# Crackin up



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

I am putting it here since this topic has come up in both Ladies' and Men's lounges. DH and I were laying in bed this am after he came in to wake me up. (He brought coffee! Good morning already!) I was laying with my head in his lap, and we were just sort of shooting the breeze. I was thinking of this group.

I asked him do you remember that book Men Are From Mars, Women are from Venus? He said Yah, rolling his eyes. I asked if he knew what it was about. He said some guy trying to make boat payments by selling his self help book on Oprah. tee hee. So we went on to discuss the book and what it might be about.

Finally he asked, why are you asking me this? I said you know that board I read? There are a bunch of people on there who try to figure out marriage by figure out what men are like and what women are like. He, dumfoundedly said, well THAT is stupid. Why wouldn't you find out what YOU and YOUR PARTNER are like?

It was easy to get out of bed after that. I fell out laughing.

So THAT is the point I am trying to make about gender stereotyping and generalizations in my other posts.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

I get your point, it's a good one, but don't you also think that by sharing experiences and advice that worked for one marriage it is possible to help another? Not to mention, I think many come here for validation that they're not alone in their trouble.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Trenton said:


> I get your point, it's a good one, but don't you also think that by sharing experiences and advice that worked for one marriage it is possible to help another?


Absolutely! Sharing experience is very helpful. Hey we did this, do you think that would work for you. VERY helpful. THAT is the kind of thing I think can be of great use to many people. 

But I find the desire to pigeonhole genders into behaviors, characteristics and roles between distracting and damaging.



> Not to mention, I think many come here for validation that they're not alone in their trouble.


Empathy and sympathy both can give people the power to feel confident in themselves. I don't think people can act effectively when they feel bad about themselves. (I don't particularly like the word validation. Is it ok if I substitute empathy and sympathy? Do they change what you meant?) I think that can be a VERY good thing.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> Absolutely! Sharing experience is very helpful. Hey we did this, do you think that would work for you. VERY helpful. THAT is the kind of thing I think can be of great use to many people.
> 
> But I find the desire to pigeonhole genders into behaviors, characteristics and roles between distracting and damaging.
> 
> ...


Empathy and sympathy work nicely. I have to admit I just posted on a sex thread about men and porn and generalized. We do make blanket judgments about the genders there is no doubt. Being willing to take an individual as an individual is very difficult but always worth the effort.


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

I would have wholeheartedly agreed with your H - before I found this board.

What has amazed me is how many people come here thinking THEIR story is so different. That they thought everything was going great - until their wife or husband started texting / calling / dating / screwing whoever whenever. You read enough of the stories here and you see definite patterns.

I fit into the "Nice Guy" generalization fairly well. It took awhile for me to accept the idea that women aren't truly turned on by a man with a vacuum. They may really, really appreciate it - but it doesn't make them DESIRE you.

Also - in my situation - I don't think my wife has HERSELF figured out. It's not like I can just ask her. And honesty hasn't been her strong point for a while, so even if she told me what she thought she wanted, I might not believe her.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> I would have wholeheartedly agreed with your H - before I found this board.
> 
> What has amazed me is how many people come here thinking THEIR story is so different. That they thought everything was going great - until their wife or husband started texting / calling / dating / screwing whoever whenever. You read enough of the stories here and you see definite patterns.
> 
> ...


I disagree with you because I am in a relationship with a nice guy who I feel more desire for than anyone else in my life, ever. Just because you might have fallen for a woman who doesn't appreciate you doesn't make who you are less valuable or desirable. Becoming something you're not just to have someone desire you is not the answer because the person will love you for what you are not and you will always know this. How could that be satisfying? 

Isn't it possible that believing someone else's philosophy on women, which I think they have SO VERY wrong, could reasonably sabotage you in the future? The clear cut dominant/submissive theory (used for lack of a better word) constantly spewed on this forum promotes male selfishness and ego massaging and female neglect and repression. They just make it sound all pretty and sexy. They are shouting it out to wayward men in unhappy, sexless marriages so that they can further have their ego massaged. I truly hope you don't believe it. 

Further, did you ever think about how many successful relationships are out there that don't come to these boards? It's unreasonable to think that the opinions of a select few can be taken as the rule of thumb simply because it is working for them right now. In other words, take it with a grain of salt. Take everything with a grain of salt including what I'm saying right now because you have to find your own answers, your own pleasure and your own love and no one can hand that to you in a neatly packaged theory.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> I would have wholeheartedly agreed with your H - before I found this board.
> 
> What has amazed me is how many people come here thinking THEIR story is so different. That they thought everything was going great - until their wife or husband started texting / calling / dating / screwing whoever whenever. You read enough of the stories here and you see definite patterns.


But are the similarities based on gender? There ARE common traits within a gender. The problem is you never know if that is what YOUR partner has as their trait. So let's say 65% of men like sex all the time. You are a woman, and your man is in the other 35%. What good does it do to hear oh men like sex all the time. Yah maybe MANY men do. Maybe LOTS do. But HERS doesn't. So how does it help her to know what MEN like/do/feel?




> I fit into the "Nice Guy" generalization fairly well. It took awhile for me to accept the idea that women aren't truly turned on by a man with a vacuum. They may really, really appreciate it - but it doesn't make them DESIRE you.


It doesn't? Which women? My nice guy husband rocks my world.

No one likes a carpet, someone who is too insecure, male OR female. You see the same thing over in the ladies lounge. Why does my husband call me names when we fight? Why does he belittle me? Because you are insecure, and you let him. Having self esteem and being "nice" are not mutually exclusive.

So have you convinced yourself to be an aggressive **** bag so you can get the girl? How about be you, nice. And learn self confidence? Once you have confidence, you can find a woman who LIKES nice men.





> Also - in my situation - I don't think my wife has HERSELF figured out. It's not like I can just ask her.


Nope. That's why there are things like marriage builders and whatnot. You don't have to give up on the two of you figuring yourselves and each other out. But my advice would be for the two of you to figure EACH OTHER and YOURSELVES out. Not men. And women.


> And honesty hasn't been her strong point for a while, so even if she told me what she thought she wanted, I might not believe her.


I had the same problem. Marriage builders, Passionate Marriage and the now defunct alt.support.marriage helped a LOT.

Sorry to hear things are not going well. I hope they improve!


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Trenton said:


> They just make it sound all pretty and sexy. They are shouting it out to wayward men in unhappy, sexless marriages so that they can further have their ego massaged. I truly hope you don't believe it.


I am DYING laughing here from the mental image you just gave me. Man is dominant, benevolent dictator. He is hot, buff with nice abs and a tight @ss. He says, "Og say WOMAN, What's for dinner?" Woman sighs and delivers dinner to the barcolounger in her negligee because everyone knows that a woman will do ANYTHING for their hot and sexy dominate male.

Then they wake up on the barcolounger with the porn movie over.


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

I've spent a lot of time here arguing with BBW and MEM that the dominant male stuff is not all true. I think a lot of what makes a great marriage work is more about personality types then gender.

But that doesn't mean I throw out all of their ideas either.

Generalizations are not always bad. There is usually SOME truth behind the way we link certain types of people (gender, religion, political affiliation, cultural, jocks, nerds, whatever) to certain behaviors.

One of the beliefs I've always had about women that I've changed since being here on this board - I used to think it was important to be "nice" in bed. Now, I'm not convinced most women want a man to totally take over all the IMPORTANT decisions in a marriage - but I AM convinced that MOST women are more turned on by a confident, physical lover more than a sensual, sensitive lover.

You see a lot of good guys here whose wives are 'affairing down.' It makes no sense, but it's a lot more common than i would have believed in the past.

I've never heard of a "biker chick" leaving "the gang" for a sexual obsession with an accountant. But I've known of a few women who have left nice, professional, good husbands for a guy with a Harley and some tatoos.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> I've spent a lot of time here arguing with BBW and MEM that the dominant male stuff is not all true. I think a lot of what makes a great marriage work is more about personality types then gender.
> 
> But that doesn't mean I throw out all of their ideas either.
> 
> ...


I wouldn't throw out anyone's ideas entirely and I will admit to you that a nice guy in the bedroom wouldn't necessarily work for me. My husband has all the control in the bedroom but that's only because I trust him to know exactly what pleases me and he has always been considerate. He's not slapping my ass every time we have sex. He is sometimes gentle and sometimes butt slapping. This is only in the bedroom though.

There are areas in our relationship where I have more say, for example with the kids. It's not that I don't go to him for advice but it's more that he respects that I'm involved with them 24/7 and would be the better decision maker. 

My husband is a computer geek and graphic artist that loves tinkering with machines and inventing. He is kind and thoughtful to me (almost) always. I receive flowers and he does amazing surprises and always has. He makes me feel special, loved and no matter what, I know he'll be there for me. In doing all of this he makes me feel safe. The thing is, I'm really in love so it is insulting to read that I shouldn't be because he's not dominant enough. It's insulting and it's confusing.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> I am DYING laughing here from the mental image you just gave me. Man is dominant, benevolent dictator. He is hot, buff with nice abs and a tight @ss. He says, "Og say WOMAN, What's for dinner?" Woman sighs and delivers dinner to the barcolounger in her negligee because everyone knows that a woman will do ANYTHING for their hot and sexy dominate male.
> 
> Then they wake up on the barcolounger with the porn movie over.


I see it more as a repressed 1940's - 50's relationship but now that you've laid it out...haha, now I'm picturing Fabio but a less romantic one!

My friend once sent me an ad from the 40's that came from Better Homes & Garden and it outlined what a woman should do and it was insane. It had a picture of a smiling woman and her two children smiling. The girl and woman in beautiful dress and boy in neat clothing. It listed things such as...have roaring fire in fire place, make sure to brush your teeth and smile before greeting your husband with a smile, make sure the children are well behaved and happy to see their father, be sure dinner is hot and is something that will excite your husband. 

I giggled wildly but felt really, really badly for women back then.


----------



## Amplexor (Feb 13, 2008)

Trenton said:


> My friend once sent me an ad from the 40's that came from Better Homes & Garden and it outlined what a woman should do and it was insane. It had a picture of a smiling woman and her two children smiling.


It's still out there floating around.

http://www.j-walk.com/other/goodwife/index.htm

Worth a good chuckle.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> I've spent a lot of time here arguing with BBW and MEM that the dominant male stuff is not all true. I think a lot of what makes a great marriage work is more about personality types then gender.
> 
> But that doesn't mean I throw out all of their ideas either.
> 
> Generalizations are not always bad. There is usually SOME truth behind the way we link certain types of people (gender, religion, political affiliation, cultural, jocks, nerds, whatever) to certain behaviors.


