# Any girls out there actually like men who are passive and not "alpha"?



## fairies (Nov 2, 2013)

Sorry, the title could have used better wording. I know. I really couldn't think of better words to describe the type of guy I'm thinking of.

After my really awful relationship, I have come to a conclusion in my life about my preferences in men that might change the way I date forever. I dated this guy who claimed to be an "alpha male" (I made a post about it a while ago) and wanted to have the "leader" role of the relationship. When I told him I believed it was 50/50, he said there always has to be one person with more power. Then he'd always say "What, do you want to date a wimp or something?" So I have come to the conclusion. Yes. I do want to date a "wimp."

I did some obsessive research about this argument and read different internet articles and posts about relationship functions and who should "lead" because he really convinced me for a while that I was going crazy and had no idea how life worked. I noticed a lot of women these days still like their man to be the leader, which is totally cool if that works for them. It doesn't work for me though. Personally, I like to have control over things and find myself to be good at that. After dating my boyfriend, I feel really turned off by the average "macho man" who wants to be the protector, savior and breadwinner or whatever.

It seems like guys still want to fit the role of the manly man. Personally, I feel no need for that. I would rather date a sweet man who is more passive and emotional rather than the average macho man who wants to be the bread winner and be the overseer of everything. I got really mad when my boyfriend wanted to take the lead for everything in the relationship. It pissed me off that he wanted to wear the pants and basically have me submit to his final say.

So the thing is, although I appreciate a man who wants to protect me and take me out to dinner, I personally would prefer to be the one to do the care taking too. I don't want to always be the princess in the relationships. I would like to take boyfriends out on dates too, and drive them places, be able to be trusted with major decisions, ect. I want to surprise my man with a date. I want us to do that for each other. And I would really like the idea of a guy who wouldn't mind making me breakfast (of course I would cook a lot. I love cooking) in the morning and doing mushy-romantic things girls would do. I don't mind doing anything a man would typically do. I hated not being able to do anything because my boyfriend wanted to always be the manly role. Especially since he gave himself so much props for it and wanted me to allow him to have the final say in things cause he was just so damn protective and manly. I felt constricted to only being able to do certain things in the relationship.

Can any ladies relate to this?

Are there any guys out there who are passive and "un-manly"? Because I really like that shit. I want a man who is really sweet, sensitive and is not afraid to be emotional. I want a guy who isn't afraid to feel, and come to me when he's upset. I want to comfort my man when he cries, as I'd want him to do the same for me. Not that I would ever want to be titled as the "boss" but I suppose I do like to have the chance to take the lead and initiative in certain things. (I think my last relationship seriously traumatized me) I wouldn't mind being the bread winner, but I wouldn't mind if he was either. My mom would have been the bread winner when her neck went out, and my dad did not mind staying home and taking care of my sister and I.

I just really want my relationship to be separate from the idea of genders being supposed to act and be a certain way. I like equality. I believe in a sandwich for a sandwich. I don't always want to be the little lady who needs to be protected. I like men who feel and don't need to be tough.

Where are all the un-manly guys at? Because there are girls out there who want you.


----------



## qingdom (Apr 5, 2011)

fairies said:


> Because there are girls out there who want you.



This smells like a trap. The scent is so strong digitally, it must be real... else otherwise.


----------



## fairies (Nov 2, 2013)

qingdom said:


> This smells like a trap. The scent is so strong digitally, it must be real... else otherwise.


This is not a trap this is real. I am so done with dating the average macho male. It's to restricting and the love doesn't feel real.

I hope what I said didn't sound bad. I tried wording it the best I can.


----------



## MisterD (Feb 24, 2010)

Just date another woman, geez. Or, have surgery where you can get a D.

The alpha male thing... really has no place in human society. By the definition... Every male that becomes a father is an "alpha male."

You didn't like being dominated by your partner, you should've told him.


----------



## Ace Face (Nov 13, 2011)

I, by no means, want a "passive" partner. I want a partner who will be direct with me. You've already owned up to the bad choice of wording with the title though... so moving on. 

I am more comfortable with being the one who "wears the pants" so to speak. By nature, I tend to take the lead in most situations. There is nothing wrong with that just as there is nothing wrong with people who would rather let somebody else take charge. Just find a pairing that works for you. And yes, I believe people should view their partners as equals. I view my partner as an equal, and I regularly ask him to voice his opinions to see where he's at, as he's not naturally inclined to be super verbal about his thoughts on certain things. The fact that I tend to be the "leader" has nothing to do with inequality in our relationship, but has everything to do with both of our personal preferences. I like to take the reigns and he truly does not.


----------



## FearAndTrembling (Jun 5, 2013)

I want somebody who is difficult, because I am more passive. I don't care to be the boss or leader. I want a woman who is gonna challenge me, I like that. 

I grew up in a household like what you describe. My mom was the boss in our house. My father was more easy going. Not that my mother totally dominated him, but she was the stronger personality in the house.


----------



## Das Brechen (Nov 26, 2011)

I applaud your honesty, OP. I hope going forward you find what you're looking for and keep it honest with these men. There are plenty of men who would rather follow and be submissive to a woman. *Plenty.*


----------



## fairies (Nov 2, 2013)

MisterD said:


> You didn't like being dominated by your partner, you should've told him.


Trust me, I did tell him. He didn't care. That's why there was a lot of conflict


----------



## RandomNote (Apr 10, 2013)

I dont mind being the submissive one, just means less work for me. Being an "alpha" as you say is a pain, id like to find a girl that can take charge a bit (also a bit feisty for that matter).

Oh and Op can you point me in the direction of said girls you mentioned:tongue::kitteh:


----------



## AriesLilith (Jan 6, 2013)

Hmm I tend to be more assertive than my husband, thought I wouldn't want him to be less than an equal. He might be more passive but he is confident and speaks his mind too, and can be assertive for himself in life while I might lack of it at times.
I certainly can't imagine what it's like if every time I ask him to speak his mind or opinion, he gets too agreedable or pleasing - I'd feel like walking on egg shells, as in I might step on him or his feelings and become inconsiderate in some situations, without realizing that since he wouldn't speak his mind (how would I know what he needs or thinks or feels, if he is too passive to speak up).

I don't need him to become dominant or more assertive in our relationship, but I need a partner who is assertive and confident enough as a mature adult human being.


And what's so unmanly about cooking?  I love men who cooks. My husband is not a great cook yet, like me (we need to stop cooking simple food lol), but he's still better than me. XD


----------



## KINGoftheAMAZONS (Jun 21, 2011)

I don't think _passive_ should automatically be linked to _emotional_ (and vice versa), and I think it's important that men who are passive, emotional, or gentle not be made to feel like "lesser men" because of their natural dispositions. I think there is plenty of room within "manliness" for the inclusion of qualities like passivity, emotionality, and or gentleness, and I admit that I find such men intriguing myself roud:. But this is probably because I too am a masculine being whose natural demeanor is one of emotionality and gentleness (I'm too stubborn to be passive though lol). You might find the kind of man you're looking for amongst the introverts (especially the feelers). Good luck


----------



## associative (Jul 1, 2013)

An obsession with being an "alpha" and "real man" is actually the most 'beta' thing in the world. 
_All you achieve with self-consciously macho behaviour is to wave your insecurity in everyone's face_.

Often I prefer to take the lead in my relationship, sometimes I prefer my partner to.
Most of the time I prefer to work together. She likes it that way too. You end up with far fewer slammed doors and sulks that way.


