I'm not sure why I'm posting this...
I guess I'm just not a fan of the prescribed male/female dynamic that most people in society hold.
In all honesty, I'd love to adopt the "female" role. I want someone to fawn over me, protect me, and generally make me feel secure and safe and cared for.
But that doesn't seem like it's in the cards with most women. I've been idealizing relationships with men instead lately... I know that's dumb but at least with someone who's already going against societal expectations I stand a chance at adopting a role I prefer.
I'm just so tired. I got burned in my last relationship because I cared a lot but she had a personality disorder and was legitimately incapable of caring back. I continuously fed an emotional vampire and I can't help but see those same trends in a lot of people - it feels like I'm trapped always giving love and care and support in a relationship and never receiving it.
And society sees that as an ideal. I understand that, caring about someone is such a good feeling. But it's really saddening to see that emotional expression towards a man is often viewed as something that doesn't really need to happen.
[–]Maephia 26 points27 points28 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]throwaway2222aa3 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mrmcthrowaway19 44 points45 points46 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]AleksandrNevskyleft-wing male advocate 12 points13 points14 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]mrmcthrowaway19 4 points5 points6 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists 9 points10 points11 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]adool666 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]Aaod1 points [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link
Good luck I wanted a woman who cared even half as much about me as I cared about them and the vast majority of women I dated utterly failed at that easy requirement. For most of them I was nothing more than something they could use or something like a beast of burden. For a gender that complaints about objectification they sure as fuck treat us like objects not actual human fucking beings. Almost all the women I dated fit into one or more of three categories crazy, treated me like shit, or took advantage of my kindness so I would rather be alone than deal with that bullcrap. Because of my experiences dating them and my other observations I now view women as utterly incapable of caring about men unless they prove otherwise on an individual level.
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Aaod 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mewacketergi2left-wing male advocate 15 points16 points17 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]AskingToFeminists 12 points13 points14 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]BlasphemousJester1 points [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link
Good women are out there. Women that truly want a partner to love. Women that aren't entitled. We exist.
The men in this thread can probably give you better dating advice than I ever could, but nevertheless, here's some things you might want to look for:
Girls that are down-to-earth. A more casual social media presence is a sign of a healthier mind than someone that's posting sexy pictures all the time.
Girls who have brothers! And good relationships with their brothers. Everyone talks about how you should look for a girl who has a good relationship with her dad. True. But growing up with brothers teaches females to have a lot of empathy for the male experience at all it's stages. At least it did for me.
Steer clear people who are clearly ideologically driven. There's a difference between someone that vehemently believes in fourth wave feminism vs people that "agree" but never gave it much thought. Try to learn to distinguish between the two. You may not be able to find a girl that's openly anti 4th wave feminism but there are still a lot of females out there that have open minds, they just haven't been given any other kind of information.
Once you start dating someone, if you're ever talking about an issue that they have a different opinion on (an opinion that they unknowingly adopted from ideology) use the socratic method. Just ask questions. Encourage them to think. Make sure you never force opinions. People get stuck and stubborn in their ideas but if they care about you, and you treat them with respect, the socratic method goes a long way. Remember in these kinds of convos, minds are usually not changed in a day.
Make sure you see some evidence that she has actual empathy for you!! And other people in general! This is more for the beginning of a relationship rather than just dating. But if she's the kind of person who laughs or doesn't take you seriously when you say things like "I'd really appreciate it if..." then drop her. These people can't be changed. Don't let little instances of narcissistic or entitled behavior go by. Don't ignore red flags. Too many guys put up with stuff bc they don't realize it's not a temporary bad moment, its a character flaw. And you deserve better..
Lastly, remember that humans are evolved for pair bonding. Its in our DNA to take care of one another! So don't lose hope. The beginning of relationships is usually characterized by excitement and adoration rather than making someone feel safe and taken care of, but that comes with time and mutual trust which makes it even more special. There are women out there that genuinely enjoy taking care of their man, it's just a behavior that isn't shown in the earlier stages of a relationship.
[–]Grow_peace_in_Bedlam 7 points8 points9 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]YooGeOh 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Grow_peace_in_Bedlam 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]FlashAttack 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 3 points4 points5 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Geiten 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Robble93 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]OkLetterhead10left-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BlasphemousJester 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sofus_ 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]adam-lThe empress is naked 4 points5 points6 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[+]BlasphemousJester1 points [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link
That's not an accurate characterization of evolution. Both males and females primary sexual strategy is pair bonding. The sexual strategy that involves pumping and dumping (lol) is the secondary, inferior strategy.
Human babies require lots of time and resources to successfully survive childhood. A man has not succeeded in passing down his genes just because he inseminated a woman. To be successful the child must actually survive to sexual maturity.
For this reason males are wired to love their partner - from an evolutionary perspective this looks like protection from danger, providing resources, and general intimacy. The secondary strategy is to have sex with available women and not stick around. These are not mutually exclusive, so men might "cheat" while pair bonded.
Obviously, due to the high demands from human babies, a females primary sexual strategy is also pair bonding. Providing for each other is simultaneously a sacrifice and a benefit.
True romantic love is not the same as a parent's love. It shouldn't be - then we'd have a whole world of push-overs and people willing to out up with abusive behavior. But just because romantic love will never be 100% unconditional, that doesn't mean it is totally without sacrifice. From an evolutionary perspective, both males and females made sacrifices for each other all the time.
[–]adam-lThe empress is naked 4 points5 points6 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]BlasphemousJester1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
This information is straight from evolutionary biologists. I can assure you it is current, but I'll find some sources. FYI, evolutionary psychology has a lot of problems in its methodology that aren't very scientific. And psychology for that matter. But "primary" and "secondary" are the words used among evolutionary biologists.
Of course a man who has the opportunity to inseminate hundreds of women has a better chance of passing on his genes than if he settled down and had 3-4 children with a woman he pair bonds with. This is not usually an option for most men. In fact, throughout human history a huge number of men fail to successfully pass down their genes with even one child, let alone many (this is relatively much higher in men than in women).
Some men, a very small number, are able to adopt the secondary strategy as their main sexual strategy due to high status. But for most men, pair bonding is the strategy that yields the highest success rate in children surviving childhood, so traits that increase pair bonding (capacity for love) are selected for.
[–]adam-lThe empress is naked 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]goldenjuniperleft-wing male advocate 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PrincessofPatriarchy 2 points3 points4 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]PrincessofPatriarchy 0 points1 point2 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]PrincessofPatriarchy 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]PrincessofPatriarchy 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]-SidSilver- 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]-SidSilver- 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]PMmeYOURcovfefe 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]Plazmatron44 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]PMmeYOURcovfefe 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]PMmeYOURcovfefe 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Blauwpetjevalued LWMA contributor 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link