14

Is this what men want?

Posted by jimslag 3 years, 8 months ago to Culture
47 comments | Share | Flag

If this what we want then I have not found it yet. 2 wives and numerous girlfriends and I don't think that woman the article talks about exists. I guess it is meant to still be searching or something like that.
SOURCE URL: https://www.yahoo.com/news/truth-men-choose-woman-apos-143500169.html


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ Dobrien 3 years, 8 months ago
    I always find these advice columns lacking. I have seen many long term marriages dissolve during times of difficulty and adversity.
    If you want a partner in helping with the day to day chores great but you would be wise to hire the help instead of marrying. The idea of finding a woman that allows you to be better is more reasonable to seek.
    I say for long term success a couple needs to build a strong foundation of basic common goals.
    The me can be there if the we is the priority for both. The care, love and support will not be an even exchange at all times but should be there when needed. Chemistry is a given. Marriage and relationships require attention just like any quality effort. Do not underestimate the value of communication , know what you want and need from your spouse and tell them, just because you might be able to anticipate needs ,your lover may not. Teach and be taught. To share all that life and living offers with someone else is a gift to be cherished.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 3 years, 8 months ago
      Wow, "Dear Dob"...haven't read you column before...laughing, of course your spot on.
      I think men especially would like a spouse that will support them in their efforts to succeed.
      "The women behind the man" seems to come to mind and of course ladies...it could be the other way around too or both at the same time.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 years, 8 months ago
    I had two unsuccessful marriages behind me when I met my soulmate. Forty years later, it still works well. She's an artist and I'm an engineer, and we've learned to enjoy the added perspective we give to each other's view of the world.

    The first indication I had that I'd finally found my real mate was on our first date. I was pontificating on something, and she grinned at me and said "You're so full of s**t." It took me a minute to get over the shock of her comment, but then I realized I'd never have to guess what was on her mind. I'd been married to a woman who would pout for a week over something I said, or didn't say, or did, or didn't do, and it was a guessing game, with her admonishing me "If you really loved me, you'd know what's wrong."

    To this day I've never had to guess what's on my sweetheart's mind, and it makes life much easier. She always says she tells the truth and is prepared to run like hell if I don't like it. For me it's all about honesty and trust. Once that's established, everything else takes care of itself.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 years, 8 months ago
    Yes. Self-love.
    It's nice if it all falls into place where one person wants to clean and the other person wants to maintain the car. The trick is figuring it out, which requires clear communication. Some people (usually men) don't get hints and need it spelled out: "I sort of enjoy cleaning the car but can't stand getting under the hood. Do you mind if I cleaned up a bit, or do you already have it how you like it? Would you mind checking out how a noise my car has been making, or is it better just to take it to a mechanic?" The other person has to be strong enough to be honest: "I'd love if you wanted to clean up. I don't enjoy getting under the hood either, so we should take it to the mechanic, but maybe I could cook a nice meal and clean up the kitchen; I like doing that; and you could clean the car if you enjoy it."

    When my wife and I first got married, we were uncomfortable turning things over to each other. We were 32 y/o, and we knew how to hire IT companies and attorneys and take care of ourselves. Ten years later, I have her read contracts and I blindly sign them. She has me set up her electronics and re-balance our portfolio, trusting I'm taking precautions to keep her clients' data and our wealth safe. She used to be annoyed when attorneys, accountants, brokers, insurance agents, put my name first on documents. Now she likes it because she doesn't want to deal with formulas and models anyway, and who cares if some nitwit thinks I'm the "man of the house".

