Are insecure women better than secure women?

Dr-Mechano · 2015-10-16T03:10:53+00:00

You are either the sub or the dom.

I disagree on principle. I think it's entirely possible, and in fact fairly common, for relationships to function as partnerships built on discussion and compromise rather than one person having to be in charge.

I don't buy into the dichotomy of "She'll either tell you what to do or you'll tell her what to do," because that completely ignores the far more reasonable middle-road of "You'll work out your problems together, because you're both adults."

bromance946 · 2015-10-15T14:50:43+00:00

Girls who have already made a decision will still ask for validation from others. They are socialized to be very sensitive to approval from others at all times. This seems to be what your GF is doing. Yes it looks the same as insecurity, but it's more a function of gendered behavior than individual traits, IMO.

FallingSnowAngel · 2015-10-15T10:32:44+00:00

I am repulsed by dominant women.

About time I finally met an honest pillbug. Most pretend submissives are just expressing women's true nature.

Not just because of their character, but because they are repulsive, looks wise.

Damn, nevermind. Here we go exploring strange new worlds again...

But it makes sense, sweet, beautiful women had everything handed to them all their life.

Especially the offers for free dick pics. Is it really free beer/RPG loot if sexual favors are expected out of it?

Sure, things are great if you're shallow as Hell, and some men and women really are, but looks alone don't tell you a single thing about someone's talents and ambition.

That makes your character weak, they want to avoid conflict, these are the women who can't pick a restaurant, because they don't want to affect others negatively and don't want to be so egoistical to just go where they want

My entire family is like this. "It's your turn to pick where we're going." usually means someone just lost a battle. And our looks? Well, there's a range, but let's leave it at someone as shallow as you likely wouldn't have very much to offer to offer most of us.

And those you would show your better side to, aren't idiots.

What I don't want is some ugly girl that had to grow a strong character to get what she wants, with an unnecessary confrontational attitude.

Odd. That defines the redpill philosophy for men.

You guys generally pretend anything but high pressure, my way or the highway diplomacy is a great way to talk yourself out of women's attention, though it would have been news to good old Ben Franklin...

Face it. The reason the redpill can't stand a strong woman is because most of you aren't very strong yourselves. Any challenge to your authority has a good chance of succeeding.

[deleted] · 2015-10-15T13:27:52+00:00

I am repulsed by dominant women. Not just because of their character, but because they are repulsive, looks wise. Now this is a hard statement to defend. But it makes sense, sweet, beautiful women had everything handed to them all their life. What I don't want is some ugly girl that had to grow a strong character to get what she wants, with an unnecessary confrontational attitude.

You know, sometimes people have to face adversity in life that they can't overcome "just by being pretty". There are a variety of reasons a woman would develop a confrontational or dominant attitude beyond "I'm not attractive". Frankly I find that oversimplification of a woman's reality bizarre. You can be "attractive" and abused as a child, live in a broken home, etc.

Either way, I do know a few women with dominant personalities who are gorgeous. Charlize Theron is a good example, she's frequently cited as having a dominant "I take what's mine" attitude, and she is obviously a bombshell.

It's too extreme to say that dominant women are unattractive, but I would say that there could potentially be something to your theory, that attractive women don't 'need' to be dominant to get what they want. Especially ones who never had to face any adversity.

IMO hot women tend to be more caring, sweet, non confrontational, submissive also less secure and have a less dominant/stubborn character.

My bet is that women are encouraged to be caring/sweet/non confrontational, etc., and that some attractive women don't NEED to be dominant or assertive to get what they want. I know many women who sound like you girlfriend who act that way because they've never had to make decisions for themselves and don't care to start now.

But obviously your question, "Are insecure women better than secure women?" I don't agree with. You obviously like having an insecure girlfriend who you can make decisions for. But it's relative depending on what "better" means.

RedManBearPig · 2015-10-15T11:15:11+00:00

I have some things that I don't agree with in your post but I get where you are coming from with this idea. Just thinking you are missing some perspective on the subject.

Being strong is very attractive to weak individuals. That's also why betas love strong women in TV and video games. You are either the sub or the dom.

