Why DO males take the responsibility for initiating?
I don't know. I do know I don't experience what I find sexually attractive/appealing as a choice, be it in terms of a partner or acts. Where and how that sexuality was formed is another matter.
I also know that my experience of my sexuality is not the one commonly ascribed to men as 'natural'.
Physically it is obviously going to run up against certain limits, but psychologically I think it has a pretty wide scope. Not just what turns people on, but why it does.
Sure, different cultures have tried to understand it and police it in different ways - but no culture is singular through and through. There is always dissent, and cultures shift and change over time, though some rituals and expectations stick long after the reason for their development has been forgotten.
As I understand it, you would say the frustration comes from our going against our nature. I have outlined above as to why that is impossible. I think any frustrations come from many other sources, as well as our individual natures being pluralistic and plastic and often contradictory and open to influences outside ourselves, and end up refracted through (and informing) sexuality issues and gender strife.
Islamic countries impose their values through a variety of methods, with often brutal consequences for those who disobey. And one should not assume that the public face of a culture matches the private one.
_________________
Of course, it's probably quite a bit more complicated than that.
You know sometimes, between the dames and the horses, I don't even know why I put my hat on.
Last edited by Hopper on 16 Apr 2014, 8:21 pm, edited 2 times in total.
I've wondered that for years but I have a pretty legit answer for you on this topic.
Eventhough both men and women have unique genetic and inherit programming, the main cause of today's standards and pressure on men to initiate on many things such as relationships, dating, and commitment, is because of society. Society has molded people into believing that it is acceptable and unacceptable to be certain ways for the approval of the opposite sex. Furthermore, part of the script that society has put on men also includes the fear put on men to change this. This script has been created in the early days when women where mistreated. Women eventually took a stance against that and retaliated for equal rights. Women eventually had more rights and regained power but it unfortunately swung somewhat to the other extreme and stayed that way for several decades now.
I think what really bugs you about this is the fact that you noticing the deeper depth of this issue. You are more aware of things, probably from struggles and a different outlook due to be ASD. Men in truth are very emotional beings and they are forced to suppress these emotions in order be accepted as a "man". The fear of changing this is so ingrained that men judge other men for acting or not acting this way. This causes women to think men are emotionally shallow and don't care when at the same time they are told that being emotional is not attractive. This suppression forces power away from men under the name of them believing they have the power due to initiating things when really the power is brought to women to be the chooser. This creates a sense of un-attainability to women and the opposite in the women's view. Men are accused as being wrong or shallow for being attracted to women's physique often caused by the perspective of un-attainability. As a result women think men are being shallow when in truth women want the same thing as men do. But unfortunately this off-kilter makes certain things that men try to do from the heart un-flattering. Men are looked as shallow and unable to emotionally when in truth they are desiring the opposite. I think it's a real problem.
Fortunately, there are actually groups out there that are trying to correct this. Some of these groups are "Masculinest", (I not a big fan of this group though and feel they are too aggressive and somewhat out of line). In truth men are very emotional and we are taught to suppress our emotions in order to "be a man." What I find interesting is that I actually know some women who think this social pressure they put on men is ridiculous as well! This can however be changed by speaking out. Write a blog or joins some groups that are trying to get the word out on this. I feel like if this is corrected there will be a more balance in regards to male/female and bring more peace into the word which could help ease other issue like the economy and political corruption.
_________________
James Hackett
aspie quiz results; http://www.rdos.net/eng/poly12c.php?p1= ... =80&p12=28
There is something I've never understood about heterosexual dating. It's something that everyone seems to accept as "just the way things are", but I don't understand why - and I'd like to. It's kind of hard to formulate as a precise question, especially one that doesn't come across as a rant or completely childish, but here's my best shot at it:
Why do males generally put in all the effort in initiating relationships?
I constantly read about the man having to "attract" the woman, to actually initiate contact and ask her out, to keep her interested in the early stages and so on. It's perceived as completely normal for the man to, basically, sell himself to the woman and for the woman to choose from competing sellers.[1] There are already many threads about this, so I don't want to go into too much detail - hopefully you get what I'm talking about.
