is so important to you, do it yourself. Don’t marry someone just so you can use them for that purpose. Women are not “mothers first, human beings second.” It is much better to have a happy and fulfilled wife – whether that means that she loves her job or she loves staying at home.
Sayanta 270
Women are not mothers first, human beings second.
That’s a great point- unfortunately, men who make these types of comments don’t, and probably never will, see women as human beings.
Ruby 271
Helen
I have a feeling that HP would think that staying home with the kids would be demeaning to him, and clearly not a man’s job.
Hadley Paige 272
TO: Helen, Sayanta, Ruby RE: posts 268> 271
Would someone please tell me why I am a bad person; or why I am deserving of criticism from you all, because I want to find a woman who’s priorities in life is to be a good wife & mother; and who I think has the necessary skill set & motivations to have a reasonable chance of success at that?
Helen 273
Hadley, please read over my past comments… I never ONCEwrote or even thought that you were a bad person. I suspect you are a good one. I do think you need to be aware and caring, however, of a woman’s desires and needs apart from her being a mother. These include her desires to be loved as a woman, and her financial and intellectual well-being (as a job could give her, but frankly being a stay-at-home mom couldn’t – and I speak with experience of having done both).
Sayanta 274
HP-
I agree with Helen. No one said you were ‘bad.’ (what’s ‘bad’, anyway?). Please read our posts carefully; we’re trying to relay a woman’s POV, and if you do want a successful rel’ship, you’re going to have to empathize with a woman and see things from her POV. And vice versa of course.
Kenley 275
Helen,
Please read what HP wrote — he said he wanted a woman who would be a good wife and mother. I think the wife part means loving her as a woman not just as a mother.
As a woman who has never had the desire to be married or have children, I have never assumed that because I don’t want those things, all women don’t want those things. There are in fact some women who want to be stay at home moms and who will be quite fulfilled doing that….just because you didn’t feel fulfilled in that role doesn’t mean some other woman won’t. Moreover, why is a job the only way for a woman to cultivate her intellect? Not all jobs are intellectually stimulating. Also, given the cost of daycare, I know many women who indicate that most of their pay check goes to paying for that daycare. So, again, I’m not certain that working in and of itself guarantees a woman financial stability. A paycheck? Yes. Her financial well-being? Maybe.
While I agree that no one said HP was a bad guy, there definitely seemed to be a desire to make him feel bad for wanting stay at home wife and mother.
Hadley Paige 276
RE: Helen @ 273 >> “please read over my past comments I never ONCE wrote or even thought that you were a bad person”.
Helen, please look at the following postings:
Sayanta Oct 7th 2009 at 05:04 pm 268
Helen- He’s pretty much spelt it out- man go hunt, woman stay home and cook big mammoth.
——————————–
Helen Oct 7th 2009 at 06:45 pm 269
Sayanta: hee! Love it!
——————————–
Sayanta is portraying the traditional arrangement as neanderthal. Looks like criticism to me. You express agreement. Please note that I have no problem with women not wanting the traditional arrangement. Just don’t attack me personally (by agreeing with another critical poster) and then deny it.
Hadley Paige 277
RE: Helen @ 274 ” we’re trying to relay a woman’s POV, and if you do want a successful rel’ship, you’re going to have to empathize with a woman and see things from her POV”
——————————
This post is about why men are (generally) not interested in strong, successful women. Your POV (I assume you are a self defined strong successful woman expressing the POV of such) I understand. And maybe for the sake of this exercise I may even concede your points. It doesn’t change why I am not interested in strong, successful women.
The fact that maybe most (maybe not most) women want what you express is not what we are talking about. The post is not what women want, its why men are (generally) not interested in strong, successful women. I am telling you>> here it is:.
I don’t want a strong successful woman because her motivations, desires and priorities are not (in my opinion) consistent with being a good mother. I want a women who will be a good wife AND!! mother. The fact that many women don’t want this doesn’t change what I want. It just makes the pool of women I will consider for marriage smaller.
Interesting side note: If my pool of likely women is smaller due to this requirement, I must become more flexible in other requirements (perhaps, the women doesn’t have to be quite so attractive, for example) or else my likelihood of success is diminished.
Sayanta 278
HP-
How exactly do you define strong? You said you don’t want strong, successful women. Take away the word successful, just because it means so many different things to different people. Are you saying you expect a good wife and mother won’t be strong? (Trust me, you better be strong to give birth!). Or is it just that you want someone submissive?
Maybe…is that the real issue? That it’s really submission you want? And somehow you think that ‘traditional’ women will be that way? If that’s the case, then the relationship won’t be equal. Of course, you may say that you don’t want an equal relationship. But inevitably, those kind of relationships will lead to unhappiness- it’s just that most men don’t realize it.
Helen 279
Hadley: Laughing at Sayanta’s funny comment was not an indictment or even indirect criticism against you. It was funny because of the imagery of the mammoth. Don’t read any more into it than that. And I was not the one who made Comment 274.
Now here is what I see as the crux of what I found disagreeable about your assertion (which is nothing against YOU personally):
With all due respect, there is something you value even more than the well-being of your future children. That is your job, and everything your job connotes.If you didn’t value your job more than having a parent stay home with the kids, you’d volunteer to stay home with the kids yourself.
I don’t blame or judge you (or anyone else) for valuing your job and all it brings: stimulation, adult conversation and friends, relative peace, financial security. But my point is: women value all these things too, and that doesn’t make us bitches (that may not even make us “smart, strong, successful women”).
So why should a wife have to give up all these things to raise your children (childrearing isoften a hellish job, with no pay) just because she is a woman and you are a man?Women value their jobs, independence, stimulation, andadult companytoo. And as Ruby pointed out earlier, there is no evidence that children who attend daycare or stay with a nanny are worse-off than kids with stay-at-home parents. Indeed, they have lower asthma rates!
That’s my stance on the situation, having actually had to battle it in my own life with a man who didn’t understand at first, but now does. It is not against you or any other man.
Sayanta 280
Helen-
Great post. Couldn’t have said it better myself. But HP seems pretty set in his beliefs. All our talk of empathy and women’s rights doesn’t matter, because he won’t hear it. I guess we should end the conversation. Well, I will at least. I’m not going to dictate anyone else, obviously.
Joe 281
Helen sez:
Imagine a woman saying this: I need to choose a husband based on whats important to me: having someone stay at home with my children while theyre in their formative years. Therefore, I only want to marry a man who will be a good dad and stay at home with them till they go to grade school.
There areprobably fewer men who are stay-at-home dads, but they exist. If I had a wife who pulled in double my salary I’d be happy tostay home and take care of the kids and let her bring home the bacon. If she pulled in less than I do, I probably wouldn’t be as agreeable. One must be practical insuch matters, after all.
Hadley Paige 282
RE: Helen @ 279 “why should a wife have to give up all these things [to raise your children?”
Helen, you keep talking about this choice as a sacrifice. It may be for you and others like you. I respect your choices and priorities. Pursue what you want & I hope you get it and it makes you happy & fulfilled. I also am not interested in you (or others like you) as a wife.
I am looking for the type of woman who views this choice as a preference not as a sacrifice. That is what I mean when I say I am looking for a woman with the correct set of priorities in her life. I want someone who views it as a calling. Therefore they are not “sacrificing” anything to do this, rather they are happy to find a man who is willing to provide the environment to allow them to do it.
Feminists give lip service to the notion that women can be anything they want to be. But the truth is that the feminist movement is very down on women making the choice (as an expression of desire not sacrifice) to be a traditional wife and mother.
Ruby 283
Studies show that women suffer more financially than men when a marriage ends. There’s nothing inherently wrong with wanting to be a stay at home mom, but the feminist movement has wanted women to be aware that doing so, as well as allowing the husband to make all or most financial decisions, can prove costly in the event of divorce.
A quarter of all divorced women in America live at or below the poverty line.
A womans standard of living decreases anywhere from 27 to 45 percent in the first year after a divorce while a mans rises by an average of 10 percent.
Sayanta 284
HP-
You say you respect choices of career women but yet you use the word, “Correct set of priorities” when talking about a woman who wants to be only a wife and mother. Given your choice of words, “Correct”- aren’t you essentially saying that only wife/motherhood is women’s calling?
Helen 285
Joe #281: You rock! That’s great that stay-at-home-fatherhood is something you would consider… and your weighing of the matter based on salary is totally reasonable.
Hadley #282: “I am looking for a woman with the correct set of priorities in her life.” – It’s rather stunning arrogance for any person to posit what the “correct set of priorities” in life for the opposite sex is. At most, one can say what the right priorities are for a spouse for himself or herself, not for an entire gender. And I couldn’t care less whether you are interested in me for a wife.
Hadley Paige 286
RE: Sayanta @ 284 >>”you use the word, Correct set of priorities when talking about a woman who wants to be only a wife and mother.”
_________________
Not my intention to suggest that that is the only appropriate course for women to take. I meant it to mean the correct set of priorities as far as my goals are concerned.
Helen 287
Check out this He Said / She Said article about whether it’s “OK” for the woman to be the breadwinner: http://lifestyle.msn.com/relationships/articlemc.aspx?cp-documentid=22024557>1=32023
I’ll cut and paste what the man said. Would you men agree or disagree?
He Said: Let me start by stating that I am about to reveal one of the dirty little secrets men have and lie about constantly. The reality is that it takes an exceptionally confident and self-assured man to be comfortable with a woman being the breadwinner in a relationship. As a gender we don’t admit this. “Of course!” we say. “I wish my wife was so that I could stay home,” we boast. “How great would it be to not have to work?” we ponder smugly, as if having a partner who lived up to this would solve all our problems. But most of us who say these things are lying through our collective grinning teeth.
The truth is that, while most men are attracted to women with power (and money is a vehicle for power), we do not want powerful women for partners. The idea of a woman who desires, earns, and achieves more is scary. Most men simply do not want to compete with their partners for power. Our partners can earn, do, and achieve slightly more than us and we’re fine with it. It’s a fun and friendly competition, and it helps keep us honest and focused. If, however, you eclipse us to the point that we can’t out-earn or success you, we’ll lose interest faster than you can say “corner office.”
For those of you who watched Sex and the City, remember Steve breaking up with Miranda because she wanted to buy him an expensive suit for an event at her law firm? He said, “No way. I’ll start to think of you like my mother … You need to be with someone more on your level.” Now, I realize this is horribly unfair. The reality, though, is that most men would rather reach down than up economically. It’s safer, less stressful, more comfortable, and ultimately sad.
And Joe 281, you’re an “exceptionally confident and self-assured man”!
———-
I don’t think this is”dirty little secret”makes much sense, but men are welcome to want whatever they want. Just don’t complain about us women being irrational.
It’s worth reading what the woman had tosay too, if you click on the link. Very sympathetic yet logical points.
Sayanta 288
Helen-
Interesting (though depressing) article. Two things: I’m a little wary of believing articles where a man or woman speaks for all the people inhis or her own gender. More often than not, articles like these tend to be a platform for the author to vent his own insecurities and say, “see, everyone else is this way, too!” Second, I personally think that loving relationships can be one of life’s greatest experiences- but when you read enough of these kind of articles (and trust me, they’re ALL over the place, from both sexes), it creates a sense of disillusionment and cynicism. And then you’re bringing those things into every encounter with a man.
Say for example, a fifteen-year-old girl with big aspirations for her career path reads this article. It is Marie Claire, so it’s likely. This girl also happens to bea huge romantic. After reading this, she may choose to ignore it. However, what if that one adult male’s opinion has hit something in her subconscious? From then on, she might choose to ‘remain small’ for the rest of her life for fear of turning away men.
It’s all well and good to point to these articles as sources, “wisdom” about the sexes, but does reading this stuff actually help women and make it easier between the sexes. Or does it actually continue to tell women, yes you have to choose between worldly success and a lasting relationship with a man- because you certainly can’t have both.
Sayanta 289
oh sorry for the double post- but I forgot to add this- here’s the whole link, but here’s the response that I thought particularly interesting.
Poster’s question:
<i>I just don’t understand why men seem to be intimidated by smart and successful women? Even the intelligent, successful men seem to be intimidated by the intelligent, successful women. I just got my MBA from a top business school and all I can say is that the MBA seems to have had a negative impact on my dating life. Many other single MBA women have had the same complaints…. and, I would like to add these woman are attractive.
I would love to hear from the guys what the deal is? </i>
One of the answers:
I just don’t understand why men MY FRIENDS AND I MEET seem to be intimidated by SEEMINGLY smart and successful women? Even the intelligent, successful men MY FRIENDS AND I MEET seem to be intimidated by the SEEMINGLY intelligent, successful women. I just got my MBA from a top business school and all I can say is that the MBA seems to have had a negative impact on my dating life. SOME other single MBA women have had the same complaints…. and, I would like to add these woman are attractive TO ME.
Answer: I have no idea what guys you and your MBA friends are meeting, but whoever they are, they don’t represent Men as a whole. My fiance and my two girlfriends before her had far higher education than I. Same is true for my closest guy friends. See… real men don’t let petty shit intimidate them… only petty men do. So my answer to you comes in the form of a question. Where are you meeting all these petty men?
Helen 290
Sayanta – Hee hee! Love that man’s response. He goes down in my book as a real Mensch.
My partner is like that, too… he brags about my accomplishments to his ultra-conservative family. That doesn’t make them more impressed with me (they think I should be a SAHM), but I love that he does that anyway.
And Sayanta, that is a good point that no one man’s viewpoint should be taken to represent the entire sex’s viewpoints. It’s just a matter of finding the right person for you, and sometimes that means that you have to look in places that you otherwise would not have considered. Have those female MBAs considered looking for men in, say, the arts, or vocational-technical professions, or academia? They need to look outside their immediate spheres.
A-L 291
Hadley,
Just out of curiosity, at what age do you think children can be before they no longer need a stay-at-home parent? And are you looking for someone who would be a SAHM for the children the two of you had together, or for children who existed from a previous relationship?
Hadley Paige 292
RE A-L @291 Hadley . . . at what age do you think children can be before they no longer need a stay-at-home parent? ”
————–
Firstly I do not pretend to be an expert on this question. Secondly, I am answering this question SOLELY from the perspective of what I think is best for the mental and emotional health of children; and NOT what is the best balance for women with respect to work and family.
I do not distinguish btwn children of previous marriages and current marriage. If the children are little, then ideally mom should be around.
Certainly until children are going to school full time, they should have their mom around full time. Once they start to go to school, and get a bit older (how about seven?) a few hours spent in the afternoon after school at a close neighbor’s house who is a full time mom and has a child who is a friend of your child, I don’t think would be too bad, as long a mom in question is home in time to cook dinner and have a settled meal at a reasonable hour.
Hadley Paige 293
RE: Helen @ 287 ” we do not want powerful women for partners. ” “I don’t think this is “dirty little secret” makes much sense, but men are welcome to want whatever they want. Just don’t complain about us women being irrational.
——————
It’s a good thing for women that men want womenwho are shorter, stupider and poorer than them. Why?— because women want their men to be taller, smarter and richer than them.
Joe 294
Sayanta, I bet your MBA is a boat anchor on your dating life because men (rightly or not) expecta woman with an MBA to be very into thebusiness life, and therefore less into the personal life. Less personal life equals less time for them.
Sayanta 295
Joe-
I’m not an MBA- I pasted a link from someone who is.
Ruby 296
HP #293
“Its a good thing for women that men want womenwho are shorter, stupider and poorer than them. Why? because women want their men to be taller, smarter and richer than them.”
Whatever happened to equality in your world, HP? Oh, that’s right, if a woman were a true equal, she wouldn’t be content to be your unpaid, stay-at-home servant. I’m just thankful that the men I know don’t feel as you do, (and neither do the women) – they understand that a woman who is an equal partner has more to contribute, not just to them and to the relationship, but to any children they might have.
Hadley Paige 297
RE: Ruby @ 296 “Whatever happened to equality in your world, HP?”
—–
Ruby, My world is the real world, not the fantasy world of what I think (or you think) it should be. And being a realist, I am a little confused by your response to my posted quote.
Is it that you don’t think that women generally would like their men to be taller, smarter & richer than they are? (or just that you wish it wasn’t true). Or perhaps you think that its not true that men seek out women who are shorter, stupider and poorer than they are bc their experience tells them that in that population they are most likely to find a suitable LTR. Let’s separate what is true or not from what you’d like to be true or not.
Hadley Paige 298
RE: Ruby @ 296 “if a woman were a true equal, she wouldn’t be content to be your unpaid, stay-at-home servant.”
——–
Ruby, equality doesn’t mean everybody does the exact same thing. I assume that from your response above you don’t have any interest in being a stay at home wife & mother — fine. But it seems you are suggesting that any women who stays at home to be a full time wife (running the homefront) & mother is being exploited by her husband as a unpaid servant. Can you not conceive of this state of affairs being a preference for many women? There are many women who would love to be supported like this in order to allow them to be a stay at home wife & mom.
Guys could equally say that they object to being treated a wallet objects, slugging it out in the employment trenches each day just to allow mom to stay home & not work.
I think the truth is that if you feel that the role is an exploitation of you then don’t do it. If you feel that the role is your calling, then do it, enjoy it & be thankful that you have found in your mate a person who is willing to do the complement to what you do.
Helen 299
#298 “Guys could equally say that they object to being treated a wallet object… just to allow mom to stay home & not work.”
“Not work”???HP, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and believe that you’re simply making that statement from utter ignorance.Being a stay-at-home wife with no kids would indeed be peachy.
Being a stay-at-home mom to babies and small kids is sheer hell.
Take it from someone who’s been there, done that, would rather clean bathrooms than be stuck at home alone again with an inconsolable baby or toddlers whose demands are insatiable.
Why don’t you hear about how awful it is for SAHMsmore often? Because in the US, there’s such a social stigma against admitting it. We fear it’s tantamount to saying we don’t love our kids (which isn’t true); we fear social censure. For European mothers, it is not this way; they openly admit how awful staying at home with kids is. Read Judith Warner’s “Perfect Madness” to learn the French viewpoint. This is why Sweden (and soon Canada) has enacted a policy by which fathers as well as mothers are REQUIRED to take paternity leave.
But we in the US put all sorts of false layers on motherhood. That’s why you can make the statements you do, HP, without any intent to condemn and yet condemning SAHMs badly. And that is why Ruby #296 is SPOT-ON when she refers to this role as “unpaid, stay-at-home servant.”
This all ties back to Evan’s original question: “Why don’t men like smart, strong, successful women?” Not all men are this way; I’m fortunate to be with one who is happy to have a smart, strong, successful partner. But the reasonsome men don’t like such successful women is because these menare self-centered (wanting to adhere to a belief that women serve them, and knowing that a successful woman wouldn’t put up with this). Or ignorant (I mean this in a benefit-of-the-doubt way). Or both.
A-L 300
RE: Helen’s #299
But the reasonsome men dont like such successful women is because these menare self-centered (wanting to adhere to a belief that women serve them, and knowing that a successful woman wouldnt put up with this). Or ignorant (I mean this in a benefit-of-the-doubt way). Or both.
Ouch. Many of Helen’s comments have been pretty even-handed through this thread. This one though smacks of the discontented/”I hate men” ideology that some women have (though I don’t think Helen is one of those people). But to say that the only reason that a guy doesn’t want a smart, strong, successful women is because he’s either too self-centered or doesn’t know better is rather…patronizing? Critical? I don’t know the word I want to use, but it’s quite off-putting. And this is coming from a woman who considers herself smart, strong, and semi-successful (depends on POV).
I feel the same way about men who say that women don’t like poor or financially unstable guys because they’re golddiggers. Or the men who say that any woman who is willing to be a SAHM is going to take a man for everything he’s worth, because the majority of women initiate divorces and get everything even in no-fault situations. Or the guys who say that women only accept a date with a so-so guy because they’re trying to boost their self-esteem or get a free dinner. Might it be true of some of these women? Yes. Is it true of all? Certainly not. Just as we women don’t want to be painted with the same brush, I don’t think we should do that with men.
RE: Hadley’s #292
Is this woman you’re describing the one you looked for before you were ever married? Or is this the woman you’re looking for now? Or are you making your points just for the sake of debate? If I remember correctly from previous threads you have school-aged children and weren’t interesting in having any more, so I’m just curious.
Ruby 301
“Is it that you dont think that women generally would like their men to be taller, smarter & richer than they are? (or just that you wish it wasnt true). Or perhaps you think that its not true that men seek out women who are shorter, stupider and poorer than they are bc their experience tells them that in that population they are most likely to find a suitable LTR. ”
Correct on both counts.
“But it seems you are suggesting that any women who stays at home to be a full time wife (running the homefront) & mother is being exploited by her husband as a unpaid servant.”
I don’t think that, but I get the feeling that YOU do, to the extent that you see such work as lesser and unequal to what you do outside of the home. Not ALL men, or women, feel that it is lesser work, or that women who are stay-at-home moms are stupider. That you do reveals volumes…about you.
Ruby 302
HP, ad nauseum…
“shorter, stupider and poorer”
And therefore easier for you to control.
Helen 303
A-L #300: That’s why I said SOME men; not all, or even most, men. You are right that I do love men.I have only met a handful who have ever been of the ilk described above – both self-centered and ignorant, and with a strong desire to control women.
Ruby #301, 302: Wow. Just – wow. Thanks for making your points so coolly.I’m like you: don’t need my manto betaller, smarter, or richer than me.
And once again, that brings us back to Evan’s original question “Why Don’t Mean Like Smart, Strong, Successful Women”: Is the question moot, because it only applies to SOME men, not the majority of men?I’ve rarely met men who disliked smart, strong, successful women. Is the question then only meant to apply to those few men who feel that way? Those ones are not worth having anyway.
Leslie 304
I am actually dumbfounded by these posts. Of course men don’t strong, agressive, ball-busting, look at everything I’ve accomplished women. Men are looking for wives, for emotional and sexual partners, for future mothers of their children, not for women who act like they are trying to beat the men for a promotion or have a point to prove.
Its like – women aren’t attracted to super feminine, emasculate men. We want someone who makes us feel like a woman, not the man in the relationship, or at least I assume most of us women want that. So then, why would you get upset with guys who are looking for feminine, not masculine qualities? Men want a woman, not another man. I don’t see how this is confusing at all.. its kind of just plain common sense.
Helen 305
Leslie: it’s because the original question was: “Why don’t men like smart, strong, successful women?”Being smart, strong, and successful does not mean that a woman isn’t feminine; nor does it mean that she is “aggressive” and “ball-busting.”Indeed, we have no problem with men wanting feminine women. What we do have a problem with is when men automatically assume we would not make good partners,MERELY because we are strong, smart, and successful.
That isone woman’sperspective on it, anyway. Other women who have posted here may have other thoughts.
Kenley 306
Leslie,
I’m with you. I really couldn’t understand the posts either….especially the ones that made it appear as if only men who want to dominate women want a stay at home wife and mother. There are plenty of women who actually want to be stay at home moms. And, the ones I know often complain that it’s the working mothers — not their husbands — who make them feel that they aren’t contributing anything worthwhile to society.
Also, I find it very interesting that someone mentioned she couldn’t stand being home all day long with her baby . Yet it’s ok for some other woman (and I say woman because the overwhelming majority of paid childcare providers are women) to have to stay at home all day long with her crying baby. I guess these women aren’t really that smart and so they don’t need any intellectual stimulation. Doesn’t it stand to reason that if there are women who can tolerate staying home with another woman’s children, there certainly are women who can tolerate staying at home with their OWN children?
Hadley Paige 307
RE: Helen @ 305 “What we do have a problem with is when men automatically assume we would not make good partners, MERELY because we are strong, smart, and successful. ” ” Being smart, strong, and successful does not mean that a woman isn’t feminine”
——————-
Hey Helen, >> Newsflash item 1: life is unfair. Newsflash item 2: Women filter men by generalizations as well.
Helen, the point is that the traditional feminine qualities that most men prefer their women have are inconsistent (mutually exclusive) with the goals, motivations and personal qualities that “strong, successful women” generally have. Of course each person is an individual and may deviate from the generalities of the group, but as the saying goes “the battle doesn’t always go the mighty, nor the race to the swift . . . but that’s the way you bet.”
Men have limited time & money resources available for the process of finding a suitable life partner. They seek to maximize their efforts. Better to place their bets with the swift or the mighty.
I empathize with your frustration and indignation with being painted with a broad brush. I experience it myself as a lawyer with women who assume I am an egomaniacal jerk, and write me off.
Ruby 308
HP #307
“I experience it myself as a lawyer with women who assume I am an egomaniacal jerk, and write me off.”
Hmmm, can’t imagine why….
Helen #305
Helen, I agree. Look, some men want docile wives, some don’t. But not all of them. Barack and Michelle Obama are a great case in point. Clearly, when Barack met Michelle he realized what a great partner she’d be. She’s as strong, smart, and successful as can be, AND a great mother. And tall too!
There’s nothing inherently wrong about wanting to be a stay at home mom, although there can be risks in the event of divorce. The problem is when the job and the woman doing it are devalued. And that is most certainly what someone is doing when he says he’s looking for a wife who is ‘shorter, stupider and poorer”; he’s looking for someone who is physically, mentally, and financially inferior. I don’t believe that an ideal to aspire to.
Ruby 309
“Physically, mentally, and financially inferior” doesn’t equal “feminine”, nor should it.
Hadley Paige 310
RE: Ruby @ 308 “he’s looking for someone who is physically, mentally, and financially inferior. I don’t believe that an ideal to aspire to.”
———–
Look, its axiomatic that both spouses can’t be taller, richer, smarter than each other. You seize upon the corollary to the fact that women generally prefer taller, smarter & richer (than themselves) men. That realized preference cannot be without the related fact that by necessity the women would be shorter, stupider and poorer. Yes, I admit it its not a nice way to say it, but it doesn’t make it less true.
I am trying to explain why men generally don’t think “strong, successful women” are good spouse material. What I get back (not from all, just the most persistent writers) is a gender studies 101 rant about why this is wrong and how the world would be better if there were no gender roles. >> that’s a different subject.
While you think that the general preference of men may be wrong, it doesn’t change the fact that its true. We don’t want as spouses men with female equipment. We want women with complementary traits not similar ones. This has been said before in this exchange but does not seem to penetrate through to those posters with an agenda for changed sexual roles.
Ruby 311
HP #310
“Look, its axiomatic that both spouses cant be taller, richer, smarter than each other. ”
But you assume that the man “should” always have all the dominant traits, and that is what all men (and women as well, by your logic) want and should aspire to. I’m simply saying that many men and women would disagree with you, and do not buy into what you think is “true”. It simply isn’t the truth for many couples.
“This has been said before in this exchange but does not seem to penetrate through to those posters with an agenda for changed sexual roles.”
Sexual roles are not static, they are in flux, like it or not. Gender roles change from generation to generation and they will continue to do so. That is why courses in Gender Studies are taught in the first place.
Helen 312
Ruby #311: I won’t say much more on this post, since I’ve made my points clearly by now. But I do want to say that I appreciate all your logical and well-thought-out comments; and for joining in the fight with Sayanta, me, other women on this post, and other women anywhere who arefighting tochange gender roles to improve equal opportunities for women.
I do think that, with these efforts, there will come a time in the future that men are perfectly happy with “smart, strong, successful women”; just as men are now perfectly happy with women’s feet not being boundand women not wearing corsets. But we do need to let our voices be heard, or the status quo will prevail.
Jennifer 313
Evan writes the headlines of the blogs to be attention-grabbing and often controversial. It makes you want to read the letter and answer which is great. In this particular case though, it seems as though a lot of people read the headline and stopped.
Nowhere in the letters or Evan’s answer is it stated that men don’t like ‘smart, strong, successful women’. He talks about a more ‘agressive’ energy that a lot of men are put off by, much like a lot of women are put off by a ‘passive’ energy put off by some men that confuse ‘passive’ for ‘nice guy’. He talks about the ‘dark’ side ofbeinga super direct woman and super nice guy and how offputting that can be to potential partners. Can anyone here really disagree with that?
I don’t know why people would be uncomfortable with Hadley’s viewpoint, just as I don’t know why people would be uncomfortable with Ruby’s. Unless Hadley and Ruby try to date each other, they will each find (orperhaps have already found) what they are looking for; trying to argue the other down is , in my opinion, just unnecessary. And not even truly related to the point Evan was making.
Sayanta 314
Helen, #312-
Very insightful post- and I loved the bound feet line.
Yes, the women here have made some incredible points. But like I said before, if someone doesn’t want to hear it- s/he doesn’t want to hear it. Not much, sadly, we can do about that. But there will be a time, I hope, when ALL women will realize and cherish their true power, and then, comments like HPs won’t matter anymore- people will think about them in amusement, the same way now we laugh at people who used to think that the Earth rested on the back of a giant turtle.
Evan Marc Katz 315
Thank you, Jennifer. Thank you.
Leslie 316
Helen, in reference to your response to my comment (#305) , perhaps I lack real world experience (I’m only 26) but I have yet to find a man who is not looking for a smart and educated woman. I dated quiet a bit I met my boyfriend and every one of the guys was very impressed with my intelligence. They weren’t put off by it, they were turned on by it! In fact, around sometimes I feel like I’m looked down upon because I don’t even have a graduate degree yet.
Of course, I suppose that where you live helps alot.. in a big city the response to smart women might be different then in a small town in the middle of nowhere.
And I know that anecdotal evidence does not equal data, but from everything I’ve seen, if a man is put off by a woman’s intelligence, either she a) picked an idiot of a man or b) is trying to act like his business partner not his girlfriend.
Being attractive, smart, educated, successful are all initial qualities that get you noticed. But no one enters a relationship with someone b/c they are smart or successful (unless you are looking for a very superficial relationship). One enters a relationship b/c they enjoy spending time with their partner, they feel good around their partner and they have fun. So if you have all the smarts and degrees in the world, but can’t losen up and laugh at yourself or can’t let your date’s mistakes go, then men aren’t going to like you, but its not nothing to do with intelligence.
Helen 317
Jennifer #313 and Evan #315: Surely the point of having a comments section is to allow us to debate and discuss these items, which is FUN and gives us food for thought. I know I’ve gained a lot by reading what others have written here. There is no rule that we need only respond to what Evan wrote.
I’m sure everyone has read the whole article, not just the title, because it is an interesting topic. Evan DID write in there that women were supposed to “tone down” the aspects that made us smart, strong, and successful in business. He acknowledged that this was a double standard. So there you have it: the basis of our discussion.
And if there is supposed to be a problem with titles that don’t reflect the actual content, then isn’t the onus on Evan to change that? I don’t see any problem with it, but you did bring it up.