----------



## Das Brechen (Nov 26, 2011)

associative said:


> An obsession with being an "alpha" and "real man" is actually the most 'beta' thing in the world.
> _All you achieve with self-consciously macho behaviour is to wave your insecurity in everyone's face_.
> 
> Often I prefer to take the lead in my relationship, sometimes I prefer my partner to.
> Most of the time I prefer to work together. She likes it that way too. You end up with far fewer slammed doors and sulks that way.


I agree with you that an *obsession* with being an alpha male leads to being too tryhard and therefore repels women. Other than that, there are men who dominate, get dominated, and in between who try to lead as egalitarian a relationship will allow. Nothing wrong with being an alpha male though and being a boss in all facets of life. OP has a different preference and that's cool. Not that she needed my approval.


----------



## shakti (Oct 10, 2012)

Ooooh, me! Alpha and wannabe alpha males leave me totally cold...I like feminine, gentle men


----------



## DemonD (Jun 12, 2012)

My life experience tells me no. No they don't.

From what I've seen, if girls were faced with the choice between a passive guy or face-aids they'd have think about it.


----------



## changos (Nov 21, 2011)

Hi I know your title asks for women, I'm a guy but I have something to say. Research around INTJS ability as natural leaders (I'm INTJ) but also research around INTJS ability to follow. MOST are natural leaders but are not struggling to control everything, it might sound contradictory depending how much you know about intjs. I can talk from first hand experience me and a few other intjs, we see, listen, we notice but doesn't mean we want to take over, we can lead and we can follow. Sure if the leader sucks we take over.

What I try to explain is a social failure of concepts. "Leading" and "following" is too often confused with "control and submission".

I've been "dating" what you could consider an alpha woman and she struggled, I didn't care but I explained to her it's not about control, it's about the best approach. So, as you share on your post some woman also fit what you describe trying to lead when they can't, that sucks being a man and being a woman, it sucks for both cases.

I think and work about sharing, cooperating and switching roles about leading and following, not controlling and being submissive, many fail at this because being smart also means knowing where to listen and follow, but those many confuse it with "being quiet and obedient", it's not like that.

*About protection: *it's a matter of trying and finding out how you really are. Why? friends told me about this before and ended up accepting to find beautiful to feel protected, so it might be contradictory depending the scenario BUT It depends a lot on the man, from my personal experience, regardless of what many women have told me... I believe not every man can make a woman feel protected the right way while also making them feel independent. In fact many try to get a man who can be controlled and they fail to feel any kind of protection (the healthy one).




fairies said:


> So the thing is, although I appreciate a man who wants to protect me and take me out to dinner, I personally would prefer to be the one to do the care taking too. I don't want to always be the princess in the relationships. I would like to take boyfriends out on dates too, and drive them places,


I'm totally in favor. I like to drive and taking my girl to dinner but I'm tired of society expecting me to be the "taxi driver" and the walking wallet. The only think I can say from MY personal experience is, many times women driving me to dates meant headache, slow driving, or fast and imprudent. Just saying, is very common in my country, doesn't mean man drive better... but it makes sense because if men always want to do the driving you can't increase driving-hours-experience on the other side. I'm so good at driving that nervous people fall sleep during the travels with me, just saying, but I'm a natural care taker so do your numbers.




fairies said:


> be able to be trusted with major decisions, ect. I want to surprise my man with a date.


Trust must be earned, both genders.



fairies said:


> And I would really like the idea of a guy who wouldn't mind making me breakfast (of course I would cook a lot. I love cooking) in the morning and doing mushy-romantic things girls would do. I don't mind doing anything a man would typically do. I hated not being able to do anything because my boyfriend wanted to always be the manly role.


I think I love you  seriously, many men are as you describe. It's about finding them. I like to cook and like my love partner to cook for me too, it's both ways. And, others like me, like to teach things to their partners (man things) so they can do it without us because we won't always be there and it's important to share things (including the cleaning). BUT it's not the vast majority of people.




fairies said:


> I just really want my relationship to be separate from the idea of genders being supposed to act and be a certain way. I like equality. I believe in a sandwich for a sandwich. I don't always want to be the little lady who needs to be protected. I like men who feel and don't need to be tough.
> 
> Where are all the *un-manly *guys at? Because there are girls out there who want you.


Amen to that. I'm here ha ha just kidding.

I don't know If I will be able to explain this the right way, english is not my first language:* from my perspective it's not about being manly, or not, it's about being human and this applies to both genders*. Many things people expect means sacrificing something else, per example "ohh soooo manly" ok who will listen to his needs??? "ohhh so girly" usually means being the guy must be too permissive. 



I believe it takes time to find the right partner, in this case: for you (as any of us) because surprisingly as many women could agree with your post, many of them wouldn't like the same guys as you because at the end, many expect the contrary. I got to know women who actually ask for a macho man, not a "man" I mean almost an abusive human being, but that seems to make them happy.


Sorry for my intrusion, just saying.


----------



## monemi (Jun 24, 2013)

I have a strong personality, but I wouldn't say that I'm in charge or my husband is in charge. It's a pretty equal relationship IMO. We joke about it because I am pushier than him. I have dated guys that wanted to dominate all of the time. Never made it to serious long term relationships with them. I don't think it's that unusual for women to not want to be completely dominated.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

l don't want any kind of alpha behavior present anywhere near me, l _truly_ do not understand it.


l've been equally repulsed, confused and violated when a man or anyone else treats me like he wants me to dominate them.


----------



## Ecky (Dec 6, 2010)

I'm confident and self-assured and have no problems taking the lead in situations that require it, but I have very little interest in taking the lead for its own sake. I have my own life to run, I don't need to be micro-managing someone else's. As I just posted in another thread, I'm happy being a home-maker when my situation requires it and I'm also fine with being the primary provider. I like to cook and maintain my own living space.

In terms of relationships:

Mentally - If I'm certain you're wrong, I'll let you know. If proven wrong, I'll gracefully bow down to the facts. 

Emotionally - I have feelings despite being an INTP, but I don't think they necessarily take precedence over anyone else's. Compromise is actually most comfortable for me, moreso than either -always getting my way- or -always holding someone else's feelings as more important-.

Sexually - It gets exhausting being the initiator all the time. I can play either role but I am most comfortable with a mix or variety.

___

I give a lot of thought as to where these behaviors and expectation come from. I'm not quick to write off someone who wants to dominate or be dominated, but it's not something I intuitively understand.

EDITED: Terrible spelling/grammar. That's what I get for cooking while writing a post.


----------



## Ravenetta (Oct 23, 2013)

Most relationships I've observed consist of one human being swallowing up another into their ego and will. It is horrific, but true of even the "nicest" people.

I need a partner whose will is on equal footing with mine. That may or may not become true of my current partner. His will has completely swallowed me up, but I think it is finally occurring to him what he has been doing to me, so maybe we can recalibrate. He is an alpha in idea space, but not elsewhere, so I'm not sure how that counts.


----------



## MindBomb (Jul 7, 2010)

koalaroo said:


> When I see the word "passive", I almost exclusively take it to mean someone who lacks agency. If you're assertive about what you need and proactive with problems, then you aren't passive or submissive (as a note, these are related words but not synonymous.) I guess I see it more in terms of passivity versus agency, and submissiveness versus dominance. If more people had agency, but treated others as equals, the world would be a much better place. I've been in relationships where me asserting my needs (expressed constantly as wanting to spend quality time with the sig other) was met as an act of hostility in which I was supposedly trying to control the person, thus instigating a cycle of abuse.