This is a generalization and it doesn't hold up. It might be that nerd betas favour strong women because of their own weakness but I don't know really. Can't fathom their motives or relate to it. There is more to it than just that from my understanding. I personally favour "strong women" not because of my own weakness but because I would simply trample or completely disregard a women that is too submissive. A woman needs to be able to handle the heat that I bring. Although in my case it doesn't really relate to attraction, more a case of respect. Though women who I respect are more attractive to me. I also think being dominant and submissive is not as binary as you make it out to be. It's more fluid than that.

But what about a women that loves taking charge? Right, there would be a battle at every decision where we don't align. The most stubborn wins. I am repulsed by dominant women

I think what happens here is that you are confusing strong with stubborn and dominant, and confusing stubborn with dominant. A woman can be stubborn and not dominant. To my understanding there also plenty enough strong women who take on a submissive role in a relationship or strong men who do the same. This often more in situations where both partners have equal footing in the relation and when they are very compatible with each other. They are fine taking on the submissive role because of their trust in their partner but outside their relationship they will take charge. In their career for example. It also comes back down to dom and sub is fluid not binary. Though I will say that there are partnerships where one partner takes charge because the other can't. This is more like what you talk about and then you are in the play field of attraction. Someone who is strongly submissive will always find somebody who takes charge attractive.

What I don't want is some ugly girl that had to grow a strong character to get what she wants, with an unnecessary confrontational attitude.

Not all the girls that had to grow a confrontational or "bitchy" attitude are actually strong and I have doubts that it is related to their looks. From my experience with this kind of women this confrontational attitude stems not from being secure with themselves, it actually stems from being very insecure. Portraying a harsh surface protects the ego and protects them from harm done by others. It's just to make sure that they don't end up with more insecurities. If you get close enough you will find out.

I am kinda curious where you are from because I think we are also dealing with a cultural difference here. What you say might apply more to your country than the countries of others around here.

[deleted] · 2015-10-15T12:47:59+00:00

No , beautiful women tend to be more confident. Being confident and being stubborn are not the same thing. I'm insecure but also stubborn.

belletaco · 2015-10-15T13:12:53+00:00

If I wasn't already convinced red pillers were in high school, this post has thrown me over the edge. Confusing dominant with secure is your first problem. Then equating dominant to stubborn or bitchy is the next. Would you call a dominant man stubborn or bitchy? Some people are leaders whether they are male or female. I tend to like to be in control because of my anxiety, doesn't mean I am bitchy, I just like to know the outcome of things and having some control helps that. I also don't like indecisiveness. Someone like your girlfriend would drive me CRAZY. But yeah, just bad correlations all over this thread.

wtknight · 2015-10-15T12:46:24+00:00

My own attitude towards relationships is that I want them to be a best friendship with the added bonus of sex. I don't want a woman who is going to be more submissive than me and ask me to make all of the decisions. Then it's like raising a child and I don't want this out of an adult friend that I'm hanging out with on a nearly constant basis. On the other hand, I don't want a woman who is more dominant than me, because I like my freedom to make choices and to not be controlled. This is why I see women who are secure, but not dominating. I want an SO who I am not ashamed to call my best friend to other people that I know, and I cannot do that if she is insecure and always acting in a way that defers to me. When there are conflicts in an egalitarian relationship, you work them out just as you would with one of your male best friends, by negotiation and compromise.

[deleted] · 2015-10-15T14:05:03+00:00

I don't like dominant women either. It's nothing to do with looks, just less feminine behavior. If prefer a poor girl with good looks and feminine behavior over a hot dominant career woman. A feminine career woman is fine but is like to make more than she does. If she makes more than me is probably be really insecure about the relationship.

[deleted] · 2015-10-15T14:56:40+00:00

Are insecure women better than secure women?

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "better." From what you describe, insecure women would definitely be higher maintenance. Insecure women could also be more susceptible to manipulation by others, which could possibly make them a higher risk for cheating.

ExpendableOne · 2015-10-15T23:34:58+00:00

I think the problem is that a lot of women, and yourself, seem to be confusing confidence/secure with being selfish, narcissistic, dominant, confrontational and general cunt-like behaviour. It is entirely possible to be secure, and still be sweet, caring, non-confrontational and submissive. It's not insecurity to be open to change, to be open minded or to put others above yourself(it can be, if you're doing it out of genuine insecurity, but it doesn't have to be).