Evan Marc Katz 318
Helen, you’re entitled to your opinion. But as you know, my column is never a matter of right/wrong. It’s effective vs. ineffective. Many smart, strong, successful women are ineffective in connecting with men. I’m trying to help them understand what men really want.
You’re trying to change what men really want. However, you CAN’T change what men really want. So to continually rail at perfectly reasonable men like Hadley is a waste of energy. He’s not changing his mind. All you can do is either adjust – or not adjust – accordingly.
Long, long, long story short: accepting men as they are is a far more effective stance than continually being surprised that smart, strong, successful men are often turned off by women who exhibit the exact same traits that they do. My upcoming eBook, Why He Disappeared, explores this extensively.
Thanks for your commentary.
Helen 319
Evan #318: “you CAN’T change what men really want.”
I respectfully disagree.You’re right that I, personally, cannot change what men want. (By the way, I did not rail at Hadley, nor did I try to change his mind.) But there is a plethora of historical evidence that men do change their expectations of what they want, based on women fighting for equality – in the US andworldwide, in recent and far history.
I recognize that you and I are working on different time scales. You coach your clients to get immediate results. I set my sights on a longer-term goal of reducing potentially harmful inequalities (including the fear that they won’t be liked for having what are essentiallysurvival characteristics), so my daughters can enjoy an even better life than I have.
Sayanta 320
I do see where Leslie and Evan are coming from. But I’m going to have to go with Helen on this one, mostly because both of us are thinking about more long-term consequences than the immediate results (not that there’s anything wrong with the latter). That is…yes, we’re beyond changing HP’s mind. But if we- and other women- don’t put out our POVs and arguments out there, nothing is really going to change- you see, because nothing’s going to get discussed and debated. Discussion and debate bring change.
For example, what if Indians had just accepted (and since I’m Indian, I bring this up) that ok, the British are meant to rule us- let it remain at that. What if they’d never debated and discussed the terrors of colonialization within themselves? The Independence movement would never have happened. I understand some might think I’m being dramatic with that example, but I think the underlying currents are the same. No discussion, no rebellion, no change.
See, some are saying that we’re not going to change men. I disagree; again I’m going to nod to Helen’s wonderful prior example. At a certain point in history, men would have preferred foot-bound, corseted wives. But now at this era, any stable, rational man would be horrified at the idea of such a physical disfigurement imposed on his wife, whether she’s a stay-at-home mom or not. Similarly, if we women use our power, and raise enough hell, the idea of a strong, successful woman as ‘bad’ will be just as archaic at some point as the above.
Just to be clear, I do agree with the idea of complementary traits (fem energy, masc energy, etc.). I take issue with the idea that a lot of men think that a successful women can’t also be feminine, receptive, and nurturing. For example, I’ve seenmalelitigators who are lions in the workplace, but lambs with their g-friends. If men do it, I KNOW women are certainly capable of it.
Als0- one thing I’ve noticed on this blog. As much as I love reading it, I’ve noticed that when women say anything that pretty much accepts men’s stereotyping as normal and rational, those post-ers are thanked as having seen the point. But the ‘fighters’ (lol) are somehow seen as just beating their heads against a brick wall. Not criticizing here- just making an observation. Feel free to disagree.
Helen 321
Sayanta, you and I think on exactly the same wavelength. Thank you for defending my points about men’s views on women. Your own terrific example of colonialism isperfectly legitimate and NOT dramatic, because similarly bad things have happened to women in the past and ARE happening to women in different parts of the world today. Where women have the power to speak up and share our POV, to effect change that benefits all women (and men as well in the long term), we should.
And I love, and completely agree with, your last paragraph.
Evan Marc Katz 322
I debated whether to reply to you, Sayanta. You’re thoughtful and articulate and I don’t, for a second, disagree that the world can use some changing. Really, I don’t.
What I will simply point out is how easily my words get co-opted. Naturally, I thank people who see my point, just as Helen thanked you for seeing her point. And naturally, I think that the fighters are beating their heads against a brick wall. Are men, as a gender of 3 billion, any different now than when this blog started in 2007. No? They are not.
But I’m really writing this because I feel that when you reduce this dialogue into an argument – a he said/she said/I’m right/you’re wrong conversation, you lose the nuance of the original post.
I’ve never defended men who lie or cheat or act without integrity.
I’ve never said that you’re wrong for wanting a man to act with consistency, to make a commitment, to always call after sex.
I’ve merely pointed out what any observer of the world would also notice: often men lie, cheat, flirt, play around and act in their own self-interests. This isn’t news. People are selfish and will get away with as much as you let them get away with.
You, as a woman, have two choices: keep investing your time in the same type of disappointing men, or change the type of men you’re choosing. If you want a smart, successful, charismatic man, don’t be too surprised if he is also occasionally arrogant, flirtatious, a workaholic, selfish, emotionally unavailable or a player.
How much evidence do you need to see that this is the case? When do you think this will stop being the case? When you and Helen post on every blog for women that men should stop being this way? I’m not defending these men – I’m pointing out that they exist.
But that’s not even the point. The real point is that if amazing men can have these negative qualities, so can amazing women.
And if amazing women also have these negative qualities, how surprising is it that men will not respond to them?
Thus, “Why Men Don’t Like Smart, Strong, Successful Women”. It’s not because you’re smart, strong and successful. It’s because you have a whole bunch of qualities that we have ourselves that we don’t like.
So if my not-so-revelatory observation was “Lots of men don’t like to date female versions of themselves”, how did this turn into me saying that the world would be better if women were in corsets and relegated to full-time motherhood?
We can agree to disagree on the solution to this problem, Sayanta and Helen. I advocate accepting the world as it is and making different choices in men. You may prefer to attempt to change men. That’s your prerogative.
But until you actually prove that my assertion about what men want is wrong, I’m going to keep encouraging you to stop banging your head against the wall.
Because, from my perspective as a dating coach for smart, strong, successful women, the only person who’s getting hurt is you.
I thank you deeply and sincerely for your passionate voices on here and I hope that you continue to voice your opinion – even when you disagree. Especially when you disagree!
Evan
Maggie 323
he real point is that if amazing men can have these negative qualities, so can amazing women. And if amazing women also have these negative qualities, how surprising is it that men will not respond to them? Thus, Why Men Dont Like Smart, Strong, Successful Women. Its not because youre smart, strong and successful. Its because you have a whole bunch of qualities that we have ourselves that we dont like. . . . . . I advocate accepting the world as it is and making different choices in men.
Evan,
Ah, if only it were that simple! Where are all these “other choices”? From reading this thread, it appears that most of the contributors are mid-thirties and below.
I am early 50′s. I am strong, nuturing, successful, respectful, a leader, and gentle, the list goes on.Alsomaintain a healthy weight for age build and age, not heavy but not skinny, The above statementis not arrogant, butare what is oftensaid by others.
The difference is, that in my age group, if the statistics from the internet are valid, there are about 12 single women for every single man. Add to the mix that most men want women significantly younger than themselves, and the number is truly daunting.
The theme that occurs over and over in this entire thread is that men are acceptable with their halo’s and warts, but women are not acceptable with any warts.
The statement/question “And if amazing women also have these negative qualities, how surprising is it that men will not respond to them?” says it all. Men won’t respond to, let alone accept, respect and love,women who are not their ideal, but women have to accept, respect and lovemen for who they are, without question.
You are right, we cannot change the double standard thatis so obvious. What can change is perception. As an example, until the late sixties, when Twiggy made super skinny the new ideal, men wanted women with real bosoms, with curves and a healthy weight. Now, the media has told men that isn’t what they want, and men buy it in droves.
Which goes back to the original point of this comment, men can demand some sort of ideal that changes as their tastes change. Women have to measure up to an unrealistic ideal, and must settle for what ever it is that men want to be, or be without a companion. How many threads are there about men struggling with an equivalent issue? None, there are no equivalent issues for men. They have choices.
Any way you slice it, there is something really rotten about that.
Helen 324
Evan, I do appreciate your thoughtful comment. A few responses:
Some parts sounded defensive: “how did this turn into me saying that the world would be better…” “I’ve never defended men…” “until you actually prove that my assertion… is wrong…” Evan, I wasalmost neverresponding to your original post in my previous comments, so please don’t take it personally!You original post was brilliant; personally the point I found most useful was: “Men want to feel masculine. We want to feel needed.”
I was (and I think Ruby and Sayanta were) responding to other commenters. Surely that is acceptable on this blog. If it is not, please let me know and I’ll limit future comments only to what you wrote, not what others wrote.
I do have to refute your point though about “the only person who’s getting hurt is you.” Evan, there are a lot of happily married people who read your blog because single friends directed us here, though we’re embarrassed to admit it (not because anything is wrong with your blog, but we feel we don’t “belong”).I am one of them.My single friend directed me and other married galpals to THIS entry, asking: “did you dumb yourselfdown to getmarried?” So I can’t get hurt by being smart, strong, and successful. Frankly I’ve been these things (a smart-ass) ever since my husband first met me and through a decade of awesome marriage.
And that relates to your point: “until you actually prove that my assertion about what men want is wrong…” Like Leslie, I can only offer anecdotes that suggest that menLOVE intelligent, successful women, and when they meet one, they want to contribute even more to her success and happiness. Honestly, that’s why I love men. But that’s anecdotes: wouldn’t it be simple enough to prove by administering a survey, even over the web?How about it?
Ruby 325
I debated whether to add more fuel to this fire, but…my problem with the arguments that men don’t like strong, smart, successful women is the certainty from EMK and HP have that ALL (or even most) men feel this way. All I keep saying is that not ALL men feel that way – again, anecdotal, but the men I know definitely don’t.
One of the original letters said “When I am not interested in them, they work for the relationship day and night. When I am committed to them and act nice and devoted, they start to look elsewhere.” Couldn’t any of us say that, whether rich, poor, smart, not-so-bright, etc.? She could be unemployed, uneducated, with no self-confidence, and make that statement. Can anyone actually think it would be easier to date while facing those obstacles while than to be wealthy, successful and confident and dating?
Studies have shown that both women and men who are college-educated are more likely to marry and less likely to divorce than people with lower levels of education. A Swedish study was just released revealing that men were more likely to live longer if their spouse was well-educated. The womans education was more important for a mans chances of a long life than his own educational attainment. The authors of the study suggest that education predicts occupation, which predicts class and social status as well as income.
Who would have thought that marrying a smart, successful, strong woman could actually be good for you!
Sayanta 326
Hmmm….wow. Where to even begin. Well, first of all, Evan- thank you for responding so thoughtfully to my post. I also want to add to what Helen said- nothing I said was directedagainst you and your original post- it was all in response to HP. So, I genuinely hope my words didn’t sting in any way: that certainly wasn’t my intention. I love the fact that this blog exists as a forum for all of us to discuss such heated, interesting issues.
Helen, Ruby- I’m pretty much with you guys here (as usual
). But I’m going to add a bit of my own opinion again…hehe. I believe I also mentioned, as Ruby did, in a prior post that my issue with this whole topic is the word “all” or even “most.” Not that I’ve never done it myself, but think about what those words do. They make a generalization, right? What does a generalization do? It leads to a stereotype. What do stereotypes do? They dehumanize people. We just see the stereotype when we meet a person, and in the deluge of preformed idea that we have about this person, we lose compassion for them, because all the negative ideas we have are swirling in our heads like some bad acid trip.
When you hear the words “criminal defense lawyer” what goes through everyone’s mind? Nothing good, right? I’m ashamed to say that I thought the same way.Then I met a man in the past month- not anyone I’m dating (so there’s no rose-colored glasses here, lol). Thelevel of compassion, gentleness, and patience that this man has completely astounds me. I can only hope to be at that level at some point in my life. He didn’t tell me he was a criminal defense lawyer when we first met. But if that’s the first thing he’d stated at our first meeting, all these negative ideas that I have about crim defense lawyers- and yes, I admit that I’ve made stereotypes as well- would have colored our conversation. I wouldn’t have seen the amazing qualities this man has, and we wouldn’t have become friends. But because I got to talk to him and connect with him as a human being first, all the other stuff didn’t matter. It even changed my mind about crim defense lawyers.
I understand why people stereotype/generalize. Really, I do, because I’ve been a big-time offender. It’s a way to explain our pain, to make order out of this chaotic world. They become our rules, our commandments. But we miss out on so much. We don’t talk to people and think about their hearts, their feelings, what gives them pain, how we can help relieve that pain for them. Because all that’s going through our head is he/she is successful- so, he/she is also arrogant, and on and on and on. And all this does is create moremisery in the world, particularly between the sexes.
Some of you might think the next bit I’m going to say is New-Agey, but I can only shrug my shoulders at that. In my experience, you see/get what you expect to see/get. A very mundane personal example. Last year, I went out on the worst date of my life. The guy was a complete ass to me while we were out. I left as soon as I could, and decided I was never going to date again. Not just that, I was so jaded by men and dating in general that after that date, I saw arrogance and condescension in every social encounter I had with a twenty/thirtysometing male (my age range). A few months later, I went out on the best date of my life. I was on cloud nine- and whenever I interacted with men in my age range after that date, I got nothing but friendliness. What changed? That good date put me in a good mood- I met a guy who was wonderful, and so that colored my other interactions with men. So really, in either case I never really saw people <i>as they were </i>- I saw only the best in them, or only the worst in them. But everyone’s both light and dark.
What if a man like HP was stuck on a train next to a woman? What if, just for talking’s sake, they didn’t discuss how the other makes their living in the first couple of hours (the train’s broken, and it’s gonna be that way for a while). They connect through other small talk, the small talk goes to deeper levels, they connect, they bond. The woman is lovely, sweet, funny. She has children, loves them, seems like a wonderful mother. Train’s fixed, and when they all get off, woman hands the HP man her card. She’s a criminal defense lawyer. What will HP do (I’m not talking about HP himself necessarily, just a man with those kind of ideas about women)? Well, I’m thinking, since he’s got, hopefully, some level of depth and feeling, his ideas about what ‘his woman’ should be like may change. Maybe not fully, but he just might start thinking. Because of that one encounter. That’s really all it takes. One encounter. And I think that might be an answer to your question, Evan. You wanted some kind of assertion/proof that successful men aren’t…x,y,z. I met that one amazing compassionate, successful crim defense lawyer. That’s all the proof I need. If there’s one, there’s more- because there are 2 billion men out there. It was a long lesson to learn, though.
amy 327
Wow. You know, I came to this site feeling all sorry for myself, sad and lonely — I’m a 41-year-old single mother, and while I’m in good shape, I look like what I am: a short, harassed middle-aged Jewish lady who exercises and doesn’t get enough sleep and is distracted most of the time. After…oh, God. 25 years of dating and marriage, I know what I want and what I don’t want, among them more socks to pick up. (That’s under ‘don’t want.’ I don’t have some kinky sock fetish.) So thank you, Evan, for showing me, someone old enough to be your mother by the looks of it, that I should stop complaining and be thankful.
Why? Because all this stuff about “you don’t have to dumb yourself down, act passive,” etc. is a lot of baloney. You’re right — even if they don’t want kids, men want an easy, pleasant ride. Who doesn’t? Well, I’m not that ride. I’m a hell of a good friend, there’s always good conversation and good art, and you’ll get a lot of laughs, but easy and pleasant, not so much. Sex all the time, no. At this point a man comes third in my life behind my daughter and me. In other words, I’m a real woman, a real mother, and just not interested in tiptoeing for a man. And the beauty of it? I don’t have to! That’s not so bad. Especially when I stop and think about what my married friends put up with, and how they contort themselves for the marriage, to smooth things with their husbands and avoid stepping on the men’s toes — without even thinking about it, they’ve done it so long.
I still believe, Evan, that there are men out there who are more interested in “interesting and loving” than “easy and comforting”. Real men who know themselves and take care of themselves, are bright, and are looking most of all for a good friend, a good woman. Right now, yes, I get the 50somethings looking to escape their wives, who know too much about them. And any sensible person now would stand back, seeing that I’m busy, and really don’t have time for him. But someday, when my daughter’s grown, I think I will find such a man, and we’ll live somewhere in an apartment and hope for shows that have something new, count ourselves lucky to have found each other, and not worry too much if things don’t match up exactly.
Best wishes,
Amy
Evan Marc Katz 328
Thanks for sharing, Amy. Like I’ve said, over and over, it’s not an either/or. Being easy doesn’t mean tiptoeing. You can be interesting AND pleasant. Every time someone suggests that these are mutually exclusive, I want to cringe, since I’ve never said that. All I’m saying is that men like to feel masculine, supported, and loved, as opposed to second-guessed, criticized and bossed around. Believe it or not, there are some women who can pull this off without “contorting” themselves. It took a lot of effort, but I married one myself.
By the way, you are exactly 4 years older than I am, which would make us a very odd mother/son combination.
amy 329
Ha! Yes, that’d make for some interesting parent/child moments. Well, you look very well-preserved up there.
If a man wants to feel masculine, however he defines that, I think that’s wonderful, but it’s up to him. I’m well aware of my womanhood without a man here telling me about it. Would I support a man, sure — unless I think he’s a lousy guy, and presumably I wouldn’t be with him then. But this is not the same thing as being uncritical. And with a name like Evan Katz, surely you know that loving and bossing are not mutually exclusive. (!)
Am I pleasant? Sometimes. And sometimes not. I’m a person, Evan, and I have good and bad days like anyone else. I don’t go around pleasanting things up to suit other people. I do see long-married women who do this, and I’ll tell you, therapists make a pretty penny off of them. These women have learned to keep things pleasant, to make a nice home, to keep their husbands happy…and by and large, what they do winds up taken for granted and abused. And then they don’t know what to do. They’re trying as hard as they can, they feel horrible, but they’ve been sucking it up for so long that they hardly know how to say, “Jesus H. Christ, if the job makes you that miserable, why don’t you quit and get another one? You’ve been bitching to me about it for five years, I’m done being your free therapist. Don’t talk to me about this jerk or that jerk again. Plus, you were a real asshole to me in the car, and the next time you do that you can walk home and find someplace else to sleep.” Or other such things. Yes, you can be pleasant if other people are consistently pleasant to you. But you know, it’s remarkable, in marriages, how often people are unpleasant. No, I cannot say I’d advise a consistent policy of “be interesting and pleasant, or at least be his idea of interesting and pleasant”. ”Be who you are, and be worthy of your own respect,” strikes me as a better idea.
What it comes down to is that I find most men want considerable coddling, and feel entitled to it. If a woman is around, they will readily offload much of the general maintenance of their lives — hygiene, health, family relationships, social lives, career scutwork, decisionmaking, entertainment, checklist-maintaining, even financial planning — and act as if hurt if the woman does not pick up. This is part of “support”, maybe in part because they’re looking at what other men get from their women, and don’t want to feel they’re coming up short. I have no energy or patience for it. I know what adults are capable of; I know what I do every day, raising and supporting my child.
I think that women my age, particularly mothers, tend to be extremely supportive of their friends, and love them, too. We create very strong support and care networks. But if you look at how we behave with each other, you’ll also see that we leap to do for each other, and tend to be very careful about not asking others to do our work for us. Mothers in real need will refrain from asking their friends for help because they see that their friends are already burdened, and don’t want to add to the burden. On the other hand — I needed to go on an overnight trip, and my wonderful friend with four little kids, money trouble, and an ill father didn’t think twice about offering to take my daughter overnight. I hadn’t even asked. Another friend is trying to sort out options for her frail parents — I offered to do some research on services to help her mother pack up the house. My friend hadn’t asked, but it just seemed obvious, and easy, too. She was so grateful — and had her husband thought to do this for her? No; he was complaining that she was leaving him with the kids while she went to check out the situation with her parents. And this is a good, responsible guy, who brings home the bacon, doesn’t drink or run around, and is very much into the kids.
We do for each other in myriad ways all the time, women do. And in 25 years of experience with men, I’ve seen very few pick up like that, on that level. Do we second-guess, criticize, and boss each other? Ah…you know, not so much. Constructively, sometimes. But I’m thinking of women I’ve known and lived with for years, and…yeah, there’s some tough love sometimes. Sometimes. It’s almost always meant and taken well, and usually a favor. I tend to think that if the men are feeling henpecked, it has something to do with their own behavior. Again, something they can fix for themselves, not look to the woman to fix.
I don’t know how much of this comes from expectations of sex. Sure, I’ve had times in my life when I’ve been more than happy to oblige. And others when I’m just not interested. But I think there is still, in the dating and marriage, an expectation of sex where the slider is pushed far towards the male side on expectation. And again, I don’t see this to be my problem. God gave you a hand; if I’m not interested, go use it and enjoy. Again, I seem to be fully capable of taking care of myself that way, and I don’t see why a man shouldn’t be able to do the same.
I guess what it comes down to is that if a man’s going to make more work for me, and won’t be happy unless I’m not how I already am, the man seems to me not worth the effort. You know? I’m busy, I’m a serious person with work to do, a child to raise, a house to keep, friends to help and enjoy. If a grownup man comes along for a grownup romance, for love, wonderful. I think it’d be marvelous. But no, he should not rely on me to look after him or his sense of masculinity. He’s bound to be disappointed there.
Sayanta 330
I’m kinda depressed now.
amy 331
Wait, I know, it’s because I sucked all the air out of the room.
A-L 332
Why are you now feeling depressed, Sayanta?
Sayanta 333
oh- I was just kidding. Kind of- the whole ‘there aren’t many mature men out there’ kinda gave me the blues for a sec.
Helen 334
Sayanta, if you feel depressed because of Amy’s comments, I’d like to offer an alternative viewpoint (don’t I always?) from nearly a decade of marriage.
Amy is right:marriageIS aboutconstant compromise. But I honestly think that this makes us better people, smoothes down the rough edges, and makes it easier foreveryone else to tolerate us, not just our spouses. Each one of us, single, is a piece of work in ways that we can’t easily detect (we often don’t know our own flaws, even if we do see them easily in others). When we get married, any sharp edges will have to get smoothed down if the marriage is to last. Example from our own marriage: my husband’s rough edge was that he wanted to debate every single topic, and could do so forcefully, without regardfor how the other person was feeling. My rough edge was that I was one of the biggest cheapskates ever: laughably so. Both of us have toned down these aspects of ourselves considerably. And I’m not sorry for having my own peculiarities whittled down.
There are people who want to cling on to their peculiarities, and that’s okay if they are traits that don’t bother or hurt anyone else – but if they do, what’s wrong with toning them down? It doesn’t make you any lessappreciated asan individual. It just makes you easier to get along with.
A response to Amy: I think a man DOES need a woman to make him feel masculine, and that a woman can do this without much effort: simply by making him feel appreciated.
Sayanta 335
Helen-
I just love your posts. Thanks for that viewpoint. Really though- I was making an offhand comment which, I guess, had some subconscious stuff loaded behind it. lol- looks like I need to start taking my own advice about the generalizing thing.
I’ve never been married (I’m only 31 though), or in anything really long-term, so I can’t exactly speak intelligently on the subject- but what you’re definitely giving me sound advice for the future.
A-L 336
A couple of things.
1) I think Amy’s examples help illustrate the importance of compatibility within a couple. If you’re dating a guy and he’s always complaining about his job, that’s probably not going to get away if you get married. And if hearing about it bothers you, (and you’ve discussed it with him and he doesn’t want to curb it), then it could be a dealbreaker. One of the points of dating someone (if you’re looking for marriage) is to find someone where nothing could change and you’d still be happy to come home to them in 10, 20, or 50 years.
2) Related to #1, figure out for yourself what is really important in a long-term mate. Some people require a 10 on the passion scale while others are willing to do with less. Some need someone who earns a certain income while others are willing to be the sole breadwinner. Some people love the excitement of debating over every single thing and to others it sounds like a nightmare. Everyone has their own set of needs. But the key is finding someone who fulfills those relationship needs, and not finding something else that’s really exciting that doesn’t. My mom for instance had a passionate relationship with tons of intellectualism and excitement. After they married she realized she needed someone who was easygoing, and knew that her husband wasn’t it. But just because my dad wasn’t an easygoing fellow doesn’t mean that none exist. Two of my aunts found them (same age bracket). It’s just a matter of looking.
3) I actually think the younger women here have it better than some of the older women. I think because of the experience that some of the more veteran women hear have talked about, they’ve raised their sons to be more self-reliant, helpful, etc. So there are fewer younger guys who expect to be totally coddled by their wives, whereas there’s a greater expectation of that in older men. But not all hope is lost for older women as I suspect that many older men may have eased up in their old requirements as they’ve been divorced and/or had this issue arise before.
Just my $0.02.
Sayanta 337
A-L-
Very good points too (you’ve thought a lot about this!
) I guess it’s like anything else in life worth doing- patience, perseverance, and sense of humor needed.
amy 338
Sayanta, I’m not sure what you mean by “mature”. I do think there are many men out there who’ve got advanced degrees from the school of life. But I also think that the default, regardless, is to believe that that the woman will care for and do for, and not really to be to cognizant of…well, of all sorts of things. Of how much he’s asking for. Of what the woman’s time is worth, or that indeed it has value. Of how much silent, invisible maintenance work women do.
We still get TV shows where the overbearing husband gets stuck taking care of the kids for the day, and is completely undone. He and the house are a total wreck nine hours later. And then he’s appreciative (and hopes he never, ever has to do it ever again, anxious to push the whole thing back to his wife). But where are the shows with the guy taking the role of the 50something woman, making phone calls to take care of the elderly aunt, pushing the husband to go to the doctor, making the lists for the upcoming trip, worrying silently about where money for xyz will come from, checking online about medication interactions, finding couples-night activities and researching restaurant reviews, calling the handyman to complain about something not done, etc., etc., etc.?
I haven’t seen it. I don’t expect to. And besides, what’s the use? In the end, you’d get some bewildered guy saying, “I’d be lost without her,” but we already know this, and so does she. So what? She’s still doing all the work, and probably she’s got a job, too. If she’s got time for that and doesn’t mind doing it, fine. But I do think men expect it, in the sense that they don’t expect the absence of that attention.
My solution? Have the guy live somewhere else. Don’t become the maid and concierge and nurse and social director and nutritionist unless that’s really what you want to do. He’s got a map and a phone, and so do you; you’ll find each other. Or go spend time at his place, sleep over, stay a day or two, and when you’ve had enough, go home. If you’re getting on each other’s nerves, go home. There’ll be a whole world of personal-maintenance of his you’ll never even know about, let alone take care of. You’ll have no idea what shirts of his are clean or whether or not his water bill’s been paid. Meanwhile, he doesn’t have to put up with your rotten mood, either, or feel henpecked, or eat something that’s good for him, and so on. There you go, love insurance, $700/mo.
——-
A-L, it’s true, you don’t want to marry someone with really jarring habits you can see while you’re dating. During a marriage, though, people change. Things happen. Children happen. Expectations are fulfilled and disappointed. Some people handle these things well, some not so well, and these are things you can’t always see from the perspective of dating or engaged. That’s why if your 99% response to stress and strife is “stay pleasant, make things pleasant”, you’re headed for trouble. I think too many women get taught this as a sole mode of dealing with family problems, esp. when it comes to the men. I don’t know how many fear that if they’re not that way, the men will leave.
———
Helen, I agree with you about “bad habit” traits, and if that’s all we’re talking about, I have no problem with it. I think it’s a more serious problem when one partner defines some aspect of another’s personality as a “bad habit” and demands change, or when the conflict isn’t about annoying habits, but about division of labor in the family or something else of similar importance. I can’t tell you how many women I talk to who’ve worked hard to get where they are in a career they love; they found wonderful men who assured them that they took the women’s careers just as seriously as the women did and supported them in it 100%; they got married and had children….
and all of a sudden, the important career in the household is the fella’s. It’s never said out loud until she forces him to say it, and then the definition, or excuse, turns out to be, “I make more money (and telling me not to make money for my family, and rise in my career, emasculates me, and that’s what’s really important).” Slowly, or not so slowly, she finds she’s doing most of the housework, too. And after a while, she decides she doesn’t want to be a shrew anymore, gives in, and accepts that her career is diminished and she’s half-housewife. Fifteen years later, she goes to therapy because she’s unhappy, and is told she needs to “do something for herself”.
One reason I have no intention of living with another man while I’m raising my daughter is that I don’t want those negotiations again.I don’t see a reason to put myself in a position where it’s necessary to negotiate for my own work.No thank you. I’ve been through it three times personally, and outside of my romantic life have met precious few men who, when push comes to shove, will willingly and on a longterm basis take hits to their own careers — the kind that women do when children come along — in order to “play fair” with their wives. The pride of breadwinning wins. This shocked me the first few times I ran into it, but it doesn’t shock me any more. There are other issues that run that deep for other people– household finance, extended family matters, attitudes towards education and religion.
Anyway. If marriage is what you’re after, I think it’s a good idea to live with the other person for a good year or so before you start talking rings and invitations. And to have an excellent prenup, as well as some reasonable idea of how divorce and custody actually work.
——
If men need women to feel masculine…and I don’t really believe they do…then I am sincerely sorry. To me, that seems a sad circumstance.
——
Ruby 339
Amy #338
“But where are the shows with the guy taking the role of the 50something woman, making phone calls to take care of the elderly aunt, pushing the husband to go to the doctor, making the lists for the upcoming trip, worrying silently about where money for xyz will come from, checking online about medication interactions, finding couples-night activities and researching restaurant reviews, calling the handyman to complain about something not done, etc., etc., etc.?
I havent seen it. I dont expect to.”
Actually, I already do, and have done, all that stuff as a single person. It would be nice to have someone to share the load. And what ever happened to love, sex and intimacy? Are the married guys out there so friggin’ lazy that they can’t lift a finger to help out with a few chores? No wonder Sayanta felt depressed!
Helen 340
Amy, are you by any chance that brilliant womanwho wrote a comment to Maureen Dowd’s NYTimes article, beginning with “Whaton earth wouldMEN have to get unhappy about”? Your points and hers are identical. On the whole, I’d agree with you.
HOWEVER (and this is meant as a note of hope to Sayanta, Ruby, and even you, Amy): MEN ARE TRAINABLE.Even after you marry them, they’re trainable. We as women need to be bolder, ask for what we want, and not be afraid to say no if we’re presented with an unreasonable request.Seriously, women, practice with me: No. No. No. My job is important to me. This project is important to me. This hobby is important to me. No. Will you please take out the trash, dear? Will you pick up the kids tonight? Will you make dinner tonight? I’m so tired. Thank you so much, dear!