I don't argue whether they are good or bad. I agree that there is some truth even. My sole contention is that they are at best a distraction and at worse destructive when trying to identify specific problems in specific marriages.





> One of the beliefs I've always had about women that I've changed since being here on this board - I used to think it was important to be "nice" in bed. Now, I'm not convinced most women want a man to totally take over all the IMPORTANT decisions in a marriage - but I AM convinced that MOST women are more turned on by a confident, physical lover more than a sensual, sensitive lover.


Probably. Most. But wouldn't YOU be hosed if you took that assumption to the one of the women who happened to be DOM? And LIKED her subs sub in bed?



> You see a lot of good guys here whose wives are 'affairing down.' It makes no sense, but it's a lot more common than i would have believed in the past.
> 
> I've never heard of a "biker chick" leaving "the gang" for a sexual obsession with an accountant. But I've known of a few women who have left nice, professional, good husbands for a guy with a Harley and some tatoos.


I read more BDSM mags than you do, I guess! Every read anything by Tristan Taorimino? There is more out there than main stream media will lead you to believe.

And really there are plenty of men having affairs as well. This is not a female thing.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> I've spent a lot of time here arguing with BBW and MEM that the dominant male stuff is not all true. I think a lot of what makes a great marriage work is more about personality types then gender.


For the record, it is not just BBW (am I the only one who thinks Big Beautiful Woman when seeing that?) and MEM. GreenPearl does it in a huge way as well. Many other posters have it as sort of this background thought process that seeps into responses. Every time I see things like women are tender hearted by their nature, I want to scream. *I* am not tender hearted by my nature! I am kind. But I am viscous with people's feelings in arguments (not on purpose). 

I DO agree when I hear disparagement of the gender equality "myth." Everyone knows women are superior to men in organizational skills, intelligence, caring arts and professions, really most everything. I just keep my man around to do the heavy lifting. :rofl:


----------



## AWife (Sep 25, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> It took awhile for me to accept the idea that women aren't truly turned on by a man with a vacuum.


I get turned on just THINKING about my husband actually holding a vacuum. If it was running and moving across the carpet.... wow....


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

Wish I had the energy to discuss because that's really part of the "fun" of these debates, but its been beaten out of me at work today. And I had a very bad experience with a gorilla - but that's for another thread.

I know its both men and women having affairs - but always considered the midlife crisis male who finds a younger woman to be the "classic" example. So many stories here of the "bored" wife looking for excitement and getting tired of the "nice guy" who thought he was a great husband. Didn't realize THAT was such a big trend and think that - in the bedroom - some of this Alpha Male stuff could be helpful.

Tried to stop typing "BBW and MEM said" so much - don't want to give those two ALL the blame/credit - but they are the ones whose opinions I guess I'm more opt to read - they get the most responses. They are also two men with 20 year marriages. And yes - I've noticed that there are many women who agree with them - which still puzzles me.

And if you find a story in one of your BDSM books/mags about a hot pornstar biker chick who is TOTALLY CRAZED over Accountants with big vacuums, please SEND IT MY WAY!!!


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> Wish I had the energy to discuss because that's really part of the "fun" of these debates, but its been beaten out of me at work today. And I had a very bad experience with a gorilla - but that's for another thread.
> 
> I know its both men and women having affairs - but always considered the midlife crisis male who finds a younger woman to be the "classic" example. So many stories here of the "bored" wife looking for excitement and getting tired of the "nice guy" who thought he was a great husband. Didn't realize THAT was such a big trend and think that - in the bedroom - some of this Alpha Male stuff could be helpful.
> 
> ...


I think Accounting is sexy and if you have a Dyson vaccuum I very well might follow you around.

I think one turn off for most women (and men for that matter) is self pity but confidence doesn't have to come with dominance, it can be packaged many different ways.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Amplexor said:


> It's still out there floating around.
> 
> The Good Wife's Guide
> 
> Worth a good chuckle.


Ah thank you, that is it but as you can see I got the source wrong and changed the details. :rofl:


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

AWife said:


> I get turned on just THINKING about my husband actually holding a vacuum. If it was running and moving across the carpet.... wow....


:rofl: same!


----------



## F-102 (Sep 15, 2010)

I agree with 777, it seems that there is a myth that women tend to "trade up" in affairs, but the ones I see, they have great, honest guys for partners, but the guys they cheat with seem to always have drug problems, are wanted in six states or have twenty different stories about those IRS letters they keep getting. But then again, the ones venting about these affairs are the men who get cheated on, so you have to take what they say with a pinch of salt. But it was funny about the old "Good Wife article? Have you seen any from the turn of the 20th century? They say things like a woman should never, ever eat in front of a man, and to only take bites when his eyes are averted! WTF!?! And BTW, did you all know that June Cleaver passed away about a week ago?


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

Those gender generalizations you see on forums are necessary because they talk about the vast majority of people. Allow me to illustrate on a potential forum topic. 

Say someone posted "Men think overweight women in bathrobes aren't attractive". There will probably be at least one poster who claims that's unfair because it revolves solely around men and women don't like overweight men in bathrobes either. That's completely correct. Except the person who made the topic was probably trying to see how many men agree...or trying to explain that most men don't like that type of woman. 

Then there will might be a poster who claims the topic is offensive to women and proves how shallow men are. Except, most of us, from both genders are shallow and we can't change what we find attractive and what we don't. We can only be honest about it. If you don't like milk, you won't eat it. Eating it will always lead to a bad experience. 

Last in line, there will probably be a poster who comes and says, "your affirmation is not correct, i like overweight women in bathrobes". That's perfectly ok. There are exceptions to every rule, that's what this forum is all about, explaining how some people are the same, others are different, trading advice etc.

If we had a "strawberries are good" thread, would people really come and say "hey, but what about bananas? this is fruit discrimination!"  Probably not. Why? Because these generalizations aren't an instruction manual for how people should lead their lives and for what they should like. There are always people who don't agree, we're all different. Some generalizations simply apply to a majority of people in general, women or men. It's for example safe for me to say "women cry more than men". 

What i really mean is "most women cry more than most men" which is actually true. i just don't add the "most" because i rely on people to understand what i mean and assume they don't have to be reminded all the time that no rule or info or fact on this planet works for every single person out there. As a further proof to that if i say "men like women", a gay guy can always show up and explain how that's not true because he likes men. You can't cover every single individual on the planet all of the time. If that were the case, i'd be scouting Alaska and Mongolia before posting this to see how people there feel about what i've just said.


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

Trenton said:


> Isn't it possible that believing someone else's philosophy on women, which I think they have SO VERY wrong, could reasonably sabotage you in the future? The clear cut dominant/submissive theory (used for lack of a better word) constantly spewed on this forum promotes male selfishness and ego massaging and female neglect and repression. They just make it sound all pretty and sexy. They are shouting it out to wayward men in unhappy, sexless marriages so that they can further have their ego massaged. I truly hope you don't believe it.


I respectfully disagree with you as a woman. I was quite annoyed with what MEM and BBW said at the beginning because i understood it somewhat wrong. As soon as i heard "dominant" my mind jumped to "in charge of me and controlling me". That's not what it's about. The dominant guy is not the "woman slave, fetch me dinner now" kinda guy. He's more of a guy who is capable of initiative, holding his own ground, not becoming a doormat and not being passive and childish in bed. 

As for the actual sex part, i personally think that i'm considerably more attracted to my man if he's dominant in bed. Don't get me wrong, outside the bedroom my guy is the kind that always comes home on time, never hangs out with the guys to drink, loves kids, cooks and helps with the cleaning on every occasion so he could be considered a nice guy. 

During sex and when he has a hobby or at work, he's dominant. Again, this means with initiative and confident. That's incredibly attractive for me and i would jump in bed with him on every single occasion. Giving up control for him to have it in bed doesn't seem degrading at all to me because i'm more confident in my sexuality right now. 

I can loose control and just enjoy myself. To further explain how i understand things, it's like dancing. The man gets to lead. If the woman leads, it's awkward for both partners. She can lead with no problems at all, but few women want to and feel any attraction towards their male partner in this scenario. Now going back to sex, it's the same leading part in the bedroom. Dominant doesn't mean the man gets everything he wants and the woman is his sex slave. If that's what you understood, i doubt that's what is being said in these posts (i'll need some backup from the guys here though). Rather, i think it means the man has the leading role, just like at dancing, and the woman follows along. If the man steps on the woman's toes, in both situations and the woman doesn't like it, she is completely free to complain, kick his ass, or whatever else she can think of (take this as a joke please . Which further proves that the submissive woman who is being led by a man isn't doing anything she doesn't want to do and she can be just as strong willed as he can. She just lets him lead because she enjoys it.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Nekko said:


> I respectfully disagree with you as a woman. I was quite annoyed with what MEM and BBW said at the beginning because i understood it somewhat wrong. As soon as i heard "dominant" my mind jumped to "in charge of me and controlling me". That's not what it's about. The dominant guy is not the "woman slave, fetch me dinner now" kinda guy. He's more of a guy who is capable of initiative, holding his own ground, not becoming a doormat and not being passive and childish in bed.
> 
> As for the actual sex part, i personally think that i'm considerably more attracted to my man if he's dominant in bed. Don't get me wrong, outside the bedroom my guy is the kind that always comes home on time, never hangs out with the guys to drink, loves kids, cooks and helps with the cleaning on every occasion so he could be considered a nice guy.
> 
> ...


In BBW's philosophy, his ideals are the only way and so it's ironic that me saying...sure maybe it works for some but not for all...is met with so many coming to his defense. This is wrong when you, yourself, and many others are saying it's not always the case but does happen. Right there is a flaw.

I am saying that every couple is different and that there is no one philosophy that will work for all. There are plenty of relationships on this board that prove nice guys can be in good relationships and make women happy too. How can BBW's philosophy completely overlook that and still be considered sane? How can men and women constantly defend it when they know it has this critical flaw? That is all I keep saying.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> Wish I had the energy to discuss because that's really part of the "fun" of these debates,


I like the discussion. It makes me think.




> I know its both men and women having affairs - but always considered the midlife crisis male who finds a younger woman to be the "classic" example. So many stories here of the "bored" wife looking for excitement and getting tired of the "nice guy" who thought he was a great husband.


That's funny. I always thought the "classic" example was based on the notion that men are just walking horn dogs, the man who just couldn't keep it in his pants. For the longest time many people thought the statistic were that men cheated A LOT more than women do.