    It took a long time to figure this out, and I'm not saying I have it all figured out.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Stormi 3 years, 8 months ago
    I think if a woman has to "get a guy to marry her" that is a problem to begin with. It smacks of manipulation. That does not even factor in the obsession some gals have with weddings, only to find they don't even know the groom really. Rand's heroines learned that they had to be whole, not closed off, but secure in their own identity, before they were ready for her heroes. You cannot need marriage, it has to be a growt situation h for both. I remember sitting in a restaurant listening to two guy, both divorced, talking about dating.One ha just demped the flavor of the month, because he said he could not talk with her about anything. His buddy agreed with his view. Sinatra once said he would not waste time dating stupid women, as after 10 minutes, thee was nothing to talk about. Sometimes we think it is all about looks and sex, and that men are superficial, but they are actually smarter than many women think. The game playing bachelorettes may get the attention, and may get the marriage, but when they drop the pretend being act, reality becomes hard. Rand would advise, be your best self, and your most authentic self, marriage will come when it is right.I have had so many guy pals over the years, who would come for advice with their latest dats, and I have had two husbands. The first brief marriage started with admiration for my independence, but collapsed when I insisted on decision making be between us, not a group hug with his mom and dad, and definitely no taking money from them. That is how I felt adults should function, he liked clinging on to dependence. This second marriage has survived 47 years, after meeting at work, we grew from there.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 years, 8 months ago
      "I think if a woman has to "get a guy to marry her" that is a problem to begin with."
      I agree that entire message. I think some young women think they have "pay their dues", as it were, putting up with boyfriends' idiosyncrasies for a while, and then once you get serious all that weirdness will have to go. I almost think they tell girls that the nature of dating is to put up with stuff you don't like, never say it aloud, and then once you snag him he won't mind your changing fundamental things about him.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Stormi 3 years, 8 months ago
        Girls are definitely getting the wrong message from both schools and the media. First, they are not taught to be individuals, but rather to rely on peers rather than self. Then the media comes along and tells them they need to act like sluts, dress like whores, and smell like a the alluring fragrance of the day to get the guy who will make them eternally happy. They don't even explore who they are or might be, they don't focus on work, they don't love cars (unless it is a limo to the church). Advertising, dumb sitcoms, and painted up singers solidify that route to marital success. They don't focus on how many broken marriages these people have had, and how they end up alone, but not happy with being with "self". As a reporter, I sometimes had to cover school stories, and was amazed at how little the women's lib thing has advanced teen girls. They still actually talk about getting pregnant to land a guy! Geez, we were more advanced in the 60s!
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 years, 8 months ago
          "we were more advanced in the 60s!"
          I know, and I don't get why we've gone backwards on this issue. It's almost like we think sexism has been nailed so we can now encourage kids to indulge in the fantasy of being a princess who a prince will rescue and provide all material and spiritual support. If you raise an eyebrow to it, they'll say the girls have "leadership skills" because they're comfortable demanding what they want like a boss. I'm all for getting what you want, but that comes by fair trades giving others what they want. Feminism has gone way backwards in my lifetime. When I was a kid and had my Free to Be record, I knew it was not correct to call toys boy toys or girl toys, even though most boys/girls tend to chose certain types of toys. Now if you're a little kid who likes a toy associated with other sex, people wonder if they're transgender. Maybe some of them are, but often it's just individuals doing their own thing, and we feel we have to shoehorn them into a group.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ Stormi 3 years, 8 months ago
            You have described it perfectly. It is a combination of the entitlement teaching in schools, the rush to label people and make them focus on sexual identity in kindergarten. For years they have said boys need to not play with guns. My dad taught this gal to shoot when I was 8, with responsibility. I have not killed anyone ...yet! Then they are against cars, cars bad, so all the fun we had checking out the new models, gone. Girls are not getting the work ethic thing, they whine, they protest, but they don't apply themselves to work.Your "free to Be" was headed by one of the biggest ball buster nasty women around, Marlo. Her dad was so wonderful, and she is nothing like him.Feminism is about hate and anger just as is rape. As a kid, a lot of boys liked gir;sl toys, just as I like boy/s toys, and we had a great time without any labels on toys. My dad taught me to throw a football properly, but also signed me up for sewing classes at a local dept. store.Just as a guy should know how to sew on a button as well as when to change his car's oil. If schools would just teach academics and let lids grow up whole individuals, we would not be in the mess we are in.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jdg 3 years, 8 months ago
    This seems to me incredibly air-headed -- and I doubt it was written by a man.

