# Why do some males pick such screwed up women (?)



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Most women many male(s) date have following in common; 

(1) - Emotionally damaged.

(2) - Detrimentally un/smart. (ex; many male(s) girlfriends are not very smart - I have noticed).

(3) - Classless.

(4) - Screwed them over more then twice. 

(5) - Extremely clingy. 

(6) - Weak-willed - weak all around. (re: large victim mentalities).

(7) - Overly ''empathetic / sympthatic'' + give away all asset(s) irrationally to a charity.

(8) - ''Poor judgments / poor-judgment calls''.


What attract(s) male(s) to these irrationally damaged women .. (?) Is it because they reek of more 'traditional' feminine characteristics .. (?)

_Ex;
_
If I whine about how hideous I am on some things, male(s) tend to see this as ''cute'', thus, reassure me 1,000 times that this is false.

Is this possibly a ''mechanism'' that female(s) use to 'trap' males .. (?)


*Caveat:
*

An impulsive first (2 or 3) answer(s) are going to receive 20+ thanks (via) an attack on my persona (re: irrelevant to the topic); please disregard & formally address (Post #1).

Edit;

_Yes I am aware about the ''subjectivity'' within these exemplifications. 
_
___

Com.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

I've never seen any evidence of this being a trend; there are so many lovely and emotionally healthy women in relationships. What you're saying implies that the majority of smart/emotionally healthy women are single, which could be true in your experience but definitely rather silly as a generalization.

Plus it sounds rather bitter to write the majority of women in relationships off like that.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Because they're either screwed up too, or they think they don't deserve better.

I've noticed that a lot of young and immature women are like that, though. They're really annoying.


----------



## Carpentet810 (Nov 17, 2013)

Sounds like typical western women. America is quite famous for these, and by famous I mean infamous, not to say western Europe gets a free pass.

For mates American males are rated #1 in the world despite greencard changes that make getting married harder. American women are ranked 17th in the world falling from 14th as mates.

I suspect weak guys go after the low hanging fruit.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> Because they're either screwed up too, or they think they don't deserve better.
> 
> I've noticed that a lot of young and immature women are like that, though. They're really annoying.


Additionally, it seems ''immaturity'' (re; classless / dumbness /) et al - is usually a very _sexy_ asset for female(s). 

_Ex; (1) -->
_

As a pattern, I notice, the more ''girly + cute'' I act, the more male response (via) emotionally / affectionately. I have tested this with 20+ sum male(s) out of curiosity. (re: the ''damsel'' effect).

The more 'sexually loose' - the more male(s) responded sexually, thus, this 'gain(s)' more male attention than the latter. Also, they have assessed 0 aspect(s) of my persona, thus, are more willing to accept a ''damaged'' woman.

It also may tie into _biological_ differences; --> ''Females sharing the brunt'' of biological a/effect(s) responsibility.

Ex; (2) -->

(re: female(s) focusing more materalististic assets) -- _meanwhile_, the male cares much less if the female is ''sub-par'' / so long as she is '*attractive*', thus, anything 'more' = _nagging / arrogant / boring_ / etc.


Ex; (3) -->

Also, (X) males are more likely to 'date' down + a hideous woman - than a woman dating a hideous or fat man.


----------



## Felipe (Feb 25, 2016)

Catwalk said:


> What attract(s) male(s) to these irrationally damaged women .. (?) Is it because they reek of more 'traditional' feminine characteristics]


most men out there value more physical traits and some other useful things, so:

1 - she must be hot
2 - her body language must be feminine (I don't know how to explain, it's a more soft way of doing things)
3 - she must be emotional because: 
a) it's the opposite of what most men are hence there is attraction 
b) it's easier for a cool-headed guy to manipulate a hot-headed woman than it is to manipulate a cool headed woman (like you I suppose)...or so they think it is

am I being too chauvinistic? please give feedback


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Felipe said:


> most men out there value more physical traits and some other useful things, so:
> 
> 1 - she must be hot
> 2 - her body language must be feminine (I don't know how to explain, it's a more soft way of doing things)
> ...


No, I have noticed that male(s) tend to have very 'low' + _less_ requirement(s) via female(s) (re: reproductive / relationship) means - so this makes sense. Just be dumb, smile + ''overly emotional'' - you will nail a nice, good male. (re: anything else, pertaining to my list) is a bonus + unimportant.

Unfortunately, these standard(s) are rather _saddening_ to assess.


----------



## Felipe (Feb 25, 2016)

Catwalk said:


> No, I have noticed that male(s) tend to have very 'low' + _less_ requirement(s) via female(s) (re: reproductive / relationship) means - so this makes sense. Just be dumb, smile + ''overly emotional'' - you will nail a nice, good male. (re: anything else, pertaining to my list) is a bonus + unimportant.
> 
> Unfortunately, these standard(s) are rather _saddening_ to assess.


what kind of man you feel attracted to? If you don't mind me asking


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

Everyone is flawed. 

It's not possible to get someone that is lacking any of the flaws you put... especially emotionally damaged. Who isn't emotionally damaged? 

How many songs have you heard that deal with how emotionally undamaged we are? If not many... it's because it's not very common.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Night Huntress said:


> I've never seen any evidence of this being a trend; there are so many lovely and emotionally healthy women in relationships. What you're saying implies that the majority of smart/emotionally healthy women are single, which could be true in your experience but definitely rather silly as a generalization.
> 
> Plus it sounds rather bitter to write the majority of women in relationships off like that.


I am aware.

_Usually_ - I take a ''2nd person POV'' / this time, not so. --> (re: irrationality).


----------



## ECM (Apr 8, 2015)

I tend to sometimes feel an attraction to very quirky or even crazy women (not completely mental and manic, but something about an oddness in them) 

I think some guys (and this has happened to me), feel sorry for them, and end up falling in love with an underdog as it were, because they want to express a genuine romantic affection by showing they love something imperfect in comparison to all the other options they had. 

