Cemar said I think what is happening is that women "Desire" the bad boys, but end up marrying the good guy, the one that brings security, is a good father, provides for the family, looks after her needs.
This is absolutely true and has a basis in biology - supposedly monogomous birds exhibit the same behaviour. What female biology desires is "bad boy" genes for her sons so that they will survive and fight off the competition, however, the best evolutionary strategy is to marry the good guy and shag the bad guy on the side (which is what birds do). The safe nest-building good guy is great to make sure the off-spring survive childhood, the bad guy gene makes sure they survive beyond childhood and get to pass the genes on to the next generation. So on this theory the guy's best move is to act confident and arrogant to attract the women, then "reform" under her influence into a good guy, walk her up the aisle and revert quickly back to the original version that made her heart beat faster in the first place. After all this is what romance novels are made of (except they don't get to the bit where the guy switches back to his cheeky original self). This is what I see happened in Hairdog's case, he started off assertive and cheeky which is what made Mrs HD fancy him, then he got all nicey nice on her and married her but she really wants the old Hairdog back.
I often think it's a pity our generation (generation X) never really did formal couple dancing. When a man leads a woman on the dance floor you can tell straight away whether he is alpha, beta or omega. The alphas dance fantastically and know how to lead without stepping on your toes or pushing you around, the betas haven't got a clue and the omegas just barge you around like a shopping trolley. The interesting part is that it really doesn't make a lot of difference how good a dancer the woman is.
I think good leadership, like I described about the paint colours, is about coming alongside someone and gently but persistently edging them in the direction you want to go. The direction is firm but the method of getting there is gentle.
Fran
if we can be sufficient to ourselves, we need fear no entangling webs Erica Jong
“What female biology desires is "bad boy" genes for her sons so that they will survive and fight off the competition, however, the best evolutionary strategy is to marry the good guy and shag the bad guy on the side (which is what birds do). The safe nest-building good guy is great to make sure the off-spring survive childhood, the bad guy gene makes sure they survive beyond childhood and get to pass the genes on to the next generation”
If human females only select sexual partners based on the behaviors of “Bad boy” genes then the “good guy” genes would not be able to replicate and would have died out long ago.
DNA tests on closed communities have shown that for the most part the 1st and sometimes 2nd child belong to the husband and subsequent childen have another father. Also the H obviously does have sex with the W otherwise there would be no cover for the pregnancy. So the good guy genes do get passed on.
Fran
if we can be sufficient to ourselves, we need fear no entangling webs Erica Jong
I don't think that your example suports the idea of a "bad boy" gene.
There are quite a few models to explain why a woman may be attracted to a “ bad boy “
Here is one, assume that the “bad boys” behavior is simply a result of a high level of testosterone and that high testosterone levels are indicative of superior health. The female is making a selection based on the display of his testosterone levels as an indication of “quality genes”. This avoids the assumption of a “bad boy gene” guiding male behavior.
"Bad boy" gene or high testosterone it doesn't really matter, does it? A high testosterone male is generally healthier, stronger, takes more risks, less empathetic and has a higher sex drive than a low testosterone male. If anyone wants to interpret that as "bad boy" that's a social interpretation of biology. It does epitomise the type of male that generally gets the women's pulse rate up. Whether the woman, when thinking socially about it really wants to spend the rest of her life with a big, strong, unempathetic risk-taker who's fairly likely to stray is the dilemma.
Big strong hairy-azzed risk taker - good as far as health of off-spring goes Socially adept, caring, faithful - good as a long-term prospect.
What has not been addressed at all, and when you look at ape societies as well as many human societies is whether the monogamous model fits at all. What we might well be happier with is a model where women live together in small sororities helping each other with the kids, and "entertain gentleman callers". Very often in the human versions of these types of society it is the brothers of the family unit who act as providers and protectors. The social unit consists of a matriarch and her daughters raising babies, the matriarch's son's provide for the family and go elsewhere to spread their DNA.
The monogamous model is more of a democratic model, one man one woman (kind of like one man one vote )
I sometimes wonder whether what we are currently witnessing in terms of high divorce rates and serial monogamy is a break-down of the monogamous model possibly back to some kind of sorority model.
And who called Corri the tangent queen
Fran
if we can be sufficient to ourselves, we need fear no entangling webs Erica Jong
end up marrying the good guy, the one that brings security, is a good father, provides for the family, looks after her needs. It does not pay to be the good guy Ever since I radically changed my thinking to eliminate negatives, stuff like this actually makes my head hurt.
It litterally leaps out and hammers me with the pain of its defeat.
Wow. That phrase. It does not pay to be the good guy
You have taken a positive expression (good guy) and rendered it a negative with your beliefs (it does not pay).
AHHHHH!!!! My belief says a good guy is the one who does what she really needs for the health of the R. Regardless if thats what she wants/tells him/ believes. I believe a person who uses there strength to cause negative change in their or other peoples life is the 'bad boy'.
My first reaction to this has always been ...I have no idea how to approach it from this angle.
But I have just recently noticed something. So Ill give it another shot. Plus I am going to take you to task for your all around tone in this post. Are you ready?
My H has always wanted to follow me, for me to lead him. BS. He may want to make you happy, but thats not the same thing at all.
This is not necessarily his fault as I obviously chose him, in part, for this trait. Didnt you chose him because you trusted him? You felt safe with him?
I really jumped into the leading position and somehow positioned myself as the R expert of the marriage and expected him to defer to me. Man, was I in for a shock. He could hold his own just fine, and did. So you didnt actually manage to assume the leadership postion did you. Therefore he does not want you there.