    I chose never to marry, and have not regretted it. But if I were in that market, the fact that a woman has an agenda that involves changing me would be an absolute red flag. I'm fine the way I already am. The woman I'd want to be with is already fine too.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 3 years, 8 months ago
    This article, while amusing, consists mostly of B.S.
    It states things as facts with no corroboration to speak of, at all. To impose general rules on men is as silly as trying to "understand women." Which has been a male outcry for centuries. The most they can say with any truth or accuracy, is that these statements may be true with certain men sometimes.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 3 years, 8 months ago
    It's tough if one in the relationship is continually learning, growing, trying different things and adapting to new knowledge...my wife hates change...didn't know that 25 years ago.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 3 years, 8 months ago
    I think a man who wants polygamy needs his head examined. Forget about imprisonment in anything other than a mental institution. Legal marriage is pretty much a BAD idea even to one other person in this society, let alone to several people !
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Stormi 3 years, 8 months ago
      Polygamy is like being a politician, which one philosopher described as "the grandest form of slavery." There is not freedom, only trying to please too many others.I grew up not too concerned about marriage, enjoyed dating and my work. I had freiends who planned their weddings in every detail, but had not yet picked the "perfect" mate. It They never once considered if they were a perfect mate. When my first marriage failed after a couple years, I saw it as a mutual but beneficial failure.I did not look closely enough at his lack of independendence from his parents, and did not realize fully how much my independence was a tribute to my parents. There also has to be humor or nothin will survive. When the cat throws up, the kid totals a car but is unhurt, or or storms take down giant pine trees, you have to be able to find something in it all to laugh about and move forward. My cureent husband is the tax guy, loves it, I am the IT person, our personal and business partnership works well with the merged talents. When we remodel, we both love getting into it. When the car has a noise, I explain it to the mechanic, I grew up with cars and being around my dad. My husband loves the time mowing grass, it is his religion. I hate mowing, but love planting tree starts and bushes.We could not agree on the methods of our broker, so we have two brokers, and everyone is happy. You have to learn to disagree and accept you are two different people. The hardest lesson for me learned in the first failed marriage, was to let go of the illusion, the other person would supply your happiness, without your having to do anything about it. T That illusion would have been a very big burden, no matter who the man was.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by coaldigger 3 years, 8 months ago
    For me, it started out by wanting to sneak home for lunch and a "nooner" but after 55 years it is because every Thursday is homemade pasta night. That is because I am a simple man but I know value when I see it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 3 years, 8 months ago
    Both of my wives read Ayn Rand before we got married. They don't get along, but I still work with and for my ex on occasion.

    In both cases, I married an equal. My first wife was smarter than me - maybe why it didn't work out... - but we were both committed to "equality of opportunity" when it came to work life and home life. In both case, our intellectual and aesthetic interests were different, but similar; our skills and interests were and are supplemental and complementary, sometimes congruent, occasionally identical. In both cases, My experience is pretty close to CG's.

    As for men being "helpful" and "doing things for..." for one thing, both people have to have that attitude of caring, or else the marriage is just about property rights across families, very olde worlde.

    I agree with FFA that Yahoo is not the place to look for insight and wisdom. The article was just a bunch of ignorant blather - a popcorn leaping out of our culture of the millennial moment -- but it opened the door to some discussion here.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 3 years, 8 months ago
    So here's the real question: if women want marriage why are they willing to give up their best leverage (sex) before then? It is the rare man who once he's experienced the physical outside of marriage is willing to constrain himself to it and get married. I've seen it happen over and over. Women: you are deluding yourselves if you believe that the only way to get married is to get physical. Nine times out of ten all its going to do is end up with you getting pregnant and him leaving. Make him walk the walk (down the aisle) and save yourself the pain and frustration.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jdg 3 years, 8 months ago
      Their best leverage is a bait-and-switch that has been the topic of endless jokes, but works. She begins by giving you not only sex but really good sex with all the bells and whistles. If you're like most guys, you naturally assume that if you marry her, you're going to keep getting those goodies for the rest of your life.

