Jump to content

[ace cis-females] Thoughts on "Alpha male" type guys?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, mreid said:

Not really. If you look into the personality types surveys you will see that most are IN- in the mbti.

I'm not talking about the (most definitely flawed) personality type surveys, I'm talking about observing actual human interactions. Have you ever glanced at a Hot Box thread with everyone yelling at each other because their opinions are all so different? Or think of all the people who hang out in JFF, then there are just as many people who hate JFF and avoid it like the plague. There are those who obsess over anime and those who hate anime. I could go on. And *of course* in an online forum there will be a higher percentage of IN, that's the same no matter where you go online. Introverts are far more likely to end up spending significant amounts of time in online forums. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mreid said:

So if you take only in consideration the biology, most men look for signs of fertility in women, most women look for resources. Culturally, this is usually what most people are imprinted for.

I think those who differ are usually either biologically different and their biology revolts against the imprinting, or they are biologically within the "norm" but badly imprinted in which case their biology also revolts against the imprinting, or both. (by biology here I mean both the physical and psychological biology)

Wait, wtf? lol.

 

So anyone who doesn't slot neatly into your special little theory has something wrong with them? Their biology is revolting against their 'imprinting'? ..Or even better, they're 'badly imprinted'. Is anyone else reading this or is it just me?

 

Image result for baffled gif

 

..Anyway. Just look at the responses in this thread - most (er, all?) the females have responded saying they do not desire the 'alpha type' male. In this day and age, among the general population, 'alpha types' are generally considered douche bags and scoffed at. It's only a very specific type of woman  who seeks out the 'alpha male' to dominate and provide for them, and said women often have self esteem issues in my experience.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mreid said:

Not really. If you look into the personality types surveys you will see that most are IN- in the mbti.

 

Perhaps you don't understand what a poll is.  With a poll, all you get are answers from  1) whomever happens to be on-line at a particular time, and then within that group 2) whomever happens to see your poll post, and then within that group 3) whomever happens to feel like answering your poll  post.    In other words, you get an unreliable and incomplete idea of whatever you're trying to find out.   If you look at surveys that have already appeared on AVEN, you get the same unreliable, incomplete picture.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, mreid said:

I think it's just you Ficto. You completely misunderstood it.

I was referring specifically to your words, talking about people who don't slot into your little theory as being 'badly imprinted'.

 

6 hours ago, mreid said:

Really? Then how do you explain stuff like Fifty Shades of Gray?

Oh sorry, was every woman in the world into those books? No. A very specific subgroup of women (mostly middle aged housewives) went gaga for that shit - there just happens to be a lot of them and they're very, very loud.. poor things. Women with specific personality type where they love to masturbate while reading it but would be literally terrified if they actually ended up in a situation with a disgusting specimen like Christian Grey. Anyone truly into BDSM is sickened by those horrendous books/movies, which are not an accurate portrayal of consensual power dynamics or BDSM. Again, you're referring to people with a very specific personality trait... which usually involves underlying self esteem issues. BDSM is an entirely separate thing from women who are looking for an 'alpha male' to 'care fore them', just to clarify.

 

6 hours ago, mreid said:

That specific type is very common it seems.

It's the most commonly portrayed personality type in mainstream media, yes, just as women having multi orgasmic penetrative sex and cumming at the same time as the man is commonly portrayed in the media - even though for the vast majority of women that is very, very difficult to achieve. Oh, also, in movies women almost wake up with their makeup on. If one goes by what one sees portrayed in movies and TV, one would assume all women wake up with perfect hair and flawless foundation. Women also don't snore, going by what we see most commonly in the movies: These are THE most common types of women we see on TV yet in real life, almost no woman alive never snores, never farts, wakes up with flawless foundation, and doesn't grow armpit hair even if she's lost in a desert. So yes, we do commonly see women going gaga for the arrogant gym buff in movies/tv, but it's not an accurate portrayal of how real women (in general) think and behave.