You don’t have to say No all the time. Nor need you nag constantly. But be pleasantly relentless in asking for what you need. And thank them! Then they’ll be eager to help you again, and again, and again. Men are awesome that way… just try it. Ask with a smile.
That’s my secret. It’s worked for me. It’s worked for my girlfriends whose hubbies do most of the housework AND the kids are named after the wife’s surname. Wasn’t it Bridget Jones, of all people, who advised usgals to always be busy and important? I don’t agree with everything she says and does, but I DO agree with THAT.
Ruby 341
It saddens me that women are still faced with the same damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don’t conundrum: too demanding and strong and you’re a pushy ballbuster, too weak and passive and you’re a doormat (and a resentful one at that).
Thanks, Helen, for the words of hope!
Sayanta 342
Helen-
I think you should write a book for us want-to-be-hopeful single gals.
amy 343
Helen -
Far be it from me to rain on parades (seriously!). But you know how, when you get a new dog, you take it to the trainer? And how you pay the trainer? A lot?
That’s because training is work. It’s a job. And, frankly, it’s not easy, even before you get to the fact that some percentage of dogs will say “no”, or be a little slow on the uptake, or be wellmeaning but rambunctious, etc.
If doing that training work is OK by you, then all is well. Me, I don’t want to train and manage a man. (Management: there’s another job you get paid for, ordinarily.) And, frankly, I don’t want to be trained and managed, either. We are grownups, yes?
I have a little child, and I train and manage her. I expect to do that. Sometimes she says no (or NO!). But she’s a nice, smart girl, and she really does her best most of the time. She’s also my responsibility, so of course I’ll do this work. She’ll need it when she goes out into the world.
But an adult? No, he’s not my responsibility. Apart from which, I don’t want to set up the dynamic where the man does as told in the expectation of getting some. If he gets some, it’s because I want to have sex with him, not because he vacuumed his hair off the bathroom floor after I only asked once.
I don’t see what’s so hard about pitching in on the everyday jobs, not just the hero “I fixed the broken doorbell (kind of)” way. If the guy can’t do that, then I don’t think he should give up his own place, or get in the habit of treating my place like a hotel. (Actually I find that even real slobs will pull up socks and clean up after themselves if they’re visiting a woman rather than living with her.)
Oh, and no, I’m not that NYT lady! Thanks, though! I went & read her comment, and I like her style. So did 300 other people, apparently!
Sayanta 344
Amy-
I’m going to risk taking a serious beating here, but reading the tone of your posts, I was wondering- are you genuinely not interested in finding anyone right now, or have you just given up on men out of embitterment? I just thought it was surprising that someone who’s made the decision that men just aren’t worth it would be posting on a dating blog- I mean, you’ve already made the decision that there aren’t good ones and that they’re not worth it, right? So that being the case, why are you expending mental energy toward thinking and writing about them here in such detail? Is there maybe a part of you that hopes that you’re wrong about your opinions about them? Not trying to mind-read, just sorting things out from your post.
you’re free to do whatever, as we all are. I’m just very curious.
Selena 345
I chuckled at the idea of “men being trainable”. Well maybe if you get them very young – like puppies. I don’t know of any young women who envision married life as having a fulltime job and spending their time off doing a second shift of most, if not all the housework and child rearing and taking on the added responsibilities of managing their partner’s life as well. In many cases I imagine it happens insiduously. When you get serious with someone you want to prove you are a “good girlfriend”. Instead of having every date involve going out, you start shopping and preparing some great meals at home for him. And you’re not going to expect him to do the dishes afterward – after all, he’s your guest. You’re not overly bothered by picking up his socks from underneath the coffee table, or putting the beer cans he left on topof itin the recycle bin. If he leaves some clothes at your place, why shouldn’t you throw them in with your laundry? You’re doing a load anyway right? And when you stay over at his place…well it’s not a big deal if you tidy up a little while you’re there. He probably appreciates it since he’s so, um, busy.
When you move in together, you’re happy the two of you reached that level. You also probably believe you will be equals, sharing the household tasks. The reality turns out more to be that whoever wants it done most does it. He’s supposed to clean with you on Saturday and maybe sometimes he does. But then there are all those Saturdays where he promises his brother or buddies he will help them fix something, or go somewhere with them. You end up doing all the cleaning just because you want it done. You realize if you try to split the cooking with him, you will end up having nothing but grilled meat. Or perhaps a side of boxed mac and cheese made with water because he didn’t think to get any milk. You’re watching your weight…and your pennies …and it just makes more sense for you to do the shopping and the cooking because you’re better at it. We each bring our strengths to the relationship right? And after all, he does “fix” things around the house. That is when he finally gets around to it. Which could be months.
Year after year you find yourself taking on more and more little tasks that he would put off. Paying bills, renewing insurance, tags, remembering birthdays and buying gifts. All these countless, countless tasks that you come to do automatically and the don’t really seem to count, because as Amy pointed out, they are invisible. The person you partly do these things for has become so accustomed to you doing them, he may not even know what they are. Is he deliberately selfish? Taking you for granted? Probably not on purpose. It’s more that he’s been “trained”. Trained by you into a form of learned helplessness. Or perhaps You are the one who has been trained. No matter the equalitarian soul you once where, you have managed to train yourself into taking on all these responsibilities – sometimes whining, nagging, and complaining, but you do them nonetheless. Multiply this by 10 for each child you have.
Fortunately not all males are lazy, thoughtless, slobs. And if you don’t want one as a partner pay attention while you are dating. Not just to his lifestyle and behavior, but your own as well. Resist the urge to “take over, or take on” (because you do it better/ want it done the most) or realize that’s what you’re doing and correct it unless you don’t really mind ending up like Amy’s friends.
Men like relationships that are easy? They aren’t the only ones.
Helen 346
Oh Amy and Selena.It is not as bad as you portray. Even if you did experience this in the past, please don’t believe thatyou will never be able to be happy in aLTR with a man.(Selena, who is the “You” in your entry? It’s not I; my husband does more chores in our household than I do.)
I used the term “train” lightheartedly: not at all condescendingly or meant to conjure a grueling task – because it isn’t. Whenever you live with a person, you BOTH are in some ways training each other and yourselves. The great thing about living with someone who loves you, and whom you love, is that you feel more comfortable asking each other directly for the things you want and need.
In retrospect, what was underlying my earlier comment “Men are trainable” is the idea that you don’t have to find the “perfect” man. There is no perfect man, just as there is no perfect woman. Every person is a work in progress. But if there is one thing I do think men have in common, it is that they feel happy when they know they can make a woman happy. You don’t have to feel helpless that you can’t change anything about a person – you CAN, just as you can change yourself, to make your common life more pleasant. It’s not always easy, and you may decide that rather than the trials (and joys) of living with a husband or boyfriend, you would rather live by yourself. That’s fine. But I think that changing one’s attitude toward what a man can offer is probably the best move toward happiness on BOTH sides.
amy 347
It’s true, Selena. Which is why I’m not interested in engaging in this kind of futility anymore. If a guy won’t be bothered to learn to cook nutritious meals, for instance, you’re faced with a few choices:
1. Eat junk (and then be upset because you don’t feel well, are gaining weight, etc).
2. Cook for the family (and fume, unless you like this and have time for it.).
3. Cook for everyone but him (and deal with the fallout).
4. Mobilize an arsenal of manipulative schemes to make him want to learn how to cook nutritious food (somewhere in here sex will be involved, and you’ll wonder how you turned into this bizarro pre-Friedan creature).
I find most women pick up the work themselves because it’s less work than arguing, wheedling, scheming, etc., and in the end they don’t want to live in a pigsty and have kids who’ve never seen a doctor and never go on playdates, because nobody’s bothered to arrange the visits. Not because they’re unaware of what’s going on. It ends with lying to yourself and finding excuses for the guy, telling yourself that he does XYZ and so you should count your blessings, because really, he’s wonderful. Once the kids are grown, you may safely permit the scales to drop from your eyes, unless you’re scared of being alone in old age.
Sayanta, no, I haven’t given up — I’m totally open to the possibility. I don’t want to get married, no. And I don’t want a man living here, and I’m not looking for a stepfather for my daughter. But a companion, for me? A bright, loving, funny fella, a grownup with his own life, his own work, his own house, able to take care of himself? (And one who’s not married? Boy, do I draw the married 50somethings. They’re terrific for flirting with, though. That’s fun.) Sure, I’d love it.
This time, though…I know who I’m looking for, and I recognize the odds of finding him, especially where I am geographically. (I’m not moving anytime soon; my daughter’s father and grandparents live here, and though I could legally pick up and move her away from them, I wouldn’t.) And I’m not chasing a guy. I find it’s a great way to pick up the nebbishes and the terminally indecisive. If a man’s interested in me, he can make it known, act, do something about it. So if it happens, terrific; if not, I can’t quite call it a tragedy. The rest of my life is exhausting, but pretty good.
It’s ironic, in a way — since I became a single mom, I’ve had thoughtful friends out hunting men for me, and they’re generally professionals — doctors, law professors, scientists. Catches, right? But I don’t want the wife job, and these men get confused when they meet a woman who’s interested in them, but not in marriage. Maybe it’s a consequence of too much SAT prep, I don’t know. They’ve got it all mapped out, anyway. In general they’re nice guys; they just haven’t thought too much about what they’re really asking a woman to do, and for what in return.
I’m not bitter, either. Somehow women who talk about the raw deal plainly wind up getting called “bitter”, which I think says something deep about our society. (If I had no choice but to be married, though, then you bet I’d be bitter.) But I’m very much surprised that women are supposed to want this deal, or to put up with it, or be “gracious” and “pleasant” about it. It seems obviously rotten to me. I had a good 20 years’ worth of being a single woman, treated as an honorary man, before I got married and had a child, and WOW. Talk about night and day in terms of respect and compensation for your work. There’s no question in my mind as to which estate is better. The child is wonderful, but I wouldn’t take the rest of the package again.
amy 348
(incidentally, how do you make the paragraph breaks? Sorry about the megaparagraphs up there — I hit return, and I see the break in the text box, but it doesn’t come through in the post.)
Sayanta 349
Helen-
I like that line, “changing your mind as to what a man can offer…” but what do you mean by that? Are there certain things you believe that they just can’t offer, so there’s no point in looking for it? For example, I read a book by a female psychotherapist who was begging women to not look for meaningful, long conversations with men as a form of bonding, ’cause it ain’t happening.
But I don’t want to misunderstand your sentence, so that’s why I thought I’d ask.
Ruby 350
Amy #
Do you think that if you live with a man then taking care of him is a given? What if you’re married and don’t have kids? What if you find a house-husband? Rare, but they do exist?
Ruby 351
Amy #347
My message got messed up!
Do you think that if you live with a man taking care of him is a given? Does it make a difference if you don’t have kids? What if you find a man who would be a house-husband? Rare, but they do exist…I’m just curious…You mentioned being treated as an “honorary man” – what do you mean? Some of my never-married woman friends feel that they’re stigmatized for having never been married, you know, the “spinster” stigma.
amy 352
I’m wondering too, Helen. I haven’t met these trainable men, and neither have any of my friends. I did for a long time live with a man who assiduously took care of his own friendships, cleaning, cooking and grocery shopping, which was wonderful, but…well, that was it. Anything that required negotiation with the world, or fixing things, or long-term planning…it was all me. And then when I got sick, I realized that he’d never extend the kind of care I’d have given if he’d been sick. The best he could do was to pretend I was fine. That was really the end of it. We had a great time together — still do, I just saw him today — and the love was and is genuine, but again, it came down to me carrying most of the load of a marriage. So, no. We’d been engaged; I broke it off.
Incidentally — and if the setup makes you both happy, that’s great, but — why does your husband do more household chores than you do? Don’t you feel compelled to chip in more so that there’s some sort of rough equity, seeing as how you both live there? (And if not, why not?)
Selena 353
Actually Helen I’ve had only one relationship with a household lazy slob guy. Loved him anyway, though sometimes I wasresentful. Since him, I’ve known and loved other men who weren’t like that so no I’m not bitter. The You was meant generally, not personally to me, you, or anyone else. And though my life has not turned out like some of Amy’s unhappy married friends, I’ve read/heard a plethora of stories from women in the same situations she describes.
I understood you wrote “trainable” light-heartedly, it wasn’t until I started writing about how women mightfind themselves in “the second shift” type relationships that itoccured to me perhaps women are the ones ‘training’ their men, themselves by unwittingly setting up that pattern early on without ever meaning to do so. It didn’t happen to me, but perhaps it could have. The examples I gave were from my own life with one boyfriend and they were the mildest ones!
I think the problem may be that people aren’t always clear on what their expectations are regarding sharing a household.And communicate those expectations to their partner BEFORE moving in together/marrying. If your idea of partnership does not include serving as someone’s personal assistant, maid, cook and housekeeper are you making that known? Light-heartedly, but firmly ofcourse. Or do you not say anything out of fear your man would choose not to live with/marry you if he knew he had to take turns scrubbing the tub and the toliet? Vaccuming his hair off the bathroom floor with no guarantee of sex for the effort?
Sure Helen, people who love each other want to make each other happy. But patterns can be very hard to change. If you establish the pattern of doing all or most of the household/ family maintenance early on – in the spirit of being a “good girlfriend” – should you really be surprised 4,7, 15 yrs down the line your partner doesn’t want to change the play? By then he knows that if he stalls long enough, you will scrub the tub, the toliet, pick up his crusty socks, etc., etc. ad nauseum because it matters more to you than it ever will to him. If a woman doesn’t like the way “the second shift” lifestyle looks, she’s better off being cognizant of the patterns she may be setting up by “doing for” her boyfriend. It’s not about finding a perfect man, it’s about finding a man you will be compatibleliving with. Just an observation.
Sayanta – the men I loved the most, was closest to, and with the longest were the ones I bonded with through long, meaningful conversations. Countless long, meaningful conversations. Sometimes still having such conversationslong after we decided to part as lovers. I can’t imagine falling in love otherwise. I tend to find uncommunicative men dull.
What does this published psychotherapist suggest IS the way to bond with men? Sex? Cooking? lol
Amy - you double space between paragraphs by hitting the enter key twice. Love your writing style btw.
amy 354
Thanks, Selena, and thanks for the formatting tip!
I do think there’s a real difference between “married, no kids” and “married with kids” when it comes to division of labor, money, issues of religion, etc. There’s less of everything to go around, including time, and the stakes are higher. A formerly carefree couple finds that something’s gotta give, and since caregiving has to be part of the equation, whoever’s doing the caregiving is obviously not going to want to exclude part of the family from care. Even if the other parent isn’t playing nice, it’s very stress-inducing to say, “I’ll take care of the children, but I won’t do anything nice for you.” Even if it’s what you feel like doing, you can’t, because it’d hurt the children. These are very hard things to think about. I have a writer friend now on the verge of marriage, and she’s walking straight into trouble. She makes no money; she lives off the guy already; he makes decent money, but not good enough for nannies and household help, and they want a kid. And he’s in a regionally-successful band; he’s made it clear he won’t give that up.
So when they have that kid, when is she going to have time to write? Sure, he supports her in her career. But someone’s going to have to be with the baby, and someone’s going to have to make money, and someone’s going to have to clean the house, cook, shop, research daycares, buy clothes, build a support network, go on playdates, go to the doctor, learn all about child development, research schools, volunteer in the classroom, drive to the dance and trombone lessons, etc., etc. Whose career will get the shove? Will they move to a tiny place so he can go part-time? Or….
The biggest source of frustration I hear from well-educated, married women is that they were clear — very clear — in plain English about what they wanted and needed, during the courtship, and the man said yes yes yes. And then the baby comes, or the man’s offered a highly-paid job in another state, and it’s like these conversations never took place. One of my friends here finally divorced her husband when he came home from grad school and announced that he’d won an eight-month fellowship in Africa. Had they discussed this? Had he taken into consideration the fact that they have two children? Nope. Off he went, and she’s now struggling like mad to keep her head above water.
I went through it, too. Even when I was pregnant, I pointed out to my husband that he was going to have a fight on his hands when it came to quitting time, because he was somehow going to have to explain to his boss that he was leaving at five. And do it. Because I didn’t get to go do my work till he got home, and I hadn’t signed up to be no 24/7 mommytron. Again, he said yes yes yes, and then when the moment came…wow. To his credit, he really did push, but of course the boss pushed back. And he had real trouble seeing that he was taking it from a bad systemic setup just as much as I was, but that he was also going to have to work out a solution, just as any mother does. It really frustrated him that my work was not available to sacrifice, and I’m sure that contributed to the divorce.
Come to think of it, I had a boyfriend in my 20s who behaved similarly, though no child was involved. Got real frustrated when it turned out I’d meant what I’d said.
Ruby, there’ve been times when I’ve thought, “Gee, I need a wife,” but I really don’t want that. I just want a man with his own work, something substantial and serious that he loves and can talk to me about, and who also takes care of his own self-maintenance and his share of the relationship/home/etc. work. Without hounding, training, cajoling, eyelash-batting, etc. I do all that and raise and support a kid, so I don’t figure it’s an unreasonable thing to look for in someone I’d invite into my heart, my life, and my bed.
amy 355
Oh, sorry, Ruby — hard to believe I’ve still left something out, but you asked about the honorary-man thing. I think this is likely class-related — if you’re in a profession, and you went to college and learned there to play with the boys, you get treated more or less as one of the boys. Depending on your field, you may have to earn the respect first, but once you’re in, you’re in.
Until you become a wife — that’s the first crack — and then, fatally, Mom. You’ll notice that most professional women don’t decorate the office with pix of the kids, or bring their kids around much. There’s a good reason for that. Mom’s many rungs down on the social-status ladder. Mom is there to serve, and she left her brain in a taxi some years ago, though she’s real cute. Mom’s ignorable when she’s upset. She probably needs help with something. Mom does not in fact quite exist as a person outside her role as a mother, and of course she does all she does because she — well, she loves to, doesn’t she? She wouldn’t do all that stuff if she didn’t want to.
I was totally flabbergasted by the whole thing when I went through it. I’ve pretty much recovered now, but it’s been in direct relation to the number of hours my kid spends away from me. At this point I’m fairly aggressive about mentioning child-related obligations to colleagues, but this definitely works better with older colleagues than with younger, who tend to resent the existence & intrusion of other people’s children into their work lives. It really is easier to relegate the whole phenomenon of children, and the people who must fuss with them, to some World of Mom apart from work.
Ruby 356
Amy #354, 355
Thanks, Amy! As a middle-aged, never married person, I’m not going to have children (am ok with that), but I haven’t given up on the possibility of marriage. Or at least a boyfriend. Sometimes I wonder if I’m looking at things with rose-colored glasses, so I find your perspective very interesting.
“…a man with his own work, something substantial and serious that he loves and can talk to me about, and who also takes care of his own self-maintenance and his share of the relationship/home/etc. work.”
Sounds good to me.
Helen 357
Amy #355, you are SO RIGHT about the invisible-mother phenomenon. And you asked me earlier why I don’t chip in more with household chores? It is exactly because of that: my husband wanted kids, I didn’t; I made the sacrifice for him to have kids and (as alluded to in one of my earlier posts) am finding it hellish.He knows that I’m having a hard time being a mother. So, though we never talked explicitly about it, he does most of the childcare and I do most of the other things: cooking (which I love), laundry, etc. If you were to add it up on both sides by time and effort, he does more. Both of us are fine with that.
But the point is that this all worked because I was VERY explicit about what I wanted and didn’t want, right from the start. Many women have problems with this: being afraid to just laydown our bottom line. I admitted outright to my husband that I couldn’t care less whether we had kids. And even admitted to him afterwards that I hated motherhood. Even the most liberal and liberated women have trouble admitting these things in our society. But someone has got to say it, or – as you point out – people will just keep assuming we do mom things because we love it. No: we love our kids; we don’t necessarily love being mothers.
So, Sayanta,I think what works with men is to be lovingly honest. Be true to yourself and also be kind in how you express that to your man. Don’t shout at him; he isn’t to blame for your wants. What I meant by what a man can offer is to talk with him with the expectation that he will try to meet your needs if he loves you! Assume the best, and he will often give it.
Sayanta 358
Helen and Ruby-
thought I’d share this to boost our argument.
http://www.oprah.com/article/oprahradio/jchatzky/jchatzky_20061206
Sayanta 359
http://www.oprah.com/article/oprahradio/jchatzky/jchatzky_20061206
wait…i think the link’s not coming up properly
Helen 360
Sayanta – Yesssssssssss!
I’ll copy and paste the main points here:
—————————————-
According to Dr. Whelan’s study:
Men do not want to marry subordinate women. Ninety percent say they’re looking for women with equal intelligence.
Sixty-eight percent of men said that smart women make better mothers. Dr. Whelan says this generation is not thinking that career women are neglecting their families.
Women shouldn’t downplay their success at the start of a relationship. If they do, Dr. Whelan says they’ll never know if they’ve found a match.
Forty-five percent of high-achievers participate in online dating, which is a great way to meet people and get to know them efficiently, Dr. Whelan says.
A woman in her early 30s, who lives in a mid-size city, has a master’s degree and earns $55,000 a year, has an 84 percent chance of getting married, according to Dr. Whelan.
As a woman, the best way to find someone who fits you is to stop perpetuating these myths, Dr. Whelan says. Be confident in your position in life, and look to meet people at events, as opposed to bars.
———————
Have you women heard the saying, “If you’ve got it, flaunt it”?If you havebrains and success, flaunt them.Men DO love them. They just don’t love it if you are defensive or angry about being smart and successful. Be HAPPILY and crazily and over-the-top joyously brilliant. Just shower your smiles and your brilliance upon that man. I guarantee you he will be captivated. Then let him know you’d like him to ask you out.
Hey Sayanta, what about that wonderful-sounding criminal lawyer you mentioned a few posts back? I find myself wishing you two would get together!
Sayanta 361
No: we love our kids; we dont necessarily love being mothers.
Helen- so sorry to keep asking questions…lol. I’ve never had kids, so I was curious- what does the above mean? How can the two be separate from each other?
Also, I agree with what you’ve said about women speaking up about what they want. I was actually reading a book that talked about women in past eras keeping silent to avoid angering the people in power (men). Because doing so would mean dire economic (and other) consequences. Centuries of conditioning is hard to undo, but it can be done. And since women in many parts of the world are tasting power for the first time, they’re still trying out their wings. Again, as I said before, transitions are shaky. I think the whole gender thing now is a matter of waiting things out, but at the same time joining the fight when necessary. Balancing the two, I guess.
amy 362
Sayanta, kids are people, and many are pretty easy to love, one way or another — but being a mother is work! And almost none of it’s about you or what you need and enjoy — it’s all about the kids, and what they need and enjoy. It wraps around your whole life, because every few hours, there’s more to do for the kids; you’re talking with them in ways that are primarily for them, not for you; you’re looking around for what they’ll need next. It’s gigantically timeconsuming, even when they’re not there. Today, for instance, despite flu, I got up and — instead of having tea and wrapping up in a blanket and sitting on the couch — I made breakfast and lunch for my daughter, got her out of bed, made sure she got dressed in clothes appropriate for the weather, made sure she brushed her teeth and flushed the toilet, made sure she ate most of the breakfast, made sure she had what she needed for school, shut down an argument about a Ring Pop, got her into the car and buckled her into her booster seat, drove her to school, walked her in, and then went home.
Then I could make some tea and sit down. Not for long, though, because I had a phone meeting at 9. I work much more for money than I did before; the overhead for a kid’s middle-class life is something pretty fancy compared with what I used to live on. I meant to take a nap, but there was just too much work to do, and a guy called with another project offer this afternoon. Between working and trips upstairs for tea, I watched the clock and tried to reach my daughter’s friend’s mother to find out whether the post-extracurriculuar-Spanish-class playdate was still on, and, if so, whether the pickup time was OK, and whether they needed to borrow her booster; after confirming, I had to get in touch with her grandpa to give the pickup info and hope he remembered to pick her up there.
6 pm, she’s home again, I calm her down a bit and start supper while she lets the violin teacher in; my living room is full of squeaky Old McDonald and A, A, B, B for a while. Off I go to fold laundry and find the pajamas she wants to wear to a sleepover tomorrow night. (I still have the flu, remember?) Dinner, and I clean the kitchen while she talks to me and tells me about various children & the snacks at her friend’s house, and between asking for everything under the sun asks me when the people in China will be able to sell things again and have jobs, and why the banks can’t just take back the fake money from people they shouldn’t have lent it to. After the economics and international trade lesson, I fix the dishwasher (still flu, right?), put in another load of laundry, clean out her lunchbox, and supervise & praise homework. Etc, etc., till bed an hour later, when I beg off the bedtime story, because my throat hurts. Still, prayers and the rest of the bedtime routine.
Then I can come sit for a while with tea again and a chat board before getting back to work.
She’s a beautiful kid — bright, funny, genuinely kindhearted and considerate, thoughtful. I love her to pieces. But you’d have to be on drugs to want to do this every. single. day for years on end, with or without flu. You do it because it’s a binary choice; part-time isn’t generally an option.
amy 363
Holy Mother of God, Helen, that’s one hell of a sacrifice. Having kids because someone else wanted them? From your body? With all the stuff that goes with motherhood?
Wow.
Yeah, I get the housework thing.
Sayanta 364
Amy-
wow…I totally get it. I think motherhood is definitely harder on Western women. Because in many Eastern countries, the whole ‘village raising a child’ is still in place. This is one of the huge huge downfalls of the nuclear family. One woman cannot and absolutely SHOULD not be expected to be raising children by herself. Ideally, I think a child should be raised among a loving strong support network of cousins, aunts, uncles, friends, etc. But sadly, that does not happen now.
I debate whether I want kids. I do want to be a mother. But I don’t want to be raising a child without the kind of support network above. Maybe, if I do it, it’ll have to be in another country.
Sayanta 365
Amy-
BTW- I didn’t mean that single mothers are incapable of raising children, obviously. Plz don’t read it that way- many single mothers do exquisite jobs- I just think women should be getting more help than they are.
Helen 366
Sayanta: Amy nailed it on the head with her painful post #362 (get better soon, Amy!). We love our kids but I, at least, cannot honestly say I enjoy being a mother. This is not hard to imagine: you love your grandparents but might not love being their permanent caregiver. Same with kids.
They get you sick,ALL the time. They make you constantly frustrated by being too slow, by disobedience, by tantrums, by messes, by completely wrecking the home you’ve just tidied or cleaned. They cough all night and prevent you from sleeping. They wet their beds and wake you in the middle of the night. They wake you sometimes just because they feel like it. They scare you to death with weird conditions like constant nosebleeds or inexplicable rashes or hives. They sadden you with stories of how other kids mistreated them. They misbehave and their teacher warns you.
Who in their right mind can honestly say they enjoy dealing with these things? I don’t, and I admit it outright. I love them, but Sayanta, you can love other people around you who won’t take years off your life by the sheer stress and frustration and sleep loss children induce. If I could do it all over again, I would not have had kids, even if that meant I couldn’t be married to the wonderful man in my life now. That is just the truth: one that gets hidden far too much in our society. People need to go into this with eyes much more wide-open, and not feel as though they must have children just because everyone else is doing it. Everyone else is too afraid to admit how painful it is sometimes (i.e., most of the time).
Sayanta 367
Helen-
I appreciate the honesty of your post. Thanks for your thoughts on this- I honestly have never given motherhood much thought- the whole “first a date, then marriage, kids, etc.” lol But have you found that there are rewards to having kids that outweigh the stresses of it? I’ve heard that from other women- that there is a lot of struggle, tension, etc. to say the least of it, but that the rewards and growth that come through being a mother outweigh all of that.
There’s no ‘answer’ for this-because marriage and motherhood are such individual experiences, but I just wanted to think out loud on that for a second. I do think though- as aforesaid, that there would be less stress on mothers if a stronger support system for them existed. Perhaps greater community development is an answer, though that seems like it would be more difficult in a mixed society like America.
Oh- as for that crim lawyer, he’s a bit older than me, and has a g-friend. Still, friendship is as great a treasure as a romance.
And one last thing- Helen, your husband sounds awesome. Does he have any brothers? ;-p If you’re comfortable with it, feel free to share how you guys met…
amy 368
Sayanta, people say “oh, they’re worth it” for all sorts of reasons, but the primary one is — what the hell else are you going to say? Who wants it to get back to a kid that his mom regrets him? No, we have all kinds of sentimental baloney that exists solely to protect the kids. But sure, there are plenty of moments where you’re listening to the kid and thinking, “She looks like a bat.” Or, “God, I wonder if he’s going to grow up to be one of those losers who sprays spit when he talks and mushes around in old New Balance sneakers everywhere. Why did I have children?” Or, “I can’t remember what fun feels like. I think that’s probably not a good thing. What a dumb thing I did to myself.” But saying this kind of stuff out loud would, you know, hurt children, and that’s a bad thing to do.
thanks. Was it painful? I’m numb from six years of sleep deprivation, I can’t tell anymore. Actually it wasn’t too bad till kindergarten hit — I swore I’d never get up that early again, and now I’m in for it for the next ten years. I’ll have eyebags to my knees & be all palsied.
Me, I’m happy with my choice, and grateful every day to have gotten such a good, lovey, healthy kid. But the operative word is “choice”. For many years I didn’t want children, and one day I woke up and said, Oh. It’s my turn now. It’s been about me for twenty years, and now it’s time for it to be about the next generation. I mean that’s literally what happened. I can remember the blue sky out the window. In a profound way, I did it for me; it was just my time. I knew it would involve major sacrifice, and that was fine with me, because I’d had mine. Did I understand how much it’d take, no, but I also knew that you never expect a journey’s going to be as hard as it is. I also planned for single parenthood, knowing that it happens (and I’m damned glad I did).
Greater community and family involvement is also a mixed blessing. I had a taste of it last summer, doing research in a beautiful university town, and staying with older cousins. I brought my daughter with me, and she went to camp while I did my thing in the library. My cousins practically adopted her — they did so much for me, looked after her if I wanted to meet a friend for dinner or go for a run, they cooked for us, etc., etc., etc. On the other hand, in a setup like that, you really lose a lot of independence and maturity. Your role changes significantly, and I can see why it generates so much stress when single moms have to move home. Similarly, if you look at the Scandinavian countries, they’ve got great childcare systems and support for time off when the kids are babies…but they can’t actually pay for it anymore, and if you’re a woman who’s serious about her work, you’ll have a real fight on your hands if you look to come back more than part-time and rise in the ranks. I think one way or another, you pay.