      Then as soon as she has the ring on her finger, bam! She now has what she wants and you can't take it back. So from then on, you're getting a lot less, and at the slightest provocation you're sleeping on the couch.

      If you let this happen, you've just learned Briffault's Law the hard way. https://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/c...

      Lessons here: (1) Don't marry. (2) Rather than be deceived as above, turn the tables. String her along by letting her think (but never actually saying) that someday you'll commit to her. As long as she believes that, you'll continue to get the goodies.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 3 years, 8 months ago
        If your marriage is based on a lie, why would anyone entertain the delusion that it will last? It doesn't matter which of the partners are lying! A stable and fulfilling marriage isn't based on deceit from either partner.

        And if you're the guy who just wants the sex without the commitment, you should know that psychological studies show that married men get more frequent and better sex...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jdg 3 years, 8 months ago
          How long ago were those studies made?

          Ultimately, both sides' sexual strategy either is based on (at least passive) deception, or loses, because each side has its own, perfectly valid goals and they are not compatible with each other.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 3 years, 8 months ago
            Pretty recent (last 10 years). Here's the report: https://ifstudies.org/wp-content/uplo...

            "Ultimately, both sides' sexual strategy either is based on (at least passive) deception..."

            I gathered from one of your other posts that you are not married. With that view of marriage I can see how you would have such negative views.

            My wife and I have been married for almost 20 years. We've had our rough patches as all marriages do, but there is no basis of deceit in it on either part. Have I seen deceit in marriages? Yup. And those are never happy or stable. But I've also seen the happy marriages where the husband and wife love each other and their children. And from personal experience there is nothing like it.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 years, 8 months ago
      " if women want marriage why are they willing to give up their best leverage"
      I can't tell if this sarcastic/ironic, but taken literally it is a hardcore insult to the women in question.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 3 years, 8 months ago
        It was meant to be taken literally and it came from my wife, actually. Guilty conscience maybe, but insult? I'm not quite sure how someone would take it as an insult but maybe you can explain.

        It's actually a very simple question of self-control and being willing to work towards what you want. Think of it as an investment in one's self. How can you invest yourself fully into a marriage (which is the ultimate commitment) when you've already spent much of your capital? And if you come in with little capital, it's going to take a lot longer for that capital to grow and become self-sustaining in comparison to someone who comes in with a lot of capital. There's also the security and risk to take into account: if you've ever "invested" in another relationship, the risk has been and always will be greater that you will repeat that action. The downside is that there really isn't any reward for the high risk, neither does "diversifying your portfolio" gain you anything.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jdg 3 years, 8 months ago
          The problem with thinking of it as a capital investment is that female beauty is the fastest-depreciating asset known to man.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 3 years, 8 months ago
            I'm not investing in beauty. I'm investing in a relationship. If my evaluation of the other person is purely physical and that is the only criteria, I'm going to have a pretty shallow and temporary relationship. If on the other hand I value that other person for their wit, their kindness, their willingness to put up with me day in and day out, their cooking skills (a big one to me), and a whole host of other characteristics... Well, there's a lot to consider and find value in beyond physical appearance. Of course I'm no Brad Pitt either...
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 years, 8 months ago
          "I'm not quite sure how someone would take it as an insult but maybe you can explain."
          It sounded like it was saying, "the best thing she's good for is...", which in my mind is tantamount to calling her a whore.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 3 years, 8 months ago
            I'm going to put this quite bluntly, but what is a whore? It is a woman who is willing to have sex with someone she isn't married to - usually for money. Whether a woman sees herself in this way or not is up to her, but sugar-coating the words to spare someone's feelings isn't what reality is all about. There isn't common vernacular in English for a man who does the same (man-whore just isn't quite the same), which I think is unfortunate and truly sexist.