 

Maybe YOU personally have met quite a few women who want a domineering gym buff for a boyfriend like so many girls in the movies do, but many other people here have met many women who want a balanced relationship with a caring, sensitive man. So your theory does not hold up when compared to everyone else's experiences.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, mreid said:

[...]those who differ are usually either biologically different and their biology revolts against the imprinting, or they are biologically within the "norm" but badly imprinted in which case their biology also revolts against the imprinting, or both. (by biology here I mean both the physical and psychological biology)

What do you look for in people’s

posts and profiles to determine whether they are “biologically different” and/or “badly imprinted”?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, mreid said:

Then how do you explain stuff like Fifty Shades of Gray?

A lot of people like/are titillated by imagining doing things they see as taboo.  In the US, at least, a good number of people still see kink as a collection of taboo things, have very little true understanding of it, and enjoy being in on the “dirty little secret” du jour.

 

Clearly they don’t value good writing, either, but...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere
On 9/13/2018 at 6:50 AM, mreid said:

My questions:

1. How do you feel about them?

2. Experiences with them?

3. How do you feel about the idea of being "taken care of" by such types, and playing a passive, stereotypically feminine role?

4. Do you think you might be a bit masculine personality-wise?

Ad 1. Definitely dislike.

Ad 2. Not much, in terms of relationship experience - zero, of course, since I have never been in a relationship anyway.

Ad 4. Yes, absolutely. I consider myself quite androgynous.

 

Moving point 3 to the end because it's the most interesting one.

Ad 3. Very much unappealing or even more than unappealing (in the sense of active aversion and not just disinterest).

To be honest: the "passive, stereotypically feminine role", its sexual associations and general social power imbalance is the reason why I wouldn't want to be heterosexual or even just a heteroromantic ace. Actually, I'm not so absolutely averse to men. I enjoy having fantasies about gay sex (I'm autochorissexual anyway, but in this case they are necessarily in third person ;)). I find feminine men very esthetically attractive (sometimes as much as "ordinary" women and more than hyperfeminine women, which aren't particularly interesting for me - looking at them, I rather feel some sympathy for what the society and culture expects them to do in order to be "attractive"). In terms of personality (with the reservation that of course personality is determined by much more than just gender) I definitely prefer women, I have some distrust for men despite no really bad experiences. But one of the reasons why I definitely wouldn't want to be in a relationship with a man is this sociopolitical background. For me it feels that even if I was in an absolutely equal platonic relationship with a man, the society would perceive me as subordinate to him, would imagine this as a sexual relationship and me as a heterosexual woman... It is so psychologically uncomfortable for me that for this reason I can't even consider a different-gender relationship.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

. For me it feels that even if I was in an absolutely equal platonic relationship with a man, the society would perceive me as subordinate to him, would imagine this as a sexual relationship and me as a heterosexual woman... It is so psychologically uncomfortable for me that for this reason I can't even consider a different-gender relationship.

 We don't live in the 1800s anymore. These days it's generally accepted (and expected) that a man and woman have an equal, balanced partnership, shared responsibilities etc. If a girl said "oh yes I do nothing but submit to my husband and he does all the hard work and I give him sex in return" or whatever, the majority of people (including therapists etc) would view that as an unhealthy power balance, or some less empathetic people may even accuse the woman of being lazy and not thinking for herself. It seems that some here mistakenly believe that the same power dynamics that existed in the 50s are still expected today, but they just aren't. Back then, everyone lived very, very differently. Nowadays it's expected that a woman be just as strong in a relationship as her husband, and people frown upon the 'meek, submissive wife' stereotype. Even in BDSM literal power dynamic relationships, the submissive has just as much (if not MORE) say than the dominant. It's actually actively encouraged that people have a healthy relationship with an equal power balance and equal responsibility - that's what's generally expected these days.