I'm gonna be provocative and go out on a limb and state that most women deep down, consciously or *subconsciously*, do not like passivity or submissiveness in men--even if they state otherwise. Especially women who have strong personalities.

Being proactive, confident, and decisive does not mean that you are "Alpha" nor does it mean that you are domineering and controlling. One can still be "sensitive" and "gentle" and seek equality and still have the former traits.


----------



## GoodOldDreamer (Sep 8, 2011)

Good to see people are still willing to argue over rather pointless semantics. It's pretty clear that the OP equates "passivity" to "gentleness" or "a reserved nature". Maybe "soft-spoken" or "cool-headed". Geeze. :dry: A lack of more proper wording aside, the intent of the OP is pretty clear.

Anyways, I'd suggest NFs. Or perhaps Feelers in general? Keep an eye out for types with Fe in their function order. They are more likely to put the consideration of those around them into a priority equal to or greater than their own. Social/group harmony and all that jazz.

As you are an INFP (Fi dom), you're more likely to butt heads with someone else who has Fi (whether it's dom for them or not).

Now, could we please read past the poorly chosen wording to the actual meaning in the OP and maybe stop taking every little thing out of context because of personal biases?


----------



## MindBomb (Jul 7, 2010)

Good old INFJ to the rescue! "Can't we all just get along?" Geez.

NFs don't have the corner on being sensitive to a partner's needs or pursuing equality in a relationship. Talk about personal biases.

I think the thread is more interesting to talk about passivity rather than equality. It's a distinction that many screw up to his/her own peril. Which is what the OP did (she used "passive" multiple times in her post); in this case, I think the semantic slip actually is important. But, whatever...carry on.

Edit: Oh, and I responded to @koalaroo so having a little side thread within a thread is allowable don't you think?


----------



## marked174 (Feb 24, 2010)

I'm not sure it's right to put down those who have a more submissive personality. People are different and have different strengths and weaknesses. It wouldn't be right to say that anyone who is assertive is an abusive person either. The potential for abuse is present in all personalities. It's good for people to have different preferences, but it isn't good to label all those outside those preferences as "bad".


----------



## RobynC (Jun 10, 2011)

@MisterD



> Just date another woman, geez.


Actually, we're not so easy to deal with either...


----------



## WamphyriThrall (Apr 11, 2011)

MindBomb said:


> I'm gonna be provocative and go out on a limb and state that most women deep down, consciously or *subconsciously*, do not like passivity or submissiveness in men--even if they state otherwise. Especially women who have strong personalities.
> 
> Being proactive, confident, and decisive does not mean that you are "Alpha" nor does it mean that you are domineering and controlling. One can still be "sensitive" and "gentle" and seek equality and still have the former traits.


I was about to mention that: there is a lot of grey area between total alpha male and submissive, with most people falling somewhere between the two. The majority of people can probably cultivate these traits with enough determination and practice, though results may vary. 

Man or woman, I'm not sure any healthy person wants a doormat for a partner.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

Don't worry about it OP, it's a generational thing in a lot ways...many girls adjust assuming they're supposed to be into that.

My mom still thinks one of my boyfriends was gay and asked if several of my straight male friends were, with little justification. INTJ by the way...had his own masculineish interests, simply didn't ''identify'' with...anything.


l just avoid the entire dynamic, if it means being seemingly rude to a few individual people who have less than sincere intentions in the long run it l am unconcerned. lt's easier to distance yourself from in adulthood.


----------



## jeb (Jan 6, 2014)

I can certainly say that the type of men the OP is seeking are out there, as I would consider myself to be one. 
In terms of taking control, I often find that it is an expectation put forth by the women I'm dating. It is tiring and feels like work, and I would very much enjoy doing thoughtful things for the woman in my life if only it felt like I was choosing to do so out of affection. A woman who 
reciprocates, is thoughtful and wants to take me out too, isn't afraid to be sexually initiative and at the same time values equitable distribution of relationship responsibilities... that is the holy grail of women to me - if you find a single one, please send her in my direction!

Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk


----------



## fairies (Nov 2, 2013)

Thank you for all the responses everyone! Btw sorry for the confusion on the word "passive." I wrote this based off of my recent relationship where my partner always gained some kind of pride from arguing and winning, and always wanted to direct the way for everyone if he spotted something wrong in people's actions. So by saying passive, I wanted to make a point that I don't want my boyfriend to have to step in for every little thing. Sorry. I should have clarified that.

I should have explained myself better, but it was really late at night when I was typing this and passive was the first word I seemed to think of. Rather than passive, I would like to see a guy who is calm, easygoing and doesn't feel the need to always argue with people, have to try to guide everyone for everything, correct everyone, ect.

I'm really glad I got so many responses to this! My boyfriend would always say "there needs to be a leader or nothing will work" or say something along the lines of "you should be happy to be with me. men aren't men anymore." And I'm really glad to see that there are men out there that are crossing the traditional roles and really just being themselves! You guys are all awesome


----------



## fairies (Nov 2, 2013)

GoodOldDreamer said:


> Good to see people are still willing to argue over rather pointless semantics. It's pretty clear that the OP equates "passivity" to "gentleness" or "a reserved nature". Maybe "soft-spoken" or "cool-headed". Geeze. :dry: A lack of more proper wording aside, the intent of the OP is pretty clear.


Yeah, I apologize for the confusion on the word passive. I'm no longer going to start threads late at night when I'm annoyed and not thinking straight! xD

By passive, I pretty much do mean easygoing, cool-headed.


----------



## LadyO.W.BernieBro (Sep 4, 2010)

fairies said:


> Thank you for all the responses everyone! Btw sorry for the confusion on the word "passive." I wrote this based off of my recent relationship where my partner always gained some kind of pride from arguing and winning, and always wanted to direct the way for everyone if he spotted something wrong in people's actions. So by saying passive, I wanted to make a point that I don't want my boyfriend to have to step in for every little thing. Sorry. I should have clarified that.
> 
> I should have explained myself better, but it was really late at night when I was typing this and passive was the first word I seemed to think of. Rather than passive, I would like to see a guy who is calm, easygoing and doesn't feel the need to always argue with people, have to try to guide everyone for everything, correct everyone, ect.
> 
> I'm really glad I got so many responses to this! My boyfriend would always say "there needs to be a leader or nothing will work" or say something along the lines of "you should be happy to be with me. men aren't men anymore." And I'm really glad to see that there are men out there that are crossing the traditional roles and really just being themselves! You guys are all awesome


Yeah...it's...interesting.

lf anything l watch interactions and the dynamic between different men rather than between men and women, to really understand the motivations and the very core of the behavior.

l'm not saying total dominance doesn't serve a purpose, but that's the only thing it does IME/O...serve ''a'' specialized purpose that

The kind of men l keep around and invest in may be emasculated by some other males, but are taken more seriously and are better *liked *by the majority of people.


l love a charming, persuasive man who people really admire :kitteh:

Not just tolerate.


----------



## Paradox1987 (Oct 9, 2010)

When I came to this site, years ago, I remember agonising over what username to pick. Eventually, I settled on "Paradox1987". I settled on it, because I think it is the best reflection of me. I believe that if you studied my character to its very core, you would emerge holding a great number of paradoxes, and they all started developing back in the golden year of 1987, back when the sun shone, and grass glittered a lustrous green :tongue:.