"Nobody wants to date me because im odd" - " I love you" 

Granted it has its limits.. (well, not limits, cause love is love, and we love who we love), but say someone who is mentally insane and borderline.. yeah... not into that type of crazy, but girls who are insecure, and shouldn't be, im always a sucker for that, or someone who is going through something. The times I have fell for someone is always when they are going through a crisis and I help them through it, and then my strong empathy becomes love for them. 

You find out as time goes on they have tendencies to have up and down emotional rollar coasters and may not be 100%... but in a weird way, it makes you love them for it, the imperfection, something to tend and nurture with affections and someone to make feel better about themselves and loved, who really does deserve it despite their problems. 

Its a hard thing to explain, if im free and not dedicated to someone, I have this desire to hold close someone who is in pain, and to heal it with a romantic affection in a "you will never be alone ever again" sort of way. So naturally you end up attracted to women with numerous problems, via through going through something that has made them this way. 



Its like the reverse of "Nice guy comes last" type thing and many women seeing that they want to "save the bad guy" and to fix him as it were.

Granted, im going by my experience and havent had the "fortune" of yet dating someone who is considered... "100", though my ex wasnt crazy, but she fit into the emotionally unstable and insecure category more than anything...


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Despotic Ocelot said:


> Everyone is flawed.


Then fix them.


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> Then fix them.


The definition of 'fixing them' in the human context, is a journey not a destination. 

And since life does not have a 'schedule' and will prove that to you time and time again... part of that journey is adapting, in addition to growing.

All of which ensure that to be a human being means to never be 'perfect'. And that is what makes humanity beautiful, and the human condition as endlessly provocative as the unending discoveries we make in the physical world.

The physical world is HOSTILE to any form of life in the vast expanse of space... this tiny sliver of a slip we call the 'crust', on this rock orbiting the sun, is one of the few places life can exist. And the prevalence of nature's hostility to life... does not make nature any less beautiful.

The same goes for humanity.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

EccentricM said:


> I tend to sometimes feel an attraction to very quirky or even crazy women (not completely mental and manic, but something about an oddness in them)
> 
> I think some guys (and this has happened to me), feel sorry for them, and end up falling in love with an underdog as it were, because they want to express a genuine romantic affection by showing they love something imperfect in comparison to all the other options they had.
> 
> ...


Not surprised. I _appreciate_ your honesty; this seems to reflect most male behavior. :smile:


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Despotic Ocelot said:


> The definition of 'fixing them' in the human context, is a journey not a destination.



Move faster.



> And since life does not have a 'schedule'


Make one.



> All of which ensure that to be a human being means to never be 'perfect'.


Indeed, _however_, soon bio-enhancement(s) will be available. :smile:



> and the human condition as endlessly provocative as the unending discoveries we make in the physical world.


It is endless suffering. (i.e., cannibalism / metobalism / lose-lose / extinction).


----------



## ECM (Apr 8, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> Not surprised. I _appreciate_ your honesty. :smile:


Np, nothing to hide here on my part.


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

I like this quote here haha. They're discussing Ryan Seacrest, and the fact that they don't understand him. How someone like him can exist (8:16 - 9:12 in the video)



*Joe Rogan:* Some people just can't navigate anything that's complicated, or serious, or nuanced, or really sensitive emotionally, it's just, some people just don't have the capacity. You know, Ryan Seacret. If you're doin' a fuckn' interview with Ryan Seacrest, it's great if you wanna tell him what color you like. "What's your favorite color, line 3?", "I like red, but sometimes blue!"

*Bobcat Goldthwait:* I'm just kind of in awe of someone like him, with an empire. Cause, I mean, I don't know what he does... I'm not even being negative.

*Joe Rogan:* He found a hum. He found a hum that secretaries tune in to, it's like a whistle that dogs can hear. And he hit that hum. It's like a drone, it never goes too high, it never goes too low, and he never says "_fuck_ this world, what are we doing with our lives!?", none of that.



Ryan Seacrest is the kind of person you would have if you did 'fix everything', and had no flaws. And that's what makes what they said so funny lol. Because then... you're not real. You're not relatable to anyone, if you're 'perfect'. There's no point of reference people share with you. You're this 'product' kind of thing, that people mock for it's lack of humanity.

It's because the nature of humanity means flaw is inherent within it, and can never be 100% 'removed'. Since life itself can never remove it's 'flaws'. It'd be nice if we didn't have viruses, sicknesses, earthquakes, tornadoes, ice ages, if animals didn't eat each other, etc. But those things are just inherent to life, and can't be removed. Only 'lived with' and 'adapted to'.

That's the same for us. We can't remove our flaws, because the notion of a society is itself 'flawed'. We can only live with our flaws and adapt to them in a way where it detriments us the least. But they can never be made fuklly absent.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Felipe said:


> what kind of man you feel attracted to? If you don't mind me asking


_High_ /_ unrealistic_ standard(s) for their future emotional / physical + mental well-being. :bwink:


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

.


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

I have to say though... I agree with that mindset. The mindset of invincibility, 'fuck what the nature of things is, I'm going to exterminate x problem', etc. That is the only way to go about things if you want to pioneer something, or breach new horizons, or take us farther than we've been before.

You have to have that mindset and believe it.

But a sober acknowledgement of reality shows... one can never be perfect. You can strive for it, and you can go higher than anyone before you has gone. But you can never reach it, because it's not part of the law of life.

Just like the law of life stipulates that to propel an object faster and faster, requires more and more energy... to get to the speed of LIGHT itself, requires an infinite amount of energy. You can get 'close' to the speed of light... but you can never actually hit the speed of light itself, because you can never be in possession of an infinite amount of energy to make that happen. It's just not possible.