 

It would appear that certain people are applying their own personal hangups about unequal power balance in relationships to society in general, which is just not the case and is kind of offensive to the bi and hetero sexual people here. Us sexual ladies are just as capable of desiring equality and balance in our relationships as anyone else, thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere
13 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

It would appear that certain people are applying their own personal hangups about unequal power balance in relationships to society in general, which is just not the case and is kind of offensive to the bi and hetero sexual people here. Us sexual ladies are just as capable of desiring equality and balance in our relationships as anyone else, thanks.

Sorry if I offended you. But still for me it would feel uncomfortable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nowhere Girl said:

But one of the reasons why I definitely wouldn't want to be in a relationship with a man is this sociopolitical background. For me it feels that even if I was in an absolutely equal platonic relationship with a man, the society would perceive me as subordinate to him, would imagine this as a sexual relationship and me as a heterosexual woman... It is so psychologically uncomfortable for me that for this reason I can't even consider a different-gender relationship.

Society is always to find some way to criticize you, your hobbies, and yes, even your relationships that are none of their business anyway.  Trust me, your problem would not be solved by getting together with another female instead.  People are still going to wonder and question who "wears the pants" (literally the wording they'll use) in your relationship anyway, if they don't just have even more outright offensive or even homophobic things to say instead.

 

The sooner you can learn to say "fuck that, and fuck you" and just tune all that shit out, the easier it will be to deal with life.  Not speaking just in regard to relationships, either.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mreid said:

I also suggest you take a look at the stuff in places like Fanfiction.net, which is mostly used by women and girls aged 15-30, and see if their fantasies don't have something of that.

People’s fantasies and their real life preferences - even here on AVEN - are often quite unrelated... and fanfic (or other fiction) isn’t necessarily reflective of either the author’s fantasies or his/her/their real life preferences.

 

14 minutes ago, mreid said:

I am not saying anything ground-breaking here.

It seems a bit of a leap to diagnose strangers over the internet as being

22 hours ago, mreid said:

either biologically different

or

22 hours ago, mreid said:

biologically within the "norm" but badly imprinted

...based on what they choose to share here.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mreid said:

Although they usually are... specially on fanfic.net where no one's being paid for writing anything, so people just write what they like.

People write the stories they want to explore/their fans want to read.  Neither has anything to do with fantasies or personal experience by default.  Some (not all, or even most) write self-insert stories, but even those aren’t always about their own fantasies.

 

12 minutes ago, mreid said:

I’m not diagnosing anyone, they are the ones who share their diagnosis. If someone says they are autistic or that they have some trauma that they think may contribute to their preferences, then they are the ones doing the diagnosis, not me. And besides there are studies that show a correlation between these things.

I’m not saying illness and sexuality can’t affect one another.  I just don’t see how you get from that to how most people here fall into one or both your categories.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
everywhere and nowhere
19 hours ago, mreid said:

Really? Then how do you explain stuff like Fifty Shades of Gray?

 

1 hour ago, mreid said:

Either way, only goes to show how many people enjoy that sort of plot/fantasy.

Just mentioning - I personally hate it. I prefer gay erotica anyway, but I always prefer stories free of domination, power imbalance, humiliation... (Sometimes not easy to find... on some Polish erotica sites most gay stories are of the type "How I became a slut", "Becoming my best friend's slave"... absolutely not my cup of tea.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mreid said:

Although they usually are... specially on fanfic.net where no one's being paid for writing anything, so people just write what they like.