However, I also believe that I am not particularly special as a human being. Like my fellows, I too am 23 base-pair chromosomes and in an Huxley sense, I am bio-chemically human. Consequently, I believe that most people, if not all, are chock full of paradoxes, ironies of character; bundles of contradictory roles. To this end, I can be compassionate, nurturing, caring and supportive. I can take the moment to let you drop all the balls of life you were juggling and throw your arms in despair. I am happy to assist someone in finding their feet again, and usually glad of the opportunity to have made someone smile. In short, I can see the positive in many things, even the perversely funny things when I feel like my world has collapsed.

However, there is another side to me too. I can defend myself, my positions and thoughts. I am opinionated, stubborn and often too outspoken for my own good. I abhor violence used in anger, but I can load up with vitriol and scorn with the best of them. When there are panic situations, I'm very good at keeping my calm. Before making big decisions, even if the decision must be made quickly, I attempt to keep rashness out of my matrix. I pick my battles wisely, and try and ensure an open channel of communications.

In relationship terms, I seek someone relatively similar. Someone who is in it for the team. Is willing to be decisive when their expertise demands it, is capable of understanding that when panic/disaster strike, we're in it together. In short, my idea of an ideal relationship is where partners put "we before me", because this shows me that compromise is possible. I believe that true partners are nuanced, they know how to work together, with neither team-mate gaining an upper hand. A successful team is an adaptable team. Adaptability is perhaps the single most important trait in any person. Knowing when to assert and when to defer, when to guard and when to strike and when to rally together and when to work independently for a shared goal are the hallmarks of a relationship done right in my eyes. Those hallmarks will not be met by people if the roles and traits are distributed by sex/gender, it is better rather to defer to the 'invisible hand' of Adam Smith.

In short, in my mind, it is best to be a diplomatic male. A diplomatist will not stoke a fire merely to watch it burn. Nor will a diplomatist allow key interests to be squandered. Rather, a diplomatist will negotiate.

*EDIT*
When I was growing up, and even today, my greatest male role-model has been Atticus Finch. Mr Finch is everything I always wanted to be, it helped that I wanted to follow in his footsteps, and that I have always identified with his character. Such is the character I hope to cultivate by the time I am ready to have a child of my own.


----------



## aendern (Dec 28, 2013)

fairies said:


> [original post]


You sound exactly like the kind of woman I am attracted to. I fit your descriptions of a "passive man." Although I agree with the other posters who dislike the word "passive" because it suggests a sort of doormat quality, which is not what I think you meant. (if they had read your post they would understand D: )



> Where are all the un-manly guys at? Because there are girls out there who want you.


There are un-manly men out there who want you, too!



FearAndTrembling said:


> I want somebody who is difficult, because I am more passive. I don't care to be the boss or leader. I want a woman who is gonna challenge me, I like that.
> 
> I grew up in a household like what you describe. My mom was the boss in our house. My father was more easy going. Not that my mother totally dominated him, but she was the stronger personality in the house.


Same.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

I think that a lot of guys posture as alpha-males when they are't really.

A mook for example, is an insecure dominating type who overcompensates for his fear of his own short-comings, by applying too much force when its not necessary, to get his way all the time. Hes afraid that if he gives an inch, people will walk all over him. At the core he knows hes weak or otherwise "flawed" (mostly in his own mind), so he puts up a front to throw others off the trail. 

A real alpha-male isn't deeply insecure like the mook. He does not feel threatened by his significant other like the insecure beta-male whos posturing as alpha. He doesn't have to aggressively preempt you, he knows that things aren't suddenly going to fly out of control if hes not cowing you into submission every second. He values your opinions, and he is not too insecure to say you're right, or that hes wrong. He does not have the compulsion like the beta-male has because he trusts himself, and knows he can make good judgments about who to trust. He is not threatened by your happiness or your success, because again, hes not a weak insecure baby like the beta-male whos competing in the TRYHARD olympics to be an alpha-male.

The beta-male type that I mentioned typically *feels threatened* by other men as he perceives them as more masculine than them (shaky self-confidence), which will manifest in subtle ways or obvious ways. Some guys like that start fights to prove a point, others might just puff up a little or talk themselves up after they have been in the presence of a more successful man. Some of them even feel threatened by women, because they're already insecure in their masculinity, so if they encounter a woman whos _god forbid_ more strong willed, successful, or intelligent -- then not only is he a sissy compared to some other men, but now even other women are more of a man than him. 

*Bonus anecdote where I reference a hate-able schmuck:
I saw a good example of this recently in a guy who is *obsessed* with gender roles for how women "should" be. He has this neurotic compulsion to marginalize them as either "proper" women who are docile, only there for breeding and taking care of their husband, etc; vs "improper" - having her own will, finding her own identity. That is just a very insecure man (and a pig-disgusting _rarity_ fortunately) who feels threatened by -everyone- pretty much. They love to posture as alphas.. but they really aren't. Its just their -thing- to -want- to be the alpha-baboon. 

**And a disclaimer: 
Masses of other menfolk have no interest in being the alpha, or the aggressive overcompensating beta. Plenty just do their own thing and don't care about proving themselves against each other, or fixate on roles and social hierarchies. 

Anyway, a real alpha-male is a rare find among all the posturing little betas. They're secure and confident enough to not act petty like these dominating little beta-males. And if he has integrity, along with his self-confidence - well, what a gem.


_
(And I do hope people realize the terms alpha and beta used in this context have nothing to do with socionics. Stupid, I know, but the other day someone actually thought that.. so.. )_


----------



## koalaroo (Nov 25, 2011)

@Promethea - Hah. My narcissistic ex is such a beta. Thank you for that edifying post.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

koalaroo said:


> @Promethea - Hah. My narcissistic ex is such a beta. Thank you for that edifying post.


I know them well; I'm a magnet for overcompensating riled up little beta-males with something to prove. They have been trying to knock me down a peg or ten all my life. ; )


----------



## The Proof (Aug 5, 2009)

OP maybe you don't actually want a guy who was un-manly, but it's certainly possible to find a non-douchebag guy


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

The Proof said:


> OP maybe you don't actually want a guy who was un-manly, but it's certainly possible to find a non-douchebag guy


Lol well worded, friend.


----------



## fairies (Nov 2, 2013)

The Proof said:


> OP maybe you don't actually want a guy who was un-manly, but it's certainly possible to find a non-douchebag guy


I can't disagree that the guy was a total douche. Even if my next boyfriend is manly, what is really important that him and I are both equals and he isn't domineering. I'm hoping my bad experience gave me the skills to be able to detect a douche early in the relationship and I have better luck xD


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

fairies said:


> I can't disagree that the guy was a total douche. Even if my next boyfriend is manly, what is really important that him and I are both equals and he isn't domineering. I'm hoping my bad experience gave me the skills to be able to detect a douche early in the relationship and I have better luck xD


Good luck!


----------



## Villainous (Dec 31, 2012)

No


----------



## Realpeopleonly (Jan 16, 2014)

I am a enfp male with a enneagram 2 and a life path of 33/6 ( numerology) I am one of those males that always wants to find the good in people and I find that it is the same in women. The problem lies in the fact that I seem to attract the women with a lot of baggage that need a hand which iam always willing to give I would just like someone who can appreciate my giving loving nature with out always needing to try and drain me .... Where are all the stable woman that want a man that can show his feeling and wants to live a life of adventure ??!