But should we ever get closer and closer to that... the people who get us there, had a mindset of "I'm aiming for the speed of light" lol. That's the mindset you need to get as far as one can physically go.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Despotic Ocelot said:


> I have to say though... I agree with that mindset. The mindset of invincibility, 'fuck what the nature of things is, I'm going to exterminate x problem', etc. That is the only way to go about things if you want to pioneer something, or breach new horizons, or take us farther than we've been before.
> 
> You have to have that mindset and believe it.
> 
> But a sober acknowledgement of reality shows... one can never be perfect. You can strive for it, and you can go higher than anyone before you has gone. But you can never reach it, because it's not part of the law of life.


To be fair, I do not aim for 'perfection' - only _reduction_ of as much harm / suffering as possible - it appears, that these behavior(s) are self-defeating + _detrimental_ to one(s) well-being. (re; adding _unnecessary_ harm + struggle).

I do not see the logic going for ''damaged'' individual(s) that ruin ones _well-being_ when demonstrably safer + better option(s) _exist._ 

---> _Ex_; stupidity. 

What are the ''reasons'' for subjecting oneself to 'increased suffering' .. (?) The only explanation seems to be, the innate human is ''stupid''. (re: _demonstrably_).


----------



## Cheveyo (Nov 19, 2010)




----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> I do not see the logic going for ''damaged'' individual(s) that ruin ones _well-being_ when demonstrably safer + better option(s) _exist._


I can see why you'd say that. I'm just saying for me personally... I don't see it in the way one would when buying a product. Everyone is grand, it just depends on the difficulty level in accessing the spark. That's not to say every difficulty level is fine... there's a point which the ratio of 'law of diminishing returns' and 'cost benefit analysis' becomes too great, and makes that option not feasible. That point is different for different people.

But before that point is reached... it's more about the core, inherent nature of the person. Which is separate from x issues lying on top of it. If the core, inherent nature is appealing... then you (well, people who are like me) can always bring that to the fore, and that would supercede or minimize whatever issues were obfuscating it. 

It's like gravitational lensing... that effect may warp the light from a galaxy and make it look out of focus... but for me, if the actual galaxy itself is appealing, you an always correct for the gravitational lensing, and then enjoy the image of the galaxy behind it.

That's just me though, as you know, ENFPs are inclined to think this way lol.


----------



## ShadowsRunner (Apr 24, 2013)

Catwalk said:


> Additionally, it seems ''immaturity'' (re; classless / dumbness /) et al - is usually a very _sexy_ asset for female(s).
> 
> _Ex; (1) -->
> _
> ...


Well, I just sort of skimmed your post; I sounded just like typical immaturity or whatever to me, but upon further inspection, I guess not. Erm...I guess a lot of men don't like to be challenged that much? I think that's another thing. It's patriarchy, I imagine.


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

This movie here is the shining beacon of an example of what I was saying lol. Though Quentin Tarantino didn't direct it, he wrote the screenplay, and boy can you hear it in the movie... it has Tarantino and Pulp Fiction dripping all over it.

Anyway, as to the movie's main characters Clarence and Alabama... this thread here would put Alabama in the category of 'screwed up'. Yet when you watch this movie, and how their relationship turned out... was that wholly distinct, truly individual, awesome kind of thing they had... was it worth never having that because, at first, Alabama seemed 'screwed up'?

That's what I'm saying for myself. I see Alabama, I see the core, inherent nature. And then all the stuff that ends up happening... that is totally worth it, for the trivial 'screwed up' things on the surface.

So in regards to the thread's question, stating things as to the level of something you get, versus the 'flaws' in that thing... the core, inherent nature of someone can and many times does vastly outshine their flaws. In fact, I feel strange even implying that there are some people out there whose flaws are not outshined by their core nature... we all are irreplaceable.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

@Despotic Ocelot

Well, so long it isn't *burdening* the rest of individual(s) with poor decisions / choice(s) - to ea. their own.


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

.


----------



## MissAverage (Aug 7, 2014)

Catwalk said:


> Most women many male(s) date have following in common;
> 
> (1) - Emotionally damaged.
> 
> ...


I think you described 95 percent of the population. Who isnt a little messed up? Who is perfect? I know I'm not perfect. Just because someone has issues doesnt mean its irrational for another person to choose to love them.


----------



## MissAverage (Aug 7, 2014)

There is a good chance OP is single LOL


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Despotic Ocelot said:


> I'll burden your face with this. This'll teach ya.
> 
> 
> * *


These women are working on a cheat-sheet (re: easy status). Meanwhile, other female(s) must irrationally compromise + _downgrade / fake / lie_ or mask the true-self. (re: be crazy / classless / unstable / dumb / damsel effect).


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

MissAverage said:


> There is a good chance OP is single LOL


There are few reason(s) to be ''single'' as a female - any female can catch a desperate male, if she's _nasty_ enough. :bwink: I would not *pride* myself as a female for nailing a male.

I do not have a problem attracting male(s); I am single by preference.


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> These women are working on a cheat-sheet (re: easy status). Meanwhile, other female(s) must irrationally compromise + _downgrade / fake / lie_ or mask the true-self. (re: be crazy / classless / unstable / dumb / damsel effect).


I think you're replying to MissAverage, and mistakenly quoted me haha. What you said lines up more with her post than mine.


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> Move faster.
> 
> 
> 
> Make one.


Typical Te user (possibly Te-source?) not understanding that not everyone else has momentum Te.


----------



## Acrylic (Dec 14, 2015)

Arzazar Szubrasznikarazarabanana.


----------



## ScorpioRising (Dec 23, 2013)

For a lot of people (and this applies to both sexes), they would rather be with _anyone _rather than be single, largely because they feel that they're missing out on something when not in a relationship.

Similarly, having needy partners makes them feel wanted and important, or gives them a sense of control that they seem to desire. 