"Recent studies reveal that 45-55% of married women and 50-60% of married men engage in extramarital sex at some time or another during their relationship. "

This is just some article on the internet, with no idea what the "recent studies" are. But it comes as no great surprise to me that men cheat more, but only slightly more.



> Didn't realize THAT was such a big trend and think that - in the bedroom - some of this Alpha Male stuff could be helpful.


I don't think you can take this forum ans indicative of any specific trend. Forums themselves self select for particular types of people.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Trenton said:


> I think one turn off for most women (and men for that matter) is self pity but confidence doesn't have to come with dominance, it can be packaged many different ways.


THAT is the truest statement lately.


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

Trenton said:


> In BBW's philosophy, his ideals are the only way and so it's ironic that me saying...sure maybe it works for some but not for all...is met with so many coming to his defense. This is wrong when you, yourself, and many others are saying it's not always the case but does happen. Right there is a flaw.
> 
> I am saying that every couple is different and that there is no one philosophy that will work for all. There are plenty of relationships on this board that prove nice guys can be in good relationships and make women happy too. How can BBW's philosophy completely overlook that and still be considered sane? How can men and women constantly defend it when they know it has this critical flaw? That is all I keep saying.


Nothing is universally available. Do you need a small star under every post stating "should be taken with a grain of salt and won't work for all absolutely all people"? That's assumed on every post. None of us are psychologists or have schooling in giving advice. We just present theories and opinions. Generalizations work for A MAJORITY of people. If, as you say, some people don't fit in that category, that doesn't mean the whole theory falls apart because it works quite well for some people. 

You are right just as BBW is right because your opinions and experiences and advice will both be useful for a certain personality of typology of person who will come looking for support on these forums. They are different points of view and the world can be seen in multiple ways which are all accurate. :smthumbup:

As i said before, if i like strawberries and you like bananas, we're both right and we both have a right to share our point of view. What mindboggles me is why do you have such a strong need to dismiss BBW's theory completely when no one is asking you to adopt it and no one is saying that everyone should?

Let's just all keep our minds open to anything anyone has to say here and consider that some things can be right while others aren't, at least for us and our lives. Just as there are nice men having successful marriages with women out there, there are nice men who are miserable because their wives are taking them for granted and stepping all over them. For the last category, BBW's advice will prove quite helpful. For the first one...yours will. Throughout my one or two years (i don't remember) of trolling on this forum i've learned a ton from a lot of people. I'm thankful to anyone who's ever responded to one of my posts or shared an opinion. Let's keep things just the way they are, shall we?


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Nekko said:


> Nothing is universally available. Do you need a small star under every post stating "should be taken with a grain of salt and won't work for all absolutely all people"? That's assumed on every post. None of us are psychologists or have schooling in giving advice. We just present theories and opinions. Generalizations work for A MAJORITY of people. If, as you say, some people don't fit in that category, that doesn't mean the whole theory falls apart because it works quite well for some people.
> 
> You are right just as BBW is right because your opinions and experiences and advice will both be useful for a certain personality of typology of person who will come looking for support on these forums. They are different points of view and the world can be seen in multiple ways which are all accurate. :smthumbup:
> 
> ...


I think I just pointed out that BBW does not have an open mind. I fully enjoy discussing and learning, that's why I'm here. Maybe it will or won't change my mind but I'm definitely interested in finding out about it. 

I don't disregard everything BBW says. I believe it may work for some just as you do. I don't like the premise behind it.

Perhaps you should just as bluntly and sarcastically challenge BBW if you disagree with a small portion of his beliefs rather than being one to run to his defense regardless of his blatant rigidity and disagreement with the exact things you are talking to me about. It's almost comical from my end as there are those who do this for him all the time. I mean, there are times I think it's an actual joke or imagine you all as one crazy person. 

I've thought about it long and hard. BBW's philosophy if accepted by too many has the opportunity to set women back. I don't want this for my daughter or my daughter's daughter. The philosophy itself is setting women up for abuse. I think as a society we've already been there, done that and I don't want to go backwards.

You disagree, that's great. You can run to his defense each time I challenge his values and I will continue to challenge them because I don't agree with them and I do think they are dangerous. This attitude you have of acceptance no matter what is dangerous indeed. I don't understand what you mean by keeping things the way they are, change is inevitable. 

_I love bananas but in this case the bananas are overpowering the flavor of the equally delicious strawberries and I need to point that out._ :rofl:


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

And yes - I DO have Dyson vacuum, and its pretty kick-ass! 

But I still think I'd get more chicks with a Harley.

Generally speaking of course.

Maybe I'll start dragging the Dyson around town with me - see what kind of reaction I get.

Possible new pickup line - "Hey baby, wanna touch my hose? You'd be surprised how far it can reach! And I've got ALL the attachments YOU'LL ever need."


----------



## Amplexor (Feb 13, 2008)

Trenton said:


> Ah thank you, that is it but as you can see I got the source wrong and changed the details. :rofl:



While Ward Cleaver may have come home with those kinds of expectations from June he most certainly wouldn't have ever dreamed she might be waiting with a nice "Welcome home BJ honey!" Change is good.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Nekko said:


> I respectfully disagree with you as a woman.


How do you disagree with someone "as a woman"? You really only get to disagree with someone as YOU as you don't speak for the rest of us.


> I was quite annoyed with what MEM and BBW said at the beginning because i understood it somewhat wrong. As soon as i heard "dominant" my mind jumped to "in charge of me and controlling me". That's not what it's about. The dominant guy is not the "woman slave, fetch me dinner now" kinda guy. He's more of a guy who is capable of initiative, holding his own ground, not becoming a doormat and not being passive and childish in bed.


And what about those men who don't have a great deal of initiative and not super inclined to hold his own ground? Are they unlovable? Unmarriagable? No, since I am happily married to one.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> And yes - I DO have Dyson vacuum, and its pretty kick-ass!
> 
> But I still think I'd get more chicks with a Harley.
> 
> ...


Too funny! Come on, it takes a lot more confidence to stroll around town with your Dyson than a Harley!


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Amplexor said:


> While Ward Cleaver may have come home with those kinds of expectations from June he most certainly wouldn't have ever dreamed she might be waiting with a nice "Welcome home BJ honey!" Change is good.


You have a point!


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

Trenton said:


> I don't disregard everything BBW says. I believe it may work for some just as you do. I don't like the premise behind it.
> 
> Perhaps you should just as bluntly and sarcastically challenge BBW if you disagree with a small portion of his beliefs rather than being one to run to his defense regardless of his blatant rigidity and disagreement with the exact things you are talking to me about. It's almost comical from my end as there are those who do this for him all the time. I mean, there are times I think it's an actual joke or imagine you all as one crazy person.


I have just as bluntly and sarcastically challenged BBW's opinions on some occasions. You really don't understand what i'm trying to say and i'm honestly not trying to offend you or argue but you and i have read completely different BBW posts or understood them in different ways 



> I've thought about it long and hard. BBW's philosophy if accepted by too many has the opportunity to set women back. I don't want this for my daughter or my daughter's daughter. The philosophy itself is setting women up for abuse. I think as a society we've already been there, done that and I don't want to go backwards.


This is what i'm trying to explain, especially since i've shared your point of view when i first encountered those "man up" posts. I don't think they are encouraging men to be abusive, mean and cruel to their women. Maybe i'm understanding them wrong. 

When i think of a dominant man i think of a man who is smart, confident, capable of taking care of himself, charismatic, can provide for his family, assume responsibility and control his urges, not be bullied into silence by his wife, accept any opinion of hers against his will and wants or accept any people treating him like a door mat. 

I'm not in any way thinking of a "you shall do as you are told woman!" kind of guy. That's not a dominant guy, that's a big jerk i won't even pay attention to as a friend or acquaintance, let alone as a husband. 

When i say some women love to be submissive in bed, i don't mean that they become their men's sexual slaves or do whatever they are told. I'm talking about the sexual fantasy most women have of the strong good looking man that comes and just "takes" them rather than being the "nice guy" who asks for permission three times in a row and then clumsily proceeds to petting them.

Didn't you ever feel the need for your guy to come, take you into his arms, stare into your eyes with a passionate smile on his face, then smirk and tell you how he's going to have you because he can't resist you? This, in my opinion is the "dominant" guy. Not the abusive guy who will force a woman into sex regardless of her wishes. That's not what i'm talking about. So, again, are we talking about the same thing here?


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Nekko said:


> What i really mean is "most women cry more than most men" which is actually true.


The most oft missed point. I don't disagree with the fact that many of these generalizations are TRUE. I just don't find them USEFUL when thinking through marital issues. What good does it do to know what WOMEN like when you could know what THAT woman likes. Fun for research studies not useful and often distracting or even damaging when thinking about individual marriages.


----------



## Amplexor (Feb 13, 2008)

Trenton said:


> I don't disregard everything BBW says. I believe it may work for some just as you do.


:iagree:

I actually agree with 90% of BBW's philosophy if you replace the word "dominant" with the word "confident". (Sans the spanking theory) That is why "Confidence" is one of the words in my signature line, it had an enormous impact on the recovery of our marriage. We've had a lot of threads and posts on "the dominant man" here over the past few months and for some that arrangement may work very well. But in my marriage, do I need to be dominant? No. Confident? Yes. Maybe it's just semantics to some but I see a distinct difference. My wife has always admired my confidence. It was what drew her to me when we first met in a crowd of 200 people at a professional gathering. As she said she was quite "taken" with me when she saw me "work the room". When that confidence morphed into dominance over time it pushed her away and into a very serious EA. When the marriage nearly failed, I lost that confidence and that pushed her even further away. She had never seen me in that light and it turned her off. How could she feel any reassurance in us recovering if I didn't have confidence in myself. With time and some tips from "Love Must be Tough" the confidence returned and as it did she drew closer to me because she could see I was taking charge of myself and showing her I knew we could recover. She drew to me and away from TOM. It is confidence, not dominance that is critically important in our relationship. Does that desire for me because of my confidence transfer to the bedroom? Yes it does.


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> How do you disagree with someone "as a woman"? You really only get to disagree with someone as YOU as you don't speak for the rest of us.


That was supposed to mean that i'm not a guy and i'm talking from the point of view of a woman. English is not my native language so perhaps i phrased that wrong. 


> And what about those men who don't have a great deal of initiative and not super inclined to hold his own ground? Are they unlovable? Unmarriagable? No, since I am happily married to one.