Helen —
Ruby 369
I can’t remember where I saw it – maybe it was through this very blog…a link to a recent article stating that having children may give your life direction and meaning, but having them doesn’t make you happier because children are a constant source of stress. Almost every person I know who has kids has told me they didn’t realize how hard it would be, and I’m guessing that’s why.
amy 370
That said, there aren’t a lot of jobs that are more consequential. You really don’t want to screw it up any worse than you have to.
Anyway — now you see why I’m not interested in taking care of a man’s everyday business. Be a friend, lover, companion, yes. Do little nice things here and there, sure. But cleaning, social directing, health-watching, therapizing, bucking up routinely, etc? No. For that, I’m taken.
hunter 371
Ruby/Amy, you don’t tell your kids to sit down and shut up like the rest of us were told to most of the time while youngsters?…..
Bucking up routinely?…that is humorous….there is nothing wrong with having a low sex drive…many people do….
amy 372
Hunter, you sound like a man who hasn’t raised children. If you had, you’d know that telling a 3-year-old to “sit down and shut up” will work for about 15 seconds, unless you’re doing it so forcefully that you’re routinely scaring your children. (If your parents did that to you, I’m very sorry.) In that case, it’ll work for at least 25 seconds. A minute to us is an hour to kids that age.
My daughter’s also aware that it’s rude to tell people to “shut up”.
No matter what you tell young children, or how long they’ll play quietly on their own, you must keep an eye on them pretty much all the time. They get into trouble and harm’s way in a flash.
“Bucking up” has nothing to do with sex. Look it up.
Ruby 373
hunter #371
As I said, I don’t have kids…I think that babysitting as an adult put me off of it. Actually, I think every adult should spend some time babysitting before having children. Also, I don’t think that “bucking up routinely” refers to sex. I think it means providing emotional support.
Kristyn 374
I wish Vino would come back *sigh*.
You all make me feel tired.
amy 375
Is Vino the guy who figures he deserves someone who doesn’t work 60-90 hours a week and has time for him and his needs, but also figures it’s fine for him to work 60-90 hours a week and that this caring woman should, you know, be happy with whatever’s left after that?
Sayanta 376
#375- to Amy,
Yep. Pretty much.
amy 377
Heh. Christ, it’d be so much easier in some respects to be a lesbian. That’s all I’d need, though. A short, middle-aged, Jewish, single-mother lesbian. A short, middle-aged, Jewish, Republican single-mother lesbian. I’d never be allowed outside.
Helen 378
Women, it’s been lovely chatting with you all. I will sign off on this particular thread because we’re getting a bit away from the original topic… but you’ve been great company, and I wish Iknew you all in person.
The final statement I wish to make, in response to the original post, is a statement of hope for women. I have had the exact opposite experience of what is described here: I would have written a post on why men DO love, and long to marry, smart, strong, and successful women. If you were to ask me to boil it down to one reason why, it would be this: Smart, strong, and successful women who are doing what they love are usually happier; and men are attracted to happy women. Indeed, men want to further contribute to the happiness of women, and that is just one reason men are wonderful. If men sense that the way to make this brilliant woman happier is to become a permanent presence in her life… then voila: LTR! We women are really in control; we are the ones giving off the signals. We have the power to make them positive or negative, welcoming or repulsing, to the men in our lives. In truth, the smartness and success may have minimal importance, so long as we are happy and fulfilled, in how we relate to men. If this is our basic attitude, but we also signal to them that they can help us achieve something we want, they are all the more eager to do so.
Helen 379
Sorry… one more post… I had to share with you this BBC article just published today: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8325579.stm
The first line reads: “The secret to a happy marriage for men is choosing a wife who is smarter and at least five years younger than you, say UK experts.”
When I read more of the article, it wasn’t so much that the woman had to be “smarter,” but that she should have a better education than the man to ensure optimal chance for happiness in the marriage.
Yes, the results of this UK study are beneficial for women (because education is a good thing, and if it comes with a happy relationship, all the better!). But… WHY? Why would having a wife who is better-educated than the husband make a happier relationship for them both?
Maybe you geniuses reading this can give me a hand here.
Sayanta 380
Helen-
It was lovely seeing your posts as well! Hopefully you’ll post again here at some point.
Yeah, there are so many wonderful bloggers/posters out there- I wish I could meet many of them personally as well.
Ruby 381
Helen #379
Interesting that the study researches what makes a happy marriage for MEN. Earlier, I posted : Studies have shown that both women and men who are college-educated are more likely to marry and less likely to divorce than people with lower levels of education. A Swedish study was just released revealing that men were more likely to live longer if their spouse was well-educated. The womans education was more important for a mans chances of a long life than his own educational attainment. The authors of the study suggest that education predicts occupation, which predicts class and social status as well as income.
amy 382
Oh. Hey Evan, that thing about the nice guys, above — what you write may be true for some subset, but I’d also say that the self-described nice guys are, in my experience, uniformly not nice. Passive, passive-aggressive, and dependent, yes. ”Nice” really means something else, though.
Sam P. 383
Back to the original topic of why men don’t like smart, successful women . . . the only hesitation I have when I meet a woman whose income and accomplishmentsare greater than mine is that I worry that if I don’t turn out to be incredibly awesome in every other way other than earning ability that she will break up with me and leave me hurt. A girl who makes $50 k should be satisfied with my income, but someone who makes $100kand who wants to do multiple foreign trips per year, hire a maid etc mightresent me for not pulling my weight.
Basically it’s not an issue of not being attracted to her, it’s an issue of her not being attracted to me.
Solution: Lots of reassurance.
Sayanta 384
#383-
I get what you’re saying- but it’s hard for a woman to constantly have to reassure a man- she’s his partner, not his mother.
Helen 385
Sam P: I agree with Sayanta. Women don’t need “lots of reassurance” frommen even if they make less money, so why wouldmen need that? If a woman is with you, she likes you! There is no need whatsoever to read more into it than that.
amy 386
Yep. Solution, Sam, is for you to be confident in yourself. Friendly reassurance about day-to-day things is the kind of thing that all good friends do for each other, but it shouldn’t be a woman’s job to constantly convince you that you’re good enough for her.
Kristyn 387
I’m with Sayanta here – if she is with you, assumeshe is because she wants to be!!
Dateblogger 388
I love strong women – Ihave deep respect for women that can thrive in business in a predominantly male environment, they are usually far more talented than their male counterparts, in my humble opinion and experience, and they are great in bed!!
Jintesha 389
As a male in my late twenties who has had to leave a few women in the past I can gladly say I have stopped trying to figure out what women want, there is no point! Not all women are huge hypocrites but many are…I want to use the word “legion.” I say be successful men and go about your life and be content with yourself, a loving wife is nice but do not kill yourself to find her, its not worth it. Love is nice…..at the beginning. I say look for compatibility, and someone who “gets” you. Too many people are following a formula and sadly for nothing. I have no issue with a successful woman, I have a fair amount myself but I leave at the doorstep when I get home, life is sadly too short to argue because of some hangup you brought home from work.
Queen 390
I have to say that I really enjoyed the article, Evan. I myself a successful woman in her thirties who can’t anyone because of my “kindness”, I am one of those women who will let a man be a man, but I am not a pushover, I don’t know what is wrong with these men today and I feel that they have gave up on themselves (some of them); I have only been in a handful of relationships but I tried 110% to support them in everything and I was still cheated on, and lied to. Some human beings (including the women, the women I know, but not all) don’t want anybody nice, A lot of people like drama, they are huge hypocrites. There is nothing wrong with loving someone, but I will tell anyone man or woman you can’t be with someone who don’t want you.
Queen 391
Sayanta, I aslo agree with you if I want to always reassure the man, that is riduculous, If I want babies then I will get pregnant.
sun 392
Naomi: Instead, why not propose that men should work on being okay with a woman who is his equal in terms of power, opinions, intelligence, and status, and, indeed, that we all should work towards bringing more gender equality to our personal relationships?
Your advice is spot on. Thanks for the moment of sanity on this blog.
sun 393
Didn’t mean to state that others don’t have great posts. It’s just that I read the first few posts here and was not in agreement with any of them until I saw Naomi’s.
I went down further and saw a few more posts that were excellent also.
Brett 394
Ok I wasn’t getting updates on this thread by accident and I forgot all about it. Now that I’m back and read some more posts – wow some of you really went on some really long tangents and rants that have nothing to do with the actual subject. Not to mention I notice it was mostly women posting in this thread. Sorry amy your posts were just too long and went way off on some other planet not to mention I saw some whining, maybe a little man hating, and definitely some misconceptions about men. If you want a good man be a good woman. I can see why you are single, you think you have to do very little in relationship. Yes in a relationship there will probably be times where you need to do things for your man or lend him support. I truly recommend you study some psychology to learn more about men and people in general. You’re possibly better off just being a serial dater, since the men you just casually date will expect far less from you.
You ladies have been led to water, but refuse to drink it. Evans post @322 is totally correct. It has nothing to do with her specific succuss it has more to do with “her” in general. There is not some grand conspiracy against successful women, it’s ridiculous. Why would you go to an advice column regarding what men want if you’re not going tolisten to what the men have to say? Some men are intimidated by successful women but that doesn’t mean they aren’t attracted to them, there’s a difference. I still see plenty of women say they will not give a man the time of day unless he makes at least as much money as her..so if she’s well off why would the average guy bother with you? Only women can change that by being more open minded. You don’t see successful men in GENERAL whining about not being able to find a woman – why do you think that is? Copy what successful men do, then you should have no problems in the dating game. I don’t see why it would work any other way.
sherrie 395
Two main reasons:
a) To feel masculine men need to feel superior in areas where men were always told they were. ie intelligence.
b) Control. Men want to be in control. Conceding to a woman makes him feel like he has no control over her and how things are going in the relationship.
I don’t think most men are really capable of admitting ( even to themselves)that they are not interested in intelligent women for several reasons, the main one being that it’s not in the male nature to concede anything to women.
“Average” andnot too brightwomen will just do what men say withoutquestioning them and will not have the ability to always make it in on their own. An intelligent woman is that much harder to control.
But that’s just sad. And a huge turn off for many women as well.
If man doesnt see me as his equal – he is inferior to me.
Karl R 396
sherrie said: (#395)
‘Average’ andnot too brightwomen will just do what men say withoutquestioning them and will not have the ability to always make it in on their own.”
That’s an amazingly condescending attitude.It’s also wildly inaccurate. Most people of average intelligence (men and women) are fully capable of making it on their own.I could parade an endless string of “average” women who raise families as single mothers.
Furthermore, average women are at least as likely to be obstinant and opinionated as highly intelligent women; perhaps more so.
You believe that smart and successful women are harder to control? You might want to read up on abusive relationships. I went to a seminar at the University Texas Law School about domestic violence. The opening speaker was an intelligent, articulate and successful lawyer. She spoke candidly about the years she spent in an abusive marriage.
She made every effort to impress upon the law students that many intelligent and professionally successful women end up in similar relationships. She implied they were even more susceptible, since they were more likely to feel ashamed that this was actually happening to them.
“its not in the male nature to concede anything to women.”
Do you spend much time around married couples?
“If man doesnt see me as his equal he is inferior to me.”
Do you consider “average” women to be your equal?If not, does that mean you’re inferior to them?
sherrie 397
oh Karl, while you might be right about intelligent women being as likely to be in abusive relationships, you are missing the point i was trying ( maybe not very successfully) to make. Have i been around married couples? Yes i have. Also, I been in a few long term relationships.Often,partially, resentment men have for their partners, is in fact, due to their perceived loss of control.
If you were a woman married to a man you would know that men like to argue over anything just to prove they know better (NOT ALLmen obviously). Heck, take even guys ata bar..just the other day a man approached a woman architect and tried to argue over a subject in architecture that she clearly knows more about.
I believe there are actual websites dedicated to men explaining things” phenomenon because it occurs so often.
And regarding the very last point, if a man doesnt see me as an equal complex human being, deserving of the same consideration in every aspect, then yes I wont be able to see him in the same light as well. I am tired of being told what I am supposed to be and should like and talk like and think about and dress like because of my femaleness. I think thats only fair.
Brett 398
sherrie your posts aresome of themost ridiculousstuff I’ve ever read. You and the women that think there is some conspiracy against successful women are insane. It’s so ridiculous I don’t evenknow where to begin. If you can’t find a man and you’re a successful woman…it’s YOU not THEM. If you’re a successful womanand a mandoesn’t want you because of that then trust me you don’t want the guy to begin with. I have the same attitude when a woman will not go out with me just because I don’t have some high paying white collar professionaljob.
Bryan 399
its exactly what the story said. but he didnt get into the details. successful women are often high maintenance.. andtake more work.. but the returns are lower.and the guys that successful women likeare looking for oral sex, notbusiness partners. i have seen it all. self made and worked my way up to a hedge fund. that said, a successful high maintenance woman is better than an unaccomplished high maintenance woman.
Bryan 400
oh forgot to mention.. i dont see many asian women with the same complaints as american women.. maybe thats why they are so popular with american men.
Luv2Sk8 401
Ok, what is funny about this is thatI am one of these strong, intellegent woman and I don’t like smart guys for the exact reasons mentioned in the article about smart woman. I totally get it because as I have two degrees and a successful career, I want someone who can bring something to the table that I don’t have…saybetter social skills, a technical trade, or even a desire to let me have a careerso he can take care of the kids. I get criticized for this all the time, but really men do this all the time…why can’t I get away with it?
bob 402
@Sherrie #397
“If you were a woman married to a man you would know that men like to argue over anything just to prove they know better (NOT ALLmen obviously).”
Again Sherrie, as Karl pointed out, that’s a rather condescending attitude, one which intimates that you know more/better than the rest of us.
I’ll give my own anecdotal experience: Women like to argue over everything, and don’t know how to argue rationally.
Not a very useful, and most likely not accurate, stereotype.
You said: “To feel masculine, men need to feel superior in areas where men were always told they were, i.e. intelligence”
Wow. Really? I didn’t know you had been a man in a past life! Please, tell us more how us men think and feel.
It’s this simple, and I’ve said it before, as have others. Many men do like Smart, Strong, Successful women.
Just not women who feel the need to compete with them.
Chris 403
This is an old thread, but I hope I have something original to contribute. There are reasons for a middle-income/low-income guy to avoid a highly successful woman that have nothing to do with perceiving her as masculine or the guy feeling emasculated.
1. Time
This is informed by my dating experience with high-income women, but the fact is, a lot of high-earning women have long-hour, high-stress careers and dont have the energy and time for a relationship that the laid-back guy wants. Many 11 hour a day people, men and women, arent going to have the energy to go out on a weeknight or even to do something active on a weekend. She might not even have the time to reciprocate travel to your place. She might not have the time to send loving, thoughtful emails during work hours or even read the loving, thoughtful emails that you send her.
2. You cant afford her.
Theres also the simple fact that many high-income women have tastes that the guy cant afford. She might see a $35 per person meal as nothing expensive, but to him it might be a major splurge if hes trying to save money. To her half-price theater tickets at $50 is cheap, but to him $50 is a lot if he has to pay off student loans. She might see a $600 long-weekend in some distant location, ski resort, or luxurious spa as not expensive at all, but to him that $600 might be a good chunk of change that could better go to a mortgage. If long-term stuff is possible, then the guy has got to reckon with the fact that the $1,000,000 house that she dreams of and deserves will never be affordable, no matter what and theres a possibility of future resentment.
3. Understanding each others' careers
Your career paths might also be so different that you cant relate to each others career experiences. What if shes a boss with a secretary and office and Im some bossed-around underling? Im not going to relate to her problems and shes not going to be able to relate to mine. If youre looking for a job and youre the interviewee, it can be hard to share the experience with someone who is always the interviewer.
Im not going to say automatically say no to a high-income woman who is interested in me, but all else being equal, Ill prefer my professional peer to professional superior any day. I am sorry, but there are a lot of reasons to see a woman who makes $70,000 as a school nurse as a better prospect than a lawyer/doctor/consultant/business owner at $200,000.
Chris 404
Smarts and Success:
I should have added this before, but smarts (or at least intellectualism) and success are independent entities that don't always go together. Your successful JD/MBA/MD might have a tremendous amount of innate intelligence and confidence, but she might be so busy that she barely has time for books or current events. (the same thing would go for a guy)
High school English teachers, librarians, documentary film-makers, artists etc don't make a ton of money, but almost as a rule they are a very intellectual bunch. If a guy really craves a woman he can talk to about about the world, great literature, art etc there are a lot of places he can look, maybe even very profitably, other than the Ivy League alumni club.
sayanta 405
Chris-
Just for the record, doctors/lawyers get a bad rep for 'never having time' for relationships. This depends on the practice area- for example, a family pediatrician has way more time for his loved ones than a top plastic surgeon in Hollywood. A lawyer who works at a small-medium real estate firm has more time for other pursuits than those living in their NYC Biglaw offices.
Artists- A starving artist who's not working probably has lots of time for a relationship. Norah Jones may very well work more hours than anyone else in the recording studio (and while she's on tour).
My point: Generalizations make no sense, because there's always going to be someone who doesn't match it.
PS- Chris, I sense a resentment toward college-grad-school educated professionals from you. If you're intent on having a certain view of them before you've even gotten to know some of them, I'm not surprised that you've been having negative experiences with these women. You've stated that some of the women you've dated 'don't have time' for a relationship. I don't want to misquote EMK here, but from my memory of his past posts, 'don't have time' equates with 'I've got issues, and I just don't want to make a relationship work.' I believe the latter's the real culprit, imho. I think you just picked women who have those issues. Profession has nothing to do with it.
Also- you have to look at how a man chooses to spend his time too. I've known men with 9 to 5 jobs who come home and spend the rest of their free hours vegging in front of the TV and ignoring their family. I've known other men who work longer hours, but squeeze as much quality time as they can with their family with the free time they do have.
My point again? YOU can't generalize. I've noticed people make generalizations when they're bitter with a certain group of people because of their limited experience. I've done it myself (though I'm trying hard to stop). So, that's my two cents (or more) for the day.
Chris 406
@ Sayanta
Thank you for responding. You are right about how generalizations aren't helpful on an individual basis, but the question, “Why don't men like smart, strong, successful women?” is itself a generalization and thus an answer that consists of generalizations is appropriate. I also wanted to stick up for all the men who have just been accused of being intimidated and to point out that there are lots of highly intelligent, strong women who aren't “successful” (ie, high-income) at all.
I have had two relationships with women who were much more successful than I am, although neither was more educated, and, incidentally, both had plenty of time for me. (that was a hypothetical that _could_ happen, but has never happened to me, except with high school teachers, of all groups).
One of the really high-income women had expensive tastes that I could not keep up with. It wasn't the only reason, but my income was (by her own admittance) a factor in her decision to break up with me after 10 months.
The other relationship is in progress right now. I'm going to resist the temptation to go into details, but basically as a boss and as someone who has gotten practically every job she applied for, her worldview is very different from mine as an underling and frequent interviewee. I was deeply hurt when I heard her make fun of poorly put-together resumes she sees and she bragged about how quickly she trashed them. Even though I had never made the mistakes she described, I know how dreams are invested in a resume and it affected me to hear her revel in her own power, power that I have been on the other end of. I love this girl a lot, but from now on my interview experience is not going to be something I want to talk to her about. (Believe me, it goes both ways. There are boss issues she refuses to talk to me about.)
For the record, I am a highly-educated man. I have a BA from a very prestigious college and a masters degree. I made my choices in life though and have certain limitations and thus don't have much spending power, nor am I anyone's boss. (yes, I am gainfully employed. The interviews I'm going on are for more responsibility and money.)
*Perhaps* there's resentment there, but it's towards the successful, not the educated. Also, resentment might not seem rational to you, but it and other forms of psychological baggage are real and we all have to deal with it.
sayanta 407
Chris-
Sorry to assume that about your education level- for some reason I thought you'd stated you hadn't chosen higher education. My mistake.
Well- it's not my business to pass judgment on anyone's relationship, but the comment that your girlfriend made about the resume seem cruel to me too- and the fact that it did deeply hurt you is something I'm wondering about. I'm a professional, but have had EXTREME trials in my working life (including stretches of unemployment), and that comment would def rub me the wrong way too.
One thing I've learned- is if someone's callous in a deeply offensive way, I've learned to reconsider my attachment to them. But of course, every situation's different.
Also, I agree that we all have baggage- but at the same time, we're all responsible for working through it so we can lead richer lives.
I say all this because I sense a defeatist, “I'm not worthy” attitude in your e-mail. I've been there so many times, and that attitude is exactly the cause of some of the problems I'm having today. I hate to see someone else go through that.
Liz 408
I’m a woman and even I know that men aren’t attracted to bossy, hypercritical women. These girls often euphemize (not sure if that’s an actual word) their behavior as “Just giving them a hard time, LOLZ! Why are guys so intimidated by me???
”
Yeah, no. You’re just being a bitch. Wamp, wamp.
Bob 409
Thank you Liz, for putting it so succinctly. I would’ve said it myself, but as a man I would’ve been excoriated for it.
If you read though all the comments, you’ll find somewhere along the way I said something along the lines of “we’re not intimidated by such women, just tired of them”.
I can handle a successful woman (I have one), I just won’t tolerate a condescending one (which these type of women can easily fall into).
Kafui 410
You know Bob..I could not have said it any better,Why do women want to act like men?Its just unatural and off putting.I’m from West Africa. A Place where women and men roles are clearly outlined.I’m not in anyway against women independence or success,What I do take issue with is the way the go about it.Successful women try so hard to get to where they are that when they eventually get there,they don’t know when to stop.
.If you are role playing with your man and so you act bossy and tough,That’s sexy and should be even encouraged.But right after orgasm,Its time to be a “woman” again.When you are at the workplace you need that “Tough woman” image to get by and so by no means tone down.Give out orders.
The trick here is not letting the facade define you.But that said if you really enjoy been bossy and acting mannish maybe you should consider having a sex change..lol
PS:I think Liz the word you looking for is “Epitomizes”
starthrower68 411
I don’t deny that there are a lot of successful, smart, women out there who’s qualities that made them that way often come full circle and bite them in the rear end when it comes to men. But what I find interesting is Evan’s comment about paying the price for being ourselves.
I have probably got every strike againt me possible when it comes to finding a successful relationship. I’m a plus-size girl; I’m over 40; I have three children; I’m strong, smart, and successful. I’m a Christian. One of those I can change. The rest I cannot/will not. At some point, being true to myself has to come first. I don’t know if I’ll ever meet the right guy; I’m still figuring out if I want to try. But I read Evan’s advice because what he offers is the ability for me to make an informed decision. I often find myself passing it on to others because whether I meet the right guy or even decide to, I believe Evan’s advice rings true.
Sarah 412
Another great article. Mr. Katz, thank you for sharing your well-written wisdom with us again. (There is no need to thank me for sharing my alliteration with you!) It has definitely helped me see how my intelligence and direct way of speaking may have been off putting for men whose personalities are more dominated by their feelings. Personally, I’ve tended to find myself disappointed in and sometimes disgusted by what I consider overly emotional or sentimental men. However, I recognize that there are many types of people in the world and appreciate the rich diversity of personal characteristics that can be found in the general population.
In response to the original post as well as many of the comments, I would like to add that there is not one single paradigm that defines how all men feel their romantic partners should act towards them. I think that many of the stereotypes listed above are a product of our post-modern, post-agrarian Western society and don’t really reflect the whole of history or cultural practices.
For example, in pre-Christian Ireland, the women fought right along with the men in battle. Jewish identity is inherited, not through the father, but through the mother. Many African and African-American cultures are maternal in their power structures. These are a few examples from history that demonstrate that, universally, it is not and has not always been a “man’s world.” I think it is important to mention and note that one doesn’t necessarily have to give up her bold personality for fear of driving away a potential mate. While it is common sense for anyone to avoid being a nag or a know-it-all, I’ve found there are a lot of men who really enjoy a woman with “spunk.” In my limited personal experience, the men who accepted and appreciated my personality were primarily from Celtic-American, Jewish-American, Slavic-American or African-American cultural backgrounds. I can’t quantify why I’ve seen these patterns (could be totally random or related to my personal geographical patterns), but my guess is that their cultural backgrounds tended to place a higher value on females’ intellectual or work contributions in the family unit than other cultures.
starthrower68 413
Sarah,
There are always tradeoffs with the advancement of society. June Cleaver was always in touch with her feminine side; she was always beautifully dressed, complete with the pearls and heels, and wearing her apron working on a fabulous meal. Ward was out earning the money.
It’s not quite that way in this day and age; even married women have to go out and earn a living, but as a single parent, I am responsible for pretty much everything. Do I get help from my ex? Yes, and I am grateful for all he does. But to go from being the provider, the chief cook and bottle washer, and head of the home to femme fatale is not an easy task.
I’m not denying that men are turned off by bossy women who are trying to be men. I’m not saying they should change. What I am saying is if they want women to cut them some slack, that same courtesy should be afforded to those of us out there doing the best that we can.
Karl R 414
In another thread discussing the ‘quality’ of men, sayanta said:
“I think a lot of women put career and education into their ‘quality’ basket.”
See comment #177 in this thread:
http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/why-women-should-settle/#comment-68871
Most men will date a woman who is less educated than them, or who has a less prestigious or less profitable career.
I don’t have a degree, but I am quite comfortable dating women who have advanced degrees (DVM, JD, MA, MD). However, if any of those women believed that I was “lower quality” because I was less educated, I would have dumped her in a heartbeat.
If you have this attitude towards less educated men, I find it quite believeable that they’re reacting negatively to your attitude, not your intelligence or education.
Bob 415
@Karl R #414
And once again Karl, you add great clarity.
You’re right-’ve never been bothered by the fact of such women, rather, I’ve always been put off by their attitude.
As an example, Starthrower described herself as “strong”…I cringed when I read that (no criticism meant Starthrower-I really appreciate how much you contribute here-one of the voices of reason).
Anyway, whenever a woman makes that particular declaration about herself, it makes me think she has a chip on her shoulder about women supposedly being weak, and that she feels she has something to prove.
Men say similar things at times, and I see it as a red flag there too (like men that I work with).
A woman shouldn’t have to disclaim to a potential date/partner how great or capable she is – he’ll certainly discover that in time.
Shay 416
For myself, I would like my partner to have minimally a degree among my other critieria. Not for the degree’s own sake, but because it shows an attitude to want to upgrade himself, to want to go forward in life, a thirst for knowledge and a common way of thinking or comparable levels of intellect.
I want these because I like to learn new things, love to improve myself, passionate about life and a motivated individual. I don’t think I can stand someone who just bums around and no ambition. So, these are quite impt to me to be able to live with my partner.
If I have a guy who has all those qualities behind a degree I’m looking for and matches the other criteria as well. I wouldn’t mind. But those qualities must definately come through.
That is why I still go on dates with guys who do not have a degree, with an open mind. However, I have yet to see any guy in my circle or those that I dated who is not a degree holder and still exhibit those qualities I mentioned, which I really want to see in my future partner.
If the guy is put off, then he is not the guy for me. Simple as that.
Shay 417
Oh, I re-read EMK’s post again. He said that he love his wife because she is easy. I’m thinking that they’re probably alike in numerous ways and it is not difficult for the wife to be easy.
I would like to be easy as well. I find it easy to be easy with guys whom I like.
E.g. Date A plays computer games and talk to me about computer games. I generally don’t like people who play computer games because its a waste of time. However, I was not critical of him because if I want to talk about other stuff, he is able to carry on an interesting conversation as well. He is also motivated in his caeer. Has artistic passion.
Date B is not a degree holder. He said he wanted to show me a cute toy dolphin but it turns out that it’s a platypus. I love travelling. He was surprised that I travelled to Australia 3 times. His last holiday was 2 or 3 years ago. We really don’t have much in common and it was not a nice first date. There are many silences and during those times I was thinking, “I don’t want to make it easy for him”. I could be my chirpy, chatty self. But naw…I don’t wanna make it easy for him.
starthrower68 418
Bob,
I don’t take what you said as a criticism; if you were to look at my profile, you would not see me referring to myself in that way. But I don’t say that because I feel that I have something to prove or a chip on my shoulder. I said in the context of the discussion here. I get where you’re coming from, but I think it depends on the context in which it’s used.
Cat 419
Shay, I’m sure Evan’s wife isn’t “easy.” LOL. I’m sure you meant easy-going! As for your Date B, what’s wrong with just being your “chirpy, chatty self” to make the date fun? Is it really that big of a deal if a guy doesn’t know what a platypus is?
sayanta 420
Shay, #416-
I LOVE your first paragraph. That’s exactly why I want a man with a degree as well, but you articulated it much better than I could have. Thanks!
Joe 421
A degree is only a badge of a certain level of academic achievement. It is not an indication of your intelligence. It is not an indication of your experience. It is not an indication of how fun you are to be around. It’s only loosely an indication of your level of education.
I say this as a person with an engineering masters degree (the research and thesis put me off a PhD…call me lazy if you want!
).
If I met a woman who never went to college, but had traveled the world (without a rich mommy and daddy) and learned to do all kinds of stuff and knew about all sorts of things, I’d probably feel pretty darned intimidated. But I’d be interested.
Shay 422
Cat (#419), see EMK’s post. He described his wife as easy with him. I think he meant that she is easy to be around with.
No, its not about the playtus! The platypus is just a small thing. Giving me an uncle-ish look that says “Why you, naughty kid.” and almost wagging his finger at me is the ultimate deal breaker. I want a date, I don’t want an uncle. LOL.
It just shows that me and the guy are from different worlds. I don’t want to make the date fun and interesting because I don’t want that guy to date me again. I’m might be judgemental on the first date. But we don’t click.
You know how men are when they’re in the moment. When I make things fun and interesting, they think we have chemistry. But errhh…nope. Not for me. So, I decided not to be “help him out”.
Joe (#421), yup. Agree! That’s why I would go out with anybody once! (advice from Henry Cloud’s book)…to find out what they are like.
Selena 423
Re: #422
“I don’t want to make the date fun and interesting because I don’t want that guy to date me again.”
So you decide within the first, what , 15 min. that you don’t click with the guy and then proceed to make the rest of the date unhappy and dull so the poor guy won’t be tempted to ask you out again? Wow. I bet you leave quite the negative impression in someone who’s only crime was trying to get to know you.
Why not try to make the date enjoyable for you both instead, as long as you’re out, regardless of a “click”? If the guy asks you out again you can honestly say you had a good time, enjoyed meeting him, but didn’t feel there was a click and wish him well. A much more positive and direct approach than the chickenshit way you are going about dating.
starthrower68 424
Shay,
Love Henry Cloud!!!
Karl R 425
Shay said: (#416)
“I still go on dates with guys who do not have a degree, with an open mind.”