And this no doubt applies both ways, but I've noticed a pattern where rather large and _very _out-there women seem to have in-tow these skinny guys who have absolutely zero self esteem, whose role looks more like that of a pet than a partner.


----------



## Loaf (Mar 27, 2014)

I could also ask, why some women choose the dickheads that they do.


----------



## Rhonda Rousey (Sep 22, 2015)

Some people have empathy, you know?:wink:


----------



## VinnieBob (Mar 24, 2014)

reason 1
MEN ARE DESPERATE PIGS WHO WILL FUCK ANY THING THAT EXISTS
i see this schnizzle all da time


----------



## Grandmaster Yoda (Jan 18, 2014)

It's probably easier than being with strong independent females who only want to make money accumulate award points on their credit cards.


----------



## Crimson Ash (May 16, 2012)

In my personal experience I find it is due to the fact that I grew up surrounded by emotionally and psychologically abusive women who were also neglectful and narcissistic.

In a twisted way I fall for screwed up women because I not only understand them more than the average but also perhaps seek to try and help them be better human beings overall.

I've since learned to recognized when I'm attracted to these types and try and pull myself away. 

Your example OP isn't necessarily a trap. In most cases its a lot more innocent. However with that being said certain questions on a similar wave length are employed to gaslight and manipulate partners.


----------



## Playful Proxy (Feb 6, 2012)

Loaf said:


> I could also ask, why some women choose the dickheads that they do.


I wish I knew. I've got a friend who keeps running back to an emotionally abusive guy, Me and pretty much all of her friends have told her it's a bad idea and she's too smitten to care. At the end of the day, I'll call the cops if he really goes too far, but I feel like this is one of those situations she's going to have to learn the hard way, and the rest of us will just sit back and have a drink doing our own thing so we don't become her emotional crutch. She'll never learn if someone runs to her side to comfort her every time he hurts her, maybe if she's hurt and alone, s he'll get the idea that hey, maybe I should stop going back to the guy hurting me. Imagine that.


----------



## shazam (Oct 18, 2015)

To quote Oscar Wilde "I like men who have a future and women who have a past". I'm heterosexual, so the men don't apply to me; but they may apply to women in this regard. 

I like women who have a story to tell and not all of the points you mentioned. What is important is the ability to function independently regardless of all those traits, in my opinion.


----------



## Loaf (Mar 27, 2014)

Playful Proxy said:


> I wish I knew. I've got a friend who keeps running back to an emotionally abusive guy, Me and pretty much all of her friends have told her it's a bad idea and she's too smitten to care. At the end of the day, I'll call the cops if he really goes too far, but I feel like this is one of those situations she's going to have to learn the hard way, and the rest of us will just sit back and have a drink doing our own thing so we don't become her emotional crutch. She'll never learn if someone runs to her side to comfort her every time he hurts her, maybe if she's hurt and alone, s he'll get the idea that hey, maybe I should stop going back to the guy hurting me. Imagine that.


Sometimes you've got to be harsh to be kind. But like you say, if someones always there to comfort her, she will never learn. Time on her own to deal with it, might be what she needs. Hopefully she will learn, might take some time though, don't expect it to happen immediately.


----------



## Mange (Jan 9, 2011)

Meteoric Shadows said:


> Because they're either screwed up too, or they think they don't deserve better.
> 
> I've noticed that a lot of young and immature women are like that, though. They're really annoying.


Yes, I Dont know how old you are catwalk, but I would guess young and maybe this is the case with your young, immature peers? I have to say, though, I know a lot of intelligent, strong young women in healthy relationships.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Cheveyo said:


>


 @Pifanjr sent me this and said I was wife zone, possible unicorn. 
That poor sap..... I'm insane.


----------



## Toru Okada (May 10, 2011)

Cheveyo said:


>







I was in the danger zone because I was emotionally needy and rebounded. I suspect this is why most men date ridiculously flawed women. That and low self-worth/confidence. This hot-crazy matrix video made me laugh because I literally dated a crazy redhead stripper unironically and I learned a lot from it. You have to set boundaries and know when to fold on someone who is just going to make your quality of life worse.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Loaf said:


> I could also ask, why some women choose the dickheads that they do.


Many women are ''geared'' to _love-based_ Masochism w/out any ''gains'' (i.e., subject themselves to _self-defeatist_ + getting *WHIPPED*) --> behavior(s). On their knee(s) + getting whipped into submission with no care for '_well-being_'.

Also, ''_socialized stupidity_'' - and, as constant reinforcement - (re: this thread) is what male(s) usually seek, thus, females in opposition should just withstand + seek escorts + go overseas, as I understand it, American ''self-esteem'' for both gender(s) is down the tubes.

If you seek an ''intelligent'' woman - with a '*Shitbag*' it is probably because she has been _emotionally manipulated_ (re: more closed off / relationship-wise ''clueless'' / abuse of her inferior Fi / Fe function(s)) - thus FALLS WITHIN THE TRAP.

I have strict restrictive + protective mean(s) to prevent this, as I am INTJ - I am 'disconnected' from my (F) part(s), thus, am more susceptible to mass emotional / love-based manipulation - thus, my standard(s) are tight, as I am aware.

All relationship(s) are demonstrably lose / lose + unlegitimate + ungaraunteed until 8+ year(s) of my personal assessing - this approves (X) individual marital bond eligibility. 

However, male(s) find these females concerned about their well-being ''dangerous / negative / paranoid'' - I call it smart. As I see it, males prefer females that are interested in being whipped + beat-up / emotionally manipulated - as they are more ''feminine''. 

I understand, that is rationally the 'best' step to ensure personal well-being.

Thus, highly intelligent _tighten_ + elevate standard(s) -->_ Demonstrably_ --> as they are less inclined to be to seek _socialized-stupidity_ + societal conformity - however, male(s) _dislike_ these women + prefer female(s) from (Post #1).