From what i read from your older posts your husband is perfectly capable from standing his own ground, being assertive and letting you know that he sometimes doesn't agree with you but he communicates all that in a mature, respectful manner. 

There is a huge difference between this type of guy and a "yes m'aam" to everything you say type of guy. The one i've mentioned last isn't unloveable or unmarriageable but will tend to be unatractive at times and this will lead to all of the "my man doesn't satisfy me, i am having an EA with a hot guy on the web" kinda post. Not trying to be rude. Just expressing an opinion since i've been with two of those men who adopted all my likes and wants in less than a week and i didn't find them attractive. 

"He also never ever rolled over like a puppy and accept MY view of sex as right or normal. What he did was talk to me." I believe this was from your older post. This goes to show that your guy stood up for himself. Do you think you'd be as happy as you are now if he just accepted your opinion and put up with it?


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> The most oft missed point. I don't disagree with the fact that many of these generalizations are TRUE. I just don't find them USEFUL when thinking through marital issues. What good does it do to know what WOMEN like when you could know what THAT woman likes. Fun for research studies not useful and often distracting or even damaging when thinking about individual marriages.


When a marriage is breaking down its hard to have that level of communication. And most people don't come here until they are at the point where talking through things no longer helps.

So you start reading what other people have dealt with and look for stories close to your own. From there you can make some generalizations about - like my situation - why some women have strayed from "good husbands."

THEN - the key is to take those generalizations and try to figure out how or if they apply to your situation.

I DO feel like a lot of the generalizations about being a "nice guy" applied to me. I have no plans to try and become a Dominant male. But I understand now that spoiling your wife is no guarantee that she'll stay. Do this, and some women will see you as weak, become bored with you, and take advantage of your good nature.

Also - my old generalization about sex and how men should be "nice" was a BAD generalization. It was politcally correct - but just plain untrue (in general). And I didn't learn that by listening to some guys tell me what women desire. My belief that women want a more sexually aggressive man was changed after reading so many posts by unhappy and HAPPY women in the Sex forum.

Just like being too aggressive in bed (as someone pointed out to me above) can be risky - not being aggressive enough is risky as well. And it seems that the "general" rule is that a woman will tell you what's "too much" - but they might not always speak up when they want you too push a little more.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Nekko, unfairly I judged you then as I've never read many of your other posts. I apologize for this as that style of posting very well might be your way and I'm cool with that.

Amp, absolutely. Confidence in men is an extremely admirable trait as it is in women. The constant use of dominant/submission is what bothers me but isn't that because he is advocating dominance/submission?

Niceguy I understand but listen to Amp as well. Confidence might be your key problem. You feel like crap, it's almost as if you feel like you don't deserve any woman. If you want to attract women work on that. In typing with you for just a few days I can tell you're funny as all hell. Women like this especially if you couple it with confidence.

In regards to the bedroom. Well, it might be the one area of BBW's philosophy that I somewhat agree with (but only because it is the only part that applies to my marriage) still, I'm not convinced it works for the majority either. I do prefer, not a dominant man, but a man who wants to get what he wants and will not hold back in showing this to me. Does it mean he's not thoughtful? Heck no! He is confident in bed as well...even here confident is a better word than dominant.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Nekko said:


> That was supposed to mean that i'm not a guy and i'm talking from the point of view of a woman. English is not my native language so perhaps i phrased that wrong.


No I think your english is fine. My point is there IS NO "point of view of a woman". There is only YOUR point of view. You certainly don't speak from MY point of view. And I am definitely a woman.


> From what i read from your older posts your husband is perfectly capable from standing his own ground, being assertive and letting you know that he sometimes doesn't agree with you but he communicates all that in a mature, respectful manner.


So am I. Does that make me a man?


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> When a marriage is breaking down its hard to have that level of communication.


Well if that is the case, then there is a better place to start then what "men" and "women" want.



> And most people don't come here until they are at the point where talking through things no longer helps.


That is because many people don't know how to talk. They have been talking about what they need and not really hearing what the other needs because we expect people to talk from the same set of expectations and assumptions that we take for granted.

That is why learning about emotional needs, non-violent and effective communication and such are going to be way more important than generalizations. In my opinion.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes (Feb 11, 2010)

NiceGuy,
How did the zoo escapade go? Me?, storming my next door neighbor's house didn't work so well. He is a viking as well.

Trenton,
When the rug is pulled out from under you, having confidence to get back up again is very difficult. I wish there was a pill for confidence. I really do. I lack it too and being funny/crass is my way of showing "confidence" to the outside world. I think NG is feeling this way because his wife cheated on him. I have watched a close friend nearly loose her mind because her husband was unfaithful. She is a former NFL cheerleader, gorgeous inside and out, smart, business owner, mom, educated and a nice person. After she found out, she totally changed. It has been three years now and they are divorced. She is paranoid about everything, she is on 3 different types of anti-depression/anxiety medication, gets plastic surgery/injections just about every 2 months and doesn't look normal anymore. Any joke or compliment is met with total hostility and she picks apart all statements for negativity. I doubt that she will ever regain the confidence she once had or any at all for that matter. It is so, so sad. She is a husk of what she once was. Her ex deserves time in NG's gorilla cage covered in deer urine.


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

I refuse to give up my generalizations!

Generally speaking, sneaking into the gorilla exhibit at the zoo with your pants down carrying nothing but a ruler is a BAD IDEA.

Generally they don't call or send flowers afterwards. But maybe I'll be wrong about this one. Maybe he really was special.



vthomeschoolmom said:


> Well if that is the case, then there is a better place to start then what "men" and "women" want.
> 
> That is because many people don't know how to talk. They have been talking about what they need and not really hearing what the other needs because we expect people to talk from the same set of expectations and assumptions that we take for granted.
> 
> That is why learning about emotional needs, non-violent and effective communication and such are going to be way more important than generalizations. In my opinion.


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> What good does it do to know what WOMEN like when you could know what THAT woman likes. Fun for research studies not useful and often distracting or even damaging when thinking about individual marriages.


I don't know why - but this thread has me really riled up! I rarely want to type "you're wrong" over and over in caps, but I'm really holding back right now.

THAT woman may have stopped talking to you. THAT woman might not know WHAT she wants. THAT woman may NOT know how to communicate her needs.

THAT woman "might" be acting like a similar woman in 5 other stories on this board. Do you take the chance and lump them all together - and use the other stories to help fill in the blanks where yours makes no sense? 

Or do you simply write it off as a coincidence because we are all completely unique individuals?

In which case what's the purpose of this board? 

On this board we HAVE to generalize when giving advice to one another. We can't KNOW the other person's cheating spouse after reading a 2 paragraph summary. But we know a little about men, a little about women, and a little about people who cheat. This helps us fill in the blanks.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes (Feb 11, 2010)

Niceguy,
You are amazing. Damn, where are my icons?!


----------



## AliceA (Jul 29, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> In which case what's the purpose of this board?
> 
> On this board we HAVE to generalize when giving advice to one another. We can't KNOW the other person's cheating spouse after reading a 2 paragraph summary. But we know a little about men, a little about women, and a little about people who cheat. This helps us fill in the blanks.


True, if we don't make some assumtions and generalisations, compare a persons story to our own or others, there truly is no point in posting on a forum.

Everyone makes generalisations. Everyday we use many templates for how our day should go, and how the people we meet may behave based on very few observations of them. They won't always be correct, but it's how the brain works. Challenging your own beliefs is definitely a good thing of course. Sometimes people surprise us, unfortunately, on a forum, we're just not going to have the opportunity to truly delve too deeply into everyone's unique situation/personality, so we make do with our own knowledge and experiences, and maybe some will be similar enough to anothers to be of some use. We discard what isn't useful.

Some people's views may challenge yours, and you may think it would never work in your own life, so wouldn't in others. Instead try thinking that it worked for them, it may or may not work for others, but having more diversity on the board, more points of view, is actually a good thing. People rarely step outside their box anyway, so if the advice doesn't fit them, I doubt they'd try it.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Brennan, I hear you and totally understandable. That kind of betrayal of trust from someone who is supposed to adore is mind bogglingly painful. I don't think looks or status makes you invulnerable, I don't think anything does.

Niceguy, I hope you're hearing that I like you. I think you're funny. I think you deserve all the happiness in the world and maybe this will or won't help but I'm honest as they come so I hope you can believe me. You, your Dyson and your big balls deserve a perfect woman and you will find her.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

breeze said:


> True, if we don't make some assumtions and generalisations, compare a persons story to our own or others, there truly is no point in posting on a forum.
> 
> Everyone makes generalisations. Everyday we use many templates for how our day should go, and how the people we meet may behave based on very few observations of them. They won't always be correct, but it's how the brain works. Challenging your own beliefs is definitely a good thing of course. Sometimes people surprise us, unfortunately, on a forum, we're just not going to have the opportunity to truly delve too deeply into everyone's unique situation/personality, so we make do with our own knowledge and experiences, and maybe some will be similar enough to anothers to be of some use. We discard what isn't useful.
> 
> Some people's views may challenge yours, and you may think it would never work in your own life, so wouldn't in others. Instead try thinking that it worked for them, it may or may not work for others, but having more diversity on the board, more points of view, is actually a good thing. People rarely step outside their box anyway, so if the advice doesn't fit them, I doubt they'd try it.


I like having my views challenged and will always try something out. In fact, I gave my husband BBW's anytime you want to have sex rule. This led my husband to testing me. At our son's birthday party...sex in the locked bathroom...ahhhh. I almost died I was so anxious. That rule is still in effect in our relationship. Another on this board...I think it was Chris Taylor...gave me the idea to plan a mini vacation. We did that too, was the best thing we've done in years. I'm interested in doing what works, improving my own relationship and trying to help others if possible. 

I'm still honest and willing to say what I think and feel as well. If I disagree I will say it and if I find I'm wrong I will fess up. On the complete dominance/submission thing being a no brainer every time--I disagree fervently.


----------



## sisters359 (Apr 9, 2009)

Hey, it's one thing to say "most women cry more than men," but it is a totally different thing to say, "most women are more emotional than men." Most men I know are incredibly emotional and sensitive--but they are generally more practiced at hiding their emotions, and perhaps, too often, at ignoring or devaluing their emotions. 