----------



## RetroVortex (Aug 14, 2012)

Realpeopleonly said:


> I am a enfp male with a enneagram 2 and a life path of 33/6 ( numerology) I am one of those males that always wants to find the good in people and I find that it is the same in women. The problem lies in the fact that I seem to attract the women with a lot of baggage that need a hand which iam always willing to give I would just like someone who can appreciate my giving loving nature with out always needing to try and drain me .... Where are all the stable woman that want a man that can show his feeling and wants to live a life of adventure ??!


With other men most likely! :laughing:


----------



## Monsieur Melancholy (Nov 16, 2012)

I consider myself an omega male.


----------



## idkwatimdoing (Dec 15, 2013)

I'm a pretty passive (some might say apathetic) guy. I've always preferred to let the girl run the relationship so to speak. I've met girls who actually liked that trait about me and some who hate it, so yea they are out there i suppose.


----------



## eulersline (Dec 27, 2013)

Having an "alpha" male be passive with his mate is best. But it doesn't always work that way unfortunately.


----------



## EccentricSiren (Sep 3, 2013)

What you described is pretty much what I want. I think your ex had a false dichotomy: alpha male or wimp. And there's so much in between. To me, a wimp would be a guy who doesn't know who he is and what he believes in and lets himself get walked all over. I don't want that. But the sort of relationship you described in your original post describes what I want to a t. I'd rather have an artist for a boyfriend than a football star. The football star might be a perfectly nice person and fun to be around and all that, but I'm probably not going to daydream about being his girlfriend. I want a quirky, artsy, emotional guy who's totally cool with being that way.


----------



## EccentricSiren (Sep 3, 2013)

Villainous said:


> No


And how, may I ask, do you know that?


----------



## Nightchill (Oct 19, 2013)

fairies said:


> Because I really like that shit. I want a man who is really sweet, sensitive and is not afraid to be emotional. I want a guy who isn't afraid to feel, and come to me when he's upset. I want to comfort my man when he cries, as I'd want him to do the same for me. Not that I would ever want to be titled as the "boss" but I suppose I do like to have the chance to take the lead and initiative in certain things. (I think my last relationship seriously traumatized me) I wouldn't mind being the bread winner, but I wouldn't mind if he was either. My mom would have been the bread winner when her neck went out, and my dad did not mind staying home and taking care of my sister and I.
> 
> I just really want my relationship to be separate from the idea of genders being supposed to act and be a certain way. I like equality. I believe in a sandwich for a sandwich. I don't always want to be the little lady who needs to be protected. I like men who feel and don't need to be tough.
> 
> Where are all the un-manly guys at? Because there are girls out there who want you.


In short: yes. 

'Alpha' males are usually brutish misogynists, people who are above the task of taking their own children and frustrated/annoying f*cks who impose themselves in one way or another.

The men you mentioned I usually meet on friendly basis are from IT sector. Programmers, game developers and such. Intelligent, caring, grateful and gentle. Give you freedom.


----------



## Villainous (Dec 31, 2012)

EccentricSiren said:


> And how, may I ask, do you know that?


Because no one is attracted to a weakling pushover. The original post is painting the picture in black and white: either there is the overcompensating macho dick or the nice guy. 

In reality, there are men who are still dominant but caring/empathetic at the same time. These guys are super rare though it that's why guys only look black and white like that. I call the the good guy or the nice bad boy. They're out there


----------



## Ace Face (Nov 13, 2011)

EccentricSiren said:


> And how, may I ask, do you know that?


Haven't you heard? Making broad generalizations is totally in this season. Hmmm, now that I think of it, on this forum, it seems to be "in" every season... ._.


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

Realpeopleonly said:


> I am a enfp male with a enneagram 2 and a life path of 33/6 ( numerology) I am one of those males that always wants to find the good in people and I find that it is the same in women. The problem lies in the fact that I seem to attract the women with a lot of baggage that need a hand which iam always willing to give I would just like someone who can appreciate my giving loving nature with out always needing to try and drain me .... Where are all the stable woman that want a man that can show his feeling and wants to live a life of adventure ??!


An enneagram 2 who attracts people in need of help, imagine that. : P


----------



## Swordsman of Mana (Jan 7, 2011)

@fairies
you are describing a controlling, frat boy-ish asshole, not an alpha male. an alpha is a man who is leader, has a lack of submissive/insecure qualities and is not afraid to assert his needs and preferences. many real alpha males are friendly and sensitive and most treat their partners well. in a relationship, an alpha male will make you feel secure and looked after.

whether this is what you are looking for, I don't know. However, I felt compelled to address this because society is becoming increasingly unable to tell the difference between an aggressive dick and a strong, genuinely confident man who is a capable leader, responsible role model and pillar of security for his family.


----------



## Mr Canis (Mar 3, 2012)




----------



## Laguna (Mar 21, 2012)

I think you hit the nail on the head that your last bf traumatized you with this macho man stuff. Unless I'm so old that I don't know what is happening in your age bracket- I'm thinking you shouldn't have to worry so much about this. The "alpha" men that I have seen that fit your description are either unhealthy- or hail from some "old country" where the culture is to demean women. Please- just get out there and date other guys - (plenty of great ones out there who are strong-willed but not wack jobs) to wash the taste out of your mouth from this last loser. Don't let him do such a number on your head. NOT worth it, girl.


----------



## Kyandigaru (Mar 11, 2012)

Ace Face said:


> I, by no means, want a "passive" partner. I want a partner who will be direct with me. You've already owned up to the bad choice of wording with the title though... so moving on.
> 
> I am more comfortable with being the one who "wears the pants" so to speak. By nature, I tend to take the lead in most situations. There is nothing wrong with that just as there is nothing wrong with people who would rather let somebody else take charge. Just find a pairing that works for you. And yes, I believe people should view their partners as equals. I view my partner as an equal, and I regularly ask him to voice his opinions to see where he's at, as he's not naturally inclined to be super verbal about his thoughts on certain things. The fact that I tend to be the "leader" has nothing to do with inequality in our relationship, but has everything to do with both of our personal preferences. I like to take the reigns and he truly does not.



Totally agree. I've dated men who were passive and all I got were headaches.


----------



## WildImagineer (Jan 25, 2013)

You're acting like you discovered the cure for cancer? 
Not all women like dominant men.
Not all men like submissive women.

Can we move on now?


----------



## Afruabarkio (May 29, 2011)

Nice thread. I don't like to be the macho man, it feels like I'm working for two.


----------



## ficsci (May 4, 2011)

Even if he's not "alpha", at least he should be assertive

Is what I would say


Yah, "alpha" is overrated. But lately, when a guy honestly admits that he cries, I get afraid that it's actually a "trap". Like, are you doing this just to manipulate me? To make me think "aww he's so sensitive, I want to sleep with him" ? Or are you actually being honest? I don't get it (>__<)


----------



## RetroVortex (Aug 14, 2012)

ficsci said:


> Even if he's not "alpha", at least he should be assertive
> 
> Is what I would say
> 
> ...