----------



## MissAverage (Aug 7, 2014)

Catwalk said:


> There are few reason(s) to be ''single'' as a female - any female can catch a desperate male, if she's _nasty_ enough. :bwink: I would not *pride* myself as a female for nailing a male.
> 
> I do not have a problem attracting male(s); I am single by preference.


I am single by choice as well, I just have a different perspective on life and people.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

xrx said:


> Yes, I Dont know how old you are catwalk, but I would guess young and maybe this is the case with your young, immature peers? I have to say, though, I know a lot of intelligent, strong young women in healthy relationships.


They are _compromising_ - (re: *masking *true-self / dumbing down) or _faking_ or genuinely complying with my point(s) stated in (Post #1). 

Either that, are extremely ''needy'' + desperate - (re: settling (via) self-compromising) for gain(s), in this way, it is beneficial - however, having to ''self-compromise'' + mask / hide the true-self is self-defeating + unworth it. 

I am afraid I am not that desperate yet. 

Frozen egg(s) also keeps female(s) from ''settling'' for anything. (re: biological-clock _blues_).


----------



## Loaf (Mar 27, 2014)

Catwalk said:


> However, male(s) find these females concerned about their well-being ''dangerous / negative / paranoid'' - I call it smart. As I see it, males prefer females that are interested in being whipped + beat-up / emotionally manipulated - as they are more ''feminine''.
> 
> I understand, that is rationally the 'best' step to ensure personal well-being.


I don't find them "dangerous/negative etc". I actually find them more interesting.

I would say those that want/choose to be whipped/emotianally abused or however you want to put it, as weak.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar said:


> Typical Te user (possibly Te-source?) not understanding that not everyone else has momentum Te.


I am not a innate (Te) user - I just know when to _utilize_ said function(s) within current sitautions / locality - you should not be purely ''*restricted*'' by your dom functions, you are making yourself_ suffer _for 0 rational reasoning.


----------



## stormgirl (May 21, 2013)

Catwalk said:


> Most women many male(s) date have following in common;
> 
> (1) - Emotionally damaged.
> 
> ...



Because most men are willing to put up with almost anything in order to get laid.

In addition, men tend to want the social status that comes from having hot arm candy. She may be bat shit crazy or dumb as a post, but if she’s young and hot, most men will gladly accept the trade in order to enjoy the envy from other men.

Then there are those men who have low self-esteem, and just like women with that mindset, don’t feel they deserve better, and get into a pattern of being with emotionally damaged people.


----------



## Pifanjr (Aug 19, 2014)

daleks_exterminate said:


> @Pifanjr sent me this and said I was wife zone, possible unicorn.
> That poor sap..... I'm insane.


First of all, craziness, just like hotness, is subjective. You're not as crazy to me as you might be to others.

Second, like they said in the video, you'll have a cluster of data points. While some might indeed fall in crazy zone, most of them fall in wife zone and some even in unicorn zone :happy:

Some might even fall in Tranny zone :wink: :tongue: :laughing:


----------



## Amaryllis (Mar 14, 2014)

Carpentet810 said:


> Sounds like typical western women. America is quite famous for these, and by famous I mean infamous, not to say western Europe gets a free pass.
> 
> For mates American males are rated #1 in the world despite greencard changes that make getting married harder. American women are ranked 17th in the world falling from 14th as mates.


There's an official nationality marriage ranking? Where?


----------



## Razare (Apr 21, 2009)

You pick women in the same boat as you very often.

I dated one of these women in the past because I was basically the same. Misery loves company.

Highly attractive/successful women did occasionally look my way, but what was the appeal? They'd just get to know me and run. Better to date someone who was in the same mess as me, I thought.

Either that, you go for a pairing... overly dominant? find someone who puts up with it. Unbalanced match.

My tastes have changed now that I'm healthy. But then too, not every day for me is an amazing day, and I want a woman who isn't put off by that. There are many people in this world naturally successfully, naturally attractive, and they don't need God or anyone else, and somehow that works for them. I live in a different world and also want a woman who lives in that world with me.



> give away all asset(s) irrationally to a charity.




But like this, my favorite activity is giving money away. When I became a Christian, I nearly gave it all away but was stopped. But since then I've given away thousands.

I have a goal to give away 100k+ all at once.

So I'd love a woman who shared a passion for givings things away. In fact, she's going to have to love it because I do it all the time.


----------



## Carpentet810 (Nov 17, 2013)

Amaryllis said:


> There's an official nationality marriage ranking? Where?


Google it.


----------



## Amaryllis (Mar 14, 2014)

Carpentet810 said:


> Google it.


I did, and I couldn't find anything worthwile. There's no need to be so rude, you know. I asked _you_ because I was curious to know where you had found it.


----------



## MisterPerfect (Nov 20, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> Most women many male(s) date have following in common;
> 
> (1) - Emotionally damaged.
> 
> ...


It might be since they think they are easy prey

Honestly though I might date crazy if it was the right kind of crazy. Like Yuno Gasai crazy is just so perfect. 







(I know its wrong of me, but this just made me laugh so hard. Especially wrong considering I have pets)


----------



## changos (Nov 21, 2011)

This thread is difficult considering my experiences and what I have seen from close distance. The traits you posted do exist and do happen, why? such people are like dogs walking around near you: always there. Some will give you lots of stuff (except dignifying human relationships) and many will actually give you cheap but intense stuff. I see it as something unbalanced, but summing 10 at the end. 0 on several things but high on others.

Research around "Every breath you take" song, it's a nice angle on how many people approach love relationships from very unhealthy stuff, and many of that being exactly negative treats, like emotional illnesses or lack of adulthood. A male friend of mine said "_crazy women suck, they can kill you... but damn they are fun_".