As for the comment, "we have our preferences and we can't change them," I respectfully disagree. There is a tremendous amount of research and writing on how preferences are LEARNED, not natural. Westerners generally find the smell of cow urine to be very offensive; it is a common hair-care product and aphrodisiac in certain cultures. If anyone is interested, read up on "brain plasticity," which is based on medical research that has discovered pretty much nothing is "hard wired" into us, and the most amazing things can be re-wired (b/c wiring is really a form of conditioning, a statement that is a gross simplification of a fascinating process). 

And finally, it has been my own little private joke to think of BBW as a big bodied woman. Lest anyone think his ideas are benign, please remember that they are based on his assumption that women are "naturally" more submissive than men, that there can only be one "general" in the house, and that women are "naturally" more emotional, therefore, and less able to thoughtful and rational. His ideas are singularly misogynistic and if we were to transfer them to another venue (race), it would be very apparent. Just because some women have been socialized to think remaining child-like and under a man's control and protection is "best," does not make it right, natural, or socially productive. Amplexor, I don't find it confusing that women on here agree with BBW, I find it a bit sad to think that we continue to foster dependency in one sex when that model has proven, again and again, to be the least functional and the shortest lived.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes (Feb 11, 2010)

Sisters,
I stand up and APPLAUD you! Actually, I bow down to you. All Hail. Again, where are my damn icons?!


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

NG,
I am renaming you. Henceforth you will be SNG - which stands for Smart nice guy. 

This is truly first class thinking. 




nice777guy said:


> I don't know why - but this thread has me really riled up! I rarely want to type "you're wrong" over and over in caps, but I'm really holding back right now.
> 
> THAT woman may have stopped talking to you. THAT woman might not know WHAT she wants. THAT woman may NOT know how to communicate her needs.
> 
> ...


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

> So am I. Does that make me a man?


Nope, it makes you a confident woman. My point was you described your man as not being very confident, yet he is. 

You know, i first started out picking on BBW for what he said. As far as i can remember, i even quoted what dominant means out of the dictionary because i, like you got extremely annoyed when i heard the idea of a man being in charge of a woman, whether in the bedroom or outside of it. 

I too suggested that a better word to use is "confident" but just as vthomeschoolmom i made sure to explain that men and women like the same thing in their partners and we shouldn't attribute that to only one gender. So i'm sorry if this will be longer but i have to explain why i now partially agree with it. 

Just like sisters i believe that most of what we are today, we've learned throughout our life and in our childhood. yes, including what taste in food, men and relationships we have. Even the way we walk is in most cases learned from someone else when we were young. 

Ok, now i'm going to go ahead and say something that might bother some. Part of our behavior and most of our natural urges/instincts, are animalic right? Ok, let's look at how most of the other species on this planet mate? They start out by doing some foreplay/courting (smelling buts, brushing up against eachother, calling for eachother...we're not the only ones with foreplay) and then in some odd twist of things, the male becomes dominant (or in human terms "confident") gets on top of the female and they have steaming hot animal sex. In some species, after they're done, the female EATS the male...in others, if the male doesn't appear confident enough the female will whoop his butt and find a better one. So as you see, you can't say that in the animal world males are in charge of females. It's not natural and we aren't the weaker sex just because we're smaller. We're just slightly different from men where it counts. Those differences were designed to get us attracted to eachother. That's it. Females have to prove as fertile as possible (why men are naturally attracted to big boobs, red cheeks, shiny hair and nails etc...) and males have to prove they are superior to other males (aka, the dominant male out of a series of other males). 

Males might generally be bigger, but damn, females can and will often show them who's the boss. Having said all that note that the male is generally on top (behind) and dominant while the mating takes place. That's because, like a pea****, he is trying to prove how bad ass he can be compared to other males. The female, naturally, responds to the biggest, strongest of males because that gives her offspring the best chance of survival. Doesn't matter if SHE can kick his butt! It matters how he appears to *stack up with other males*. Why is this great for the female? Cause she gets the message : strong genes, good chance of offspring survival, if another male comes and attacks our "family" my male is dominant enough to fight him off and keep us safe, even if until that happens i whop his ass and he brings food and branches and whatever (so he's a nice guy too). We've changed this a bit, because we now sit 8 hours in front of a computer rather than run through the fields and hunt deer. But some of those instincts are clearly still there. 

That is what i understand by dominant and i'll agree to it only when it comes to sex, perhaps in small doses outside of the bedroom. That's not because i think men are should have complete control over me or can dominate me. It's because i understood how my brain, instincts etc work and i'm using them to my own advantage to get more pleasure. i know my mind reacts to that "alpha male-ness" and responds with attraction. In the same manner i'm aware that men are fascinated with boobs (well, most of them) and if i want to attract mine, my best bet is to show him some. 

Attraction isn't there for years. Those lusty, hot feelings disappear after a period. Bringing them back assumes you know how your mind works and how attraction works. That's why, before you jump up and are offended by how being tagged "submissive" makes you feel, understand it's not about men controlling you . 

And obviously, yes, all people are different. But for some of us it works and we're not "remaining child-like and under a man's control and protection is "best," does not make it right, natural, or socially productive." You know, i don't agree with the old ways of men being in charge of the household and in charge of their women at all. In fact, i've always rebelled from that as bad as i could. But i can't help but notice that with this attempt to "kill off all differences between genders" and make us all be exactly the same (same rights, same occupations, same roles) we're now having an insane number of sexless marriages between people who actually get along and love eachother. Isn't that a bit fishy?

I apologize for the extremely long post.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

I think your comparison between us and other species is a common one and doesn't offend me except that I think if you look at the vast differences (both good and bad) between our species and others you'll find there are more differences than similarities. It's really not a very good scientific argument as it narrowly works on the surface. When we look underneath it is near ridiculous.

We have the ability to appreciate beauty for the sake of beauty. As in the beautiful sunset I saw last night took my breath away. The ability to know right from wrong and develop morality as well as our desire to worship which might be tied to our sole species ability to understand that we will die (beyond the survival instinct of other species). We have humor which is a trait found only in humans. We have a larger level of self consciousness. As in we are able to step back and look at ourselves as small compared to the larger picture. We have created hundreds of languages and our ability to communicate in and out of the bedroom exists far beyond the abilities of any other species. We are capable of tracking time and comparing past, present and future. Yes, this is yet another trait humans alone have. We at times work against nature. We are the only species that does this. An example of working against nature would be pollution and creating synthetic materials.

Finally, the major separator for me and I hope for you is our ability to choose our own destiny. This alone proves we are able to go against instincts or with them on a whim. All of the above differences coupled with our ability to control our own future comes with major responsibility. Perhaps some would prefer it be more simple and all came down to ignorant instincts so as to not take responsibility for their choices but this is an excuse. Ironically, making up excuses for poor choices is yet another human only trait.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

I will add that I agree with you that current trends to try to make women equal to men by making women the same as men is an injustice to both sexes. Women really wanted equal rights but didn't want to have to be like men to get them. I'm sure you'll agree we deserve the right to vote and own property. Later women wanted the ability to not have to be home and raise children with zero control over their lives, they wanted control over their reproductive rights and lives, equal pay for equal work. These are all great desires and I assure you that you are currently enjoying many of the benefits of the hard work of strong women before you. If you don't value these freedoms just visit a country where women have no rights. It will alter your perception greatly.

So it stinks that it has created other issues. One huge one being that a man's role in the household and in our society is a little confusing. I don't think you can blame women for getting it a little wrong or for men for pushing back a little and having a desire to hold on to some of their balls. It's why I personally am an advocate for individuality. No woman is the same just as no man is the same. If we want to move closer towards fair and balance the scales of justice then we need to begin to look at individuals for who they are rather than their sex, their ethnicity or their nationality.

Some say I'm a dreamer but I'm not the only one.


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

Trenton, you are completely right. We're not animals....but we have a set of instincts that are somewhat animalic and primitive. For instance, we have the natural urge to pee. Yet when we feel like peeing in the middle of the street, none of us simply pull our pants down and go ahead. That's what separates us from animals. Some of us even go to the toiled ahead of time, anticipating that need. 


Attraction is also a pretty deep and primal need. For those women who are stuck with the choice between what attracts them (the confident somewhat arrogant alpha male) and the right choice for the world we live in(the nice guy who can prove a great companion and is love-able) maintaining attraction is hard. It works the same way for men and i'm not discriminating here and yes, not all women are the same. 

That nice guy in the marriage often has to make the same choice. Being somewhat aggressive or being nice and marrying the right, polite woman who won't accept that kind of treatment. By aggression i don't mean doing anything to harm his partner. I'm referring to biting, spanking and a sort of playfulness our society tries to teach us isn't appropriate. Pushing those feelings back, sometimes men and women kill passion for their spouses altogether. 

In this particular scenario, if the guy can understand that his woman would like him to be more aggressive, he'd enjoy sex more because it would be more natural (he wouldn't spend as much time fantasizing about how it could be). The woman would enjoy it more as well because she'd find an optimal sexual partner in the nice guy she already has. She could trust him and screw him. 

But usually the woman doesn't want to admit this because she feels like she's giving away some of her power/control/independence call it what you'd like if she allows her man to be a tid bit more dominant in bed. If he becomes that in bed, who knows, he might want to become that in all aspects of life. But this is where trust comes in. If you chose the right guy, you can trust him to still be nice and dominant in bed (assuming that's what attracts you to a guy). 


What i'm trying to say, really, is that with all these rules and clear instructions on how to have sex, we're killing off the best part of sex, that clash of passion, mild aggression, desire and eroticism that makes sex so nice hence the term "tear the clothes off of someone" when we're really lusty and want to have sex. I think most of us who don't have that anymore and have replaced it with a more polite kind of sex, because the more we love someone, the less room there is for dominance, aggression and any kind of sex play like that. 

We just "negotiate" who each of us is in that relationship and stick to that routine, stability which sometimes turns into boredom. But passion, as a general term, is explosive, powerful, not at all polite. Trying to make passion polite, you end up with a possibly pleasant but definitely not as hot as it used to be sex life. 

In that case, it's nice to understand what ever it is that brings out that sexual primal instinct in you, embrace it, try to adapt it in the relationship you already have and not try to control it. We might be stuck for 8 hours at work in front of our computers but sometimes it's nice to go back to the basics and go run on a field in nature or something. 

We might love the responsible, mature and loving relationship we have with our spouses, but sometimes it's nice to take off the leash off that aggression we have deep down and tear eachother's clothes off and enjoy the passion. Some people can't do that anymore because they try to control everything or are ashamed to tell other people how they really feel, or are afraid of loosing control and letting those primal instincts come to play. That's why BBW's posts help some men. It's true, they might not apply to every single relationship on this forum but they're at least something to think about. As is our sexuality in general and how much we really allow ourselves to feel or experiment and why we've really set those boundaries we have up now.