Its tough. I think some men can do stuff like that to manipulate people, but then others, like me just have a tendency to be honest about themselves.
(Maybe a little too honest! I remember randomly talking to a bunch of people and mentioning bowel movements or something and everyone was like WTF? XD And the other day at work, I got this funny reaction from a coworker I like when I mentioned I had a box of naked action men up in my loft! XD (Its because I liked to mix and match the clothes and accessories and maybe because child me thought it was funny XD))


----------



## MisterD (Feb 24, 2010)

I hate the self-image alpha male target in today's society.

Alpha male is a term for pack animals that need to stay together in order to SURVIVE. Human's are not like this, they will only act on enough effort as they need to, in order to survive.

Of course, you will get some people who want to break the mold, push the boundaries & become successful for a better life.

In actuality, being an "alpha" male simply means you have started a new family. The children are beta's. 

I hate falling into the social constructs of society.

I will always be a loner & do my own thing. People can come along if they want to. I'll bring everyone who chooses to come with me up in the world, on my path. 

Guys who put on the macho man, are insecure as fuck. 

True alpha's of the world are Nelson Mandela, Abraham Lincoln, there's too many to list... they are the first that came to mind.


----------



## Laguna (Mar 21, 2012)

ficsci said:


> Even if he's not "alpha", at least he should be assertive
> 
> Is what I would say
> 
> ...


The strongest men in my life- that I respected most in my life cry. (I'm not talking cry-baby. At appropriately intense times.)
For me, witnessing that give me an overwhelming feeling of admiration and respect as he is man enough to own his emotions and not in the least bit feel it defines him or takes anything away from him. A man shedding a tear at a funeral of someone important to him, or at the news of something incredible that is changing the world or that he has worked hard for. Or words or music that touched his heart and moved him. That is hot and manly in my book.

I grew up around men like this. And I'm so glad that I did.


----------



## All (Jan 13, 2014)

I prefer guys who genuinely respect me as a human being and are fun to hang out with. I don't care if they're "passive" or "alpha males". I personally think those categories are ridiculous. 

I've also met horrible guys who could be considered to belong to each of them, the only difference was in how they displayed their worst traits.


----------



## Codger (Aug 7, 2010)

I wouldn't say I'm either, if anything I'm just laissez-faire.

Whatever.


----------



## Ravenetta (Oct 23, 2013)

Codger said:


> I wouldn't say I'm either, if anything I'm just laissez-faire.
> 
> Whatever.


I wonder what would happen if someone who just didn't care ended up with a control freak. Would they be in control or just really confused? ha.


----------



## Codger (Aug 7, 2010)

fia said:


> I wonder what would happen if someone who just didn't care ended up with a control freak. Would they be in control or just really confused? ha.


In my case, I probably wouldn't notice. 

I know one couple like that though. She goes mental and throws a shit fit, he just chuckles, winks at you and says "give her 5 minutes, she'll be fine". Probably the most chilled out and patient man I've ever met.


----------



## Dragunov (Oct 2, 2013)

MisterD said:


> I hate the self-image alpha male target in today's society.
> 
> Alpha male is a term for pack animals that need to stay together in order to SURVIVE. Human's are not like this, they will only act on enough effort as they need to, in order to survive.
> 
> ...


Alpha male just means doing your own thing, going after what you want and being confident in your own skin, it's not some "societal construct" that you decide to go against because you feel inferior.

Why is it always societies fault?


----------



## EmileeArsenic (Jun 8, 2012)

I thought I wanted that, so, recently, I found a super cuddly sweet guy (INFJ), and I was bored the entire time. I don't care for idiotic power struggles, but I do need a challenge. I like digging below the surface to see the full picture and I like to find a little bit of a snuggle bunny in the guy I end up with, but I like it to be one of those hidden sides that I had to work to find - almost like he doesn't like to admit that that side is there, but once I get my snuggles, he doesn't want to let go. Finding those things about my guy makes me see him in new lights and through different filters and I end up more and more into him every time I find a new little thing about him because I treasure each little facet he shares with me.

If you'd asked me months ago, I never would've realized this, but I like and need a bit of friction, and more passive type guys don't give me that.

I'm already passive. Another passive person in the relationship means we'll likely never get anywhere.


----------



## lilimarleen (Oct 17, 2013)

I'm not interested in an "alpha male" because I don't care whether or not someone can "be a man" and all that nonsense. I don't want anyone passive, either. I just want a direct, serious person. They can have plenty of traits that might be considered feminine, as long as they are REAL with me.


----------



## iloveusarita (Nov 9, 2013)

I think women like confidence, but meh, it's some PUA bollocks that's infused society.

Modern dating culture IMO is just the projected views of some Californian liberal elite, SOME of it makes sense, but the rest is just things said for effect, PC bollocks, or as said mass projection of subjective thoughts. Kind of like me saying "I like Haagen-Dazs, so EVERYONE ELSE DOES TOO!" lol..


----------



## iloveusarita (Nov 9, 2013)

Dragunov said:


> Alpha male just means doing your own thing, going after what you want and being confident in your own skin, it's not some "societal construct" that you decide to go against because you feel inferior.
> 
> Why is it always societies fault?


lulz.. when did he say it made him feel inferior? He simply doesn't agree with it, should he?


----------



## lochy (May 10, 2013)

has someone mentioned being with an INFP might be a good idea? 
(didnt read all 11 pages)

if you want sensitive and emotional im your guy 
well we all are  (i think..)

i will tell you it can be rather troublesome a lot of the time as its somewhat easy to hurt my feelings.. but my emotional sensitivity and availability seem to make up for it says my girlfriend 
she told me today that im like a big teddy bear cause im so soft/gentle/sensitive. 
thats a good thing right? hah 

ive never fit into the 'traditional male' role, so during my earlier teen years i really struggled with identity stuff but if you want someone caring and understanding NF's might be a wiser choice?
hope thats somewhat interesting to you fairies =]


----------



## Codger (Aug 7, 2010)

nishanal said:


> I think women like confidence, but meh, it's some PUA bollocks that's infused society.
> 
> Modern dating culture IMO is just the projected views of some Californian liberal elite, SOME of it makes sense, but the rest is just things said for effect, PC bollocks, or as said mass projection of subjective thoughts. Kind of like me saying "I like Haagen-Dazs, so EVERYONE ELSE DOES TOO!" lol..


By modern you mean, a small portion of American society.


----------



## Dragunov (Oct 2, 2013)

nishanal said:


> lulz.. when did he say it made him feel inferior? He simply doesn't agree with it, should he?


Doesn't agree with self improvement? From what he wrote it looks like he takes it as a threat rather than a source of inspiration or competition to better himself.


----------



## iloveusarita (Nov 9, 2013)

Codger said:


> By modern you mean, a small portion of American society.


well yeah, exactly so.


----------



## iloveusarita (Nov 9, 2013)

Dragunov said:


> Doesn't agree with self improvement? From what he wrote it looks like he takes it as a threat rather than a source of inspiration or competition to better himself.


how I interpreted it is that he doesn't agree with the alpha and beta labels.


----------



## MisterD (Feb 24, 2010)

@fairies 

You should define your version of "alpha"... People have different views.


----------



## fairies (Nov 2, 2013)

MisterD said:


> @fairies
> 
> You should define your version of "alpha"... People have different views.


My version of alpha is defined as the man being the leader, the head of the household who has the final say on decisions along with being the stereotypical manly man who fixes cars and is the breadwinner, coming home to dinner on the table. Basically patriarchy.