What I'd like to know is why this is the case or, more specifically, why men go along with this. For once, it's male behaviour that puzzles me! I understand why women go along with it - less effort is easier than more effort and they can, apparently, get away with it.[2] If I could - I would, too!
I get the strong impression that males are just more desperate for relationships than females. (And I am talking about relationships here, not just sex.) Are they actually? If so, why? If not, why do they act as if they are?
This somewhat makes sense on online dating sites, because there the males outnumber females 2:1 (at least). But it makes no sense as a general attitude, since the number of single men and single women must be approximately equal. So while there appears to be a strong supply-demand imbalance I can't see how there could actually be one.[3] So why don't things look more balanced, with each gender putting in roughly the same amount of effort and treating each other more equally? Are women just that much happier to stay single than men? What am I missing here?
Please note: this is a serious question, not a rant. I'm looking for insight, not rhetoric.
[1] Yes, I understand that there are exceptions. I'm talking about overall trends here and I think few would argue that this is not the case in general.
[2] Yes, I know that women also have dating problems. This is not another "who has it easier?" thread.
[3] It's theoretically possible that more women than men are in relationships with the same sex, but all the data I can find shows that homosexuality is more prevalent among males.
Men want sex. Women want love.
Women are the employers. Men are the employees. Sex is the wage women pay men for agreeing to get into a relationship.
Duhhhhh!
Islamic countries impose their values through a variety of methods, with often brutal consequences for those who disobey. And one should not assume that the public face of a culture matches the private one.
Bravo!! !
I agree, sir.
Please continue sewing the board with your wisdom.
_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."
-XFG (no longer a moderator)
@infilove. Yes Ive heard of masculinism . I disagree that men should express open emotion to women. A major point of theirs and personal experience is that its a quick turn off for many women. So both men and women pursuing relationships should be reminded of things like that. Some women may think theyre okay with it but ive observed they quickly remember otherwise to their displeasure
Women are the employers. Men are the employees. Sex is the wage women pay men for agreeing to get into a relationship.
Duhhhhh!
Someone please kill off all people who think like this. Seriously, just die.
Agreed. "A real man with confidence is not afraid of showing off his hard dick to every woman he finds, hardy-har-har!"
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,051
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
That's true but it can be solved by appereance changes, there are plenty of stories by women confirm that:
http://www.quora.com/Physical-Appearanc ... attractive
A lot of them felt invisible before the change.
Do you know Kirsten Lindsmith, that girl on the WP Homepage? She had a very similar experience as those stories on the Quora page, her dating life was zero (because boys assumed she's lesbian) when she was wearing tomboyish-looking things but it significantly improved after appearance changes.
http://www.wrongplanet.net/article425.html
hear that girls? all you've got to do is completely change your appearance and learn to dress and behave like someone you're not, and then random strange men will find you attractive--yay! i'll get right on that.
It's sad, isn't it? Some girls looked more natural and cuter to me in the "before" pics on the Quora page, this fake eyebrow trend is pretty disturbing but it's becoming the norm :-/.
Appearance changes affect guys' dating chances greatly too.
Of course, if you have a horrible personality, no appearance change would help you for long-terms but I am assuming the minimum default is nice personality.
Wow, seriously? You had guys say to you "well, I wanted to go out with you, but now that you're asking me out... NO!" ? If so, I still have much to learn about just how messed up people can be!
Women are the employers. Men are the employees. Sex is the wage women pay men for agreeing to get into a relationship.
Duhhhhh!
Someone please kill off all people who think like this. Seriously, just die.
Yes! I struggle to respect anyone (male or female) who thinks that this is how things should be or even "OK". It seems that many people do, but when I say so, people tell me I'm cynical. At least I'm not the only one!
I utterly resent this attitude and I reject this system. I will not be a woman's "employee". If that means I remain single all my life - so be it. My self-respect is far more valuable to me than sex. I also resent and reject the (closely related) idea that women "give" sex and men "get" sex.