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

Trenton said:


> I will add that I agree with you that current trends to try to make women equal to men by making women the same as men is an injustice to both sexes. Women really wanted equal rights but didn't want to have to be like men to get them. I'm sure you'll agree we deserve the right to vote and own property. Later women wanted the ability to not have to be home and raise children with zero control over their lives, they wanted control over their reproductive rights and lives, equal pay for equal work. These are all great desires and I assure you that you are currently enjoying many of the benefits of the hard work of strong women before you. If you don't value these freedoms just visit a country where women have no rights. It will alter your perception greatly.
> 
> So it stinks that it has created other issues. One huge one being that a man's role in the household and in our society is a little confusing. I don't think you can blame women for getting it a little wrong or for men for pushing back a little and having a desire to hold on to some of their balls. It's why I personally am an advocate for individuality. No woman is the same just as no man is the same. If we want to move closer towards fair and balance the scales of justice then we need to begin to look at individuals for who they are rather than their sex, their ethnicity or their nationality.
> 
> Some say I'm a dreamer but I'm not the only one.


No, you're perfectly right. It was a major injustice to women that they couldn't vote, learn to write, read work etc...From some points of view, we really should be equal. And yes, all of us are different (but we're alike at certain things...we all have two hands, some of us like shopping...others love sports, you get my point). 

The nasty part is that some understood equal to mean "exactly the same". The second nasty part is that some women are still a bit angry from back when they didn't have a lot of rights, and somewhere in the back of our minds (or i dunno, i used to have this, it feels that way), we feel like we're being pushed in the same gender stereotype when someone explains we should be more submissive, nicer, more nurturing and loving. 

I personally had a real aversion to those words and tried to avoid being that simply because i didn't want to go back to the time when women were nurturing and loving yet the slaves of their men. So i stopped being nurturing and loving altogether, and more of a "male-like" companion to my man. That wasn't very smart, as you could tell, because he still wanted to be married to a woman.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Nekko said:


> Trenton, you are completely right. We're not animals....but we have a set of instincts that are somewhat animalic and primitive. For instance, we have the natural urge to pee. Yet when we feel like peeing in the middle of the street, none of us simply pull our pants down and go ahead. That's what separates us from animals. Some of us even go to the toiled ahead of time, anticipating that need.
> 
> 
> Attraction is also a pretty deep and primal need. For those women who are stuck with the choice between what attracts them (the confident somewhat arrogant alpha male) and the right choice for the world we live in(the nice guy who can prove a great companion and is love-able) maintaining attraction is hard. It works the same way for men and i'm not discriminating here and yes, not all women are the same.
> ...


Peeing isn't a great example because other species can learn to hold their pee. It's not one of the things that sets us apart as it's a requirement (like eating) and sex we can live without. Our species have created test tube babies, cloned body parts, with modern science we can even scan DNA to logically know which man has the best sperm and which woman has the best egg. Basically, we created better ways to tell things that otherwise we'd have to leave up to instinct. Ah intelligence...both a good and bad thing. The thing is, we also have advanced emotions and this means that we need long-lasting connections with others. Common sense tells me that these two things would allow us to over-ride our natural instincts and replace them under normal circumstances-much like we don't crap in front of one another. So unless society goes back a couple thousand years and drastically changes, I don't see becoming more instinctual a good thing. I'm sure you don't want me pooping on your lawn in broad daylight.

Don't know. No matter how many times I do this in my head it sounds stupid. I'm not calling you stupid as you don't seem to be but I do think the comparison is a stupid one. I see it all the time too.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Nekko said:


> No, you're perfectly right. It was a major injustice to women that they couldn't vote, learn to write, read work etc...From some points of view, we really should be equal. And yes, all of us are different (but we're alike at certain things...we all have two hands, some of us like shopping...others love sports, you get my point).
> 
> The nasty part is that some understood equal to mean "exactly the same". The second nasty part is that some women are still a bit angry from back when they didn't have a lot of rights, and somewhere in the back of our minds (or i dunno, i used to have this, it feels that way), we feel like we're being pushed in the same gender stereotype when someone explains we should be more submissive, nicer, more nurturing and loving.
> 
> I personally had a real aversion to those words and tried to avoid being that simply because i didn't want to go back to the time when women were nurturing and loving yet the slaves of their men. So i stopped being nurturing and loving altogether, and more of a "male-like" companion to my man. That wasn't very smart, as you could tell, because he still wanted to be married to a woman.


Don't know. I don't really have an aversion but I am offended by the context in the threads we're discussing. I've never stopped being a woman to my husband, he's the one I swoon for and I've always been me with him (the good, the bad, the beautiful and the ugly). I'm nurturing and emotional by nature and I embrace these things because I don't know how to be anything else. My husband is less emotional and nurturing but he creates a sense of safety and security for me and I find his quiet, soft spoken intelligence disarming. We are a good pair, we fit but we also flex.

I'm not asking anyone to change who they are or pretend to be something they're not. I'm saying stop defending a philosophy where there's only one way of doing things between males and females and that's dominance/submission. BBW is articulate and says some great things but overall he's got it wrong because his philosophy is unyielding and narrow. Can we take things from this philosophy and learn? Absolutely. It's always important to keep an open mind to the ideas and thoughts of others. Should we defend it as if it is the only way a relationship can find success? Nooooooooo.

I think you and I are more on the same page about this than we recognize.


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

Well, i'm lacking a better comparison because there just doesn't seem to be any. The peeing thing, as you said, isn't the best example out there, but it's the best i could come up with.

"other species can learn to hold their pee" my point was, we may control it but we still have to pee eventually. Same with sex, we can live a whole life without it, but men, assuming they don't have sex, will come in their sleep anyway (which basically means it is a requirement) Women aren't especially happy if they ignore sex either and some will orgasm in their sleep as well. Same with fantasies. We can control them, never put them into practice but sometimes we can't help but think about em. 

No, it's not good to become more instinctual. It's good to occasionally let some instincts out though because they are there, just like our feelings are there. It's not good to jump up and run in every situation when you're afraid (flight of fight response) but it might be a good idea to do it if a car is nearly running over you. that's also an instinct you could completely over-ride because for the most part its unnecessary. We don't encounter a lot of life-and-death situations. But it's good to keep it there and use it when it's needed. 

I'm not saying we should behave like animals. I'm saying some of those primal instincts we already have can be used to our advantage. I'm also saying that attraction is for most people a primal thing. They can't rationalize it or choose who they're attracted to. Some men and women are attracted by the same things (not all, but you know...you can't always talk for everyone) So i as a forum poster, come here looking for advice. My partner is simply not attracted to me. I've asked him why and he simply doesn't know. He can't help it because you can't condition attraction. So, i learn from other people and start trying things to see how my partner reacts to them. If he responds to what other people think he'll respond to, great, i'll do that. If not, i'll just keep looking for something else. That about sums up, in my view, what is happening on this forum.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Nekko said:


> Nope, it makes you a confident woman. My point was you described your man as not being very confident, yet he is.


He is not DOMINANT. To assert that confident and dominant mean the same thing is simply wrong. Look it up.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

breeze said:


> True, if we don't make some assumtions and generalisations, compare a persons story to our own or others, there truly is no point in posting on a forum.


Comparing our experiences is not the same as making a gender generalization.

Useless generalization: Black people are naturally less intelligent than white and have big lips. Women are more emotional and less capable of reason. Women like dominant men and are naturally submissive.

Sharing and comparing experiences... My DH and I had a problem like that. We tried to do this and that. It worked really well for us. When we tried doing the other thing, it worked less well....

See the difference?


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> Comparing our experiences is not the same as making a gender generalization.
> 
> Useless generalization: Women are more emotional and less capable of reason. Women like dominant men and are naturally submissive.
> 
> ...


Hard to find a definition of "generalization" that doesn't have the word "general" in it.

Best I could find: 

Generalization - reasoning from *detailed facts* to general principles; the *connection of isolated facts *by a general hypothesis

Generalizations are born from facts and individual observations. The notion that women are more emotional - which I believe is true - has come from thousands of years of people making specific observations, discussing their observations together, and doing some simple math in their heads. Over the years, enough people have concluded that 7 or more times out of 10, a woman's behavior differed from a man's.

Take a quick poll around your workplace, on FB or among friends about the movie Steel Magnolias. Women like the movie more than men. That is why it is categorized or generalized as a "chick flick." There are obviously some gender differences at play even in something as simple as this movie.


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

Stereotypes start in truth.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> Hard to find a definition of "generalization" that doesn't have the word "general" in it.
> 
> Best I could find:
> 
> ...


God this gets frustrating. I am having a bad day. 

I never ONCE said these generalizations did not have foundation in truth. I said that when solving individual marital issues, and for the sake of giving advice, they weren't *generally* USEFUL.


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> God this gets frustrating. I am having a bad day.
> 
> I never ONCE said these generalizations did not have foundation in truth. I said that when solving individual marital issues, and for the sake of giving advice, they weren't *generally* USEFUL.


Yes - this thread is a little frustrating!

FWIW - I think you and I are fairly close on how we feel about the dominant male stuff - sounds like we are just getting there by different paths.

I was trying to figure out why there is such a broad difference from a FEMALE perspective when comparing posts in the Women's lounge to posts made by women in the Men's lounge. I didn't see ONE positive comment from a woman regarding the Taken in Hand website in the Women's lounge thread. Yet I know I've seen women support this approach on other posts in the past. Just kinda makes me wonder...


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

I just skimmed the taken in hand thread. Honestly, it sounds dysfunctional to me. What is the need for emphasis on control? The idea of who is in control is just not even something we THINK about. Why would anyone, male or female, want to abdicate their right and responsibility to direct their lives? The only reason I can think of comes down to lack of self esteem on the part of both parties, manifested in different ways.

That said, if it works for any given couple, rock on. I certainly would not chose that life. 

I think you continue to wonder because you continue to want to fit men and women into their correct pigeon holes. We don't always fit.


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> I just skimmed the taken in hand thread. Honestly, it sounds dysfunctional to me. What is the need for emphasis on control? The idea of who is in control is just not even something we THINK about. Why would anyone, male or female, want to abdicate their right and responsibility to direct their lives? The only reason I can think of comes down to lack of self esteem on the part of both parties, manifested in different ways.
> 
> That said, if it works for any given couple, rock on. I certainly would not chose that life.
> 
> *I think you continue to wonder because you continue to want to fit men and women into their correct pigeon holes. We don't always fit.*


vthomeschoolmom - You had me at hello...