I commend that practice. It’s a good way to avoid overlooking good potential men.
Shay said: (#416)
“I would like my partner to have minimally a degree among my other critieria. Not for the degree’s own sake, but because it shows an attitude to want to upgrade himself, to want to go forward in life,”
Almost everyone seeks to improve themselves. The people in my dance class are seeking to improve themselves, at least within the scope of that activity. So are the skateboarders zipping around the park below my office. The people who spend their weekends playing World of Warcraft are seeking to improve themselves … at least within the context of that game.
There are numerous ways to improve yourself: academically, emotionally, financially, intellectually, physically, socially, spiritually or in the countless hobbies and interests that people pursue. When you say that you want someone who is seeking to upgrade himself, are you looking at all of those possibilities? Or are you just seeking someone who is upgrading himself in a narrow subset of ways that seem worthwhile to you?
Have you noticed that people often become very advanced in one area, but remain somewhat stunted in another? I just encountered a 41 year old man who has an MBA, a net worth of $30 million, and who is completely morally bankrupt. The tendency to excel in one area at the expense of others makes sense. If someone tries to take a year-long spiritual retreat, it will probably impact their career advancement. Training like an olympic athlete cuts into a person’s social life….
Someone who is academically / intellectually well developed will probably be a very entertaining conversationalist … but the person who is emotionally well developed is going to be a lot easier to get along with in a long-term relationship.
sayanta 426
karl R-
I don’t want to misquote here, but it sounds like you’re saying someone has to choose between being educated and/or financially successful and having good character/self-reflective capabilities. I think that’s a dangerous stereotype, if that’s what you’re saying- one that can keep people from reaching their full potential.
Karl R 427
sayanta,
I’m saying that someone will probably not reach extreme success in one area without making sacrifices in some other area. You can focus on one area, or you can work on all of them. But you’ll get further in one area by focusing … and you’ll be more well-rounded by working on everything.
Shay 428
Selena (#423), rest assured that I did not make the date dull and unhappy. I make the normal responses as would a normal person being talked to. I just did not put in the effort to make it fun. And c’mon. My job is not to entertain him. Why should I?
And no, I did not make up my mind about him in the first 15mins. The date lasted several hours. Meeting at 3pm for a 430pm movie, dinner after the movie until 7:45pm. His idea. He wanted for the date to go on but I was seriously tired and it was not fun because he didn’t have much to talk about. Hey, can’t blame me for wanting to bail out.
Btw Selena, I tried your suggested way the last time. I told the guy he was not what I was looking for when he asked for a second date. HOWEVER, he INSISTED that we could work it out because I am the one HE IS LOOKING FOR. You know, that totally freaked me out. Good thing he does not know my address. I’m totally not sure if he would start stalking me!!!
If a guy can take rejection, its fine. I don’t know if this one would. And really, the easiest way is to fade out. Just like what the guy always do.
Karl (#425), yes I agree with you. I’m a very practical person and a believer of Maslow’s theory on hierarchy of needs. Improving himself means trying to get a better job, for me. Once fundamental needs are fulfilled (roof over head, food on the table, etc), normally people then would go after other stuff in life. I think the main thing about why I would prefer my partner to have a degree is all of those things said above. We would have common way of thinking, etc. And what if I really define it in a narrow subset of ways that is worthwhile to me?! Those qualities are important to me! And its my life to choose who to spend it with!
And I do keep my options open. I’m going on dates with anybody at least once. If any guy managed to challenge my assumptions behind those qualities, I’m flexible enough to change it when I’m convinced of it.
And really, Karl, if there is no basic level of attraction which stems from looking at and talking to the person. There is no interest to carry on to find out what’s inside. The emotional part.
Please guys, don’t tell me you guys have not met people whom belong to different worlds compared to you and you know they are really not what you want!
Karl R 429
Shay said: (#428)
“I’m a very practical person and a believer of Maslow’s theory on hierarchy of needs. Improving himself means trying to get a better job, for me. Once fundamental needs are fulfilled (roof over head, food on the table, etc), normally people then would go after other stuff in life.”
I’m glad you invoked Maslow. That makes this explanation easy.
According to Maslow, “a better job” is a level 2 need. My job earns twice what I require to meet my level 2 needs. If you (as a date) want me to improve my job, that means you are insecure about your level 2 needs.
Do you think I’m going to be excited about dating someone who is focused on level 2 and 3 needs, when I’m working on level 3, 4 and 5 needs? Is it in your interest to chase off (or turn off) the men who are higher up the hierarchy than you are?
Shay said: (#428)
“And what if I really define it in a narrow subset of ways that is worthwhile to me?!”
As long as you’re only ruling out the men who are wrong for you, then it’s working in your favor. If you’re ruling out the right ones, then it’s counterproductive.
Are you just assuming that it’s working in your favor, or are you taking steps to ensure it?
Shay 430
I don’t have any rules for dates, Karl. I did not enjoy my date with the non-degree holder because we’re from different worlds. Our frequency is different. Not because he doesn’t have a degree.
And I did not turn off my date. I was merely not going all out to please and entertain him. I am polite during the date and continue to have a decent adult conversation. Is that so hard to understand for the people who keep on the attack?
And really, I’m sorry if I stepped on your tail, Karl. I’m sure as adults, we can agree to disagree.
Selena 431
No it’s not so hard to understand Shay. But you did specifically write,
” I don’t want to make the date fun and interesting because I don’t want that guy to date me again.”
Which comes across very differently than being polite during the date and having decent adult conversation.
Christina 432
@ Karl R
Woman can do multiple things at a time, that is they can make their carrer and take care of their loved ones also, it is men who can concentrate only on one thing at a time
Chris 433
@ Christina
Men and women can do multiple things at once only if they choose to. For some people, being in grad school, climbing the career ladder, or even just spending time exploring the world is an excuse/reason to not get married, not have children. Haven’t you ever heard of someone saying they’ll go to the next step <i>after</i> they finish some other task?
If someone’s career is an excuse to not get married or not have children the person whose career isn’t in the way is going to be unhappy or worried. I’m worried that my girlfriend’s degree and career ambitions will be her excuse to never have children. Her plan to start trying to have her one biological child at age 36 really worries me.
Thus, should I ever become single again, I’m going to have an extra degree of caution whenever that “smart, strong, and successful” woman seems interested. If she wants to have children as much as I do, then great, but if not, then I’m going to pursue other girls.
Jack @ I Love Your Accent 434
@Chris
Absolutely spot on. You know, we all are guilty at one point or another in our lives of building up this utopian scenario of how we will, let’s say, start a family when we’re “financially independent” or when we have an “established career”. The sobering reality is that for MOST people, that never happens.
The challenge is to find a mate who understands this and is ready to build a life with you no matter the situation may be.
jack 435
I think that way too many women are seeking to compete with men in the realm of traditionally masculine traits.
That is well and good, and your right to do so.
Many of you will succeed – Maureen Dowd has a rapier-sharp pen that many men would envy.
But heterosexual men do not desire another male as a romantic partner.
I see a whole symphony of defensiveness on the part of many women here. You are obsessed with equality with men, yet you desire to be seen as romantic objects. For most men, you will be seen as another guy – respected, liked, but not a object of desire.
A favorite rationalization for many women is to attribute this to mens’ insecurity. Please – go ahead and do so. I may even agree with you in person in order to end that tiresome discussion.
I really don’t care if you think you won the argument – I remain happily single and dating the sweet, more girly girls. Call me insecure – I love their sweetness, it’s really nice.
I’m sorry that I have not become the enlightened male that loves your hard-charging corporate persona. I’m sure there are thousands of men who desire you intensely – you are not going to miss me at all. Besides, someone has to date those silly girlish girls.
I may want a hard bench and a set of challenging barbells when I am at the gym. Those barbells are tough, and more than my equal.
But-
When I come home, I want a soft, compliant, comfy chair to pass the evening in.
I’m such a caveman! But I’m happy – I sure hope I never become enlightened.
Mark 436
I agree with comment # 414.
Men are more willing to date someone without a degree. They are also more willing to date someone who earns less. My hat is off to you Karl if you have actually dated women with advanced degrees, even though I would be rightfully skeptical. It has been my experience that women with a college degree will not even speak to a man without one. I, too do not have a college degree and have found dating to be almost impossible. It has opened my eyes though. I have learned that men must limit themselves to women who earn less and have an equal or lesser education. Believe me, I try to abide by this rule. However, it is becoming more challenging with each passing day, due to the ratio imbalance of male versus female college graduates. Ever try a dating website? They have a small supply of women who lack a college degree. Even the bar scene is filled to the brim with female college graduates. I think we are going to see a lot more single, middle-aged men in the near future.
Men are not intimidated by women with advanced degrees and financial security. Men are just smart enough to realize that they shouldn’t even make an attempt at such a woman, as rejection would be imminent. I have actually made preemptive rejections before. The way I see it, she would just reject me once she found out what I did for a living. This way I can keep my pride and what’s left of my self-esteem.
Let’s face it Karl; women want your earning potential. Even women with a college degree want a man’s earning potential. Their partner is just as much of a status symbol as a designer bag. How often do you hear of a female doctor marrying a male nurse as opposed to a male doctor marrying a female nurse? Men must match and/or exceed a woman’s education and they must exceed their level of income. When you think about it, men are always marrying down. If two affluent people marry each other, but the man earns more, then technically he still married down.
Dating is nothing more than a business transaction. Love is conditional.
Leigh 437
I must be in a minority here, I run my own company, in a very macho industyr (weapons, explosives) and all my crew are men. I am a workaholic, very driven , can be terribly ourspoken(especially after a few wines) and try and tell it like it is (or as I think it is). My crew love me, are extremely loyal, as I still do all those feminine things for them, make baby blankets when their wives are expecting, praise them for a job well done, bollack them when they havn’t done a good job. But I never emasculate them(or women either, if their is such a term) I try and treat them with respect. I have men hitting on me constantly, they know what I do for a living rather than feel threatened , it turns them on. I have never had a problem being a strong woman in a male dominated industry world. Plus I loooove being a woman, getting dressed up, flirting, making a man feel like hes the manliest thing around.
I truly belive men love sucsessful woman.
astromuffy 438
Hi, I just wanted to respond about directness. To me it means being clear about what you want, or need, or otherwise, clear communication that leaves as little room for misunderstanding as possible. It doesn’t mean tactless or unbridled honesty. Although honesty is a part of directness too, but all this can be softened by tact, which I have.
I have given up on finding love in a mate, but will continue to cultivate all the positive aspects of my personality while mitigating the flip side as best I can.
My standards are WAY too high. I will never lower them, and as a result will die as the old cat lady. But that’s OK. I have a peaceful, happy, productive life which is free from all the BS that comes with men. At least in my own experience.
Nathan 439
Well, I think its because most men are tired of playing the I’m dumber than you game, if we really want to succeed in relationships we must discover what is myth and truth. I think men are able to see between the lines.
drewmbah 440
@most men adore smart, successful women.
what they loathe are egotistical, unpleasant egg busters.
its pretty damn easy for a woman to get and keep a man c dont be fat j dont be crazy.
Dating & Money: How to Keep Your Man - CBS MoneyWatch.com 441
[...] the chances are good that the same qualities that made you successful may also be undermining your relationships. Why? Every quality can be looked at in two ways — positively and negatively, said Evan Marc [...]
Helen 442
Evan, I’m going to go all the way back to one of your earlier comments (#322) in which you wrote:
“Thus, “Why Men Don’t Like Smart, Strong, Successful Women”. It’s not because you’re smart, strong and successful. It’s because you have a whole bunch of qualities that we have ourselves that we don’t like.
So if my not-so-revelatory observation was “Lots of men don’t like to date female versions of themselves”…”
Evan, that IS revelatory for a lot of us women, although clearly you did not think it was. I still can’t understand it, and any light you can shed on it would be appreciated. We women don’t mind being in relationships with men who are a lot like us, in terms of job, education, goals, etc. Why do men not like being in relationships with women who are similar in these ways? Obviously it isn’t true of all men; my hubby didn’t mind marrying a fellow PhD. But there must be enough such men that think this way in order for you to write what you did above.
Actually, any man who has insight on this: your thoughts are appreciated.
Evan Marc Katz 443
Helen,
The answer to your question is the ENTIRE PREMISE of my book “Why He Disappeared”.
Men want what they can’t get at work, what they can’t get from their buddies, what they can’t get from themselves: femininity, nurturing, softness, sweetness, sex appeal, emotional generosity, patience and understanding. Thus, your education and income are mere bonuses, but they’re certainly not the main course.
Guys?
Karl R 444
Helen asked: (#442)
“We women don’t mind being in relationships with men who are a lot like us, in terms of job, education, goals, etc. Why do men not like being in relationships with women who are similar in these ways?”
We don’t necessarily dislike women who are similar to us. For the most part, we don’t care whether we match on certain criterea.
The top two things I look for in a woman are “fun to be around” and “easy to get along with.” The first increases the amount that I enjoy being in the relationship; the second decreases the amount that I dislike being in the relationship.
Using that, you can figure out how important a trait is. The quantity and quality of sex is very important. The prestige associated with your job is not. If you come home from work every day exhausted and complaining about how miserable your prestigious job is making you, then it has become a negative.
Does your husband’s PhD contribute to either of the most important qualities? Ideally, it makes conversations with him more fun. But I’ve known people who can tell an anecdote about getting lost in such a way that I’m rolling on the floor laughing. I’ve also known geniuses who talk endlessly about subjects that only interest them. Who do you think I’d prefer to spend my life around.
Ella 445
Hi Evan, I just purchased your ebook after having quickly read this article. Sorry if I overlooked some details, but may I just ask: How would you characterize your wife? Is she, wealthy on her own – or do you improve her financial situation? Is she having a succesful career? Is she a strong personality, a leader…? I’m just trying to understand if your wife manages to be easy and all that at the same time. Please, don’t take it as a critique, it’s mere curiousity. Because: for my working life and goals, I don’t need to be and even cannot afford being easy. I’m facing tough conflicts of interests, etc, and soft “homie” skills would just kill the thing. But, yes, sure, for my personal life, I need to acquire the skills to play the soft role of an easy woman. I will have to develop a new mode, an alter ego… schisophreny…
)
Goldie 446
@ Karl #444: Where do you draw the line between “easy to get along with” and “pushover”? I’ve been told that I am in the first category, but at times I catch myself sliding into the second. As a woman, how can I define the boundaries without coming across as high-maintenance, but at the same time not letting my partner walk all over me? Abstract example of what I’m talking about – if he wants me to drive across town at a moment’s notice so we can have sex at his place and then I cook him dinner and leave – technically, agreeing to that will make me easy to get along with, but something doesn’t sound right about this situation. Where’s the golden medium when you’re easy to get along with, but still have respect for yourself?
Cat 447
“if he wants me to drive across town at a moment’s notice so we can have sex at his place and then I cook him dinner and leave – technically, agreeing to that will make me easy to get along with, but something doesn’t sound right about this situation.”
Good lord, Goldie, (#446) don’t drive across town to his place unless he’s making YOU dinner at YOUR convenience! If you’re doing anything “at a moment’s notice” but flying to Paris or some great weekend getaway he’s surprising you with, I think you’re being a pushover… I’m all for cooking for someone, because I love to cook and it’s a fun couple activity, but that doesn’t sound like what you’re talking about at all!
Kaitlyn 448
Evan….I love this!
It might mean, however, turning off some of the things that make you “successful” at work.
I work and am “tough” at my job because I have to be…its a man’s world (business wise) and I can’t be soft, etc. and still successful in my field. The whole ‘Run with the big dogs or stay on the porch’ mentality.
So…that said…why on earth would I want to keep up that ‘front’ in my personal life or in dating for that matter? Its exhausting.
Being feminine has nothing to do with being unintelligent, being ‘weak’ or not being who you “are”…it just has to do with (at least in my opinion) leaving the “work persona” behind at work. I can be tough, take charge and no-nonsense 8-10 hours a day…sure. They pay me well.
After hours? Come on ladies…am I the ONLY person here who gets tired of it? I’m “in charge” and need to constantly have the answers for questions, problems, issues, etc 50 hours a week…I don’t want to do that in my personal life.
I want to be a ‘girly girl’. Yes, I’m smart. Yes, I’m successful. Yes, I’m motivated and driven and all that stuff…but I’m still a woman. I like feminine things and I like being a girly. Does that make me LESS of a success? No…it just means I can separate my “career” persona from who I am in my personal life.
And, well, honestly finding a guy that ‘gets’ that would be great. Finding a guy that wants to be the ‘man’ in a relationship and that realizes that when I’m done wtih work…I’d really like someone to open doors and pull out my chair and just well, be the gentleman/man in the relationship? Send him my way.
Because I will gladly smile, flirt, and be the ‘feminine’ energy and let a guy decide where to go to dinner, agree with him that XYZ is stupid, ask him to kill a spider and thank him for shovelling a sidewalk…
Its easy…its natural…and it makes things much more pleasant.
Diana 449
To Goldie #446, wow! Your abstract situation would make the woman seem like a doormat and desperate, with no mind of her own. Ugh. I think “easy to get along with” means that she’s easy to talk with and spend time with. She doesn’t wig out if plans don’t go perfectly, or if he has a different opinion. She’s open to new ideas, and she doesn’t try to control everything, especially him.
She’s flexible, understanding, and patient; not a shit stirrer or in need of anger management therapy.
Karl R 450
Goldie said: (#446)
“As a woman, how can I define the boundaries without coming across as high-maintenance, but at the same time not letting my partner walk all over me?”
It’s easy.
If a woman is high-maintenance and demanding, I have to do a lot for in order to keep her happy. In other words, she is placing a demand or expectation upon me (whether implicit or explicit).
If a woman has boundaries, she is saying there are things she won’t do in the relationship. In other words, she isn’t allowing me to place a demand/expectation upon her (whether implicit/explicit).
Goldie said: (#446)
“if he wants me to drive across town at a moment’s notice so we can have sex at his place and then I cook him dinner and leave – technically, agreeing to that will make me easy to get along with,”
If you don’t feel like doing it, it would make you a pushover.
You can set a boundary on any of that. You aren’t available at a moment’s notice. You don’t feel like cooking. You don’t feel like getting together just for sex. All of those are reasonable.
Don’t set boundaries just to prove you can. Set boundaries where they make sense to you.
In a good relationship you will do things for each other. I’m a lousy cook, so my girlfriend does all the cooking. If she doesn’t feel like cooking, I pay for take-out. She hates doing dishes, so I take care of that most of the time. But we do those things voluntarily; neither of us has to do them to keep our partner happy.
Selena 451
@Karl # 444
The top two things I would want in a man are “fun to be around” and “easy to get along with”. Precisely because I’ve know some who weren’t.
Not a gender-specific ideal.
Joe 452
And, Selena, do you find men who are “in charge” to be fun to be around or easy to get along with?
Goldie 453
Guys… esp. Cat (#447)… please don’t worry about me!
This was really, honestly a hypothetical! (though fairly close to the real situation) No one’s that much of a pushover, not even I! 
Everyone else just sits back and enjoys being waited upon 
Maybe one day I’ll meet a guy that I’ll be able to do these things with, too. I continue looking.
Karl (#450): “If you don’t feel like doing it, it would make you a pushover.”
Thanks. This is a good guideline.
My problem is, after sharing a room with my parents for 17 years, followed by sharing a room with various roommates for 7 years, followed by the 18-year marriage during which I raised two kids and a puppy, I’m so used to ignoring my needs and doing what others need to be done… that I do no notice I’m being used until it’s too late and the situation gets out of hand. I need to learn to be more aware of what I’m being asked to do, and ask myself whether I’ll be okay with doing that on a regular basis.
“In a good relationship you will do things for each other. “
That comes pretty naturally to me. I’m a big fan of teamwork. So far the only people I’ve seen reciprocate, though, are my kids and my dog
@ Karl & Selena: Agree with you both, “fun to be around” is very high on my list – maybe #1 even. Not because I want to be entertained, but because it shows a person’s entire attitude/outlook on life. If a man can’t laugh at what life throws at him, then I’ll have to deal with his negative/dramatic attitude down the road – I don’t want that. If he cannot laugh at himself, this means he takes himself too seriously – I definitely do not want that!
Helen 454
Thanks, Evan and Karl R, for the clarifications.
Karl R, it sounds crazy, but actually I’ve come to realize that there is one main criterion for me when it comes to relationships: kindness. I don’t care if they’re not “fun” people (I’m usually the joking extrovert of the crowd), and kindness generally makes them easier to get along with, because there is an underlying trust.
Jennifer 455
If women are getting smarter, stronger, and more successful across the board, what a lovely challenge for men to dig deeper, past their neediness from women to define them as men, and actually become more whole themselves. Being direct does not mean being unloving, unfeminine, cold, and unsupportive. In fact, a women who is really in command of who she is has all the more to give her man. Just because women learn to acquire attributes men once held for them does not mean they have had to lose their yin sensibilities as well. Women have been looking at themselves with a critical eye from a disadvantaged position in life forever, perhaps it’s time for men to take a little look at who they are and how they contribute to the difficulty in their relationships. It might make them more whole. For God’s sake, Ulysses never complained to Helen of Troy that her face launched a thousand ships into war.. He just strapped on his armor and showed up of for real. Life, and being on the planet, I’m sorry to say, is not easy..for women or men, the illusion is thinking that it should be. And frankly, I know a number of intelligent, very good looking, talented, independent, emotionally vital men who are delighted, turned on, completely aroused, and actively pursuing strong women, finding how bored they are with ‘easy’ immature women. Being fully engaged in relationships is an amazingly good time.
Dean Kaplan 456
I think the women in the letters posted for this post may be so confident and self-assured, that they’re not paying attention to their shortcomings. Especially a woman who’s a millionaire, if she truly had it going on like she said, one of those guys would’ve hanged-on for dear life. Either she doesn’t see the big picture, or isn’t telling the whole story.
Bob 457
@Jennifer #455
Sigh…how often does Evan need to repeat this: Looking for men to change is simply folly. Not because men don’t/can’t change, but that you aren’t in charge of them changing.
The only person you have any control over is yourself. Look at what you can change about yourself, about how you view relationships and life, to figure out what in your paradigm is simply ineffective.
As I said at the beginning of this thread, when women proclaim they are “strong and successful” it’s just a big turnoff. It’s akin to man shouting how great he is in bed, or that he has a big penis.
Your statement “In fact, a women [sic] who is really in command of who she is has all the more to give her man.” sounds like just such a proclamation. (Not that I disagree with the sentiment, just the “look at me” proclamation).
Your rant simply makes it clear that you think men need to grow up and change and become “as great as women are”. Talk about sexist condescension.
Good luck finding a GREAT man who will date you with that kind of attitude.
Joe 458
I would say that strong women need to consider how they are as a potential Wife/Mother because just because someone is rich, smart, strong-willed doesn’t mean they are suited to be a wife or mother. But its also good to know how to seduce a man in all cases. Good Luck!
Bee 459
I agree with Evan, and I like his hypothetical example. Just like women want nice guys, I think most men want to be with a resonably intelligent female (unless they’re not too bright themselves and then it probably doesn’t matter). But just like nice guys lack certain traits that women desire (assertiveness, masculine energy, etc.) I think smart, successful women may also lack (or at least convey that they lack) certain characteristics that men desire in women. Perhaps successful women convey the attitude that they don’t need anyone, particularly a man, in their lives? Perhaps they come across as less approachable, less friendly, less affectionate, etc.?
Shaqi 460
Very interesting discussion.
i think that is not very complex. people might have contradictory wills. so a successful ++ man might even meet a successful +++ women but they arent still sure what they want. S/he might even think that S/he wants such a partner. But in reality, they can decide.
A ++ woman might meet a ++ man and still s/he is not interested. Sometimes, I doesnt mean that there was something wrong in that person. There are alot of other factors, the timing, our own emotions, etc.
Actually, i think the one we end up with might not have many basic things but for some reasons the relationship goes in a way that we think , Oki, s/he is the one.
One last comment. I perceive myself as being very professional and also very caring, feminine and supportive. Apart all,when i look deeply into this issue, I think “relationships” are just one aspect of our lives. I think it s good to have a good connection with an ideal person, but if it didnt happened, I just didnt. there is no need to be worries about ;0
sassysophia 461
I think there is an assumption getting in the way here. That iF women are strong they automatically emasculate men. Then that IS THE MAN’S problem.
By strong I mean has her own mind but can hear some one else. I won’t be a bobblehead on a date. I notice men also constantly one up me and then I never see them again and they are dismayed!
If I mention I’ve traveled well they’ve been to x,y, and z and do I speak thai? No, great, let’s go to a thai restaurant where then corrects everything I say….is that ME being too strong? He wants me to be LEAD by him. He wants to TEACH me a thing or two. HE talks constantly about HIMSELF. He has two children from two different women who he never married either and who are both “crazy.”
I think men are very insecure and it’s not my job to build thier self-esteem. I also feel no obligation to be a guy’s mother, therapist, or sexual fantasy, unless I’m getting paid.
Strong women are also NOT getting what they need from men: recognition, respect, admiration. Then he will get softness! Women who are healthy and capable in this day and age no longer plop down in a mini skirt, twirl thier long blond hair, bat thier eyes and say, “Oh you big stong man.”
You’re missing the point Marc. Denying strong women what they need to give a man what he needs isn’t the answer. Women today will ONLY let down their hair and softness when they know they’ve been acknowledged as a human first and a woman second. Women have paid a high price for being a woman! Women have paid a high price for being soft. They’ve worked hard. They are proud. If a man can let a woman shine she will be so much more feminine with him. He will have earned her softness.
Kayle 462
So glad to see all the women standing up for themselves in this thread. “I’m not saying; I’m just saying…the exact same thing I’m not saying” article. It’s bunk. And frankly, I’ve spent so much energy *becoming* the “perfect” woman, as one commenter pointed out (down to the ‘FALSE’ “femininity”- in my case. being demure and silent just confuses the more perceptive among us, and really I’d rather be with them), I’ll be d*mned if I spend one more iota of it adapting to what “men” (straw-men,in every sense of the metaphor) say they want. God knows, it’s easier to just stay single.
Bravo to the guy who just wants a woman who will let him drink beer, doesn’t mind if she does so herself (i prefer whiskey or wine) and blow him once in a while. If you’re not an emotional jackass we’re still out there looking for you!! (trust me, you frequently come in the same package as the jackasses, and only pretend you want the above girl, but get POed when we’re not insulted by you having your own life (because we have our own) while we still expect intimacy (because else why bother? That’s an FWB). Bravo to the woman who correctly pointed out that there is a conflation between women having “good” traits and assuming that women who have those traits are also emotionally distant or “difficult”. I was NEVER thought difficult until I was around people who assume that independent thought is the same as senseless rebellion and an affinity for irrational arguments. They eventually expressed surprise at my theretofore well-known reasonableness. Again, it was ALL in their own heads!!!
Kayle 463
@Leslie: more of the problem lies in that you’re not seeing the crux of the problem with the broad viewpoint of the article and those of those who agree with it:
Having fun and being smart and feeling good are not, repeat NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, and I don’t just mean that it is possible to have those character traits in one person. Most people don’t deny that part-it’s the first part *alone* they have trouble comprehending. Most people think of a relationship, as well as a “good time” as something that is antithetical to thought, to put it mildly. Many also believe that a good time means frequent, although meaningless failure (sometimes called “compromise”, when referring to women who are categorized as not failing frequently in the context of dating. People only make that specification for men, when they are indeed being domineering in the context of the actual relationship or specific arguments), or absolute success, rather than striving toward success regardless of potential failure, at anything. OTHERS DO NOT. If I shut off my brain, or start to act weak or I can’t accomplish anything I am NO LONGER HAVING FUN OR FEELING GOOD. If it appears that I am, I am either wasting MASSIVE amounts of energy in order to deceive the masses, or you should call an ambulance because I’m delirious with fever. Here’s an example, and I hope it helps: I hate dancing badly. I don’t go to clubs where that is the expectation, not because I fear failure or because I have to be the best. It is because I enjoy the thrill of dancing well, even when it’s a step I don’t know yet. I don’t look at learning a new dance step as an opportunity for failure or success because “just being there” is more important; I also don’t think of success or failure as mutually exclusive with fun. I want to do well because it is more fun than screwing it up and kicking my own legs or someone else’s or, in my case, just trying desperately not to stick out because I’m better than most of the other people in the room and I don’t like the attention, but I AM STILL BORED WITLESS and torturing myself trying not to show it and attract further negative attention. I like mastering new steps because I enjoy learning. I don’t have a problem not doing “conquering” new dance, except when the old one gets old. Having a goal is more interesting and I grow bored at some point otherwise. Other people look at this as not being able to have fun. They’re a little closed-minded. Or, at the very least, they hate learning or think that they do. A side-note: I am also not measuring a man’s “manliness” by how well he dances (or leads) or does anything else. A man, however will probably assume that I am, not because of me, but because that’s how he and other men measure him; so he presumes a woman does as well. I’ve never had a lesbian or gay man make the same errors in judgment about strong, smart, women as many of the heterosexual men and women in this article and thread have and call it “logic”.
The trouble with the article and its perspective is that it presumes “love” to be a place of little thought and even less challenge IN GENERAL. A man who feels like a woman is competing with him, for example, just because they are both engaged in sports, or an intellectual discussion thinks of challenge in general as competitive, even when no one is in direct opposition to him. Likely he’s the kind of man who only thinks at work because he has to, not because he enjoys thinking and he is only successful for the money or the prestige and does other things to get away from those trappings. Many women these days are successful at high-level or self-made jobs because they enjoy thinking and working and the challenge; no woman who doesn’t is going to be willing to put up with the sexism or even the raw competition on top of the work itself in order to be successful, otherwise. It is a major part of who they are AND SHOULD BE WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR- or a least the appreciation thereof- IN A MAN. They SHOULD NOT HIDE IT/”not lead with it” unless it is something they deem that can be satisfied with it not being part of their relationship. The norm for smart women. is that they can’t help it and they enjoy intellectual & or occupational pursuits. Some women like dominance and use work to take advantage of their own aggressive tendencies, but I bet that fewer of them succeed by being dominant, at least as overtly dominant as the men who believe these things seem to think they are. Unlike men, they are socially punished, not rewarded for such things (past a certain age, anyway), even in the workplace. Remember, society is telling women that they shouldn’t be smart or successful, “naturally”or otherwise, and that they should hide the desire to be such. Women actually have to walk a MUCH finer line in the workplace than these men are giving them credit for, and certainly a much finer line than any of the men have to walk. A more natural assumption, if men were really paying attention to the sociology rather than their gender-centric assumptions, would be that women are MORE adept at dealing with power in a way that doesn’t take away their “femininity” due to the societal constraints that require them to do so, but that would be a rather inconvenient assumption if what one really wants to do is to give advice to women.