It's insecurity that pushes women to expect men to make all the decisions, because they are too scared to make it themselves or because they don't want to deal with the consequences, but it's not insecurity to be able to make decisions while still being entirely able to let things go or sharing in decisions. Being confident/secure doesn't mean you have to put your foot down on every decision and start a fight over every little thing. If anything, I'd argue that this is a form of insecurity as well in that it's being scared of trusting others and scared of compromise(or just overcompensating for insecurity as it is generally understood).

I think, generally speaking, there are very few genuinely secure/confident women out there. Hypergamy is, in of itself, a result of insecurity and entitlement. A lot of women will also see a guy that's inexperienced or altruistic and see that as insecurity, when it isn't really(a lot of that gets lumped into this "beta" label).

[deleted] · 2015-10-16T02:31:20+00:00

I like a secure woman because I get to see what she likes and try new things instead of her being nothing but a hole and an audio loop of "I don't know, whadda you wanna do?".

also, you are mistaking the difference between a secure woman and a stubborn woman. When both partners are secure you can work things out together and respect each-other. When both partners are stubborn you get nothing but arguments (like you described)

[deleted] · 2015-10-16T08:06:53+00:00

In my experience, I much prefer the company of confident women. Not arrogant, not egotistical, not overbearing, just confident in themselves. She could be high energy, or really cool headed. It doesn't matter. If she's confident, it feels right. It's cool to be around and there's less neuroticism on her part. Insecure women, I find, end up going the indirect route in getting what they want and that causes a whole bunch of shit, which I hate. Of course this is not always true, but a generalization based on my experience.

wombatinaburrow · 2015-10-16T09:09:37+00:00

Your girlfriend sounds like a headache

bonerdude420 · 2015-10-15T11:17:43+00:00

You're conflating secure woman and stubborn bitch. it's not the same thing

taiboworks · 2015-10-15T15:14:42+00:00

short answer: no

confidence correlates with emotional stability which correlates to physical health and physical symmetry. unless you think hotter girls are less physically healthy, less symmetrical than unattractive girls, your theory doesn't make sense, hold up. insecure women are in fact less symmetrical, less attractive, and less physically and psychologically healthy than more secure, confident women.

"More facially asymmetrical participants in our two independent samples report more psychological, affective, and physiological problems." http://www.toddkshackelford.com/downloads/Shackelford-Larsen-JPSP-1997.pdf

ppdthrowawai · 2015-10-15T16:00:26+00:00

Can't say I agree really. Insecure vs secure has little to do with dominant personalities. In my work I've dealt with plenty of very dominant secure women and passive insecure types to know they really don't correlate well.

Security IME has a lot to do with your background and upbringing. Who are her friends, are they catty bitches, does she have a good relationship with her family?

Personalities are just that: personalities. A disposition independent of most things. Dominant personalities are definitely harder to game, no question about that. They require better game or higher status and tend to shit test more.

As far as secure vs insecure, they tend to respond to different types of game. Secure people are more straight forward IME while insecure require a little bit of working around their issues, more manipulation if you will. They shit test AND comfort test

alreadyredschool · 2015-10-15T23:28:33+00:00

I've found that there are lots of attractive women with dominant behaviors in the workplace (think of a ball-buster attorney) who nonetheless want to be submissive in the relationship. They spend all day acting like a man, so when they come on they'd prefer to act (and feel) like a woman.

[deleted] · 2015-10-15T23:53:04+00:00

No.

Non-confrontational and submissive? Sure. You can be confident/secure and have both those traits, and none of what you describe is insecurity.

Insecurity is needing constant validation. It's being unable to take a compliment because you think the other person is lying to spare your feelings. Insecurity is getting anxious if he doesn't text back within five minutes. Insecure women are more likely to be guarded than warm and caring.

AND I think that honestly, while they may not be dominant, insecure women are likely to be more controlling. More likely to try and keep tabs on you and keep you from going where she can't see, because she's worried she isn't good enough for you. Truly insecure people are clingy, needy, and often times hard to be around. I've tried to help several insecure friends and it's just draining.

It seems to me that you're looking for a girl who is very agreeable, not insecure. Very agreeable people often dislike making the decision about things such as restaurants because they genuinely don't care where you go and would rather make the other person happy by choosing their first choice. Plus, a very beautiful woman is less likely to be insecure.

alreadyredschool · 2015-10-16T12:39:55+00:00

Wanting a man who is strong/assertive is not equal to being insecure. You seem to have a problem with confusing the 2.