I think there is a big difference between trying to understand fundamental differences between men and women - and the reasons for those differences (nature/nuture) v. trying to "pigeonhole" them.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

niceguy & vthome, I started the Taken in the Hand thread when I read a post by BBW about that philosophy and I do think it is the backbone to his own beliefs. I was surprised by the 100% negative reaction. Not one woman came to the philosophies defense when it wasn't associated with BBW. I found this interesting too and for many reasons.

Perhaps most women (insert generalization here with softening adjective) flux so fully between wanting to impress men and being themselves that they are willing to agree with philosophies they normally wouldn't? Don't know, it's really a weak correlation on my part. I've seen many women who enjoy male attention and flirting more than they enjoy sticking up for their ideals and beliefs. Then again, I've read many strong women who almost always are at odds with either a female or male poster for their ideals as well quite a few in between. Yes, it's a weak correlation.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Conrad said:


> Stereotypes start in truth.


Stereotypes start in majority perceived truth but the majority is not always right. In fact, they can be dangerously wrong.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Trenton said:


> niceguy & vthome, I started the Taken in the Hand thread when I read a post by BBW about that philosophy and I do think it is the backbone to his own beliefs. I was surprised by the 100% negative reaction. Not one woman came to the philosophies defense when it wasn't associated with BBW. I found this interesting too and for many reasons.
> 
> Perhaps most women (insert generalization here with softening adjective) flux so fully between wanting to impress men and being themselves that they are willing to agree with philosophies they normally wouldn't?


BBW (gah I have a hard time writing that without thinking overweight woman in nice clothes) is quite charming. My guess is that the charm acts like smoke and mirrors as well as some seemingly intentional misunderstanding, like equating confident and dominant. When were THOSE ever the same thing?!?

But yes there may be some of that for some of the folk. Ingratiating oneself gets approval. And approval feels good! I would venture further that this is particularly likely with words of affirmation people.




> Don't know, it's really a weak correlation on my part. I've seen many women who enjoy male attention and flirting more than they enjoy sticking up for their ideals and beliefs.


I have seen ingratiating men too. There was a guy on usenet that used to do 180degree flips all the time in order to agree with one set of women and disagree with another. It was quite funny.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> BBW (gah I have a hard time writing that without thinking overweight woman in nice clothes) is quite charming. My guess is that the charm acts like smoke and mirrors as well as some seemingly intentional misunderstanding, like equating confident and dominant. When were THOSE ever the same thing?!?
> 
> But yes there may be some of that for some of the folk. Ingratiating oneself gets approval. And approval feels good! I would venture further that this is particularly likely with words of affirmation people.
> 
> ...


I agree and it's no wonder that these same people become offended when others challenge the same view they once challenged. 

It's like they're saying..."no, no, no you are looking at it all wrong. I once thought that but then I realized how great BBW (sounds like some type of spray on hair to me haha) is and that there was some truth in his words. If you replace this with this then he's got something great here."

Huh?! What?! Oh sheesh. Ewwwwww. Sigh.

The thread on educated women being less likely to be in happy relationships, oh that one had me seething. I didn't even post because I felt it was useless. As if it is a negative that 57% of all college degrees go to women and we should now be ashamed of our intelligence if we want to please a man. Double ewwwwwwww.


----------



## nice777guy (Nov 23, 2009)

Trenton - I know I've seen women on this board defend the taken in hand ideas. I glanced at the website once before and found it amazing that any woman would ever buy into that kind of a relationship.

One thing I've noticed about the "dominant man supported by wife" thing - it almost seems like some of these wives are doing this to try and build their man up. One poster in particular had me wondering if she was the one truly pulling the strings, but letting her "fragile" husband THINK he was in control.

I know I've read the phrase "striving to be submissive" on a few occaisions - sounds like an oxymoron. To "strive" to be less than what you could be isn't really striving, is it?

I have two young daughters. Wish I understood all of this a bit better! On one hand I want them to believe they can do anything they want - and that the only differences in gender are related to our sexual organs. BUT - I also want them to know that being a mother and a good wife is just as noble as having a great career.

I want them to do what feels right and not just go aggressively for a career because they have the "right" to do so.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

nice777guy said:


> Trenton - I know I've seen women on this board defend the taken in hand ideas. I glanced at the website once before and found it amazing that any woman would ever buy into that kind of a relationship.
> 
> One thing I've noticed about the "dominant man supported by wife" thing - it almost seems like some of these wives are doing this to try and build their man up. One poster in particular had me wondering if she was the one truly pulling the strings, but letting her "fragile" husband THINK he was in control.
> 
> ...


I have one daughter and two sons with my daughter turning 14 today actually...my weekend was filled with a sleepover of five young, loud teens. It was challenging!

Teaching that we are all individuals that can accomplish and surpass obstacles (such as generalizations and long-held beliefs) to make our dreams and the dreams of others a reality provides the courage needed to become ourselves. You couple this with a loving, supportive backbone of a family and you create strong, happy people. They won't be happy all the time and the family situation might not be ideal all the time but that's OK too. 

If you teach young girls that they must be submissive in order to please then they will grow up being submissive. We can see this in cultures where submission is the most attractive trait in women. The same goes for the dominant male. Oh the horrible things that have come from promoting these two stereotypes. They are so self limiting and harmful. If we dare to climb out of our limited realities and look at the suffering in the world then we will see a pattern. The alpha male is very capable of destroying when things do not go his way and the submissive female will never speak up to stop that destruction. I can think of SO MANY examples it's painful.


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> I just skimmed the taken in hand thread. Honestly, it sounds dysfunctional to me. What is the need for emphasis on control? The idea of who is in control is just not even something we THINK about. Why would anyone, male or female, want to abdicate their right and responsibility to direct their lives? The only reason I can think of comes down to lack of self esteem on the part of both parties, manifested in different ways.
> 
> That said, if it works for any given couple, rock on. I certainly would not chose that life.
> 
> I think you continue to wonder because you continue to want to fit men and women into their correct pigeon holes. We don't always fit.


You don't have to "think about" control.

It just comes naturally to women.

That's where nagging comes from.


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

Trenton said:


> I agree and it's no wonder that these same people become offended when others challenge the same view they once challenged.
> 
> It's like they're saying..."no, no, no you are looking at it all wrong. I once thought that but then I realized how great BBW (sounds like some type of spray on hair to me haha) is and that there was some truth in his words. If you replace this with this then he's got something great here."
> 
> ...


This sounds really angry.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Trenton said:


> The thread on educated women being less likely to be in happy relationships, oh that one had me seething. I didn't even post because I felt it was useless. As if it is a negative that 57% of all college degrees go to women and we should now be ashamed of our intelligence if we want to please a man. Double ewwwwwwww.


The only people who are hurt by this attitude is the people who have it, IMO. You and I know who we are. They aren't going to be able to change that!


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Conrad said:


> You don't have to "think about" control.
> 
> It just comes naturally to women.
> 
> That's where nagging comes from.


So are you TRYING to be a dismissive @-hole? Or does that just come naturally to YOU?

Let me guess, you are on here because your marriage is on the rocks? Gee, go figure.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Conrad said:


> This sounds really angry.


Your point is? Are you trying to undermine my opinions by interpreting them as the angry, nagging rants of a woman? 

I thought if I was angry I would use all CAPS? No?


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

We should have ignored his comments. That's what BBW would do. :rofl:


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> So are you TRYING to be a dismissive @-hole? Or does that just come naturally to YOU?
> 
> Let me guess, you are on here because your marriage is on the rocks? Gee, go figure.


Ignore me at your peril.

I'd take a look at the underlying hostile tone taken to those who dare speak the truth.

The name-calling has already started.

I'm sure that part of you makes your man feel cherished and respected.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Conrad said:


> Ignore me at your peril.
> 
> I'd take a look at the underlying hostile tone taken to those who dare speak the truth.
> 
> ...


You're just silly.


----------



## Amplexor (Feb 13, 2008)

The thread has been enlightening and candid so far. We'd expect a wide spectrum of opinions here. Please don't let it degenerate. I'd hate to shut it down due to name calling or trolling. Thanks.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Amplexor said:


> The thread has been enlightening and candid so far. We'd expect a wide spectrum of opinions here. Please don't let it degenerate. I'd hate to shut it down due to name calling or trolling. Thanks.


I read you and totally agree. Name calling I get but what is trolling?


----------



## Amplexor (Feb 13, 2008)

Trenton said:


> I read you and totally agree. Name calling I get but what is trolling?


Throwing out unpopular or ridiculous opinions, wild stories or harsh words in order to start a fight or reaction.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Amplexor said:


> Throwing out unpopular or ridiculous opinions, wild stories or harsh words in order to start a fight or reaction.


Oh. I apologize if I appear to do this but sometimes my opinions are not popular. It's never my intention to start a fight. I do like heated discussions/debate though. Just let me know if I'm out of line for these forums.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

I guess I feel that Conrad's point was no point at all. If he wants to hate women, that is his right. I will call him on it. In general, I agree that name calling is non-productive. If I were a better woman, I would have ignored as Trenton suggested. But I confess, I don't feel the slightest bit badly about my departure from polite behavior. 

I WILL strive to do better next time. Thanks, Amplexor.


----------



## Amplexor (Feb 13, 2008)

No blood, no foul on anyone's part so far. Just trying to keep it clean. Thanks all.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

All I know is that this man is the man I want to smell like.

Carry on ...


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

LOL!


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

vthomeschoolmom said:


> I guess I feel that Conrad's point was no point at all. If he wants to hate women, that is his right. I will call him on it. In general, I agree that name calling is non-productive. If I were a better woman, I would have ignored as Trenton suggested. But I confess, I don't feel the slightest bit badly about my departure from polite behavior.
> 
> I WILL strive to do better next time. Thanks, Amplexor.


One way to start would be to say it's your opinion that I hate women.

I can assure you that the opposite is true.

What bothers me is people that are so PC they wish to shut down all points of view - even in the face of so much misery (that people openly express) from doing it the other way.