I had a stalker (exGF) and while that sucked, lots of aspects of the final stages on the relationship where amazingly intense (intense as good), but it's just like a drug, it sucks. *The point is*: when people asked me and I answered, to my surprise most people said "oh she loves you". I was like WTF. *The people who have the traits you posted are usually very manipulative*. This means they suck yes but they know how to give and how to take. I'm not sure how this happens on the male side because the currency there is "stuff" while the currency on the other side (women) is usually: the person itself.

I must confess, there was a stage with that exGF when I thought, such insisting approaches meant "deep, loyal love" but my reasoning won the battle, it sucks. Still, a lot of guys say "Wish I had a stalker or someone sick like that". It's difficult to interact on this thread having so many ideas, and like you do a lot of times, each sentence gets divided on modifiers and situations. But I could say: such people usually do things other refuse to do.


----------



## changos (Nov 21, 2011)

Playful Proxy said:


> I wish I knew. I've got a friend who keeps running back to an emotionally abusive guy, Me and pretty much all of her friends have told her it's a bad idea and she's too smitten to care. At the end of the day, I'll call the cops if he really goes too far, but I feel like this is one of those situations she's going to have to learn the hard way, and the rest of us will just sit back and have a drink doing our own thing so we don't become her emotional crutch. She'll never learn if someone runs to her side to comfort her every time he hurts her, maybe if she's hurt and alone, s he'll get the idea that hey, maybe I should stop going back to the guy hurting me. Imagine that.


you just reminded me something worth considering: as I posted, people with such traits are usually highly manipulative, so, let's consider the fact (proven? evident I would say), that such people, can be jerks, idiots but also very charming. And also there are idiots who go after sick people because that's what they truly like.


----------



## with water (Aug 13, 2014)

You keep digging at this. Why does this in particular get under your skin?


----------



## Another Lost Cause (Oct 6, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> Most women many male(s) date have following in common;
> 
> (1) - Emotionally damaged.
> 
> ...


Well, at least I don't see any points up there accusing them of being judgmental, judgmental, and more judgmental.


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> I am not a innate (Te) user - I just know when to _utilize_ said function(s) within current sitautions / locality - you should not be purely ''*restricted*'' by your dom functions, you are making yourself_ suffer _for 0 rational reasoning.


In case of modulation Te, it's less available - in more fetishy way, consumes more energy, is slower, etc.


----------



## Cheveyo (Nov 19, 2010)

Temperance said:


> You keep digging at this. Why does this in particular get under your skin?



Wild guess:

She wants a dude who is only interested in crazy chicks.


----------



## with water (Aug 13, 2014)

Cheveyo said:


> Wild guess:
> 
> She wants a dude who is only interested in crazy chicks.


And so the cycle continues.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

> Well, at least I don't see any points up there accusing them of being judgmental, judgmental, and more judgmental.


_Good observation_ - I have _critiqued_ (Post #1). I understand lack of ''judgment +_ poor_ judgment'' is highly detrimental to well-being + other(s).

_____________

Com.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Cheveyo said:


> Wild guess:
> 
> She wants a dude who is only interested in crazy chicks.


I implied _nothing_ about crazy chick(s). :tickled_pink: ..


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

changos said:


> Research around "Every breath you take" song, it's a nice angle on how many people approach love relationships from very unhealthy stuff, and many of that being exactly negative treats, like emotional illnesses or lack of adulthood. A male friend of mine said "_crazy women suck, they can kill you... but damn they are fun_".
> 
> I had a stalker (exGF) and while that sucked, lots of aspects of the final stages on the relationship where amazingly intense (intense as good), but it's just like a drug, it sucks. *The point is*: when people asked me and I answered, to my surprise most people said "oh she loves you". I was like WTF. *The people who have the traits you posted are usually very manipulative*. This means they suck yes but they know how to give and how to take. I'm not sure how this happens on the male side because the currency there is "stuff" while the currency on the other side (women) is usually: the person itself.
> 
> I must confess, there was a stage with that exGF when I thought, such insisting approaches meant "deep, loyal love" but my reasoning won the battle, it sucks. Still, a lot of guys say "Wish I had a stalker or someone sick like that". It's difficult to interact on this thread having so many ideas, and like you do a lot of times, each sentence gets divided on modifiers and situations. But I could say: such people usually do things other refuse to do.


I understand - and appreciate your honesty. :bwink:


----------



## with water (Aug 13, 2014)

Catwalk said:


> I implied _nothing_ about crazy chick(s). :tickled_pink: ..


He's an Ne user. He can find himself in places with no implications needed. lmao


----------



## Crimson Ash (May 16, 2012)

Catwalk said:


> Many women are ''geared'' to _love-based_ Masochism w/out any ''gains'' (i.e., subject themselves to _self-defeatist_ + getting *WHIPPED*) --> behavior(s). On their knee(s) + getting whipped into submission with no care for '_well-being_'.
> 
> Also, ''_socialized stupidity_'' - and, as constant reinforcement - (re: this thread) is what male(s) usually seek, thus, females in opposition should just withstand + seek escorts + go overseas, as I understand it, American ''self-esteem'' for both gender(s) is down the tubes.
> 
> ...


I must say the way you post in forums is uniquely fascinating. 

You make some decent points. There is another level to the love based masochism that some people gravitate towards. For one its not exclusive to women, also many seek this type of relationship out and hope to try and fix that person. They at times treat it like a project. Sadly, in most cases they see minimal results and more often than not simply leave that situation with more damage to themselves than repair to their partner.

"Socialized stupidity" I would argue solely exists due to the relative ease that it allows for men to engage in a relationship with a woman. Truth be told I would like to believe that it isn't what a majority go for and the more vocal element usually seek it and therefore it is assumed that most men enjoy it.

Intelligent woman with "douchebag" types could be due to emotional manipulation but at times it is also due to the persons own insecurities. If you ask a random number of women who are in these types of relationships they might answer when asked why they chose the way they did because they simply "fell in love" and can't figure out why.
In some cases this is due to these types of men showcasing certain traits that are found to be attractive such as high amounts of self confidence which is a common characteristic of ones which such enormous egos. They then latch onto those positives to try and internally dispute all the negatives not realizing that unless that person makes a conscious effort to change they will forever be the same.