I don't have time to respond to the rest right now as I'm in the middle of about 25 things at once, but fantasies and the things one writes about (in fanfiction and professional fiction) certainly do not always (or even often) reflect someone's desires of something that would actually happen to them. A piece I'm working on right now is about genetic sexual attraction, and while it's an incredible topic to explore (and I admit there are many erotic components because hey, it's not for publication so I can do whatever the feck I want) I have no desire in any way to engage in sex with a sibling. Another I worked on, also with erotic elements, was about a man's developing relationship with a 13 year old prostitute.. but I don't in any way desire to have sex with a 13 year old. This is extremely, extremely common for authors of fanfiction and other fiction alike. We love to push the boundaries, explore different aspects of relationships and strange fantasies etc between fictional people - but that's precisely because they're fictional. We may even actively get off on aspects of it, but it's almost always very separate from things we actually want someone to do to us/to do ourselves. I can with almost 100% conviction assure you that E.L James does not want to be treated the way Christian Grey treats Anastasia Steele, but because it's a mere fantasy it's safe to get off to - whereas in real life you'd be frustrated, angry, and feel trapped by his disgusting behavior. And that goes for most of the women who get off to those books, and writers of similar fanfic. It's a fantasy, and it can't hurt you, which makes it safe to get off to. I've read many erotic fictional accounts of torture, brutality, cruelty, rape - but that does not in any way mean the author's actually desire to engage in such activities, even if they can get off to them in written form.

 

Anyway, in summary:

 

1 hour ago, ryn2 said:

People write the stories they want to explore/their fans want to read.  Neither has anything to do with fantasies or personal experience by default.  Some (not all, or even most) write self-insert stories, but even those aren’t always about their own fantasies.

Ryn is 100% correct and said it in far fewer words than I did.

 

1 hour ago, mreid said:

Other times I just make assumptions based on many books I've read on sexuality, biology, psychology and psychoanalysis. Again, not the most scientific way to do things, but I work with what I got. Often I make an assumption about a person and as I read through their posts I often see my assumption get confirmed. I think everybody does this sort of thing to a degree, either online or in real life.

I've already seen you make an utterly incorrect assumption about a poster in this thread, whom you apparently got confused with someone else (I wonder how often that happens) and just the other day you listed quite a few completely incorrect assumptions about me, despite the fact that I am very vocal about the state of my sexuality, how much sex I am having (none), and I make many, many posts on said topics. So despite my openness you still got me completely, utterly wrong. If this happens with someone like me, what kind of assumptions are you making about people less vocal than I??

 

The lesson here is: Don't diagnose people on the internet in an attempt to slot them into a little theory that you yourself have devised with no real scientific grounding. You're only going to end up upsetting people, especially when you're claiming they're somehow defective for not slotting perfectly into your little 'alpha male/submissive female' box.

 

48 minutes ago, mreid said:

Might make one for asexuals too to compare the results.

I can tell you that most hetero asexual females will prefer someone more masculine than themselves and hetero asexual males will prefer someone more feminine. This will be the same for the sexual people. Femininity and masculinity has nothing to do with whether one wants to be a domineering alpha male or a submissive female who wants a man to look after her and control her.. it's just that being hetero almost always mean you desire traits very specific to the opposite sex (like, if I'm in love with a man, part of that is his cock, the fact that he gets stubble, the fact that his chest has a bit of hair but not soft breasts - all masculine traits. That doesn't mean I want to be dominated by some alpha male though lol).

 

...that ended up longer than intended Y_Y

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2018 at 10:55 AM, mreid said:

If I remember right, you said before that you are attracted to shy, feminine, sensitive guys. Could it be that your personality is a bit more on the masculine side? Maybe you like to be the dominant one in the relationship?

Oh also I, like everyone else here, seek balance and equality in a relationship. If I am with a man, I am most certainly drawn to aspects of his masculinity (no matter how shy and sensitive he is), but I seek balance. Even BDSM power dynamic relationships (healthy ones anyway) are about balance, underneath the dominance/submission. 

 

I hadn't realized that question was directed at me until now sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mreid said:

This "balance" is achieved in those cases because the opposites are balanced. The submissive is as submissive as the dominant is dominant. I think this is the idea behind sexual relationships.

*sigh*.