I'm not the slightest bit upset by any of this. But, the name-calling is meant to silence the opposition. Not productive.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes (Feb 11, 2010)

Conrad,
I wish we were BOTH in control. In my case, I took over "control" because otherwise nothing got done. Literally, nothing. We both work fulltime. He has a degree in Economics and an MBA. I dropped out of college. He has never once paid a bill. I doubt he knows what our mortgage payment is or to whom. It's like magic elves just take care of it, I guess. I have actually typed out a notebook for him in the event of my death that spells out our mortgage, debts, life insurance policies, wills, our trust (that he blindly signed), etc., etc. I want a partnership. I didn't get it. I wish I did. He isn't my child, he is my husband and I wish he would step up and act like it. I think generalizing that all women want control is rather dangerous. I don't want control. I want fair and equatable.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Conrad said:


> One way to start would be to say it's your opinion that I hate women.
> 
> I can assure you that the opposite is true.
> 
> ...


I wonder whom you see as shutting down other points of view. So far, you have not expressed a point of view. 


> I'm not the slightest bit upset by any of this. But, the name-calling is meant to silence the opposition. Not productive.


No it isn't. It is meant to indicate serious lack of respect for your lack of point of view.


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

It's hard to explain to you two ladies what people who partially agree with BBW mean. That's because you seem set on rejecting the ideas completely, which is perfectly ok. 



> "He is not DOMINANT. To assert that confident and dominant mean the same thing is simply wrong. Look it up."


I didn't say dominant is the same as confident. You described your husband as "not super inclined to hold his own ground" and i disagreed and pointed out that you yourself proved in an earlier post that he can hold his ground just fine. Which means that you're not married to a complete pushover, probably don't know what it's like and how it feels like you're raising a child which usually results in lack of attraction for that guy. And yes, it goes both ways, men often loose attraction because of the same behavior in women. 

What bothers me a lot is that you say we're all different yet you wonder how any woman can agree with BBW. I don't know, we might be from different generations and most importantly, we understand those posts quite differently. Myself and many women of my age will definitely agree that we expect aggressive behaviour from any male in bed otherwise our attraction will go out the window. Again, aggressive never means abusive. 

Yet i'm surrounded by women with leadership positions in companies who get things done, make more money etc. They aren't weak, easily bullied women. So this is the part i don't think you understand. I don't know, maybe at the end of the day all those gender differences are starting to disappear and we're craving to even push for difference just to get lusty over someone! That could be a factor. 



> He isn't my child, he is my husband and I wish he would step up and act like it.


I guess this is one of the reasons why we still kept some of our "feminine pidgeonholing" here in Europe. We still praise our men when they're confident, capable and strong and


> it almost seems like some of these wives are doing this to try and build their man up


 this. We build our men into dominant men when it comes to the world outside the house. I don't know if this makes sense. Maybe i should just stick to using confident because dominant clearly doesn't get any positive feedback. The point is, we're not encouraging our men to bully us, but they have to act like strong mature men in the society they live in. 

On top of all that men are constantly under competition in the workplace. Well, ok, trying not to generalize. The guys around me are...they're always "i have more" "i can do better" even if they don't directly say that. Might be somewhat immature (to me) but it's the world we live in. So when my husband, who lives in the same type of environment comes home, my main goal, as his wife (and not even necessarily that, but a person who loves him), is to make him feel better, more confident, more relaxed etc. 

I see him as better than everyone, that's why i chose him. As long as i enjoy it (and he doesn't piss me off), who better to make him special and happy than me? I'm in love with the guy so naturally i give and i'm preoccupied with his happiness and well-being as well as how confident he is. From my own personal point of view, he should be because he's great. And i remind him that on every occasion that i get, honestly and from the bottom of my heart. I also let him make decisions without contesting them (and he does the same for me). 

Why? Because this shows trust, respect and encourages him to push further, grow as an individual. If i don't trust and respect him, who will? This could pass as submissive behavior for some people but in reality, i'm acknowledging that he's an adult and not my child and telling him that he's perfectly capable of taking care of himself and me. When he sees someone trusts him to be mature and handle the situation and believes in him, he suddenly becomes confident and can handle everything life throws at him. If he fails at any time, there'll be someone waiting to make him feel better. 

That doesn't mean i as a woman am helpless and rely on my man for everything...i'm aspiring to be stronger and more capable as each day passes by. 

And yes, i don't agree with the Taken in Hand thing at all. When i say i want a dominant man, i mean dominant in the society he lives in, capable of standing his own ground, confident in getting things done. I don't mean that he gets full control over me. That's not a marriage that's close to slavery in my book (no offense to people who agree with that lifestyle). The only place where i want my guy to dominate me (and not 100 percent of the time) is the bedroom. That i'll admit to.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Nekko said:


> It's hard to explain to you two ladies what people who partially agree with BBW mean. That's because you seem set on rejecting the ideas completely, which is perfectly ok.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Please re-read my posts and then you'll understand that I actually do find some of what BBW says to be helpful. At this point the subject is a dead horse that's being beaten but by me no more.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Nekko said:


> It's hard to explain to you two ladies what people who partially agree with BBW mean. That's because you seem set on rejecting the ideas completely, which is perfectly ok.


I guess I just wonder if what you think you are agreeing with is really what he says. I tend to doubt it.



> I didn't say dominant is the same as confident. You described your husband as "not super inclined to hold his own ground" and i disagreed and pointed out that you yourself proved in an earlier post that he can hold his ground just fine. Which means that you're not married to a complete pushover,


Wait... the opposite of dominant is not a complete pushover? 



> probably don't know what it's like and how it feels like you're raising a child which usually results in lack of attraction for that guy. And yes, it goes both ways, men often loose attraction because of the same behavior in women.


Well yah, I would not recommend marrying an immature child. Not sure what that has to do with dominance.


> What bothers me a lot is that you say we're all different yet you wonder how any woman can agree with BBW.


I think you replied to one of my posts? Maybe you are linking Trenton and I together? 

I don't really wonder why a woman might agree with BBW. 


> I guess this is one of the reasons why we still kept some of our "feminine pidgeonholing" here in Europe. We still praise our men when they're confident, capable and strong and this.


I wonder how many European (and I suspect it depends WHERE in Europe) would be cringing at your attempting to speak for them in this matter.



> We build our men into dominant men when it comes to the world outside the house. I don't know if this makes sense.


It makes sense. It doesn't sounds like 

a. a life I would chose
b. what BBW is talking about. I am pretty sure he means dominance inside the house.



> Maybe i should just stick to using confident because dominant clearly doesn't get any positive feedback.


You want to modify your point of view in order to achieve positive feed back? That is what Trenton speculated was the reason for some people agreeing with BBW, the desire to please. There are certainly pleaser personalities. I, personally, think it is kind of sad when someone changes their PoV to please someone else.

It seems to me that if you MEAN confident, you should use confident. If you MEAN dominant, you should use dominant. And the feedback from us be damned. We are just here sharing opinions, just like you. We don't have to agree!



> The point is, we're not encouraging our men to bully us, but they have to act like strong mature men in the society they live in.


The way you describe indicates to me you may not know what dominant means. Dominant does not mean abusive or bullyish. Obviously those would be objectionable. But it does mean unilateral decision maker, person who exercises control. One might envision benevolent dictatorship, if one is lucky enough to get a benevolent one. I would find THAT life objectionable. I am perfectly capable of making my own decision, and being in control of my own self. 




> On top of all that men are constantly under competition in the workplace. Well, ok, trying not to generalize. The guys around me are...they're always "i have more" "i can do better" even if they don't directly say that. Might be somewhat immature (to me) but it's the world we live in. So when my husband, who lives in the same type of environment comes home, my main goal, as his wife (and not even necessarily that, but a person who loves him), is to make him feel better, more confident, more relaxed etc.


What does that have to do with dominance? I think those in good marriages try to help their mate in any way they can.


Snip a bunch of stuff that really has nothing to do with either dominance or submission.


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

@vthomeschoolmom
You've managed to spot one single sentence in which i didn't apologize for using a generalization and assumed i'm talking for all European women, which again, i'm not. 

I'm getting tired of explaining this and it seems pointless just as Trenton mentioned a bit earlier. 

"doesn't get any positive feedback" = whenever the word "dominance" is used in the same sentence as "men" a large number of women seem to become angry, offended and so on. When that happens open, constructive communication ends and contradiction begins. Not that contradiction is a bad thing, but it usually turns into one of those heated arguments like the ones between spouses where each yells something and fails to hear the other. At least it feels that way. 

Someone said it better than me when explaining that dominant is usually associated with domineering (controlling other people and ignoring their feelings) while some of us believe dominant to mean "more important, strong or noticeable than others of the same kind". As far as i could tell, BBW is a nice guy and he's been that way for a while. He's point seems to be that once in a while some women want their men to step up rather than accept everything that's thrown at them. The way i see it it's more of advice for the nice guy to not put up with every single thing his wife does (denying him sex for no reason, decision making, an opinion etc) because once the wife discovers that she can control the man (because he's too nice), she often looses interest. I'm one of those women. If my guy were to accept and say "yes" to everything i said, just because i said so i'd definitely loose interest and i wouldn't believe that he's honest. Not the life for you, i get it, you've pointed that out plenty of times. But some people need to hear that kind of message in order to improve their own marriages...with people like me. This discussion has become quite tiresome and i'll personally just let it die.


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

Nekko said:


> @vthomeschoolmom
> You've managed to spot one single sentence in which i didn't apologize for using a generalization and assumed i'm talking for all European women, which again, i'm not.


You went on for a full paragraph about what it is like for women in Europe. 



> I'm getting tired of explaining this and it seems pointless just as Trenton mentioned a bit earlier.
> 
> "doesn't get any positive feedback" = whenever the word "dominance" is used in the same sentence as "men" a large number of women seem to become angry, offended and so on.


Are you speaking to me? I am neither angry nor offensive. I can't speak for the large number of women you are referring to. I am not sure what your point is? Do you think I don't understand you? I do. I don't agree. But I understand. 


I object to the notion that "women prefer dominant men." This is what BBW continually fosters. I think it is patronizing, misogynistic BS. You don't agree. I think this is fine.



> Someone said it better than me when explaining that dominant is usually associated with domineering (controlling other people and ignoring their feelings) while some of us believe dominant to mean "more important, strong or noticeable than others of the same kind".


Maybe it would be best if you took my former advice and looked up the word. You can pretend it means whatever you like. You can pretend that BBW doesn't mean what he means so that you can continue to agree with him. As you wish.



> As far as i could tell, BBW is a nice guy and he's been that way for a while. He's point seems to be that once in a while some women want their men to step up rather than accept everything that's thrown at them.


That is not what he seems to claim to me.


----------



## Nekko (Oct 13, 2009)

Ok. We can now agree that we disagree. That sounds more than fair to me


----------