One bad example from my ex is that his mom and grandma always has breakfast, lunch and dinner ready for him, does his laundry, ect. while he does "manly" things. The guy didn't even want to freaking bake cookies with me cause he "eats them not bakes them." It seemed he didn't want to associate himself with anything girly. I know this guy is a total nut but thinking of an alpha male brings me back to this cause he proclaimed himself as one and defined himself as "the leader"


----------



## Agni (Jan 5, 2012)

fairies said:


> My version of alpha is defined as the man being the leader, the head of the household who has the final say on decisions along with being the stereotypical manly man who fixes cars and is the breadwinner, coming home to dinner on the table. Basically patriarchy.
> 
> One bad example from my ex is that his mom and grandma always has breakfast, lunch and dinner ready for him, does his laundry, ect. while he does "manly" things. The guy didn't even want to freaking bake cookies with me cause he "eats them not bakes them." It seemed he didn't want to associate himself with anything girly. I know this guy is a total nut but thinking of an alpha male brings me back to this cause he proclaimed himself as one and defined himself as "the leader"


I have to say that your version of "alpha" sounds more like a douchebag than alpha.


----------



## RetroVortex (Aug 14, 2012)

fairies said:


> My version of alpha is defined as the man being the leader, the head of the household who has the final say on decisions along with being the stereotypical manly man who fixes cars and is the breadwinner, coming home to dinner on the table. Basically patriarchy.
> 
> One bad example from my ex is that his mom and grandma always has breakfast, lunch and dinner ready for him, does his laundry, ect. while he does "manly" things. The guy didn't even want to freaking bake cookies with me cause he "eats them not bakes them." It seemed he didn't want to associate himself with anything girly. I know this guy is a total nut but thinking of an alpha male brings me back to this cause he proclaimed himself as one and defined himself as "the leader"


Man, that dude sounds like a lazy ass. (or a bully possibly)
Hell my mother would kick my ass if I didn't do my laundry once in a while! XD

Plus I don't get what some people's hang up is on cooking? Its ironic really since most of the famous chefs out there are male! XD
(Cooking is a vital life skill people should encourage others to learn as early as possible in life. I know people that can burn baked beans. HOW CAN YOU BURN BAKED BEANS!!??! @[email protected] I mean you don't even need to use the hob, just put them in the microwave for a couple of minutes, JEEZ! Xp)


----------



## dizzycactus (Sep 9, 2012)

SouthernSaxon said:


> actions speak louder than words.


that's the crux of the matter. There's plenty of women claiming to be one way, then acting the opposite. Actions are the bottom line.


----------



## Ikari_T (Apr 10, 2012)

How about an easygoing hothead? lol. I'm definitely not alpha but I can be. I shift mentality for the girl's preference. But I always make sure she knows about the decisions beforehand (with the exceptions of emergencies that can't wait). I also will voice myself if I feel strongly about something, all in good intentions though. 0 In the end, I still make sure she is comfortable with my decisions. I can sense her feelings.

There are plenty of men like that out there. I have a friend who would bend over backwards for everyone and agree with every decision except for non-politically correct ones.


----------



## SouthernSaxon (Feb 21, 2014)

dizzycactus said:


> that's the crux of the matter. There's plenty of women claiming to be one way, then acting the opposite. Actions are the bottom line.


Having just a basic understanding of female psychology has helped me penetrate this a lot.

Women have been conditioned by feminism to be ashamed of their natural instincts, and are as a rule substantially more conformist than men. So, your average woman will say that she's independent and is attracted to men who are kind and friendly and passive. But in reality, most women are quite submissive, and get very turned on by a man who will move them quickly and takes control.

I know I'm never going to win any brownie points for posting comments like this, but there are more important things in life than white knighting women you're never going to inseminate.

Mother Nature didn't take PC into consideration when crafting men and women.


----------



## dizzycactus (Sep 9, 2012)

SouthernSaxon said:


> Having just a basic understanding of female psychology has helped me penetrate this a lot.
> 
> Women have been conditioned by feminism to be ashamed of their natural instincts, and are as a rule substantially more conformist than men. So, your average woman will say that she's independent and is attracted to men who are kind and friendly and passive. But in reality, most women are quite submissive, and get very turned on by a man who will move them quickly and takes control.
> 
> ...


From what I see, that seems a fair estimation. But it's hard to deal with. I could live with people objectifying each other's bodies. Bodies are objects after all. Objectification of your character is more personal. But that's a slightly irrelevant tangent. 

It's just difficult because INTPs hate controlling or domineering people, and we see them adored by women. To our perception, horrible people, being enabled and rewarded. And then all the claims that it doesn't actually happen, that being nice is actually attractive, and it's like a big joke. 
Perhaps there is hope. Perhaps instinct is contextual. There is theory that only girls in cultures that enable promiscuity will be attracted to such traits, because guys who dominate and cheat are more genetically successful, but in cultures in which monogamy is enforced, promiscuity is not possible, and thus not a genetic advantage. In those cultures different traits might be attractive. 
I have found a girl who I can be myself around. I can be kind to her, show love, and she does not reject me or disrespect me for it, nor does she try to control me. She is from a slightly more conservative culture. Perhaps that is the key.


----------



## MoltenHorse (Feb 24, 2012)

I'm passive and "un-manly". Come feed me, ride me, wipe m...scratch that last one. 

Unfortunately I'm the worst of two worlds - I'm passive, but I'm not sweet, sensitive or unafraid to be emotional. Passive and cold. 
Come get this catch ladies. 

Looking at my surroundings, my experience is that's how it is most of the times, the alpha; forward, loud, space consuming, are also often the ones who are better at showing their sensitive side or being sweet. Sure the passive ones might be super sweet with the right person when others aren't looking, but aggressors (or "alphas") are a lot better at showing it early on and towards the broad masses. They have the confidence to do it, that's why alphas are alphas, and that's why alphas get more ladies. Just because someone likes to take command and take place doesn't make him an alpha if he is a douche that people really dislike. Sure societal norms probably has a big role to play here, but in general, we're all humanish after all. (Maybe this is alien to the Americans on here if the hollywood high-school and college movies from the 80's and 90's actually display an accurate demonstration of American social culture, but I've always taken for granted that that's just: hollywood fiction.)

The other side of the coin is that it's in a way more of a compliment and bigger experience of affection when a passive actually open up to someone and show his affection and share his emotions with someone, by the simple exclusivity of it. 
But it takes a while to get there, I'm the same. There's a much bigger chance that the next girl I end up with is a girl that show me and everyone else affection and give compliments the first times we meet, than a girl that show or give it to no one, including me.


----------



## dizzycactus (Sep 9, 2012)

MoltenHorse said:


> I'm passive and "un-manly". Come feed me, ride me, wipe m...scratch that last one.
> 
> Unfortunately I'm the worst of two worlds - I'm passive, but I'm not sweet, sensitive or unafraid to be emotional. Passive and cold.
> Come get this catch ladies.
> ...


I have learnt to open up a lot easier. It can be very rewarding. I find most girls I've tried to connect with don't understand the importance of being able to show emotional vulnerability. Relationships in our culture are often displayed as very casual or utilitarian, "chummy" even. More of a battle than anything, a competition, when it's much better as a collaboration. "Strong women" are shown in media as caring little about their relationships, which is kinda sad. It takes strength to open up. Being an inert rock is easy.