Insecure women often fear abandonment. Most don't like competition, either. A lot of red pill techniques are likely to backfire on a woman that is insecure. For example dread game, a woman who fears abandonment and competition would likely create further drama if dread game were to be used. An insecure woman is also unlikely to go after a man with a lot of female competition surrounding him.

Maybe you are also thinking that unattractive women have unattractive personalities because that is what you subconsciously want to see. It's called the halo effect. I think you are likely imagining all these things due to your own psychology. You can see the same psychology among women with men too. They call men they don't find attractive 'creeps'. Not because of their behaviour, because if a man they found physically attractive did the same thing they would not think he was a creep. It would suddenly become 'cute'. No matter what an unattractive woman does, you will see her in the same bad light because you assume you can do better and that she is somehow below you. What you have is a belief system rather than being able to identify actual fact.

PoopInMyBottom · 2015-10-16T14:47:20+00:00

Most secure people I've met, not just women, are a lot more easy-going than insecure people. They're definitely not stubborn. They have boundaries, but they tend to be a lot less concerned with power games and they're much more pleasant to be around.

That girl who is dominant, confrontational and constantly tries to claw power from you probably isn't that secure. People who are interested in immediate power gain at the cost of your opinion of them tend not to be comfortable people. They do it because they feel like opportunities for power are scarce.

When people are insecure, every opportunity to take value feels like the only opportunity in the world. The value they gain could (they think) be the only value they gain for the next year. After all, they are crap - why would anyone give them anything? Thus, they weight petty victories very highly. It's more important that they win every argument than they work on preventing arguments in the first place. They can't possibly seem weak, even if it would be better for the relationship. I've found that insecure people often start arguments just so they can win something and feel less powerless.

In terms of relationships, secure people are way better for you in my opinion. Let's say you're a girlfriend. You could try and make your boyfriend feel good, stimulating him, encouraging him and pushing him to be the best he can be. He grows into an incredible man, and the life you've built together is amazing. Every time you fuck it feels incredible. Alternatively, you could slowly undermine him over time so he becomes emasculated and depressed. You can make niggling comments and kill his motivation so he can't never cheats on you. You feel safe that he won't leave you, but your life together isn't exactly blissful. Which of those two things do you think the secure person is going to do? Which is the insecure person going to do?

I don't really have an explanation for this, but I found secure women seem to be much sweeter and much more relaxed than insecure women. They're also much more likely to help you achieve what you want to achieve in your life. I much prefer them.

Edit: Oh, insecure women are considerably more likely to cheat on you. Secure women value not risking their relationship much more than they value the immediate emotional validation of cheating on you. So, if you're looking to feel safe that that won't happen, I don't think going for insecure women is a good idea.

[deleted] · 2015-10-16T15:10:00+00:00

Being secure does not make a woman sexually dominant or obnoxious, secure people are calm and make better long decisions.

am_thro_way · 2015-10-16T15:33:11+00:00

What's better is entirely dependent on whose perspective you look at it from. You might prefer to date those women, but nobody actually wants to be a neurotic wreck who can't handle the simplest everyday decisions without outside guidance.

Because fuck, I'm as conflict avoidant as they come and I've got a neurotic streak a mile wide, but if I'm going out to eat with someone and they don't have a preference, I have no problem saying 'I know a great pizza place near here, how about that?'. If someone can't even pick a restaurant because they're worried about being judged or hurting others they're a legit head case imo. It's a fucking restaurant, if the service and food are at least passable it's not going to affect anyone negatively.

And the correlation to attractiveness seems backwards, ime attractive people are much more likely to be confident and secure in themselves.

FirionDarklight · 2015-10-15T09:44:48+00:00

Most strong independent womynnnn TM, manage to come off as obnoxious tryhards trying to one-up everyone and just can't seem to chill. They are like those people who keep talking about how goooddddd they are. In that case, I would take an "insecure" one any time. Maybe low profile would be a better choice of word. People can be secure/confident without coming off as blowhards.

Title	Are insecure women better than secure women?
Author	alreadyredschool
Upvotes	9
Comments	75
Date	October 15, 2015 8:57 AM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/3ou37q/are_insecure_women_better_than_secure_women/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/are-insecure-women-better-than-secure-women.279041 https://theredarchive.com/post/279041