 

It's because in a healthy BDSM relationship the submissive still has total control over everything that happens, that's the gift that the dom gives their sub. It's an incredibly empowering experiencing, the feeling of giving away all control while at the same time knowing you remain in total control at all times. The dom is almost the 'sub' in a way, in that nothing can actually happen that the sub doesn't truly want and doesn't truly consent to (even if not verbally). Often, the doms even end up needing to be the ones to tap out for a while when the needs of the sub stretch them too far. I was in a dom/sub-dynamic relationship with an asexual for 18 months (online, involving everything bar actual physical contact and sex), and was part of the BDSM community on FetLife for about two years. ''The submissive being as submissive as the dominant is dominant'' couldn't be further from an accurate portrayal of the dynamics in a healthy dom/sub relationship.

 

Don't have time to respond to the rest right now, working.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mreid said:

I know how dom/sub relationships work. What you said only proves my point. The submissive will only be as submissive as they will allow the dominant to be dominant, and vice versa.

The point being made is that in healthy relationships in this day and age, women 'in general' don't go gaga for an alpha male they can submit to, and men don't wander around trying to be alpha males so as to find women who will submit to them. People in general seek equality and balance. Gone are the days when women need to seek a man to provide for them, and men need to seek women to breed with. What you said is that anyone deviating from that specific behavior pattern  (seeking signs of fertility in women, and the ability to 'provide' in men) are 'badly imprinted', among other things.. and that you can slot those who don't adhere to this 'norm' into one of three specific categories. 

 

Also:

 

2 hours ago, mreid said:

The submissive is as submissive as the dominant is dominant.

is very different from

 

1 hour ago, mreid said:

The submissive will only be as submissive as they will allow the dominant to be dominant

A healthy dom/sub relationship is about balance and equality, is what I was getting at. Because both people have an equal say/equal consent/equal participation. All healthy relationships are about equality, not about an alpha dominating a submissive.

 

Yes, heterosexual women will desire a partner with some aspects of masculinity, and a heterosexual man will seek some aspects of femininity in a partner, but that has nothing to do with dominance and submission.

 

You yourself claim to be asexual, yet seem to believe you know everything there is to know about the motivations of sexual males and females, and refuse to accept it when sexual people here say it doesn't work that way. Yet you're posing your ideas as 'theories', even as questions in some places.. then arguing with everyone who does not agree with you. At some point, maybe you'll have to accept the fact that you need to expand your horizons a little bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mreid said:

I keep being accused of being a moralist for no reason, as I am completely amoral.

It’s at least partially the language you are using.  “Badly imprinted,” for example:  “bad” is a judgmental word.

 

Also, as ficto mentioned, telling people with actual experience that they’re less right than you (especially in arenas where there’s plenty of room for a broad range of differing experiences, and/or where your firsthand knowledge is limited to what you’ve studied) isn’t going to be well-received.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, mreid said:

Who has more credibility: someone whose knowledge comes from reading a lot on the subject of sex and whose sources can be verified, or someone whose knowledge comes from "experience" that can't be verified, and might be (and often is) contaminated with personal bias?

Since sex is an emotionally-charged subject, let’s use riding a bike as an example.  Someone who has studied riding a bike extensively (but never ridden) may have a very good understanding of what doing do entails.  They know what muscles it engages, how much force must be applied to turn the pedals, how to use, clean, and replace every component properly, which style is best for what type of riding, who the sport champion is, etc.  They have read first-hand accounts of riding and can imagine/extrapolate from other activities what it’s likely to feel like.

 

They may well be general experts on the subject of bikes and biking.

 

However, the very best they can do when it comes to really knowing what riding a bike is like for any given person is make highly-educated guesses.  They can never really know with certainty what each person who rides a bike feels.  They can get close, the more people they interview especially, but they’re never quite there.

 

Meanwhile, even the rider with very minimal mechanical, biokinetic, or physiology training has vivid and instant knowledge of what riding a bike feels like for them.  They may be wrong about bikes and biking, but they’re right about how it feels to them... more right than any non-rider can be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mreid said:

Bad = incorrectly, innaproprately, unhealthily... Yes it can have negative connotations, but doesn't have to necessarily.

And even if it does, what's the shock?