The likelihood that women are just “putting on” or inflating their intelligence or success to compete with, intimidate, or (unilaterally) impress anyone outside the workplace is VERY LOW. A smart, successful woman who leads with those qualities is more likely to just be looking for an equal in those areas BECAUSE THEY MEAN THE TO MOST TO HER IN A PARTNER, not just in herself. But anyone looking at it from an egalitarian point of view would already know that and wouldn’t have put a title like that on this article and he would have advised the woman to find an equal who was indeed looking for an equal or at least advised her to see if that was indeed what she was doing & looking for and then appearing to look for, not just assuming that his one-size-fits-most advice would be appropriate.
A dumb or lazy or even just laid-back or lazy-minded partner is not likely to sufficient for a smart, ambitious woman, unless she deems other qualities are more important. And any man who advises her to pretend otherwise, is not seeing is own, I guess, psychological aggression toward her. It is a dangerous concept to advance on women who openly identify as smart in a way that would be “detrimental” to her own dating success, yet probably fall in the range of normal, as Evan appears to believe these women do. Let me be personal again for a moment and explain that I don’t even really feel a spark with someone who doesn’t identify the same way- as intelligent, decent, and hard-working, and I’m only fooling myself and forgetting it if I’m pining over someone who expects me to enjoy myself not being that way or fall in love with someone who’s not. I might feel like a failure at times, but telling me that I must indeed be a failure and because of those qualities I most admire and respect in myself and others is harmful, not helpful.
InsertPseudonymHere 464
@Kayle
Bravo! I will add that messages of failure to a person for simply being who they are are harmful only when taken to heart by the recipient.
Evan cites what he believes works for the majority of men and he might be right, but do I really want to be with someone who does not love me for who I am, rather than who I pretend to be? Do I want to be with someone who puts on a mask and is not showing me who they are and sharing themselves with me? Do I want to have to wear a mask myself all the time? That would be exhausting.
More to the point, I am attractive when I am fun, happy, have a good time, feel good and am myself (whether that is smart and successful and the traits that make me successful or not.
If dates are all about debating and not yielding to show off how smart we are, the dates won’t be very much fun (in my opinion) because the whole time together is an ego defending power struggle. I am smart, and accept that sometimes my date will disagree with and sometimes my date knows more about something than I do and I am wrong. My date should be the same way. With that attitude two smart and aggressive people can both be themselves and have fun together. . . even when they are arguing. (This also works well in professional interactions. It is part of being collegial.) Outside of a few core values and world views, accepting that I might be wrong means my ego and self-identity is not tied up in what I believe to be right. That is being open minded and I don’t want to be with someone who is not open minded. This applies to men and women.
E 465
Ok it’s not that men don’t like smart women but it’s the way some of those smart women come off for instance men hate the women office type that carries this I’m smarter than anyone else attitude… Total turnoff… It’s those high school girls that have that I’m so smart attitude, she wears it on her sleeves and makes sure everyone knows that she thinks she this oh so smarty smart…. It’s the oh look at me, hey everyone look at me I’m so smart I’m going to rub everyone’s noses in how smart I am… Clue to women that is an instant turnoff know matter how hot you are… If she’s a college educated lady, carries that water cooler attitude at work, goes around the office playing the kiss a** to the bosses (know one like kiss a**es both male and female), or the ladies that don’t actually do much of any work and slides up the work ladder… Those women with those kind of attitudes can kiss any man good buy… That kind of attitude is an instant death killer and men will run so fast from you and you will be instantly hated.
Now don’t get me wrong most men like smart educated women and is totally sexy especially cause she can carry on an educated sophisticated conversation with the bit of gossip but men like a good mix of smart educated women with also a mix of gossip (just like women like men that are educated to carry on a sophisticated conversation but with some general conversation) as well. Anyways, smart educated women are totally sexy as long as she DOESN’T CARRY this I’m smarter than anyone else attitude or portray this aura that has this snooty “I’m all that” I’m smarter than you and anyone else attitude!!!
Jonathan Marcus 466
Its not that men do not want strong, successful, independent women (I for one finds it very attractive) but rather you’re fighting something that’s been in grained in men since the beginning of time. Men are suppose to be the hunters & providers. Most men do not feel at ease (I myself included) being provided for by a woman.
Personally, I always prefer to be the giver & provider than the receiver. Even when friends treat me, I don’t feel at ease.
Even though you’re successful, you have to hide this fact or not flaunt it (I know this will be hard) in the beginning when you meet a man. And let the man pay for you and once you’ve developed a stronger connection then start showing him slowly how successful you really are.
Anonymous 467
This topic makes me really sad because some of the posts by men that I have read have been very old fashioned. If what all you men say were true that women could trust that you would bring the $50,000+ home to your family and be their knight in shining armor. I too would be the most willing of all the ladies in waiting, but many of us women have the secret fear that you will be like some of our fathers. That you will treat us like our mothers had been treated by our fathers. That you will leave us with sleepless nights filled with worries about what has happened to our knight in shining armor. That we are treated poorly and disrespected as human beings, while your spending that $50,000 on yourself and on the new and exciting women you’ve stumbled upon. At least when we are smart, strong, and successful we are able to stand on our own two feet. At least we wont HAVE to put up with your cruelty. We can leave anytime we please and not have to worry about if we can stand on our own two feet or not when our relationship begins to unravel. I can probably say more on this topic, but I’ll just stop here since I’ve covered most of the key points I wanted to make.
vanessa 468
@Naomi
Because unfortunately, that doesn’t work.
June Cleaver's long lost daughter 469
I am a successful, happy gal with a good solid job. Yes, I have played every role…the dumb blonde, the smart corp gal (which I actually am), the rebel…..none work. When I have been exactly who I was raised to be, they don’t want it!
I am just fine being single, traveling and having a great time with my other single friends. I gotta tell ya, I am so sick of the SUCCESSFUL, yet coupled with the ‘low self-esteem’ guy. It’s old and I’m sorry your parents didn’t give you the confidence you needed!
Viva la single!
Ann 470
Jason,
As a woman who has dated “nice” guys you probably aren’t actually as nice as you think. I’m sure there are women who you think you would want to date. Is this because you think they have wonderful personalities? Or lets be honest, because you think they are hot/beautiful? Women probably don’t want to date you because they see through you being “nice” and in reality, just wanting them exclusively for what they look like. They are probably going out with the “jerks” because maybe they are good looking so they are interested in each other for the same reason. I have dated man “nice” guys, and let me tell you, they are as superficial as the “jerks” and once they get you start thinking well if I can get her maybe I can get someone hotter….i.e. the “nice” guys are bigger jerks because they pretend to want you for who you are but only want you for what you look like. At least the “jerks” are honest about it…which is why we date them and not you.
Powerful Beautiful WOMAN 471
Women are successful for specific reasons
1. Safety- We don’t want to be battered by our powerful ex boyfriends just because they decide to divorce or break up with us, then going all psycho and establishing law suits on us. By that time if we are the “innocent, docile type woman” we would have nothing to defend oursleves with. Some men are crazy and will do anything to destoy their ex gf’s lives because they can’t live up the the man title they were supposed to be labeled as so they attack the women who can.
So it is great if women is making the dough to protect her rights to live.
If the guy screws up then we independant successful woman have at least our career and we can shove it in the guy’s face that we don’t need them.
If the guy screws up and we happen to have kids, usually the mom will keep the kids and thus we will have enough money to support our kids. If they want emotional support, they can make it themselves. My mother worked basically all day and I was fine with my life and almost my way up.
2. Out of respect- If a woman is powerful, there is no way a guy’s family who can potentially hate us, have anything to say about us. Were successful, talented, can stand on our own two feet. We WANT a guy not NEED a guy. We won’t be labeled as gold diggers, and basically have protection from insecure vile woman (insecure vile woman can come from both success imaged woman or the stereotypical feminine woman. They are insecure because they haven’t confronted the problems of themselves).
3. PROTECTION PROTECTION PROTECTION- We can save our asses by potential lawsuits. Lawsuits are known to cause families to zip up our entire savings if we can’t afford umbrella insurance or a lawyer. The new warfare is power and influence. If you don’t have those you can’t fight a fight properly.
4. Its better to be safe than lying dead on the streets not even enjoying life. If the potential soon to be husband or your long term husband has betrayed you, at least if a women has her own money she can live happily single. She can go on trips, go shopping, explore the world. If she wanted to she can afford plastic surgery and keep young for a long time. With her long lived beauty she can attract many men she wants if she learns how to LOOK feminine. She can string guys along and pick one that is authentic. Just like how men like to pick up younger chicks and string older woman along usually. She will enjoy life not fight against life.
5. She can never be truly controlled by the guy or anyone in her life- If a woman has her own business for example, many people will depend on her for her money. Thus if you hurt her business you are hurting thousands of people who need her for money. A stableness. If you attack her you are attacking thousands of those people who need her. Thus true protection since it is linked to their survival.
6. Scientifically testosterone makes men war-driven- Is there a reason why more men are in prison than women. This is why women MUST protect themselves. So if something ever was to happen and a man gets crazyish (stalk gf, date her best friends, attack her), the girl who is financially independant will have arsenal of weapons in case that does happens. Besides it takes MONEY to buy the weapons doesn’t it?
7. People can be what whoever they want as long as it conforms to the rules also- I want to be powerful career driven woman. I can work in my office and raise my child at the same time in my office if I am my own boss. My kids would be with me at work and we can also play fun games at work as well. I don’t think anyone has ever tried this but this is MY way of thinking. Work and children together can be possible if society lets it.
I also am a very pretty woman who look feminine dress the part act the part, but when I’m at work I play the boss. I can do both. If people can’t do both they are weak and probably have their spouses taken away by gold diggers or by the most suitable one.
8. BALANCE BALANCE BALANCE- To be a successful woman you can’t appear like a BUTCH. Basically you need the looks caressing of a woman and a mind as sharp as a steel ( a man’s brain ). I also believe a woman and man both have a feminine and masculine psyche. if they are too much in one or the other it is inbalanced.
9. Woman are much happier powerful because they have a stigma of AGE that is discriminated upon them. Men look better as they are older? Woman look worse as they age. Is it really the case? We’d rather be successful and be liked for what we do, just like men, than be judged for how we look pretty old or ugly.
10. In life one must die for another to live, one must suffer for another to be happy, one must be happy for another to be sad. It is the flux of life.
Gender battles apply as well. In order for woman to be happy, we must outsmart the man. In order for men to be happy they must outsmart the woman. No one truly want to be the weaker one do they?
11. Ego is my husband. My boyfriend is my boyfriend. My money is my child. I love myself more than anyone could be cause it is friggin myself! You can call be a selfish b**** woman for all I care but I love myself. Sure I will GIVE YOU the necessities you need but that doesn’t need I will SPOIL you. It is everyone’s job to love themselves and keep themselves happy. That even means material wise, emotion wise, everyone should learn to make themselves happy or else we will constantly be jealous of another’s earnings or qualities to the point it goes insane.
Ever been in one mortgaged house, if there are 3 people (family) all balanced out with balanced work lives and balance play lives, they all can pay the mortgage easily. If they help each other because exactly alike it will be easier since there will be no power struggle. It’s just too bad people aren’t dependable and emotionally drained. So SOMEONE HAS TO BE THE POWER am I right?
Karl R 472
Powerful Beautiful WOMAN, (#471)
I like women who are strong, smart and successful. But I have a hard time imagining any sane male being masochistic enough to date someone with your attitude.
Powerful Beautiful WOMAN said: (#471)
“Gender battles apply as well. In order for woman to be happy, we must outsmart the man. In order for men to be happy they must outsmart the woman. No one truly want to be the weaker one do they?”
Living in a perpetual conflict for supremacy does not make me happy. It’s stressful and exhausting. Letting my partner dominate me is equally unappealing.
I want a partner who is at my side, not one who is constantly at my throat. I want a partner whom I can trust, not one who is constantly trying to pull a fast one on me.
I’m in a long-term relationship where we treat each other like equal partners. When we disagree, we reach a compromise that we can both accept. Gender battles don’t make anyone happy. It’s a lot more fun to fraternize with the “enemy.”
Powerful Beautiful WOMAN said: (#471)
“SOMEONE HAS TO BE THE POWER am I right?”
Go ahead. Go find some spineless man who will unquestioningly allow you to “be the power.” The men with self-esteem will be perfectly happy to go find someone else.
When you drive off every man who has self-worth, will you feel like you’ve actually accomplished your goal?
Powerful Beautiful WOMAN 473
Karl R”472
Karl R
“I like women who are strong, smart and successful. But I have a hard time imagining any sane male being masochistic enough to date someone with your attitude.”
Umm do you know most women HIDE their true attitude. That is why women are considered “evil” by man social terms for some odd reason. I would be evil too, if there was some biological clock belief crap pounded on us. It’s like we only have so and so much time to live and be happy, while men can be happy their whole life. My attitude is survival of the fittest. I don’t place my “in your face” attitude on any males. In fact I can play the lovely flower that every man seems to like.
Karl R
“Living in a perpetual conflict for supremacy does not make me happy. It’s stressful and exhausting. Letting my partner dominate me is equally unappealing.
I want a partner who is at my side, not one who is constantly at my throat. I want a partner whom I can trust, not one who is constantly trying to pull a fast one on me.
I’m in a long-term relationship where we treat each other like equalpartners. When we disagree, we reach a compromise that we can both accept. Gender battles don’t make anyone happy. It’s a lot more fun to fraternize with the “enemy.”
I agree couples should be EQUAL. But with equal comes the price. They are as strong as you, as smart as you. So if compromises don’t work, they decide to not make it work. They decide to become GREEDY. Greed has nothing to do with fulfilling needs. Being powerful has nothing to being constantly at throat.
They will have roving eye. Roving eye is ok for all as I care, but once a BREAK UP occur. There is a chance that they would want REVENGE on you for NO REASON AT ALL. That is why it is important to QUIETLY SUBTLY SECRETLY establish more power than your partner.
You never know just how powerful your partner can be. If something was to happen like lets say you and your loved one is extremely happy but you guys got into a car crash. Your partner’s eye is all damaged, but you are JUST FINE. Your partner can have ANGER or VENGEFUL thoughts on you. Might turn on you, then decide to break up and WANT REVENGE. The only true way of revenge form is to establish a lawsuit, or to socially destroy you. They can’t destroy your JOB. It would be really hard. That is why SUCCESS is truly important.
If they do ever establish a lawsuit and lets say you have NO umbrella insurance, no lawyer, then BAM all your money will be taken if they win. Chances are the LAWYER is super professional at his job. That is why people hire them.
You will have no chance to get a new relationship since you MIGHT be paying DEBT for the rest of your life.
Karl R
“Go ahead. Go find some spineless man who will unquestioningly allow you to “be the power.” The men with self-esteem will be perfectly happy to go find someone else.
When you drive off every man who has self-worth, will you feel like you’ve actually accomplished your goal?”
What I meant was let’s say the scenario was…
3 family house hold
1 mortgage.
If everyone PITCHED in it would be a happy place right since everyone can give some money while being able to have time to hang out with people, socialize, have fun.
But NOOO life isn’t like that. Not everyone would want to pitch in. Sure you could KICK THEM OUT. But if you love them you wouldn’t right?
Same thing with relationships, it isn’t EXACTLY going to be Equal. Sometimes your partner would not be EXACTLY equal. Even with the compromise. You could break up with them, but do you really want to jeopardize your long term relationship?
Then you would keep finding the perfection in people and they wouldn’t live up to your standards. So the only solution is to love yourself make yourself strong, keep humble, and hopefully someone would be LOGICAL enough to be in a relationship where they try to make it EQUAL as possible.
And no I didn’t say I want a SPINELESS man. I would like an equal too, but that is not the case. I am telling you the REASON why a woman would want to be successful. The benefits of it in case the self-esteemed man gets his ego broken and seek revenge.
E 474
“she spends her time loving and supporting me, not challenging me on everything from movie tickets, to travel plans, to wake up times.” Women that constantly challenge men, always confrontational and always thinks he did something wrong or something is always wrong know matter what he does she has that “what are you doing” tone. It’s like the yogurt commercial where this lady is on the phone with her GF explaining these different types of yogurt like (cheesecake yogurt ect) then the husband hears her talking, goes to the fridge and the wife turns around and says “what are you doing” (it’s like the always what did I do wrong this time) (like for eff sakes lady just getting something out of the fridge) (chill the eff out). That “what are you doing” tone, confrontational, challenging always thinks he did something wrong is such a turnoff. Men will run from you with that tone.
Men don’t want to come home to his girlfriend or wife that tries and makes everything a challange, something’s always “wrong”, or she’s always confrontational. Men want to come home to our girlfriend after our day and hang out as in (no arguing, no confrontations and no what are you doings). We want to relax, calm with you not this always somethings wrong.
I think with strong women that men dislike the most is most so called “strong women” have this I’m better than you attitude, it’s those high school girls that were the A plus braggers and she want to make sure everyone knows she did great, look at me attitude, she’s this all wonderful girl and she has to rub every persons nose in her greatness.
It’s also the women attitude of how so many women use the (ugh) and is like ugh I’m better than anyone else, puts her nose high up in the air and carries the bitch attitude always with her. Men run away from women like this. Men hate women that act like this and have that hard headed attitude.
On the other hand men like successful women but as long as she comes home and turns into this sweet softy and is lady like. Men certainly don’t want or like women that try and act like men that’s another huge turnoff and make us run!!
Arse Politico 475
BINGO:
http://bquot.com/46g
I suspect you project your own issues of fear of loss of control onto women who are successful and that a lot of other menchildren do, crapping in their pants at the idea of hearing your mother’s voice again and then attack them for having boundaries or proving they can control themselves or be your equal in whatever way you find most threatening and then blamed them for your abandoning them.
bcmo 476
I looked up your article after seeing part of a show, where a woman stated that men don’t like smart women. A man was then interviewed and said that men do like smart women, they just don’t like women with masculine traits. It kind of made wonder where I fit in. I’m former military and somewhat of a tomboy. I always worked hard and the guy’s respected me. I worked my way through school and graduated with a 3.9 GPA in a technical field. I’ve been maried for 18 years and I think the reason for this is that I never lost my soft side and I’m easy to get along with. I can ballance an equation, go fishing, camp in the desert, give my baby a hug, cook a pumpkin pie and admit that life isn’t all about me……..and I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.
An Old Broad 477
After a whole lifetime of looking at this issue (I’m 58), here’s what I think: women will be criticized, NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO. Really. If you’re smart and do well, there’s something wrong with that. If you’re not, there’s something wrong with THAT. I honestly think people just like to pick at us, and enjoy looking at us like we’re a huge pool of losers.
If I had my life to live over again, I wouldn’t spend one single minute worrying about myself. I really wouldn’t do it, because it won’t make one bit of difference, or do a thing to change your marital status. Be the best you you can be, and let the damn chips fall where they may.
Mark 478
Men are generally not intimidated by career women. Women love spreading lies to justify why they reject men who have smaller incomes.
The problem is that women are generally hypergamous. Most of them are unwilling to marry a man with a smaller income. As women keep climbing the ladder, they are finding fewer men who can match or exceed their incomes.
It’s time to be equal, ladies. You wanted to be educated and employed like men. Well, now it’s time to marry someone who doesn’t meet or exceed your income, as men have always done. Equality, baby.
dd 479
All women be cautious when marrying. Men like power, control, and security. Anything you do that makes them feel like they are loosing those 3 things will result in the “not liking you”.
Ladies, even if you have a career and make lots of moneey, there is nothing wrong with looking over a man’s ability to provide. Unless you want your children ripped from your breast at 6weeks of age and thrown into daycare ; marry a MAN who can/WILL provide for his family. There is nothing selfish about the family circle. Everyone works their tail off and not for themselves.
If he can’t spring for dinner on date or leave money in the cookie jar for groceries (since he eats at your place constantly) then he’ll be a deadbeat dad. He’ll be subject to run off and make you chase him for child support.
Ladies you are his “help-meet” and that doesn’t mean “help meet expenses”. Be certain your income is supplemental never the prime source. This will keep his ego happy and will keep you ladies who make a big salary from being used, or missing the joy of raising your kids so you can keep dads status up.
Spoken from experience. ..
hannah 480
This article, and the responses I’ve read so far (only a few, because they made me nauseous) is scary. I’m 50 so when I was little, there was still some outdated (ha!) literature around which advised women that they must let the man take the lead “because of their fragile egos”. Well, now we call a spade a spade — their “fragile” egos are their MASSIVE egos, which, understandably, get miffed and insecure when not universally regarded, and which have enslaved women since time immemorial. THOSE DAYS ARE OVER, NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU FIGHT IT and try to pretend they’ll come back. They won’t. This is your last gasp. A grown woman is not supposed to “nurture” a man. Oh my god I’m getting sick with the image of nursing a 6 foot hairy baby. Men and women are supposed to SUPPORT each other. Adults have opinions — if your woman wins every argument I guess she’s smarter! Is your fragile male ego deflated by that? Aww.
Evan Marc Katz 481
Charming, Hannah. Yes, your dating coach for smart women is trying to enslave women and turn back the clock. You nailed it.
Based on your clear understanding of dating dynamics, I’m sure you’re going to make a man very happy one day.
hannah 482
When “dating” advice for men is doled out, it’s about how to find a woman to make YOU happy. Of course, the only “dates” men are interested in are free prostitutes, so that’s as far as their happiness is defined. While I am certainly not a man in that regard, I reserve the same rights to focus on MY happiness and a man who’s interested in THAT, and the days when women were so insignificant that it was assumed that their own happiness not only depended on a man’s but was actually even equal to it and pretty much didn’t even really exist are over, even if men are fighting it to their dying breath.
Just a Girl 483
Alright all you “strong, smart, successful,” women, I have a question. Is that ALL that you are? Are those truly your “defining” characteristics? If so, hell, I wouldn’t want to hang around you, either.
I consider myself, “strong,” and I am certainly “smart,” at least I have tested out to be. But those aren’t my defining characteristics. I don’t take the time to shove those traits in people’s faces, unless they’re rude to me.
I am so much more than my brain, or my backbone. I am also my heart. I am also a pretty carefree, playful person who enjoys running around on a soccer field, biking or hiking as much as I enjoy sitting down and watching a movie, reading a book or drawing a picture. I can go fishing with a guy, bait my own hook, clean and cook my own fish. But, I won’t shove it in anyone’s face. It goes without saying. Yes, I am perfectly capable of doing for me, I know this, most men know this, they don’t need to be reminded of the fact. LET THEM DO THINGS. Let them be men! Give them the PERMISSION to be men.
If you’re smart, if you’re successful, SHINE ON, sista! But, don’t be the sun, otherwise no one will want to look at you. Be a candle, or a fireplace. Glow. Warm. Being feminine doesn’t mean sacrificing the fact that you’re “strong.” Women have been “strong,” for MILLENNIA! Women have been intelligent for millennia as well. It’s nothing new. It’s just that now, women see fit to brandish these traits like some sort of sword and shield with which they run off the unworthy who cannot “handle” them.
I’m a handful. I’ll be the first to admit it, but I found a man who believed that the positive traits I offer outweigh my bad ones. What “successful” women view as positive traits, I don’t think men do…at least not in women they’re interested in. From what I’ve noticed, a man wants a woman who: 1. has standards, 2. supports him (like it or not, that’s part of love, and it’s a two-way street), 3. respects him (another two-way thing…if you want it, GIVE it), 4. needs them (come on, if they [their love, warmth, sex, whatever!] aren’t needed, why should they stick around?), and so on. Let your ballbuster attitude have an “off” switch. When you’re at home, or with your man, CHILL! Have FUN. Men like to have FUN, not be criticized for every little thing. If you’re too busy to make time for fun, then you’re too busy to be in a relationship.
It’s not “hiding” part of yourself, it’s just letting OTHER parts shine brighter when in a personal arena.
You’re not going to war in the board room when you head for the bedroom, you’re meeting someone in a far different environment. As they say, “when in Rome…” because you DO NOT act the same way around your parents as you do your friends, you do NOT act the same around your boss as around your siblings, you do NOT act the same in front of your priest/pastor/rabbi/whatever religious figure you have as you do around your lover. If you do, then you need more help than just in the romantic arena.
And that’s all I have to say about that…for now.
John 484
You’re asking the wrong question. Strong women are like armored cars. Men aren’t afraid of armored cars. What men are afraid of are tanks. Tanks are scary because they’re offensive and aggressive, not because they’re armored.
E 485
I don’t think it’s that many men don’t like smart women but it’s the way a lot of the smart women come across with their attitude that turns men off. A lot of the smart women carry this snooty, nose up in the air, I’m better than you BS. These are usually the women that still live in high school life even though they have graduated college in their mid to late 20, to early 30′s, they think that nothing is ever wrong with them, nothing is certainly their fault, they want to blame everyone else but themselves for their own damn faults, they usually have this whiney attitude and the me me me, hey look at me attitude.
Yeah women like these are the water cooler women that stand around, completely gossip and think they are the sh*t. That’s only until they pi** off the wrong people and then they get put in their place real quick especially in the “real world”. But in today’s economy that attitude would get you walking papers out of a job faster than one could blink. With today’s economy bosses and managers hate that BS and they can and will get someone that is grown up and doesn’t have that complete BS attitude.
Jonathan 486
@Just A Girl 483
Wow! That’s the best written, most thought provoking post I’ve ever read here. And It says all the things I have thought for years, but in a smart, concise and no BS way.
Karl 487
Well I disagree with the above statement,every women I end up liking admiring and wanting is vastly superior to me in every-way,they are much better educated that me,have achieved much more are liked by others when I am not and are realistically way out of my league,it’s like a tramp liking a princess,I don’t stand a hope in hell,and neither does any-man man who is less successful than they are,so I suppose what it really is inferior men realise this and don’t waste their time,I am incapable of getting or attracting any women,but I can still dream as I suspect many other men do about women like this.
George 488
Post #483 is right on the money, especially the list of things most men want in a relationship. Support, respect, needing, and standards…so true.
Ingvill 489
Hi!
I know I´m late to the party and that I might also be a bit insensitive here and sound like a national commercial. But.
Is this an American problem?
In Scandinavia, where the welfare system enables genuine gender equality (as in equal opportunities, not identical behaviour) to a much larger degree, I don´t find that this is a problem in the same way. Most people I know are successful high achievers, and they still have time for their families and partners/children. The opposite hasn´t been true since the sixties. I´m not saying we live on Dream Planet, but these issues aren´t ours to the same degree.
I am a political scientist, and I work in public administration as a political advisor (non-party). All my friends have higher education, and all their partners do as well. Then again, the difference between what a plumber makes and what a person with a PhD makes here isn´t all that big. Education matters because it gets you the job you want, and we all make enough money. Looking at my male friends and relatives, every single one of them have chosen women with the same level of education as themselves.
I pay almost 40% of my income in taxes. Plus all the VAT and stuff. But health care (including hospitalisation) is free. Education (including university, but from age 15 you have to start paying for your books) is free. Kindergardens (from age 1 till they start school) are heavily subsidised and affordable. Public transport is heavily subsidised. We get paid parental leave a full year after birth, 12 weeks of which belong to the fathers, and we´re entitled to stay at home for another two years unpaid (fathers and mothers alike), if we want, and get our job back afterwards. Women in the old days had to find men who could provide for them during the years when they looked after the kids. The past is a different country. We chose partners out of personal preference, not out of practical necessity.
That said, the men who fall in love with me don´t do so because I am brainy and can write powerful speeches or analyse foreign policy. I have never once had any man fall for me over my intelligence, my achievements, my success or the fact that I own my own apartment.
I HAVE had men falling for me because I am warm, genuine, affectionate, caring, good with people and because I give honest feedback in a friendly, non-sarcastic way. Oh, and when I asked the father of my kids (a successful professional in a different field than mine), who I´d spent the first hour after we met discussing politics with what the first thing he liked about me was, the answer was: Your breasts and the way that red dress fit you at the party. Then of course, getting to know and wanting to pursue a relationship with you came later. And he has no memory of talking about politics at all!
He wouldn´t have gone for me unless I´d been his level educationwise, but level is only a prerequisite, nothing more.
Jonny 490
Are men really that insecure? I’m certainly not going to be less than I am just for someone else’s insecurities.
Yes men really are that insecure, especially in the West. I’m a man, I’ve bought the insecurity lies before. However once I grew up I realized I find nothing more attractive in a woman than her ability to challenge my intellect. I find it almost humorous that so many women believe otherwise.
At work we have a woman about 24 years old who looks rather ordinary, not particularly good looking but not unattractive either. She also wears rather ordinary clothes and sometimes she’s sartorially eccentric, but after a few conversations with her I felt my brain cornered. She is a young prodigy and I really can’t fool her even if I wanted to. Then we connected on rock climbing, mountaineering, and ice-climbing (of which she also bests me) and sexual tension began to mount. Well let me just be plain for you Michelle, from me she evokes an intense, instinctive, carnal, animal and violent desire and I’m sure you can use your imagination to fill in the details.
Anyone who wants a tall big man or a voluptuous breasted woman simply watches too much T.V. and does what everyone else tells them to do. Ironically the mantra “Do whatever you want and F$&@ what anyone else thinks!” is one such example believe it or not. It’s really quite a challenge to escape what seems to be brainwashing psyops programs of the West. But if you live in the West, you’re brainwashed. Nobody escapes it. It just so happens that some are doing the hard work of unraveling it, and the pressure to be a big tall man with power and money or a petite and voluptuous woman who frowns upon mud and rejects intellect are all part of that brainwashing.
So people who play this mindless and frivolous dating game don’t realize they are marionettes of culture.
Jonny 491
Oh and one more thing, I know of another woman who is quite successful, powerful, direct, and very attractive. She is a typical type-A go-getter on high-heels. I heard she owns a lot of property abroad. I find her a bit prickly and she has responded to me like an angry mother before. Even so I tolerated that to test this idea that she must be “a real woman” and what I found is that beneath the coarse and ballbusting exterior was a very selfish person. Now I don’t think her being a selfish person bothered me so much as she used this tough exterior to mask it, read: lie about herself. Let me try to use math to explain this:
Selfishness = nobody’s perfect = rocky relationship
Dishonesty = no trust = no relationship
EM 492
Just a Girl – I want what the guys want as well. I want standards, nurturing, love, respect, chill out together from a guy. I do not want to do all the work, pay all the bills, sacrifice for quality time, and get none of these in return.