I would argue that most mature well adjusted males do not in fact see women concerned about their well-being as 


> ''dangerous / negative / paranoid''


 but at the same time they may be concerned about falling into some sort of emotional trap and might themselves be a little closed off and paranoid.

The way I see it is ultimately it comes down to the fragility that is life. Some people choose mates simply due to convenience. Others do so by trying to fulfill some inner personal trouble. And in the more beautiful circumstances because they well and truly care deeply about the other person. 
But ultimately can you blame them for trying to find happiness for themselves with someone else before they meet their grave?


----------



## BlackDog (Jan 6, 2012)

Because people aren't two dimensional. These negative traits nearly always have a positive counterpart that is appealing. For some people, the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Temperance said:


> He can find himself in places with no implications needed. lmao


I know. I am familiar with his posting pattern(s) + thinking pattern(s) (via) other threads. I usually _avoid _argument + mass scabble + derived very little interest in them.

Btw, I have no ''interest'' in side-discussing other user(s) - thus, we may end 'side-discussions' here. 

I advise, any 'side discussion' about me, can be direct at me. :bwink:


----------



## Dante Scioli (Sep 3, 2012)

Not to be like atomically negative or anything but statistically speaking if most _people_ are shitty then it's very probable that most _people in relationships_ will be shitty.

I don't think men are attracted to shittiness as you are suggesting. Perhaps that's what's available, by and large.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Crimson Ash said:


> For one its not exclusive to women, also many seek this type of relationship out and hope to try and fix that person. They at times treat it like a project. Sadly, in most cases they see minimal results and more often than not simply leave that situation with more damage to themselves than repair to their partner.


LOL.



> Intelligent woman with "douchebag" types could be due to emotional manipulation but at times it is also due to the persons own insecurities. If you ask a random number of women who are in these types of relationships they might answer when asked why they chose the way they did because they simply "fell in love" and can't figure out why.


I am understand this would fall under (ex; 8 & 1) --> poor judgments / lack-of judgment(s), to be clear, I do not ostracize ''intelligent'' women from the following example(s) - as many can utilize said intellect _stupidly_ or still exemplify the following stated. 

Also, some may be in such relations for '_manipulation_' of said low-esteemed ''shitbag'' functioning off _socialized stupidity.
_ 

I understand this to be a ''consented'' or _aware_ double-masochist relationship; so I have very little care. (re: both submitting to *happy whippings*).




> I would argue that most mature well adjusted males do not in fact see women concerned about their well-being as
> but at the same time they may be concerned about falling into some sort of emotional trap and might themselves be a little closed off and paranoid.
> 
> The way I see it is ultimately it comes down to the fragility that is life. Some people choose mates simply due to convenience. Others do so by trying to fulfill some inner personal trouble. And in the more beautiful circumstances because they well and truly care deeply about the other person.
> But ultimately can you blame them for trying to find happiness for themselves with someone else before they meet their grave?


Very good point(s) - I very much appreciate this post. :smile:


----------



## BigApplePi (Dec 1, 2011)

Catwalk said:


> Most women many male(s) date have following in common; What attract(s) male(s) to these irrationally damaged women .. (?) Is it because they reek of more 'traditional' feminine characteristics .. (?)
> 
> (1) - Emotionally damaged.
> Because they are emotionally challenged themselves.
> ...


.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Dante Scioli said:


> I don't think men are attracted to shittiness as you are suggesting. Perhaps that's what's available, by and large.


This sort of tap(s) into (post #1) - from observation, I have merely drawn those exemplifications. The other %2 remain dazed.

I welcome negativity. :bwink: 

I appreciate your answer.


----------



## with water (Aug 13, 2014)

Catwalk said:


> I know. I am familiar with his posting pattern(s) + thinking pattern(s) (via) other threads. I usually _avoid _argument + mass scabble + derived very little interest in them.
> 
> Btw, I have no ''interest'' in side-discussing other user(s) - thus, we may end 'side-discussions' here.
> 
> I advise, any 'side discussion' about me, can be direct at me. :bwink:


That wasn't the point I was making. lol


----------



## BlackDog (Jan 6, 2012)

Catwalk said:


> (7) - Overly ''empathetic / sympthatic'' + give away all asset(s) irrationally to a charity.


You know numerous women who have given away all their assets to a charity?


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Temperance said:


> That wasn't the point I was making. lol


Then what is the _point_ ... (?) Again; he took a ''wild'' guess (via) my motivation(s) behind this post (via) my personal preferences in men. 

If you are curious - instead of ''taking wild NE guesses'' + drawing incorrect implications (re: constant with you) - perhaps, shoot me a PM and I will gladly make any ''_clarifications_'' + *quench* your _curiosity_. 

If this is still not your 'point' - I render yet another of your post(s) just completely irrelevant - meanwhile, perhaps, again, addressing (post #1). :ssad: 

This is will be my _final _attention I pay to any previous posts from you - as I usually disregard as they contribute very little to anything (re: the topics).


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

BlackDog said:


> You know numerous women who have given away all their assets to a charity?


Thankfully, no, you may view that portion _metaphorically_. :smile:


----------



## changos (Nov 21, 2011)

This thread has so many angles!!!, time and reading patience are the limits



BlackDog said:


> Because people aren't two dimensional. These negative traits nearly always have a positive counterpart that is appealing. For some people, the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.


True. Adapting involves also compensation and specialization. While this is valid I guess @Catwalk sees this on the long run (possibly?) in the sense that the negative treats are there no matter the counterparts: it's damaging the relationship and the children (if any). But yes, naturally there will be good things (or artificially, because "if else, people won't bite".