It implies they’re flawed in some way.  Someone could be “differently” imprinted - assuming one agrees human imprinting is a thing - and yet not be flawed or lesser.

 

4 minutes ago, mreid said:

As for your bike analogy, it's not the physical part of sex I am interested into, it's the psychological part that I don't understand.

I wasn’t referring just to the physical sensation of riding a bike.  I also meant what it feels like emotionally; what the mental impact is.

 

5 minutes ago, mreid said:

Sure I think I could get some valuable knowledge from experience, but I don't think it compensates the risk.

Which, of course, is your right to decide.  I feel the same way about skydiving.

 

That said, by not skydiving I lose my “right” to tell people who have skydived that it doesn’t actually feel like they say it does (X); it feels like Y and they’re deluding themselves by believing otherwise.

 

Even if I have gone skydiving I can’t be sure my experience was the same as theirs, but at least I have my own experience - and the credibility that comes with it - to stand on.

 

9 minutes ago, mreid said:

I think I will be much safer trying to understand these things from a distance than getting myself into a situation I am not naturally inclined to understand.

This is very fair and reasonable and not at all what’s causing the problem.

 

Any time someone proposes a hypothesis in hopes that it has validity, they need to be willing to expose it to openminded testing.  When the hypothesis deals with thoughts and emotions, you can only listen to subjects’ accounting and observe their behaviors.  The latter is much more difficult online, so you’re forced to give personal accounts more weight.

 

Telling people they don’t actually feel what they say they feel isn’t supporting a hypothesis.  It’s just (annoying them, and) choosing to ignore counter-evidence.

 

14 minutes ago, mreid said:

The feeling I get is that my skepticism of their experiences is what isn't so well-received. Like I said before, people have a tendency to lie, delude themselves or be confused when talking about sexuality and sexual experiences.

It’s fine to maintain skepticism.  It’s even fine to say “I’m not sure I believe that, based on these other things you’ve posted.”  Where it stops being fine is when someone goes beyond that and insists others are lying, deluding themselves, confused, etc.

 

It’s an online forum.  Most of is don’t know one another anywhere near well enough to draw those types of conclusions with any real certainty.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mreid said:

It implies they have been badly imprinted. Don't put words in my mouth.

Implication is about what others hear, not about what the speaker says... not trying to put words in your mouth, just explaining why others might be reacting as though you spoke judgmentally.

 

4 hours ago, mreid said:

[...]accurate enough to know how to make space-suits, what problems to expect, etc... like scientists do. Do those scientists have no credibility because they have never been to space?

The majority of what applies there is hard science... physics and engineering.  Those dealing with the psychological impact of time in space gain a lot of their understanding from working directly with other astronauts.  The first time up it was all conjecture but after that it’s not likely the scientists continued to stand behind theories the returning astronauts disputed.

 

4 hours ago, mreid said:

[...]surely a lot of people can agree with me on this.

You must just be unlucky that few of them have stumbled in here, then.

 

I agree that scientific study typically outweighs anecdotal reporting.  I’m just not seeing scientific study in what you are doing, or at least in what you are sharing here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mreid said:

Which is why I consider the opinions of non-asexuals on sexual attraction, and always have.

Maybe it’s just coincidence/the threads I’ve happened into but it appears from those threads that you’re (perhaps considering them, but) discarding them quite quickly.

 

11 minutes ago, mreid said:

I am not going to repeat myself.

I was just making an observation, not asking you to re-post your sources.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2018 at 6:50 AM, mreid said:

1. How do you feel about them?

2. Experiences with them?

3. How do you feel about the idea of being "taken care of" by such types, and playing a passive, stereotypically feminine role?

4. Do you think you might be a bit masculine personality-wise? 

1. I'm kinda disgusted and averse towards them? I mean not towards the people themselves, but I don't like that kind of behaviour in a relationship.