----------



## Kingdom Crusader (Jan 4, 2012)

SouthernSaxon said:


> Do you really mean this sincerely? So you wouldn't judge a guy for being awkward socially, for being emotional, or for not feeling confident to make decisions for you? If so, I actually have a lot of respect for you. The thing is, I have heard woman after woman say things like this, but when they are actually faced with a man who has these traits, they either push him straight into the friend zone or have a short, unhappy relationship due to the lack of intimacy.
> 
> I've never been a naturally assertive man, but I've been taken advantage of by expressing the traits you claim to like. So I'm working to change and as a result things are looking much more positive for me romantically. Therefore, my experience tells me that you're very unusual, and that most girls, however assertive they be, find a man who can be dominant over them highly attractive. Because of societal pressure to be "independent" and "strong", they're afraid to admit this, but actions speak louder than words.


I don't really see the connection between being socially awkward, being emotional, or not making decisions for me, and passivity. I'm confident in my assertion that I feel more comfortable around a guy who is more easy-going, or passive. This is based on real experience interacting with many people at work and school. I've been paying very close attention to this since I found out about MBTI 2 1/2 years ago, and reading articles on relationships. I need typological compatibility and commonality of interests. If at all possible, I want to be part of a little think tank to see where our brain storming will go in our general field.

Also, I don't necessarily equate passivity to being taken advantage of. I'm a very passive person and being an Asian female gives some guys the wrong idea about me. This is a matter of drawing the line.

As far as being conditioned to be "independent" and "strong".... those things have always been discouraged in my family. I've gotten a lot of ass kickings by my dad for my Ti-Ne independence of thought when I was growing up.

I will agree that I'm unusual for a woman. I do realize that I might partially think the way I do because I've always been sexually attracted to other women. In other words, I'm gay. More specifically, I'm a heteromantic lesbian, but have been bordering asexuality due to my current mid life transition perhaps. The way I interact with some guys is a bit different. I see them as my buddies, even my son.

In addition, I've been with controlling men before, and my reaction was to out right rebel against them.


----------



## laura palmer (Feb 10, 2014)

Kinda geting tired off all the topics like this. Its kind of the male version of " im not like the other girls"...
Im not to sure. I cant say I like/dislike men like that, it all depends on the person in the end.


----------



## fairies (Nov 2, 2013)

SouthernSaxon said:


> Do you really mean this sincerely? So you wouldn't judge a guy for being awkward socially, for being emotional, or for not feeling confident to make decisions for you? If so, I actually have a lot of respect for you. The thing is, I have heard woman after woman say things like this, but when they are actually faced with a man who has these traits, they either push him straight into the friend zone or have a short, unhappy relationship due to the lack of intimacy.
> 
> I've never been a naturally assertive man, but I've been taken advantage of by expressing the traits you claim to like. So I'm working to change and as a result things are looking much more positive for me romantically. Therefore, my experience tells me that you're very unusual, and that most girls, however assertive they be, find a man who can be dominant over them highly attractive. Because of societal pressure to be "independent" and "strong", they're afraid to admit this, but actions speak louder than words.


I seriously mean this. I wouldn't want a man to make decisions for me. I believe in a relationship, issues should be discussed and decided on a common ground between two people. The guy took a lot of pride in himself for being intelligent, having a high GPA and being assertive, and he tried "leading" my life to the right direction and I felt as if he were constantly bossing me around. The relationship felt superficial because he never wanted to help me clean after I cooked for him, and he always tried to fit into the mold of something he wanted to be, rather than just being himself.

Personally, I do not like gender roles. I have a lot of pent up anger about all the things my ex said about gender roles. He thinks every woman should know how to cook because it is suited for their gender, and he even got butthurt because I had a hard time walking in high heels. Why does every woman have to know how to cook? EVERYONE should learn how to cook. EVERYONE should learn how to fix things. In a relationship/marriage, why can't whoever comes home from work first cook up dinner? Or just take turns?

I truly dislike dominant men. We're not wild animals, there is no need for dominance. In a relationship, everything should be done together as equals.


----------



## fairies (Nov 2, 2013)

Asian_Chick said:


> In addition, I've been with controlling men before, and my reaction was to out right rebel against them.


This was how I went about my last relationship too. I always debated and questioned his ways when he wanted me to change something for him or do something. He basically said "Hey, I'm the better decision maker so I should do most of the commanding in this relationship and lead the way." I immediately rebelled to a controlling man as well. Are you an NF?


----------



## Kingdom Crusader (Jan 4, 2012)

fairies said:


> This was how I went about my last relationship too. I always debated and questioned his ways when he wanted me to change something for him or do something. He basically said "Hey, I'm the better decision maker so I should do most of the commanding in this relationship and lead the way." I immediately rebelled to a controlling man as well. Are you an NF?


Nope, I'm an INTP. I don't have much understanding of Fi, but with my dominant Ti function, I'm naturally geared to think and act independently. So when anyone tries to intrude my personal space, push me to think their way, or tell me what to do, I have this internal knee-jerk reaction to rebel. Then it becomes expressed as passive-aggressive behavior, or even open rebellion.

Was he an ESTJ by any chance?


----------



## angularvelocity (Jun 15, 2009)

Passive = Fail. I've seen it, and experienced it, too many times.

Guys gotta have back bones, stick up for themselves, and be assertive. Girls don't respect anything less than that, and it will ruin relationships. Whether or not anyone on this forum thinks so, I know this to be true. This is mainly why people write about why "nice guys finish last" and why it holds true.


----------



## Kingdom Crusader (Jan 4, 2012)

Passive







not having a back bone, not sticking up for yourself, or being unassertive.

I'm passive and do indeed have a bone back, stick up for myself, and work on being assertive.


----------



## Purrfessor (Jul 30, 2013)

I think a lot of assholes are created from other people telling the guy with girl troubles that he needs to be dominant. It's usually not good advice because it masks the guy. More people should enjoy being single too. You don't have to change who you are to get a girl because of societal pressure. Just learn to live with yourself. And I highly doubt every female would be disinterested in that one guy. There's no secret to getting a woman. Don't become an asshole. There're enough of them as it is.


----------



## bombsaway (Nov 29, 2011)

I don't think I'm the 'passive' one in my relationship despite him tending to be more dominant and I think that's an important distinction. I dated a guy once who I broke up with v. quickly and my reason was that he wasn't dominant enough but I don't think that was the entire reason. Like, you can be not dominant and passive but still be a strong person, which I don't think he was. I wouldn't mind a guy who was passive but strong, I think. My current guy is closer to the Alpha definition (though I think he's a little immature to properly be considered 'alpha') but he always backs down if something is wrong, which means that when it comes down to it neither of us are really dominant or submissive. He's the extravert and so tends to be controlling most situations whereas I'm a humble type 9 but we're both strong and have respect for each other, which is more important than being alpha / a wimp.


----------



## angularvelocity (Jun 15, 2009)

Asian_Chick said:


> Passive
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I do see your point, but I disagree.

By definition - 

accepting or allowing what happens or what others do, without active response or resistance.
"the women were portrayed as passive victims"

synonyms:submissive, acquiescent, unresisting, unassertive, compliant, pliant,obedient, docile, tractable, malleable, pliable More


Therefore, unresisting, obedient, and submissive, would mean you don't talk back, fight, stick up for yourself. Given that a synonym of passive is unassertive, you saying that you are working on being assertive while being passive is contradictory.

I do think we might be talking about "low self-esteem" here but either way, that is the definition of passive and the way it is often portrayed.


----------