So now I am in a position where I'd love for him to be a little stronger and more of a leader and I'm stuck with.....the same old guy I married. You are out of control woman. Stuck? Stuck? WTF is that? Yes you are more aware of and willing to admit what you need now. Are you willing to admit that to him? Have you done so? He is and is not the same old guy you married. In what ways is he improved over the boy you married?
he avoids being in charge with everything he's got--even with simple tasks such as "Do you want Subway or Burger King for lunch?" He will hem and haw until he finally stammers and stutters that he can't make the choice and would I please make it. It drives me insane.
So do you let him know that it drives you insane? Are you radically honest. If you are being emotionally controlled and reserved you are not. If your not occasionally and honestly venting your not being congruent. Thats not leading thats letting him know your emotional state and letting him know YOUR preferences. This mis calibration is akin to a man switching from needy to angry. Youve just switched from out of control emotional to overly controlled emotional. A combination of calm directness, and congruent emotionality.
I am not going to DO anything about it because my leading days are done.
Do something is not necessarily leading. If your emotional flatline is not in the best interest of the R, then its not the right way to behave. You have had major life hits this year. Its going to have drained you. Even if it is leading--- you're M. Life partners. Everyone needs to be able to take a nap now and then.
Well that wasnt too terrible of a beating. More of a friendly shake.
Oh yeah... something I just remembered. I will let other men speak about there preference, but I have never said or thought that a woman supplicating or placating was a positive attractive behavior. I will say it doesnt turn off my desire so resoundingly as it does a womans, but for a man to be authoritative, does not require a woman to supplicate.
Defeat is not the same as surrender. IMO a man has to earn a surrender. Defeat is when people just give up.
I want to finish off by saying Sincerly. Thank you. to my friends on the forum. I have learned so much. Maintaing a LTR will never be easy, no matter your knowledge or understanding. We have opposing and disparate needs, and will always encounter crashing insecurities. Biology's selfish drives will fight our cerebral good intentioned desires, but being able to feel the SO's gender needs and reasons for them.... It took me 15 years to even comtemplate fighting for my woman, and a couple more years to accepting and comprehending why I should do that and hopefully what that looks like in a attractive manner. LOL. Talk about some entrenched beliefs. HAHAHA!! hopefully it will make the next one easier. It will be fun trying at anyrate.
Here is an irony. Ive put some ( just a little) effort into learning and being aware of what is attractive to women, (I allready knew what I liked ) ...in the end it just ends up being your real self, positively.
Then I resented and feared, infatuation for yeaaars. up untill just recently as a matter of fact. lmao. <head shake> Instead of appreciating it for what it is, I diminished it for what it wasnt. Im . I feel sorry for the next one allready. LOL.
I have a question for the ladies. HP you brought it up. I think I get the difference on demonstrating ugly possesive untrusting jealousy (not an issue) and feeling unprotected by indifferance/arrogance, (definite issue) and nurturing protective sort.
my question.. How does it make you feel when your H is possesive, jealous, sexually aggressive, when you have been away for awhile?
A man who was consistently dominant in his behavior could probably keep me running hot but wouldn't bring out my warmer, more tender emotions.
PFFFF on tenderness. I just want her running hot
I mean if a man walks in my kitchen and smacks me on the *ss and says "Feed me woman!", I would be happy to feed him
of course
but if a man walks in my kitchen just looking really hungry, I would be happy to feed him too. The first man would make me feel more girlish and cared for but the second man would make me feel more womanly and caring
I dont want a mom, got one of those. So if she wants a good throw down, she better hurry up with those dishes, otherwise she is gonna have to wait till morning for some of that HOT lovin thats shes been missin all day..... LOL.
Its all about perspective. Besides stuff like this is sooo much fun to say. Its even better when it annoys her.
HP- Think about it this way. The more you are actually willing to give up control the easier it will be to state your preferences or needs. This is a rather lame-*ss analogy but think about how easy it was to make a list of things you wanted from Santa when you were a kid. Why don't you feel free to make a similar list of sexual preferences or wants for your husband? I mean there is nothing wrong with wanting Barbie's Dream House even if you might not get it if you ask for the Easy-Bake Oven too. I am certain that I am not making myself clear but if you want your H to play Santa then you have to stop playing Santa yourself even though it might kind of make you want to puke to see yourself in the role of the good little girl. Face facts, you got a stocking that needs filling on a regular basis.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
Quote: So you didnt actually manage to assume the leadership postion did you. Therefore he does not want you there.
Freakin brilliant. Thank you!
Quote: Didnt you chose him because you trusted him? You felt safe with him?
Yes. I also chose him because he had big pecs and he wore tight t-shirts. However, the fact remains that I liked the fact that he was a bit of a lapdog and willing to let me take charge. Perhaps I have abandonment issues and was looking for a man who was a "sure thing" or something, I don't know.
Quote: So do you let him know that it drives you insane? Are you radically honest.
What, are you kiddin. Of course. I don't hold it in, nor do I get angry. I calmly say it the same nearly every time: "I don't feel like deciding--would you just do it?" This sets off a state of panic inside him. Don't ask me why, fee fi FOO fum, I have no idea. Eventually he throws these decisions back on me so many times that I make the decision and then later on he'll say, Man I really wish we had gone for pizza. !!!!! (HD, is this a Six thing?) Even as frequently as he does it, it doesn't make me mad. I am used to it and just roll with it, although it gets ollllllllld, as you can imagine.
Now to answer your question. Possessive and sexually aggressive is okay in my book, but jealousy has never done anything for me whatsoever. In fact, I think it makes a person look like an imbecile and is a complete turn off for me. The flip side, indifference or arrogance, as you described it would have snuffed out any love/desire in me in much the same way.
Jenny, Girl what the hell you talkin about. You totally lost me on that analogy. Write me again in normal language cause I am interested in what you, a fellow HD female 7, has to say.
)
. I feel sorry for the next one allready. LOL.