2. Nope, fortunately I'm not their type.

3. No way. I am treated as an equal or I'm out of there. If I really have to take any role, I'd rather take the masculine. I can take care of people, but I can't really stand it the other way around.

4. Maaaybeeee... No, just kidding, I'm totally a tomboy in every sense.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe in those stereotypes tbh. I have a few friends who look and sound very "traditionally male" types, are gym-rats, and they do prefer feminine girls that will provide them with a family to take care for. In friendship-level relationship it doesn't bother me at all. I'm used to these types of guys who'll always be like "this is too heavy for you", "here let me open this jar for you" and i just let them do w/e they wanna do to "help" (just to laugh as none of them seem to know the knife "trick" with the jar) 

 

I've never had any kind emotional control however so that's another thing. If you're talking about that them i'm 100% out and away. 

 

But yeah... "macho" types. I don' mind them. Same as i don't mind too feminine girls. I think i'm quite balanced myself in terms of "masculinity/femininity"

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Alejandrogynous
On 9/13/2018 at 12:50 AM, mreid said:

When you are told "You just haven't met the right guy." usually the type of guy that's being refered to is this type.

I've never gotten the impression that this is what people mean when they say that. I have gotten the, "you haven't been with me yet," line from alpha male types, but that kind of goes with them being douchebags in the first place. When other people say, "you haven't met the right guy yet," they just mean someone you have chemistry with, whatever kind of person that might be.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1. How do you feel about them?

 

I'm repulsed by extreme masculinity, this whole tough guy mentality... Ugh

 

2. Experiences with them?

 

Not in friendships/relationships, no

 

3. How do you feel about the idea of being "taken care of" by such types, and playing a passive, stereotypically feminine role?

 

I'll take care of myself mostly. But I'll let you open up that stupid jar I can't with my strength :P 

 

4. Do you think you might be a bit masculine personality-wise?

 

Yes, it's toxic imho to be all masculine and all feminine... Why can't males and females blend in to one another?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/13/2018 at 12:50 AM, mreid said:

There are many alpha male types and not all necessarily sociopathic or domineering, but for the sake of this discussion let's consider the buff gym guy, domineering Mr Grey types, the popular jock stereotype and "patriarchal" types. Basically stereotypical alpha male types. 

 

Sociopathic and domineering men are by far and away the vast minority of the male group, including the stereotypical "alpha male" type. I think the reason you're eliciting the responses that you are is because you're conflating a lot of things. But I suppose this is what happens when one's premise is based on stereotypes. =]

 

For example - the buff gym guys and the popular jock stereotypes have little to do with the domineering Mr. Grey types, except that all three of those streotypes take pleasure in maintaining a certain physical standard.

 

It's difficult to translate the stereotype of an "alpha male" as portrayed by TV, movies, and books to actual human society, which you seem to want to be doing given the conversation about biology - but of course there are a lot of shades of grey (no pun intended) involved.

 

As a partner, I far prefer men who border on the alpha male side. I prefer a man who has reasonable, actionable, mostly achievable goals in place, who will protect me, who has the means and the desire to provide for me, who takes care of his health and at least a little bit of pride in his appearance. This comes from having been with men who don't have these things or who don't do or won't do these things. The problem is that I have reasonable, actionable, achievable goals in place, I have the means and desire to provide for and protect myself and my partner, and I take care of my health and take at least a little bit of pride in my appearance. When the balance was tipped in my favor, I ended up with a partner who relied on me for everything, who didn't care about where I was or with whom (which translated to not feeling particularly loved, on my end) and who happily ignored the men who groped me. When I was outspoken in my opinions he would throw a moody tantrum (honestly just like a child; it was exhausting).

 

Obviously I want a partner who respects me, but there is nothing wrong with wanting to be an outspoken, protective, successful man who takes pride in his appearance and wishes to provide for his family. It bothers me that society today looks down on that kind of stereotype.

 

(Added caveat - I am bisexual, and though this response pertains to a male partner, I would look for many of the same general features in a female partner as well).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...