_________________
CloudFlare eating your posts? Try the Lazarus browser extension. See https://wp-fmx.github.io/WP/
The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,051
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.
Their identity is based around getting as many women as possible to engage sexually with them. People tend to do what is necessary to keep their self-identity intact. Their 'success' rate is another matter. I mean, this is all self-reported by people whose identity is based around getting as many women as possible to sleep with them. They may not be the most reliable of narrators.
They're not a big thing in the UK, though my sister-in-law was the lucky target of one such PUA. By all accounts they weren't a very happy ten minutes for him.
Not only are you wrong, you're contradicting yourself all over the shop.
Here's something to consider: no human being is more natural in their behaviour than any other human being. Do you suppose there are 'unnatural' squid? 'Unnatural' squirrels? 'Unnatural' horses? Bees? Cats? Orangutans? No. No animal can step outside its nature - it is always within that nature. Where people like you have a very abstracted, monistic, simplistic idea of human nature/behaviour, you end up getting very confused and slipping into all sorts of dualisms and contradictions when trying to impose such a 'nature' on the human behaviour as actually lived and expressed because of all the non- and contra-instances of that 'nature'. It is folly to insist that people should - both prescriptively and descriptively - behave according to your theory when you are having to insist such in the first place because they aren't.
If you were right, it would be impossible to 'confuse'. If you were right, 'feminists, homosexuals and other groups' could not exist.
The fault is not in people's refusal to conform to your theory, it is in your theory.
Women are the employers. Men are the employees. Sex is the wage women pay men for agreeing to get into a relationship.
Duhhhhh!
Many men do want sex, and many women do want love. As many men want love, and many women want sex. And a whole bunch of other stuff, too.
Many women enjoy sex for the pleasure of it. They go out, and seek it for its own end. Many men also do this, but many others don't. They certainly like sex, but prefer it to be part of a committed relationship. And of course, some people don't have much interest in sex at all.
I agree, sir.
Please continue sewing the board with your wisdom.
_________________
Of course, it's probably quite a bit more complicated than that.
You know sometimes, between the dames and the horses, I don't even know why I put my hat on.
That sounds really stupid and hard to believe, those guys were lying.
In my generation, "nice women" did not initiate a relationship. "Nice girls" didn't call boys. It's pretty deeply ingrained in our society, although I'm happy to say that I'm seeing this slowly changing, but a lot of men my age still buy into this crap. They were also brought up that women are merely property; therefore they are not supposed to have opinions. An opinionated woman could be big trouble!
Trust me, their response upon me approaching them was so shocked and horrified, you'd have thought I had emasculated them on the spot. Their mothers probably beat into them the same ideology I had beaten into me, so they were genuinely appalled at my "behavior."
I wonder what their rationale was for that advice - if any. Have they actually had some bad experiences from sending the first message? Did they merely consider it a waste of effort when they could get the same result by not messaging? Or were they just repeating what they heard from others without really thinking about it?
I didn't ask them why. But I went against their advice and messaged men I liked anyway. And all the men I met in person were the ones I sent the first messages to (except one).
None of them worked out but it was more efficient than just waiting for my type of men to message me.
Right. It's not like men don't have a choice. They can choose not to make the first move and wait just like you.
Men like you are called "Herbivore men" in Japan.
...
According to Fukasawa, soshoku danshi are "not without romantic relationships, but [have] a non-assertive, indifferent attitude towards desire of flesh".
I utterly resent this attitude and I reject this system. I will not be a woman's "employee". If that means I remain single all my life - so be it. My self-respect is far more valuable to me than sex. I also resent and reject the (closely related) idea that women "give" sex and men "get" sex.
It just isn't true. Most women want sex. Most women are MUCH more sexual than me. I hate it when I mention I might be asexual people think "it's okay to be single your entire life". F*** that. They can't comprehend that I could want a soul-mate that goes beyond typical "platonic" boundaries (i.e. no touching, no cuddling). I'm even willing to have sex if someone wants it, though I might need some medical help. People are so STUPID in their binary thinking.