A relationship is mutual. Make sacrifices for one another. I cook, you clean. Do not leave it up to do everything or have to ask you to do the vacuuming or dishes. If you are not willing to work it out with me for our relationship, then we have two choices – accept it or not. It becomes my choice and yours. We may lose our relationship and this means that we did not make one last sacrifice for our mutual relationship.
When it is obvious that the relationship was not important enough, being type A or being a nice guy does not determine the existence of the relationship. We decide to say yes, no, maybe, how about tomorrow, let’s work this out babe, come here for a hug – you strong woman or you cool man, let’s go for a walk, i’ll put my iPod away for more than 5 secs and hold you close, i know how you like the house neat – I am making a conscious effort to pick up my clothes off everything, I know how you value trust – I am making a conscious effort of not being jealous of every girl you talk to.
Communicate. With and without direction.
Attila 493
American women are too much like men for any man to be interested in them- I’d rather hang out with a buddy or two. At least they don’t take themselves soooooooooo seriously.
Jonathan 494
So how do I soften and get married as a man since so many wealthier Eyes Wide Shut women declared war and givers of pain and never a leg up to a 22 year old male? How do I date the Soulless who doesnt have much time left as a poor male at 40? Did they just kill off the nice guy and 350 million babies sucking off billionaires and their ideas? How do i soften it up babe?
Stacy Furtaw 495
Wow! Thank you!
AnonymousWoman 496
I don’t know if this is off-topic, but just because someone may exude masculine energies through a letter or online doesn’t mean that they’re actually like that in real life. This is why internet dating can be deceiving (not that it’s bad), because one may come off as totally different than how they describe themselves.
I’ve made the mistake of describing myself as ambitious online, BUT guess what people offline tell me? “You’re too nice, honey. Start standing up for yourself” or “You are so sweet and easy-going. I can’t picture you getting angry.” I even remember a male driver’s ed instructor in highschool that told me “You’re too soft. Toughen up.”
When I post online, it’s ironic how some posters seem to think that I sound masculine, too opinionated, or even a ball-breaker (which nobody in real life has told me that). When you see a woman posting how she’s strong, successful or ambitious, there’s a chance that she may present herself very differently in real life.
I don’t know the woman who wrote this e-mail, but perhaps she’s exuding masculine energy. This isn’t the case for everyone.
Saint Stephen 497
I once dated a Hot, successful, career lady. That must have been the “longest” year of my life. I only date unsuccessful women now, and my life is so much better.
Michelle 498
Michelle you are attracting insecure men. There a lot of men who like strong women. But you have to allow men to feel needed or they will not make a committment. Men have a desire to feel needed by a woman it is part of their makeup. If you overdominate in all areas they won’t make the effort. So my advice is if you find a guy you like tell him his strengths like his funny, smart, stroke his ego. It is man pleasure. Listen to what he has to say and ask questions lots of them. That too gets men to feel good about you and your relationship. May more of an effort to show him you enjoy his company like making more phone calls and texts than he does. Just make him feel needed and wanted and you he will be butter in your hands.
chelsey king 499
That’s very true! Men are insecure in women that are more successful than they are. Men has a very high EGO that they think they should provide and support financially to the women.
This is a very good one
how to make a man want you 500
Because they don’t want to be underestimated by their partners, they don’t want to feel useless.
James 501
Evan, this is the first time I have read this blog whatsoever and I have to say this article is FANTASTIC! Women and Men alike should definitely read this article and take note. As you said men are attracted to strong confident women (or at least I know I am) but they do want to hear about life outside of work the same way that women do not just want to hear about work life.
On a final note the piece about considering the downsides to yourself is important for some people whilst for others they really need to notice the good things about themselves and get a bit of self confidence and belief that they are a good catch. I know myself for example that I can be elitist and somewhat arrogant as I couldn’t date a woman who I felt I constantly ran rings around intellectually.
I would add finally the nice guys are out there if you look for them don’t discount that guy because he’s not quite as successful or as good looking as the guy next to him who might instead be an arrogant jerk who does not care for you
VC 502
Evan
I stumbled upon this rather, and I agree with a lot of what you have said. However, you say that ‘men want to feel masculine’. Well, my problem with a great number of men is that they want to feel it, but when it comes to it, they don’t act it nor seem to wish to take responsibility for being the man. I find many men absurdly insecure and needy. I’m genuinely no man-eater, but the fact remains that most men I meet and date act very timid, seem constantly to ask for and need reassurance and are all too eager for me to take decisions etc for them so they don’t have to take any responsibility if things go wrong. Even on something so trivial as a date. It was an utter joy to travel in France for a while, because it was evident men still felt they had that masculine role – from carrying stuff, to making nice compliments, to asking me out, to taking the risk of rejection and bothering to try and seduce me. And I, in turn, very much enjoyed being made to feel like a woman; more feminine, softer etc.etc. – all those things that men are supposed to want. To feel like a man, you’ve got to be it, and believe me, if you be it, I am all too eager to let my most feminine side show.
Celeste 503
I am not bothered about hiding my personality at all – why should I be? I read that Spanish and Italian women would say of “The Rules” :”why do we need a book to tell us how to love”?? LOL!! My prerogative is to be as authentic to myself and others as I possibly can. I did “The Rules” with my ex-husband, and because neither of us were behaving authentically, I felt I did not know him AT ALL when I married him after 11 months of dating – he was like a completely different person. I now neither want nor desire to behave like something I am not as this is dishonest – why should I spend my life doing this? I have better things to do.
Mind you, at the age I am now (37), I can confidently say that I do not want a relationship. I have not had many relationships, but I have had all I want. I have come to this conclusion after much soul-searching, and my God, does it make life easier. I never wanted kids, so this made life easier for starters. I am sufficiently challenged in any case with my work and hobbies and my priority is to have fun – I have no time whatsoever for a relationship and its accompanying jealousies, eternal need for compromise, eventual boredom, and talking about sh*t to fill the time. Yeah, you can miss sex sometimes, but on the other hand it is pretty much the same physical action whoever you are with, and that can also become boring after a while. I think the key thing here is to take time to know yourself and not feel guilty for that fact…and more to the point, not ALLOW OTHERS to make you feel guilty. There is far too much pressure to “have it all” and “be all things to all people” and to “impress”. There is no need!!! The only person you need to impress is yourself!
Michael 504
I’m 40, and I’m still really not sure what women want–and I don’t think many women know what they want, either.
I don’t even try to figure them out anymore. if I like a girl, I pursue her.
But–I find many women want to have their cake and eat it too, so why can’t men?
My advice is to be who you are–or who you want to be–not who women want you to be.
If you want to be a nice guy, then be a nice guy.
If you want to be a jerk, then be a jerk.
There are plenty of women out there who like both.
Ray 505
The plain truth is that women have adapted, but most men haven’t. And they won’t, as long as women continue to wrap themselves around the axle while men don’t do a damned thing except go to work and make a paycheck.
Yes, I realize that Evan is mostly coaching women, but it seems like he is pitching the same old junk. Women, you do all the emotional heavy lifting… subvert your true selves… put your lives, careers, and selves on the back burner so your man can feel like a ‘man’ (whatever that means). Forget being a real partner or having any needs and goals of your own.
Just be a stupid, brainless (but ‘fun’) little sexpot (doled out in careful measures, of course) and you will have so-called ‘men’ chasing you. Big deal.
Men who adjust to the current world and learn to be confident in themselves without having a woman at home to talk down to and manipulate so he can feel ‘strong’ will be the REAL winners.
Evan Marc Katz 506
I’m sorry, Ray. I thought I was a coach for smart, strong, successful women who helped them find happy, healthy, relationships with men who love, cherish and appreciate them.
At least that’s what the two women who wrote to me yesterday to say they got engaged thanks to my coaching told me.
So feel free to dismiss my material as junk…feel free to completely misinterpret everything I write… feel free to make the false suggestion that I encourage women to become stupid, brainless sexpots with no sense of self…and feel free to stop posting on my blog.
Your negativity is getting in the way of women who actually WANT to understand men, receive my message, and make slight adjustments that lead them to happiness – instead of shouting from the rooftops about how men need to change to be with you. Actually, we don’t.
Greg 507
Ray are you a man or a woman? I can’t tell.
Evan Marc Katz 508
Ray is a woman. Her anger at me should have given that one away.
Ray 509
Evan@506
Congratulations on helping your clients. I sincerely wish them the best.
… and for the record, I don’t think you are always off-base. Mostly just on this post and similar ones that hold gender stereotypes where men are supposed to be ‘in control’ and women are supposed to be ‘fun’ and ‘acquiescent’. These are your words.
Men are fully capable of loving a woman in all of their complexity. To the extent that people hold a ‘low’ opinion of men and their ability to do so is what upsets me.
On the other hand, I do see where you are coming from alot of the time. Being fun and acquiescent… and making a man believe he is in control (even when he isn’t) is all part of the ‘marketing’. What one does after you catch that husband is the tricky part, though. Isn’t it? One can’t keep that charade up forever.
Could we all learn to lighten up a bit? Not take things so seriously and leave work at work? Have more fun? Sure. That could apply to either gender though.
all the best…
Evan Marc Katz 510
That’s the most conciliatory thing that a hater has said to me in a long time, Ray, thank you. I don’t think I say anything that’s particularly controversial, and I’m sure that if we were to hash this out in real life, we’d find a lot more common ground than friction. I do think that women who vociferously disagree with me feel personally indicted by something I’ve said or are largely misinterpreting what I said.
So when I say that men prefer fun to fighting, supportive to critical, being a leader to being a follower, that’s an overall statement that most can understand. But if you tell me that you’re only fighting to stand up for yourself, and you’re only critical because he’s wrong, and that you don’t want to follow any man because you’re an independent woman… that’s fine.
It just means that many men are not going to want to stick around.
If you say that this is “all of your complexity”, that’s fine, too. Objectively, most men will prefer fun, supportive, and easygoing.
Finally, by saying “fun, supportive and easygoing”, I’m not saying that you have NO opinions, that you NEVER complain, and that you put up with endless bullshit because he’s a liar, cheater, player or misogynist. I’m saying that the fun side should predominate. And if you insist on being the leader, the only man you’re left with is the follower.
Best to you.
Evan
E 511
RE Drahma: Regarding dating, time and activities… I think what turns men off in this situation is how many women with all their activities and work they shut out men, relationships. It radiates off women and men can tell that she’s so “busy” or also the “I’m to busy” is just a code for women that they are just going to instantly say no and that she would never in a million years take time for him and then we tell our friends that are with us to completely ignore her cause all she’s going to do is always so no and women that are have all the activities and “work” are completely useless to even waist time on. Women with their “work” and activities can always find time to go out with him. Obviously you don’t work 7 days a week and all night nor are you going to do activities every night and every weekend. I’m sure there are some women that are the constant busy bodies and are always gone on weekends doing something. Those type men wouldn’t want anyways cause he will never ever be priority and same goes for men that always works.
Ray 512
Evan@510
Well, take it for what it is worth… I work around alot of 20 somethings of both genders. Most of them don’t view relationships as so black and white… with men as ‘leaders’ and women as ‘followers’.
They want a partner. One who doesn’t need the label. Who is confident in their strengths, and can accept help too, without their nose getting out of whack. And I’m talking about both men and women. The world is changing. I realize that you need to coach women of all ages… likely the ones who are facing a dating pool of men who haven’t adjusted to the new world order… but that is my point.
It has always been up to women to push men to be better men (as annoying and trying as that might be for the man being pushed). It is no different now.
Perhaps some suggestions on how to develop an air of cheerful firmness on the part of your female clients might be in order. Works wonders for me. :)
Ray 513
oh, one more thing…
women prefer men who are fun, supportive, and easygoing too. I haven’t been here long enough to see if you coach women away from men who are sucking them dry emotionally. The reason why 75% of divorces are initiated by women is because men aren’t acting like partners and like a woman’s best friend.
So, women have two choices… either accept that we’re not going to connect deeply with the man we’re with (which, I’m afraid is what you are coaching women to accept in this post, no offense)…
… or women just don’t bother with them and stay single because they have better things to do that take care of some grown up man-child who has nothing more to offer than a paycheck and gets an ego kick out of bossing women around so that he can feel like a ‘man’. Ick.
Evan Marc Katz 514
Hey, Ray. Pick up a copy of Why He Disappeared. There’s a money back guarantee. Let me know if you think that I’m telling women to accept less and report back, okay?
Ray 515
I might just do that… but you need to know… none of my partners have ever ‘disappeared’. The two most significant relationships of my life told me with tears in their eyes… ‘You make me want to be a better man’. The first one… I left him. The second, died due to an undiagnosed genetic heart defect a month after we were engaged. Sad story.
Not sure how that happened, to be honest (the wanting to be a better man). The fact that these words were said verbatim (and with zero knowledge of the former) is uncanny.
Some call it ‘leading by example’, but I don’t like the titles of leader or follower.. one up or one down. Maybe that is my secret.
fred 516
I think some people just repel each other. Smart women are not so easy to be around because they are not easy going. They don’t know when to turn it off. I think when guys hang out they know to turn off the power thing but women by nature have a power thing going on all the time because they are insecure and then too add more power really makes them somewhat lopsided. Smart power women really needs to date a big strong muscular common sense kind of guy. Guys with a lot of street smarts rather than ivy league educations. That way she can show her brain power as much as she wants but the guy won’t care cause he’s to manly to give a damn.
I would say a perfect example of this is Shrek and Princess Fiona. Princess fiona is smart powerful and beautiful but Shrek doesn’t really fall for all that crap he just likes her for who she really is. And no matter how smart she is she can’t always handle the real problems of the world.
Nature always strives for balance having two smart people in a relationship leads to a big imbalance.
Darlene Kosloski 517
Totally awesome.
Gabe Asher 518
Us men are not intimidated by successful, opinionated, strong women. We are simply not attracted to them as they posess manly qualities. Hillary Clinton anyone? Men? Anyone? No takers. Not a surprise, even though she was mildly attractive in her younger years.
.
It would be like us men being quiet, shy, unsure, indecisive, not confident and lacking back-bone and assertiveness. Women would not be attracted to us. (In general. Remember peeps, we are always speaking in generalities. Women can’t wait to chime in with “you’re wrong. My friend married a quiet guy and she’s career minded and they’ve been together for……..”)
.
Put the brakes on it ladies…..We. Get. It. We really do. You don’t need to spend the rest of your lives being “guy repellent” because of self-pride. Tone it down. Get feminine. Enjoy womanly traits for a while. You might like it…..and find a good dude meanwhile.
John 519
@Ray #512
You said “I work around alot of 20 somethings of both genders. Most of them don’t view relationships as so black and white… with men as ‘leaders’ and women as ‘followers’.”
Guess what Ray – I’m at 50 (so split between Boomers and Gen X) and when I was 20 this was a very prominent sentiment then too. Guess how what many/most of those folks turned out later? Yep-most fell back to “traditional” roles, where the men and women both want him to be the leader. The world isn’t/hasn’t changed quite so much as you may believe. These kids today will likely also experience the same “back sliding”, once they get away from the indoctrination of their college years. Give them 20-30 years, and check in.
“I realize that you need to coach women of all ages… likely the ones who are facing a dating pool of men who haven’t adjusted to the new world order”
hahahahaha…oh my, how condescendingly and insultingly naive. Insulting those men who still want what they want…and the many women who want the same thing. I thought the advent of feminism was about enabling individual women to chose their own path, and not have it dictated to them. I guess the same liberty isn’t to be afforded men. How progressive of you.
“It has always been up to women to push men to be better men”
This is exactly what men dislike about “strong, successful women”. Such arrogance and condescension. Do you even like men? Why do you date them if you see them as so inferior, flawed and needing fixing?
No woman pushes me. The last one that tried got kicked to the curb like a sack of potatoes.
But I will say that my current woman’s behavior and attitude makes me want to succeed, and not let her down, because she is worthy of my effort, and displays appreciation for it.
Do you?
astoria greengrass 520
i liked this very much because i have never seen thing frm this light about woman before. i have however delt many times with “nice” guys who just are not aggressive enough, and i know you logic there is sound. i can also see that your logic for the woman can be sound too.
Ruby 521
Gabe #518
<>
Hilary Clinton was born Hilary Rodham. She started dating Bill Clinton when she was just 24, and he repeatedly asked her to marry him, which she did after four years of dating. Of course, as a result, she went on to become First Lady, so she didn’t do too badly in the relationship department!
BJ 522
Men….like the ones that responded above…..only like “passive women that SUBMIT to THEM”. Slavery is over. Unfortunately too many years of society telling women (don’t complain) DO NOT tell anyone how you feel because some man had had chosen them to be their wife, put a roof over their head and you did not want to put that security in danger. While he was OUT fancing his many other conquests. AND….we are suppose to feel BAD because we can become educated. I would love to send all of you men back into that time….and let you live that way for 5 years. Let’s see how you would have liked it.
Greg 523
Ruby,
She was publicly humiliated as first lady by his affairs. At least other presidents kept their dirt undercover so as to avoid a scandal. So I don’t think she fared very well in relationships. Unless you mean that she was just using him all along to advance her own career. Either case is not an ideal or healthy relationship.
Joe 524
@Ruby #521
So Hillary “didn’t do too badly’?
She married a lying cheat and you call that “pretty good”?
Tell you what – I make over six figures, am good looking, personable, charming… how about you marry me, and I’ll only cheat a little.
You wouldn’t be doing “too badly”.
Ruby 525
Bill Clinton is the quintessential “alpha male” – women are often part and parcel of that territory. Clinton wasn’t the first man to cheat on his wife, and their marriage has survived it, and continues to survive for over 40 years.
I simply disagree with Gabe’s assertion that Hilary was unattractive to men because she was strong and successful.
Saint Stephen 526
Is better to have a lying cheating husband than having non at all. After all men will always be men, right? Rhetoric question by the way. He’s been biologically programmed to spread his genetic code and even marriage won’t get in the way of fulfilling his biological calling. 8)
Goldie 527
I had to check Wikipedia because, from Greg and Joe’s posts, looked like I’d missed the news of Bill and Hilary’s breakup. Guess what… they’re still together. So, whatever issues they had, they must’ve worked them out. That qualifies as not doing too badly in my book. If you guys personally aren’t interested in Hilary as a woman, that’s a different story. I’m pretty sure it’s no big deal to her.
Greg 528
The Clintons marriage is not ideal. Lying, cheating and allegations of sexual assault are the foundations of a great, loving marriage. Yep!!! on a serious note I don’t think any woman wishes to have that kind of marriage. I also believe that the Clintons would have split a long time ago if they were just a normal couple. However, they probably stayed together because they can accomplish more politically and financially as a team. I would be shocked if they still loved each other and even sleep together. I don’t believe they will ever divorce because their marriage seems more like a business agreement.
By the way most men do not find women like Hillary Clinton to be attractive. She’s too arrogant and combative. I’d rather have dinner with Laura Bush or Michelle Obama. Hillary is my least favorite first lady. I’ve only been alive for Nancy, Barbara, Hillary,Laura and Michelle.
Joe 529
@Goldie # 527
I can’t believe you’d call that “not doing too badly”. Wow. You’ll accept anyone then if you’d keep a lying cheat like him! I mean the guy was caught red-handed cheating, more than once, darn-near perjured himself (actually, I think he did perjure himself but Congress voted to not impeach anyway).
So what you’re saying is, you’ll accept a lying cheat if he’s handsome and powerful enough, despite what you’ve said elsewhere on this blog.
Just trying to be clear.
amy 530
Wow. I’d forgotten all about this thread.
It must be a couple of years since I posted. In that time, lots of dating and a suicide. Man who felt himself to be useless. His daughter, I’m sure, would disagree, but it’s too late for that now. I’ve also been fired from a small job for failing to preserve my boss’s good name — while doing professional work, and doing it well, for $25/hr. His flipped-out rage at the loss of face (I’d posted an opinion on something unrelated on a forum, with my sigfile attached) was something I won’t soon forget.
Someone upthread asked me if I really wanted to date. The answer, I can say honestly now, is no. I’m not interested in men’s needs and desperation, particularly as they swim on through middle age. I don’t want to spend time unraveling their lies. I don’t give a rat’s ass about their position in their hierarchies. I don’t want to mother either them or their children. I am myself, not a pillow or a massage chair.
I’m also tired of the game in which a man thinks it’s great to go find a smart woman, and then, when he’s got one (me), he discovers that this is actually a lot of work and kind of scary, because if he can’t keep up, I’ll be bored and lose interest and he’ll feel stupid. “Smart” is not code for “she’ll figure things out for you and make your life easier” or “trophy” – it actually means the woman has a mind and will likely have it turned on all the time. And Chris, who wrote about finding an artist or some such — you know, just because they’re interesting doesn’t mean they won’t expect you to be. A serious artist is working all the time, no mater how poor. If you can’t speak her lingo, she probably won’t be interested in you.
I’m tired, too, and saddened by the fact that so few men really know what they want, what their own work is. I’m a writer, I know what my work is. Is it more important than the man is to me, yes. That’ll always be true. Has nothing to do with money. But I’ve organized my life so as to be able to do the thing I love, and that’s plain to people who meet me. I find men, middle-aged men, are envious of this, and that it makes them feel competitive. I’m not interested in that, either.
So: if there is a sane, exceptionally bright and talented (and I mean way far out there on the right of the bell curve), non-mopey/addicted single man out there who takes care of his body, grownup with his own work that he’d do come hell or high water, who doesn’t have the politics of an 18-year-old, and is not looking to be taken care of or move in with me, yeah, I’d make room for that. Otherwise…I’m sorry, men. I’ve done a lot of shopping. What I’m looking for is not to be found in this here department store.
john 531
men are far less shallow then women. A woman’s list for her ideal man would be: tall, dark, handsome, rich, educated, family oriented, exciting, spontanious, dependable, stable income, generous, etc….
men judge a woman basically on how hot she is, and if she is not that much of a bitch.
Ruby 532
John #531
You mention that women are looking for qualities like “educated, family oriented, dependable, stable income, generous”, and that for men. it’s just about how hot a woman is, but then you call us far more shallow?
Goldie 533
@ Joe #529, wow talk about a stretch. How do you go from me disagreeing with another commenter who said that no man would want Hillary Clinton, to “you’ll accept a lying cheat if he’s handsome and powerful enough, despite what you’ve said elsewhere on this blog.”
What I’m saying is, the woman is happily married, we don’t know what they did to reconcile and frankly it isn’t any of our business, but the fact remains, they’re still together. The rest is your imagination running wild.
amy 534
Goldie, why are you talking to that man? He obviously isn’t nice.
NonExist 535
The other men I know are not really concerned with how successful a woman is financially nor how smart she is aside from her keeping up with current events and enough culture to be able to enjoy a wide range of entertaiment together.
But the women I know who fit the apect spoken of in the article prefer men who are either socioeconomically, culturally, and in terms of education on their level or at least close but end up with men who are not because the men on their level seem to have this power struggle with them.
Speaking for myself I’ve had a few women like that interested in me after conversation(at work, through associates) but since I’m no longer concerned with conversing about certain things, and since I’m financially stable but not even close to the top echelon, I turned them down back when I was actively dating.
As Amy mentioned, I’m not interesting enough for that type of woman not to get bored. And having lady friends who are like that, they are always saying that many of the men they date they lose interest in because there is not enough substance.
ange 536
The way things are going, in 100 years women will be the leaders of the world
If you don’t believe me, take a look at the young men in their teens to late twenties who are obsessed with a little girls show called My Little Pony, and young Japanese men who’s girlfriends are pillows with anime girls on them.
Carrie 537
When I am not interested in them, they work for the relationship day and night. When I am committed to them and act nice and devoted, they start to look elsewhere. Anyway, in short, I need some serious help and hope to hear back from you soon.
I am not sure this question by Catherine was answered. When she is exuding her “feminine” energy ie acting nice and devoted, she gets no attention. When she is exuding her “masculine” energy i.e. I’m too busy, not interested she gets lots of attention.
Ali 538
A real man should NEVER rebuff a woman who has attained success on her own. It shows character and her will to reach for her dreams. If a woman had the opportunity to be in a better position when it came to her career then it would push me to ameliorate myself and push myself beyond what i have achieved. This is not out of jealousy but from the fact that I am a man. I would want to offer her the same what she has to offer me.
JR 539
You are practically telling her to tone herself down so that he can feel like a man. Society forces men to earn their manhood, thus everything becomes emasculating. Even sucking from a straw can make a man less of a man. Having a small dog, etc. Life must be difficult when your masculinity is constantly being threatened.
“But if that go-getter side ends up emasculating your man, or makes him feel insignificant, or second-guessed, he’s not really getting what he wants out of a partner. Men want to feel masculine. We want to feel needed.”
If you have true confidence and your manhood isn’t contingent upon external factors then you wouldn’t feel emasculated.
You are also implying that nice men cannot be manly and smart women cannot be feminine, which is more BS. Using your own assertiveness and traits as an analogy doesn’t help either. You are a man thus society allows and even encourages you to have those traits. So by comparing yourself to her, you are further more implying that these traits are manly rather than feminine.
Everyone wants to feel needed. However, how are you going to tell your partner how to need you. That is selfish. That is not about meeting her needs but about your own ego. I want you to need me and it has to be in this way. Furthermore, it is better to be wanted than to be needed. Someone needs out of necessity, out of requirement, out of obligation. Men feel if they are needed then she will not leave. However, one wants out of desire. Wanting is voluntary.
Furthermore, I have been on both sides of the fence. I have dumbed it down to attract men before and once they realize I am smart they run away. I can’t tell you how many times I have heard you are impressive for a girl, if you are a genius then I am just going to walk away or this is why I don’t like dating smart women (when I called him out on some BS he was trying to feed me). I decided I wasn’t going to tone myself down. I am an integrated person. I am feminine in every form; mind, body and soul. I have been called mind blowing, sexy, stunning, gorgeous, beautiful and a goddess many times before. I love to make meals from scratch. I love to give my man back rubs and fetch his beer. Yet I am also assertive, know what I want and I don’t play games. He can’t just pick and choose which parts of me he will want and not want. If he accepts me, he needs to accept the complete package, just as I need to accept him completely. I am going to wait for a confident man, who is equal to me or better. I am tired of lowering my ambitions for weak men whose masculinity is threatened by any and everything.
Evan Marc Katz 540
Actually, JR, I’m just saying what you’re already experiencing – that your “complete package” is not what most men are looking for.
That doesn’t make you bad or wrong or any such thing. It just means that the pool of applicants to be your partner is significantly smaller than it is for many other women. When you factor in the idea that most masculine men don’t want a woman who is as challenging and assertive as they are, that pool shrinks even further.
I’m confident, smart and a feminist who believes women are 100% equal to men. I also did very well with women before I got married. And while I admire, work with and can be friends with women like you, at home, I prefer someone who is more easygoing. Not dumb. Not incapable. Just easier. More pleasant. Less tiring.
So while you are convinced that the rewards of being “assertive” outweigh the costs, many quality men – the kind you would be attracted to – don’t agree. We are not threatened or intimidated by you. We just prefer other women, that’s all. It’s our right. Just as it’s yours to have your preference in men.
You’ll find your Mr. Right, I’m sure, JR. It’ll just be a lengthier and more challenging process for you, just as it was for me. I wish you the best of luck.
TheTruth 541
Physically stronger women are not attracted to physically weaker men, nor are physically taller women attracted to physically shorter men. Every woman that talks about her ideal man has emphasized that fact. Then you see her actual choice of man – the fact is reinforced. To claim/argue otherwise is sheer ignorance. Women seek at least an equal or greater, not less. It’s a fact!
Sheryl 542
Regarding the self-esteem issue, its possible to have a high confidence level and yet have low self-esteem. I have confidence in my abilities but I don’t necessarily have confidence in other areas. Altogether I am a fairly courageous person and generally am drawn to men who are as well either as friends or potential partners. I have noticed that both men and women who have a lot of fear or insecurity tend to dislike me in general.
Karl R 543
JR said: (#539)
“I can’t tell you how many times I have heard [...] this is why I don’t like dating smart women (when I called him out on some BS he was trying to feed me).”
Perhaps the way that you express yourself is the turn-off, as opposed to your intelligence. To me, the phrase “I called him out on some BS he was trying to feed me,” sounds openly antagonistic. Antagonism has never been a trait which I’ve found attractive: not in girlfriends, not in relatives, not in coworkers, not in complete strangers.
I recently finished reading the autobiography of Benjamin Franklin. He spent several paragraphs describing the specific words and phrases he used when he disagreed with someone. His advice on diplomacy works well no matter whom you’re talking to: men, women, bosses, subordinates….
It’s available for free if you have a Kindle.
JR said: (#539)
“He can’t just pick and choose which parts of me he will want and not want. If he accepts me, he needs to accept the complete package, just as I need to accept him completely.”
I work with a team of legal and financial geniuses. My special niche within this group is quality control. It is my job to go through their work and find every mistake (regardless of how small) so it can be corrected before the work product goes out the door. I’m also frequently given the other side’s work product to tear it apart for errors (though only significant errors are of interest).
Everyone on the team acknowledges that I am the best at these tasks.
I’m also reasonably good at debate, though I can’t claim to be any better at it than my coworkers.
Professionally speaking, I am paid to be a fault-finder, and be argumentative. These traits are part of my personality.
I leave those traits at work. If I didn’t, I’d be the absolute worst possible boyfriend. I’d be Mr. Always Right. I won’t tolerate those traits in a girlfriend, and I don’t think my fiancée should have to tolerate those traits in me.
People can’t pick and choose which parts they want and don’t want … but they can choose to reject the whole package based on one or two parts they don’t want. If I excercised my professional skills in my personal life, that’s exactly what people would do.
Would you blame them for doing so?
Observer 544
I will make several observations and try to keep them succinct and concise. And, the comments I make are based upon my assumption that the intent of this blog (and similar ones) is to discuss how men think and interact with women and why they have a “reluctance” towards smart, strong, successful women.
1. After reading a number of the commentaries from the female participants of this blog, I am so eternally thankful that I am married to my wife of 27 years, and NOT to any combination/compilation/synthesis of some of these female writers!! I will not mention specific names, but if the writing is reflective of the actual person, it is easy to determine who. Long before I married my wife, I “experienced” some of types exhibited here. Although Mr. Katz has a business to operate here, in my personal opinion many of these women have profound psychological disturbances that do not require a dating coach, but rather extensive treatment from a professional psychologist (and I am only a layperson in this subject). Their hostility to men, in a general sense, seems pathological; they appear to project their negative attributes on to the various men that have “disappointed” them in their lives when it comes to the topics of love, companionship, sex, and respect. And, again my own interpretation, they do not seem to take responsibility for their own actions. They are what I call “superannuated adolescents”; they have not “matured” (into “adulthood”) beyond the age of the onset of puberty. I cannot consider a 13 year old female to be my intellectual and emotional “equal”; and if I were to be involved with one of these on this blog, it would be “child rape”!