            Those who devalue sex are those who are willing to sell it so cheaply. One can see it merely as a physical act of pleasure, or one can see it as a special relationship-building tool and as a way to bring children to that relationship. Which one is an accurate depiction of reality?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by jdg 3 years, 8 months ago
              It's for pleasure, and is a commodity, though there are more misers of it than of most commodities.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ blarman 3 years, 8 months ago
                If that is how you view women and sex, I'll leave you to it, but I would suggest to you that it is probably this attitude that directly controls your interactions with women and the resulting opinions about relationships - especially marriage. To you, there is nothing special or unique about a relationship to value. If you carefully analyze such a value set, however, one can not help but conclude that in doing so you dehumanize all women. They become nothing more than "receptacles". It also begs me to ask if that view transfers over to men as well - do you see them merely as competitors for physical affection?
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by jdg 3 years, 8 months ago
                  I don't see my view as dehumanizing at all. But I do see pretty much all rational human interaction as trade. So long as nobody tries to actually cheat or bully the other players, all's fair (as opposed to views where one person's gain is pejoratively called "exploitation", which just shows that the name caller is unclear on the concept).
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Ed75 3 years, 8 months ago
    My comments, after reading the posts are simply "food for thought.
    1. Psychiatrist Thomas Szasa states: "Women marry men hoping they will change. Men marry women hoping they won't change"
    2. There are two times a man does not understand a woman- Just before he marries her, and then again just after he marries her.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 3 years, 8 months ago
    Wow, quite a few comments about this. I was not sure if it would even attract a couple but you guys went all out with your stories and happenings. I laid mine out in the initial write up and needed a new perspective and reading the comments has given me food for thought. Thank you...Jim
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 3 years, 8 months ago
    Interesting question, but I don't really care. If I find a man
    that I want, maybe then I'll worry about getting him
    to pop the question. (Note that I said "find", not
    "get"; but a long time has passed, and I no longer
    expect it).
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by freedomforall 3 years, 8 months ago
      You shouldn't need a legal contract with government as a threat to your relationship anyway. Better to stay together because you both want to do so.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by jdg 3 years, 8 months ago
        If the relationship were about nothing but friendship and/or sex, you'd be right. But throughout history, the marriage relationship has been primarily an economic arrangement. Indeed, for most of that time, most spouses have been each other's #1 trading partners. This naturally creates opportunities for either one to really cheat the other if not prevented by courts or enforceable contracts.

        One of the biggest mistakes a person can make in life is to assume that romantic love exists, or at least that his partner is primarily driven by it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by freedomforall 3 years, 8 months ago
          Government can't be trusted to judge equitably today. They do not care about people; they care about wielding power and forcing socialist values. A contract would serve them, not our interests. One of the biggest mistakes a person can make in life is to assume that government acts as a servant to the people. Letting them meddle in your private life in any avoidable way is a mistake.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by jdg 3 years, 8 months ago
            True, but government more effectively and efficiently oppresses people who don't try to make their own cases different by contracting than those who do. Let's try not to make the bad guys' job easy.

            Besides, arbitration is an option.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by LibertyBelle 3 years, 8 months ago
        But if you both want to, why not get the contract?
        Because you're afraid that your wanting to won't last?

        I'd much rather have it official. (In the hypothetical case of anything occurring in the first place, I mean).
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 3 years, 8 months ago
    "I don't think that woman the article talks about exists."
    I think they take women aside and tell them, "be a good person and be sure not to put your needs ahead of others". Maybe it's not just women, but I really most of the girlfriends I knew before I got married would have benefited greatly from Ayn Rand. They did what others wanted, were less than happy about it, but felt like people should be grateful for the charity and reciprocate it. They think that scenario of an informal quid pro quo of one person cleaning the car and the other person fixing it is dirty, but each person doing what he/she doesn't like is somehow virtuous.

    When it comes to relationships, in Fountainhead she says she loathes the notion of men saying they're interested in a woman they don't fancy as some twisted favor. Men are the same way. I assume it's true for people who are gay and/or don't identify as one traditional gender. No one wants pity and sacrifice.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo