I've noticed how a large portion of the female population in American Society lean toward the more dominating men and experience abusive and unfulfilling relationships. I am one of the romantic men who strive to make every experience for women one in which they feel lavished and worshipped. I believe society should be matriarchal because it is women who perpetuate humanity's existense. You are all goddess', unique and beautiful. But back on topic, I'd like to ask any women on totse, would you rather be with a man who objectifies you and tries to control your life, or a man who is gentle, passionate and poetic; striving for your happiness and pleasure? Just give me your thoughts and insight into this issue.

I couldn't agree with you more, though I also believe this doesn't mean being a pushover..as many of the "dominating" types seem to think we are. I've also found that the mindset you describe definately shows in the bedroom, and that many women absolutely love it.

What irks me the most is the types who put on the act to get the girl, then completely change. Which sadly, describes most of my buddies.

Nokio

Pussies.

Chicks don't want to date other chicks (unless they swing that way). They want a man, and obviously you do not meet the qualifications.

A real man is someone who can respect a woman's individuality and celebrate them for who they are. Not an egotistical chauvanist who thinks women are their own personal masturbatory devices.

Hate to say it, but personal experiences tell me otherwise. But hey, everyone has what works for them. Call us what you want, but if it works for us, I doubt we are going to change.

Nokio

Edit: This is in reference to Pea's post.

[This message has been edited by Nokio (edited 07-04-2004).]

Unwyred, you are destined to attract high-maintenance golddigger type women with that mindset. Romance is one thing, but putting them on a pedestal is taking things close to a Dom/sub relationship, with you as the sub.

*Shakes Nokio's hand*

Good man.

quote:Originally posted by pathogen:

Unwyred, you are destined to attract high-maintenance golddigger type women with that mindset. Romance is one thing, but putting them on a pedestal is taking things close to a Dom/sub relationship, with you as the sub.

I'd rather be viewed as submissive by other men, than to be viewed as a tyrant by women.

quote:

"Unwyred, you are destined to attract high-maintenance golddigger type women with that mindset."

I don't understand this statement. I fail to see where monetary worth plays in. I am fairly sure there are many women who would adore a guy that treats them so well regardless of their monetary value.

Nokio

As much as I enjoy this conflict between the Chivalrists and the Chauvanists; are there any women with insight on this subject?

I'm female, and I can't stand the chauvenistic types. Personally, I like romantic guys better; artsy, insane painter guys with chemical problems are better. Or just other girls. I'm fed up with guys at the moment..

But the 'a woman wants a real man, who'll go out and shoot squirrels for breakfast' yada yada yada...is quite a turnoff.

quote:Originally posted by Nokio:

quote:

"Unwyred, you are destined to attract high-maintenance golddigger type women with that mindset."

I don't understand this statement. I fail to see where monetary worth plays in. I am fairly sure there are many women who would adore a guy that treats them so well regardless of their monetary value.

Nokio



Take a woman that wants/needs to be lavished/worshipped (Unwyred's words not mine). Give her a homeless guy that will kiss the ground she walks on. He'll go panhandle for money everyday to make her life the best he can, share his space under the bridge with her. Give her a middle-class guy making 40K a year. He offers her a small apartment in an okay part of town and dinner at Chili's or T.G.I. Friday's maybe once a week. Give her Joe Executive, a well established Real Estate Investor making 180K a year. He takes her out regularly to nice places, buys her jewelry and clothes, takes her to vacation spots middle class dude can't afford and bridge guy can only dream of.

They all are decent looking guys. They all worship the ground she walks on. She finds them to be equally attractive with all the qualities she could ever want in a mate, but, she really is into the lavishing/worshipping... WHO DOES SHE PICK?

You are missing the entire point of this thread, pathogen. What I'm getting at is emotional lavishing/worship. How you treat a girl emotionally. It seems that materialistic people just simply cannot grasp this concept.

The problem with presenting this hypothetical situation is that the woman can be tailored to match exactly what you are trying to prove with no leeway..which isn't so true in real life.

Ok anyways..

I believe the topic of the thread was discussing the two different points of view towards women. My point was that many women will choose a guy based on their chilvalris rather than chauvanistic actions/beliefs no matter what they make for money. (Yes I'm stealing your words, Unwyred

That being said, in your example she would equally go for any of the guys since they all share the same chivalristic qualities.

All you seem to be doing is placing value upon the material things that the woman is given, giving the more expensive things a higher "value".

Ultimately the "value" of what she gets can only be determined by her. Because of this, I think if you presented this situation to a group of people you would get many different responses since different people don't value things equally.

Nokio

Edit: Just a few changes to try to make it clearer.

[This message has been edited by Nokio (edited 07-04-2004).]

Couldn't have said it better myself, Nokio.

And thank you for your input on this PsychoFlower, although I'm not quite sure what you mean by chemical problems (bi-polar perhaps?) Anyone else care to comment?

I think the options stated are extremes, at either end of the spectrum. There's plenty of room in between.

As always, this depends on the individual.

Take me, for example. I like to think I'm a nice person with a good heart and above average intelligence. But I can get bossy, bitchy and arrogant easily, and I become downright unreasonable and incomprehensible while PMSing. So, I need a guy with strong self-esteem, who's smarter than me and also is basically a decent person. Someone who doesn't take my snits personally and doesn't get pissed off when I'm not the nicest person. But also someone who knows when someone's messing with him and doesn't take guff or drama. I can, and do, defer to such a guy.

I think too many people make gf/bf choices before they really know themselves well enough to know what they want.

i know this: if i walked around with some chick kissing my ass all the time, id quickly lose interest.

anyway, im sure ppl who read my posts think im a 'dominating asshole.' this, however, does not affect my ability to take suggestions as to how to make the woman have a better time. verbal or otherwise.

your thought of my type lacks the subtlty of a 3rd grader.

quote:Originally posted by Unwyred:

... You are all goddess', unique and beautiful...

How many times have you used this line?

I think a better phrasing of my topic would be: Chauvinism versus Chivalry; your views and insights.

I see what you mean Cindy, I especially agree with the fact that people sometimes make choices on who they want to be with before they know themselves. This was the case with my last girlfriend, who wanted to be with a chauvinist.

quote:I think too many people make gf/bf choices before they really know themselves well enough to know what they want.

Couldn't agree with you more.. myself included heh. [/rhetorical on]And isn't that part of what dating is about? Finding out what you like and don't like?

Nokio

quote:Originally posted by thequin88:

How many times have you used this line?

I don't use it as a "line" I say it to express my beliefs.

I don't think I'm missing the point of your thread Unwyred. As for how you treat her emotionally, in my view, we are equals trying to connect, find a middle ground to base a relationship on. I'm not into one-nighters, I'd rather steer towards being in a relationship that I feel is going somewhere. If I feel in my heart that I worship her, it won't work for me if I don't feel she's on the same level and that's a two-way street.

Let's get this straight right here, I am not trying to flame you or belittle your thread, I see where you are coming from. IF the feelings you are exuding in your hypothetical scenario are returned by the woman in the same, this is going past the generalization you posted. There's a big difference in "generally" kissing a woman's ass (worshipping) her to get her attention as opposed to dating/meeting and falling in love. And when you're in love, you'll do what you can to keep her, regardless of the titles and societal expectations imposed upon you.

I hope this makes some sense... I'm pretty drunk.

Sorry about the misunderstanding. I do understand what you mean and agree with you. The difference is that I do hold women in higher regard than men. A relationship should be based upon a plane of equals, but I believe the woman plays the more important role in society than men.

why are they better? cause they give birth? its just a biological thing, nothing they chose.

let me know why.

I didn't say they were better. I said I held them in higher regard and they were more important.

They are the ones who perpetuate humanity. Men are but the seed. Women are the nurturers and the providers of life. I think that deserves a lot of respect. More than is credited. But not everyone agrees with me and that is okay. I only have a problem with the percentage of men who demean them and objectify them.

Heh...by chemical problems, I meant something more along the line of being a recreational drug user. So I suppose I meant to say 'a fondness for mind-altering substances, but not an addiction'. Drugs are fun.