2. My wife is my intellectual equal, and sometimes superior (depending upon the subject). When she challenges me, it is in a playful, non-confrontational manner; I usually respond by asking her for the source of her information and we can laugh together about reaching a valid compromise on a subject. A typical example of this interaction is her investment-choosing strategies (she is much better at this activity than I am).
3. One commentator decried the fact that she did not want to be a mother (it was her husband’s “insistence”) and claimed, by illustrating all the activities that she had to do for her only daughter, that it was overwhelming work. As a contrast, my wife and I produced 3 children in a 51 month period (we were both getting old when we married, so we had to “accelerate” our “babymaking” but we did not need any medical assistance to produce our children). This meant that my wife was at home with 3 small children for a number of years. Yet, before our daughter (middle child) was born, she worked for 18 months as a quality control engineer for a company that manufactured aircraft engines. I recognized that my wife had her “hands full” in those years; and that is why I cooked dinner half of the nights of the week, did the grocery shopping, assisted with the laundry, yard work and assisted her with ALL of the usual activities that both parents involve themselves with when they have young (<7 years of age) children. And I did this all the while holding a job that required international travel. And I am not claiming that I or my wife are therefore “perfect”; there is always someone who can claim that they did more. We simply did what we needed to do to provide for our family without getting into “territorial” disputes about who should be doing what!
4. Do I consider my wife to be strong, physically and emotionally? Absolutely!!! Is my wife smart? She has 3 degrees in different engineering and science subjects and has worked in each of those areas and at times was consequently the sole support of the family (at a middle class life “level”)! Conversely, my doctoral work was in nuclear physics; but my career was involved in sales and marketing of scientific products (so my wife did not “marry down”, nor did I, we married equals as man and woman).
5. Another observation that may have a profound influence on some readers of this blog: my wife is three inches taller than me (generally a “No-no” for some women, in my opinion typically insecure and neurotic). And my wife outweighs me (and when we first met). Nevertheless, because (at this point in time) I spent nearly a half a century weightlifting for exercise, I had no difficulty carrying her into the hotel room on our wedding night (and I am still reasonably “cut”).
6. Conclusion: if either person brings all the garbage of their past (and consequently some of their present psychological “non-negotiables”) into a possible relationship, it is not going to work.
One of the things that I noted from the blog were the comments from a number of the female writers about their success in a business context. Good for them; they will consequently easily understand the concept of a “breach of contract” in the context of a business relationship. It seems to me that none, to very few, have been a party to a marriage contract. In a typical marriage contract there is a “clause” regarding taking care of each other “for better and for worse”. All of these writers wanted to breach the contract if there is “worse” in a marriage (and I will guarantee that in a marriage that endures long enough there will be “worse” along with “better”). If that is their perspective, who would trust them in a business context???!!!
E 545
I think what also men don’t like are those so called self absorbed “hotties” that think the world is theres and their sh*t don’t stink. They think they are constantly always right and think just cause they think they are “hot” they should instantly move up the ladder just simply cause they think they are “hot”. They are these young, early 20′s to mid 20′s women that were those snot nose bratty women in highschool that thought they were the sh*t and they would also use their looks to get there way and think they could get through life just with their looks. I don’t think it’s not that men don’t like smart successful women but I think what men don’t like and hate are those women that use their looks to move up the ladder, don’t actually use their brains. The young so called self absorbed “hotties” men tend to avoid working with in the work place cause they tend to be the clamoring, I’m all that attitude.
I think for men in the work place they would rather work with smart successful women that are not the most attractive and older women that have been in the work place for several years cause these type of women actually work, actually think, and are over that women BS competitiveness. That’s what I think most men hate is that young, I’m all that attitude, totally immature, gossiping, water cooler ultra competitiveness bratty young women in the workplace.
George 546
Observer hit the nail on the head with the maturity thing. When you are a young child, your parents have to put up with you no matter what you do – in the mind of a five year old, that’s how love works. But as kids starts interacting with other kids, they learn that love goes both ways – your friends have expectations of you that have to be met if they are going to remain your friends. I’ve encountered more than my fair share of women who are convinced it’s a one way street, and my job is basically just to put up with her – that’s love in her mind. But seriously, if you’re always caught up in how smart, strong and successful you think you are, and are always bumping me to the bottom of your priority list, what real incentive do I have to stick around?
Ina 547
All these posts don’t agree with my experience. I am tall, attractive, have an MBA and am also a writer. I never hold back on my opinions with man. I used to do it before and was treated badly. The guys tend to fall for me no matter the education or power level. I must say that I really don’t care what a man does for a living or how rich he is, because I don’t need his money. On the other hand he must have emotional intelligence, kindness and be physically attractive to me. What I don’t like are man who have education, good jobs and therefore believe that they don’t need to make any effort, because a woman of their status should be “lucky” to date them. There was this guy with a Ph.D., good job, who didn’t make an effort not to dress like an old man. He just thought that his degree should be enough, forgetting that woman are visual creatures too. If I make an effort to look attractive and dress well, he should too. I like sensitive guys who are strong inside and not immature. The power a man has in the society is something I don’t care for and therefore had to dump many man who thought that their good job should seal the deal. I like passion for something in a man, not only him expressing a wish to start his little nuclear family with me in the kitchen. I like to cook and love children, but a man who takes me for granted and only looks at me as some tool to his power status as a family man, is bound to disappoint me. All man here keep talking about what they wan’t to have from woman, ever thought of giving something? You say woman should do this or that or stay without a man as a consequence. Didn’t it ever occur to you that women don’t want to sacrifice their personal development so that you can have it all. That is maybe why many of you are single or in frustrated relationships with wrong woman. Because all you want is to make woman into something she is not. The only thing that should be important is to fall in love. If you fall in love in a woman because she takes your kitchen as her new job, than you are not mature. Love is what counts, remember love, a word almost nobody mentioned on this tread. I was in love only once in my life. The guy was neither educated or rich, but he was kind despite going through some terrible life-experiences which resulted in illness. Unfortunately he died two years ago, was only 32 years old. If I never fall in love again, I will stay single and cherish his memory. Better single than with a man who thinks he can buy my love.
Paragon 548
I just want to clarify one thing here.
It is not that men actively dislike successful, high-status women.
It is just that they place no value on the same status indicators that women do – they care, first and foremost, about indications that speak to her potential as a mate(ie. communicated through her physical attractiveness, and indications of fidelity).
The reason for this, is because males have not evolved in receipt of the same kinds of mating benefits, that they themselves have provided – thus they have evolved very different considerations.
Females, on the other hand, have, out of evolutionary necessity, evolved more comprehensive concerns – that not only speak to indications of biological health(physical attractiveness, etc), but ALSO his ability to facilitate the concerns and welfare of his offspring.
This is an onerous position, in that it frequently poses trade-offs between considerations of value, that liberated women(in particular) are loathe to make.
Clare 549
I have a friend who is a classic example of what Evan is talking about. Very attractive, stylish dresser, high-powered career, extremely bright with a razor-sharp wit. I feel for her as she overestimates her worth as a partner based on these qualities, and experiences eternal pain that she is not in a relationship, whilst completely overlooking the fact that even a guy who is himself all of these things (the kind she will be attracted to) is looking for a girlfriend or wife who will make him feel a certain way.
She comes across as hard, sarcastic and self-involved, and whilst many guys may be initially dazzled by her, and some may want to be her friend because she is funny, they don’t want to date her.
You can be all of these things: smart, successful, beautiful, snappy dresser, but if you don’t make him happy you are missing the boat completely.
I have to agree with Evan, from what I’ve seen the quality men value most in a woman is being easygoing. I could add to this list gentle, warm, selfless, loving, fun. Forget about a throwback to the 1950s, these are good qualities to have as a human being.
And my opinion is, if you aren’t actually LOVING the other person, you are bring *zip* to a relationship, I don’t care how impressive your credentials are.
I care about this issue
Me off my soapbox now.
A 550
I just wanted to say this blog is EXACTLY my story!
I was all of those things with men and it is why my current bf didn’t want to date me. It wasn’t until I showed him “Warmth, affection, nurturing, thoughtfulness” that he saw me as a woman he wanted to date. He still admires the qualities I possess that allow me to be a successful entrepreneur but he has fallen in love with the qualities that allow me to be a great partner. He feels appreciated, valued, needed, just as you say, that is what a man wants.
Likewise my bf is a NICE guy. He does amazingly sweet things for me, is super loving, warm, supportive, gentle, romantic and nurturing. AND this doesn’t make him less attractive to me because he also has an opinion, can stand up for himself, is sexual assertive, confident and intelligent. He doesn’t constantly seek my approval or sacrifice his personal power.
So thank you for sharing Evan
And know that this smart, strong, successful woman learned how to be soft, warm, nurturing, supportive and loving in her relationship 
Naria 551
I notice a big difference in this between engineers/IT employees and men in my own field (law) and my husband’s (dentistry). Its comparitively rare for mid level lawyers, and more rare for doctors and dentists to marry “down”. Whereas nearly all the engineers I know have wives and girlfriends without degrees/careers.
Kemas 552
well, the reason why women don’t date a too-good man because being too good means having no leadership attitude and being easy to oppress or in other words, the more good you are the more submissive you are. you see that women’s instinct tells them that they feel insecure when they are with this kind of man.
a good man should have leadership attitude. you are good when you help people or are active to find solutions for problems but of course you must not be so easy to be fooled by people. you have to make sure you are someone who is good but knows many things beyond your woman does and can be assertive, logical, rational, and strong.
Robert in Toronto 553
So much over analysis. The answer is #2 with the following typo correction: you are SELF-Centered. The day you get over yourself you will be approached by many.
Paragon 554
@ Kemas
“well, the reason why women don’t date a too-good man because being too good means having no leadership attitude and being easy to oppress or in other words, the more good you are the more submissive you are. you see that women’s instinct tells them that they feel insecure when they are with this kind of man.”
Of course, such men are also more likely to assert their own SELFISH interests.
Thus, they will pose a greater risk for infidelity and abandonment(unless a woman can justify the loyalty of such an ‘alpha’ male – which, evidently, many women cannot).
M 555
Not that men don’t like successful women, we do but men hate that cattiness, I’m better than anyone else attitude. Also young ladies just out of college ladies that become “managers” most men HATE. Young ladies make HORRIBLE just absolutely HORRIBLE managers/bosses. To most men it’s a big huge RED flag when we see or hear these young women or ladies are the managers/bosses. Most not all but most young newly or recent college grads haven’t a CLUE and have that competitiveness, bratty, “I’m all that”, water cooler BS. Women that are much much older and have much more experience like ladies in their very late 40′s, early to mid 50′s are generally great to work for cause they are completely over that competitiveness, water cooler BS and these much older ladies understand. Yet there are some younger ladies that make decent managers such as ladies that are on the (no offense) hefty side. They generally don’t like that water cooler bs, they generally don’t like the competitiveness bs.
Stella 556
In addition to having an advanced degree from an Ivy League college, owning a business, I come from a well known affluent family. I have gotten to the point that I don’t tell my dates my last name until the third date. Every time I tell them my last name, I see them try not to react followed by their assurance that my education and family’s wealth is not intimidating to them.
My last boyfriend, before he broke up with me, actually told me that I was the most sensitive, kind, loving, feminine person he ever knew. We had a wonderful connection and talked about so many things. I love a simple life and we took walks, went to parks and cooked meals together. I was interested in his hobbies and we talked about him all the time. After a few months of dating, he told me that he resented my education, my money, and my children’s ability to attend private schools. He said he thought I was great and very unpretentious, but his tone was very mean spirited as though I had a lot of nerve to come from privilege. Despite my inviting him to my family’s compound, or to go out on the boat with us, he never showed up. He would accept the invitation, to bail out at the last minute. After doing this two or three times, he said he could only imagine working at the compound and not be an invited guest. I NEVER made him feel that way and he assured me that I always made him feel welcome. This man told me after our third date that he loved educated women and he was comfortable with my family’s affluence. That turned out to be the farthest thing from the truth. This has happened to me a few times.
The other end of the spectrum is the guy who sees me as a meal ticket. I just can’t seem to find a middle ground.
I feel doomed to be alone forever.
Stella
Joe 557
Stella, you have my sympathies, you’re is a difficult position, operating within the outer ranges of cultural norms.
You’re exceptionally successful, from an exceptionally successful family. Many/most men aren’t looking for that (nothing wrong with you or your family). I know *I* wouldn’t want to enter a world where I would be such an alien as an average middle-class person…I simply wouldn’t belong, my social-class socialization would always be apparent.
For example, while I’ve been incredibly fortunate in my own personal success, and make very good money especially considering my upbringing and lack of a formal education, my perspective on money is certainly *very* different than yours. Every penny in my life has (historically) been important. I’ve never owned a new car, and was only able to purchase a car less than ten years old when I was 35.
Even today I have to watch my money (though I live a much more financially free life)…I would venture that this is something you never *truly* worried about.
I know this is true because in my twenties I dated “up”…but only by a modest class change. My GF at the time had incredibly different values and perspectives. As a much more experienced man now, I can look back and see the great stresses we experienced that were a direct result of the class difference…and it was a relatively small class difference (blue collar to white collar).
Sadly I don’t have a great answer for you, other than you’re smart to keep your name to yourself initially, hold some of that info back until you both can understand each other some. There *are* men out there for your circumstance, but, like every limiting factor, fewer than for the 25 year old who’s looking for a husband to marry and have a family, comes from a good family, and is square in the median with values/income/class.
Perhaps it would be useful to mentally model the kind of man who would do well as a partner for you, given your circumstances. You could then use that as a guide to understand the attributes of men you meet – and identify which ones appear to be helpful.
Best Wishes
Peter 558
@Stella. A lot of upper class young women in the UK end up with men 10 or 20 years older in order to match status. I think I am in the same kind of relationship in Russia. She is 36 and I am a 60 year old outsider. Her 26 year old sister is dating a 45 year old (ex death metal rock star – really bad choice – they trade psychoses rather than neuroses. Sporty engineers are more stable and live in women free environments
). Father was the communist party boss in a large city and is still hugely influential and mother was the Vice Chancellor (Principal in American) of a major University. In their city their surname causes a sort of shrinking away or fawning supplication.
Are “Ratchet Girls” Winning? | A Break from the Norm 559
[...] say a large number of men) don’t want a career woman either. Why? It’s because the educated women aren’t offering men much that they can’t already get on their own. (Also, I think [...]
Kelloggirl 560
I think Seinfeld said it best: Women need to like the job of the guy they’re with. If they don’t like the job, they don’t like the guy. Men know this. Which is why we make up the phony, bogus names for the jobs that we have. “Well, right now, I’m the regional management supervisor. I’m in development, research, consulting…” Men on the other hand – if they are physically attracted to a woman – are not that concerned with her job. Are we? Men don’t really care. Men’ll just go, “Really? Slaughterhouse? Is that where you work? That sounds interesting. So whaddaya got a big cleaver there? You’re just lopping their heads off? That sounds great! Listen, why don’t you shower up, and we’ll get some burgers and catch a movie.”
From one “smart successful woman” to others: Wake up and smell the slaughterhouse, sisters.
franko 561
these type of women are usually a turn off for me, because many of them think that they are all that. since many women nowadays make a lot more money than many of us men do, they seem to go for the rich men instead.
hunter 562
….aaahhh. franko, I disagree with you…there are all kinds of women out there…trouble is most of them, rarely go to public places…they stay in their own little circles…
hunter 563
kelloggirl, my problem is meeting these high profile sweet hearts, most are very busy, borderline workaholics…
Realist 564
It is sad that your all making pathetic excuses for men’s childish and pathetic behaviour and refusal to grow some bals and be a man. Men want, men need etc. Nobody cares what men need.
Notice the way that most divorces are intiated by women and most women who divorce, never remarry again – by choice.
Men have 1001 excuses for their childish, selfish and pathetic behviour. Every advancement in a woman’s life is a personal slight.
Yes we are in the age of “Why are men relevant” because other than sperm donation, they are not even necessary.
Lucy 565
“Yes we are in the age of “Why are men relevant” because other than sperm donation, they are not even necessary.” Wow. That is so harsh. There are lots of good men out there. I’ve never ever had that thought about men or objectified them like that.
starthrower68 566
Guys, I hate to tell you this, but until the economy dramatically improves, there are going to be a great many quality women that have to work 2 jobs to make ends meet and perhaps provide for children as a single parent (yes, I know single moms are not too popular here but I’m not going down that path). Obviously some women AND men are workholics; but many balanced people would not choose to do so. As a quality single mom working two jobs, I’m not doing it so that I can keep men at arms’ length; I have obligations and responsibilities and I am dealing with those and not expecting to land a guy that will do it for me. Would I love to meet a great guy who wants to commit and likely grow old with me? Absolutely. But I can’t count on that happening because I don’t have the “it” factors that we regularly discuss here so I have to prepare for that not to happen. With regard to women staying our own little circles, you would not like it any better if we didn’t cultivate a life apart from you and had to have you to have a life. The neediness would scare you off. So a wise woman will be a complete, fulfilled person on her own. Unless she is purposely refusing you, she will find balance between her life apart from you and her relationship with you.
Karl R 567
Realist said: (#564)
“most women who divorce, never remarry again – by choice.”
Rose M. Kreider of the U.S. Census Bureau wrote:
“Most men and women marry within 5 years of divorce.”
If you want to convince me that you’re a realist, you might want to avoid making up “facts”.
Ashe 568
Men in hunter-gather communities prefer smart, strong women who can take care of themselves. I think that’s as close to “natural” as we can get. Before civilization, every person in the community needed to be able to pull their own weight. Today, women are encouraged to sit back and let men to all the heavy lifting when that’s actually against nature. We’re all meant to pull our own weight, and telling women that they need to stop being strong, opinionated, or intelligent just because “society says so” is against nature. Don’t worry about finding a guy. If you feel you have to tone yourself down just to be acceptable to a man, don’t do it. It’s not you, and it’s not your nature. True, it takes an enlightened individual to see above the vomit that society projects onto you, and those are pretty hard to find. If you really want kids, you may just have to settle and fake who you are, if you can stand it. Or, you can hold out for a guy that actually values you for pulling your own weight in a relationship and not being a typical deadbeat wife or girlfriend. Those are too common as it is.
Martha Chang 569
Four words:
Taming of the Shrew.
kirakira 570
Another reason why men aren’t worth it. You can take your bitter pill and shove it up your ass, if you think the things I am aren’t “ideal feminine traits” then I don’t care. I don’t want a man to take control of anyone but himself, I want equal control of the situations too.
Michelle 571
Sometimes I think we can get too focused on the ultimate outcome (be it marriage or whatever) we try too hard and forget to enjoy the moment. Once we start enjoying the moment, that’s when things seem to fall into place. I have tried many different tactics and followed many pieces of advice in order to either find a relationship or keep one going and frankly it was exhausting. Now that I’ve stopped trying to “be” something or “not be” something and started just enjoying the experiences as they come, things are a lot easier and I’ve had more luck. I haven’t found anyone that I want to settle down with just yet but that’s ok. Life is good whether I’m with someone or not.
Grace 572
Great blog and great comments. My two cents would be as follows. Men like what they like. Some men like smart and successful. Some men don’t. Some men want an equal partner financially and intellectually and some don’t. I have had men not be interested in me because of my brain, my hair color, my height, my weight (20 lbs overweight, ok), my age and any number of things that I might not even be aware of. On the other hand, I have dated men who loved the fact that I am smart and have a good paying job as well as a sweet nature and a good sense of humor. I think it is a mistake to generalize and say “all” men don’t like successful women, but I would agree that some men don’t want to date a smart and successful woman. The heart wants what it wants.
melvin polatnick 573
The social life of an Alpha male is not complex, he sees each woman as self-centered and goal oriented. As one in demand the Alpha male fully controls the situation, he pays little and gets a lot. Most women are left in tears as the Alpha male moves on to fresh pastures many times leaving behind an unsupported litter. The opposite is true for the wimp; he bears the burdens of the Alpha Male. Most unwed mothers find a wimp to help support themselves and the children of the Alpha male. Unfortunately 80% of men are wimps who would rather pay for the wanton pleasures of the Alpha Male than stay single and masturbate in their mother’s basement.
LadyBird 574
Evan,
I understand the point you’re making: the qualities we as women value about ourselves so much (success, drive, ambition, grit, strength) actually don’t score us points for men’s attraction.
If I enumerate some of my qualities, they would be: pretty, sexy body, fun, nice, cool and popular, sexy dancer. But I also have others: strength, leadership, ambition, intellect, drive, achievement, dedication. I find that men see the first set of qualities and go: “great!” and when actually discover the second set of qualities go: “wait, but you seemed great, why can’t we just stick to the first set of qualities, I don’t need the rest”.
The point is that I really want a man for whom both sets of qualities matter a lot, and that he demands the second set of qualities as much as the first set. I think it’s not about realizing that men only want the first set of qualities — but about realizing that we should reject men who only want the first set of qualities.
Thanks!!
To Clare above who says about her friend “I feel for her as she overestimates her worth as a partner based on these qualities”: I think that her friend should be exactly who she is; this is her strength and this makes her absolutely great and sparkling! I don’t look down upon women like Clare; I have sympathy for women like Clare who are more mellow, easy going, soft-spoken, not assertive and extroverted, not leaders, and don’t shine. Clare also has her qualities. The way we don’t look down upon women as Clare who don’t shine, women like Clare shouldn’t look down upon us either for shining. There is a “train” for both type of women and hopefully we all find what we are looking for: irrespective of whether leaders or not.
To Observer,
I would like to congratulate you on your life story. It seems like you really share a great relationship.
I don’t think we can stigmatize many of the women expressing frustration here: they are venting out their disappointments; there is nothing wrong with that. I think it’s perfectly normal to feel resentment that society places different emphasis on qualities for men and woman and something that you’ve sacrificed so much for and worked so much for, all of a sudden not only doesn’t matter — but could even be a minus. That’s what the resentment comes from: not being appreciated (and even being punished for) something which is obviously great about you — but only if you are a man, not if you are a woman. If you are a woman, it doesn’t count. This feels like injustice.
It’s good when women vent those feelings in a forum, why not?
To the comment above on “calling someone on BS”, I think that some men — who want to just have an easy ride and be able to get away with a lot — prefer a woman who won’t be that smart because they want to control them. That is true. If someone is calling someone on their BS, the rude person is not the whistle blower but the person trying to get away with BS.
Of course, I don’t mean simple disagreement on a topic — we can’t call that BS. But if the guy for example is cheating and the woman catches him on that BS and confronts him on the spot — and he says “that’s why I prefer not so smart women so that I can do whatever I want and not be confronted about” — that means that the smart woman has all the right to challenge him — and do so in a confrontational manner. As my boss used to say, it’s not the words — it’s the act that’s obscene.
On the other hand, if you have a more easy going soft-spoken woman, and you cheat on her, she won’t confront you directly. She will sit quietly. Many of my GFs do that. So of course a guy would prefer someone not very smart and outspoken, because he can get away with a lot.
I really like JR’s comment. It is about owning up exactly to your character and realizing you have to reject a big pool of men — the men who don’t demand success, leadership and strength from a woman but prefer other women.
hunter 575
…most men don’t know…that unless the man is really good looking…the ratio of meeting a beautiful woman and getting her phone number…is 1 out of 10 that we approach……..
Joe 576
@ Realist # 564
[i]It is sad that your all making pathetic excuses for men’s childish and pathetic behaviour and refusal to grow some bals and be a man. Men want, men need etc. Nobody cares what men need. [/i]
Well Realist, you don’t date or want a man in your life then?
Because if you don’t care what men want, then why should any man care what YOU want?
How’s this approach been working for you?
But thanks very much for bringing this up, because much like Martha Changs wonderful comment above (“Taming of the Shrew”), your point has really simplified much of what is being said here: as a woman, it’s your role to give your man what he wants/needs, as it is his role to give you what you want/need.
The “trick” is to find a partner with whom giving and receiving is complementary – you’re both able to give what the other wants.
LadyBird 577
That’s good Joe. Strong women do want to feel appreciated and admired for all they’ve achieved. And of course if they can find a partner who does and appreciates them specifically for these qualities, then they also reciprocate with being a purring loving cat. It works both ways. What we don’t want to accept is having to tone down and having to not show openly and up-front we’re proud of what we have achieved (as if it’s a bad pill to be taken in small dozes) because it makes some men feel uncomfortable and not as men enough.
LadyBird 578
The way a guy likes it when a woman lays her head on his chest and admires him for his masculinity, the same way we want to hear: wow, you are amazing for having achieved so much. It’s simple
Let’s hope it works both ways.
debbie 579
I have never been with a guy who had such a fragile ego as my ex-boyfriend. it is one thing to disagree with another opinion. It is entirely another to get mad and defensive when you call him out his actions and he gets angry because you have the nerve to point it out and hurt his feelings. GIve me a break. I do not make being meana policy by ANY stretch of the imagination but after you treat someone in a dishonest way around important issues don’t play victim and make it about your hurt feelings and not your actions.
Can’t hear anything about himself unless it is in a super nice and soft/gentle way and he will allow it and even then, he will be dishonest about it.
YUCK. Very successful. Very smart. Top of his field. And, it went right to his big fat head.
Some girl 580
I know a girl who asks the same question, “I’m just being honest, why are all my friends avoiding me?” This applies to relationships with women and women as well. I feel that reinforcing age old gender stereotypes and roles is simply behind the times, it’s not about women not being “feminine” or needing to be “nurturing”. Ugh, fuck that shit. I’m a pretty opinionated individual, and I am an analytical thinker. I will say things as it is if it is NEEDED. However, I understand the idea of tact and thus I will not verbally dissect people if it is uncalled for. The girl I mentioned above, the things she says can be very brutal and THAT is what repels people. That is the issue here, she simply needs to soften her words and treat people more gently. Stop with the “girls need to be feminine and nurturing and submissive!!” It’s simply an issue of treating other human beings as human beings. Either gender could learn from that.
Stephanie 581
It matters not whether you are a man or a woman… Be yourself and people will either have the capacity to appreciate you or not! It is far better to keep your self esteem and stay single than to build a “relationship” on lies from the start. Is it really worth it to dumb yourself down just to be with someone else???? It’d be far better to grow a pair and learn to love yourself for who you are!
hunter 582
stephanie,
….most men don’t know they don’t have to lie to get sex….
Sinkyokot 583
That should save $$$ for any man to marry a woman with $$$, so nobody bitches about alimony and child support.
Enough said.
Sab 584
Hi. I agree with some of what you’ve said but do feel a need to point out the use of the word ‘emasculating’. There is no such act, just like there is no equal and opposite word which would, if it existed, be effeminating. A person is either secure in their sex as male or female or they are not. I understand that a man wishes to feel strong, attractive & masculine with his partner in the same way as a woman wants to feel safe, attractive and feminine with hers, but this isnt always the feeling that occurs and if it was never there it
may be because it is the wrong person to be with. If it was once active but is no longer, it is most likely caused by both people.
Joe 585
@ladyBird #577
“Strong women do want to feel appreciated and admired for all they’ve achieved.”
This the whole point of this blog post – most men don’t care about those achievements – or at least those achievements are (generally) not what attract men, or what men (again – generally) desire from women.
We don’t get to choose what other people find attractive. We only get to choose how we’re going to respond to them.
Nissa 586
It’s because he’s doesn’t have masculine energy. It’s because he constantly seeks the approval of others. It’s because he’s not sexually aggressive. It’s because he sacrifices his personal power to be conciliatory.
I love your point here, because I think a lot of guys miss it. I would LOVE LOVE LOVE a nice guy who was confident enough to ask me out, to be sexually agressive enough to appreciate my body without being inappropriate, who knows himself well enough to hold boundaries with me and his family.
I have dated nice guys that I kept dating in spite of no chemistry because they were good human beings. However, I didn’t want to take their clothes off. The biggest reason for this was that they came across as passive – not confident – not sure of themselves – didn’t know what they liked or wanted. It was hard to want someone who acted like what they had to offer wasn’t that great.
Sophia 587
I don’t know about smart usually = difficult and that’s why men don’t choose intellectual women. Today on the show Ready for Love, the UPenn grad who started his own healthcare business had a choice between four women he’d never seen. He chose a model and a jet salesperson over a woman with an MBA and a JD. All were gorgeous, and none said anything remarkably different from one another other than their professions. In my opinion, she likely would have been the best match for him, but he didn’t choose her. It was clearly her education that disqualified her.
Joe 588
@Sophia # 587 He’s probably dated his share of the MBA/JD types, and has developed a bias from experience…I know I have.
The thing is that such women (women who are clearly driven to compete as evidenced by their chosen fields) oftendon’t make for fun dates/partners because of that competitive nature.
As Evan has said repeatedly – (most) men don’t want to compete with a woman – and a woman who lives to compete is likely to not hang up that hat when she gets home.
Bob 589
@Sophia
It does bring a whole host of negative stereo-types to mind regardless of sex.
The model and ‘jet’ salesperson sound more exciting and interesting. How often would you get a chance to date someone who does that? MBA or JD don’t bring fun or excitement to mind.
Also I wouldn’t expect a relationship to develop from struggling actors looking for exposure on a dating show. At least that is how I view dating or reality shows. What proof did they offer besides their words that these were real everyday people and not people trying to break into acting?
Paul 590
most of the women that are very strong and successful, want a man with a very large bank account. it is very hard for a woman to accept the man for who he is, since many of them have very high paying jobs today. years ago many women did accept their men for who they were since both men and women were hardly making any money back then. the sad thing is, the women that have the high paying job today now think that they are all that.
Jay 591
these type of women that are very successful certainly have an attitude problem, and it is such a waste of time meeting them since they really don’t want to be bothered at all when you try to start a conversation with the one that will attract us. women are certainly much nastier these days, and they are nothing like the real ladies that existed years ago. it is very obvious why many of us good straight men can’t meet a good woman anymore since they are so very impossible to meet nowadays, and many of them now like to curse at us when we will approach them. there is nothing wrong with my approach, and it is certainly not my fault that women have become so very mean today. when you compare the women of today to the ones years ago, they were much more better educated back then.