Dante Scioli said:


> Not to be like atomically negative or anything but statistically speaking if most _people_ are shitty then it's very probable that most _people in relationships_ will be shitty.
> 
> I don't think men are attracted to shittiness as you are suggesting. Perhaps that's what's available, by and large.


Wow, that was very well said.



BlackDog said:


> Because people aren't two dimensional


And because is what "*some people train other people to do, and like*". @Catwalk (and anyone interested on answering), have you seen that, despite those negative traits... those people are USUALLY the ones who end up telling the other person what to do?. I've seen lots of cases in my region of guys marrying women who are like "half" of what most expect from someone (EVEN the guys themselves), its contradicting what most said over the years compared to what they picked. As everything is not 100%, but it's a interesting stat (dominating).


----------



## changos (Nov 21, 2011)

*But why this? *I could post about the words of my friends but instead I will post about my family, my home. I grew up around women, my fathers took diff paths, absent father etc. The influence of my mother and sister on me has been huge but I'm aware and can remember most their words. They influenced me to be a gentleman, a nice guy, a provider, the one who gives the woman all she wants (because "there is a list" of standard things that make a woman happy). No, I didn't grew up with teachings of "some women this some women that" I was influenced on an universal model, the right one, the only one (sure I now know it's theirs... but consider how this shape you from early stages).

*Ready??? keep in mind I'm intj with very nice memory *and the fact that I've been tracing this info for quite a while, this also means putting it to the test verifying the sources (my family). OK, so turns out my mother highly criticizes most women. You could say the model my mother has shaped about "the women" is a model of demanding perfection and independence. So this is contradicting, my mother most times puts reason and truth in hands of women, but she highly criticizes them as lacking a lot of things. This pretty much sounds as all women are perfect, but in the end "don't get involved, all women are inferior to the model you should pursue". Sht that's heavy and contradicting, it pushes a lot of guys to the "don juanismo" syndrome.

The other part is worse. My mother has been telling my sister what to do and how to behave, it's also the same contradiction as above but it gets worse. She teaches her to impose over her husband using a wide variety of "legal techniques" but mostly, the one that I hate the most: "because she is right and she is always right", among them there are no spaces to question them.

Then we have the silly part... that, after all those teachings, my mother tries to teach me TO NEVER allow any woman to do on me, what my sister does to her husband. Pretty terrible huh? so many contradictions, huge ones. And while I don't have the best qualities to explain, they go around exactly on the traits you posted @Catwalk. And while that sounds silly enough, at the end, they SEEM to take that form because nobody will demand (expectations), or punish someone who is weak.

*In short terms, it's manipulation because they switch from adult to infected children a lot on a relationship. Yes the traits posted above are true, but not a good true because they actively, constantly and persistently try to impose themselves on the guys. And that's the truth.*


----------



## lil intro vert (Jan 14, 2016)

Catwalk said:


> _High_ /_ unrealistic_ standard(s) for their future emotional / physical + mental well-being. :bwink:


I have this framework with women.


----------



## BlackDog (Jan 6, 2012)

changos said:


> True. Adapting involves also compensation and specialization. While this is valid I guess @_Catwalk_ sees this on the long run (possibly?) in the sense that the negative treats are there no matter the counterparts: it's damaging the relationship and the children (if any). But yes, naturally there will be good things (or artificially, because "if else, people won't bite".


Everybody has negative traits, and some are going to matter to certain individuals more than others. It's also important to note that these are Catwalk's interpretations of people in relationships. What she considers "classless" may be appealing to a man who doesn't want a pretentious woman. What she considers clingy could be considered affectionate or attentive by another. It is difficult to say. 

And I mean, she mentioned subjectivity I believe. So don't really know what else to say. This really doesn't strike me as some kind of great mystery. I was asked a while back to describe my ideal man, and aside from the fact that he sounded curiously and alarmingly like Indiana Jones, he was completely fantastical and unrealistic. People just pick what traits are most important to them and compromise on the rest. Is this surprising?


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

changos said:


> This thread has so many angles!!!, time and reading patience are the limits
> True. Adapting involves also compensation and specialization. While this is valid I guess @Catwalk sees this on the long run (possibly?) in the sense that the negative treats are there no matter the counterparts: it's damaging the relationship and the children (if any). But yes, naturally there will be good things (or artificially, because "if else, people won't bite".
> 
> And because is what "*some people train other people to do, and like*". @Catwalk (and anyone interested on answering)[/U].


And then again; I just have a different view - that is, not necessarily ''negative''. I do not view 'relationships' as _negative_; just *intense*. These traits, indeed, are 'negative' - however, I asses + apply / compare + contrast + evaulate thoroughly on the ''effects'' + long-term consequences, of that is, taking these risks.

I am _processing_ all the things said - I am not just ''saying things'' ... 

Whether it makes sense, to _COMPROMISE, COMPROMISE, COMPROMISE_ - or whether it makes sense, to remain ''uninvested''. I understand that these matters require a large amount of compensation / self-compromise

I take these matter(s) intensely and _seriously_; 

I use ''physical-based'' pain (i.e., _whipping / beating_) et al - to demonstrate, that ''heartbreak'' is not much different that the pain-cognitive receptors registering a ''broken arm''. To be conscious / cautious of the pain they *INFLICT* on others, and to oneself. Because the broken heals, because we have ways to mend the arm once again - does this mean, CONSTANTLY seek to ''break my arm'' ... (?) Of course not. 

I register 'all pain' as suffering - 'emotional / psychologically / physical' - makes no difference. Like others, that have this ''thing that motivates them to live'' - mine, just happens to be SUFFERING. --> To reduce / prevent / limit - pain in all walks of life. This is my only meaning I can say, makes MY life (re: lose / lose - devoid of external meaning) - _rational_, to keep ''living''. I factor in all walks of human life, including (re: relationships, etc) judo to this.

Some may interpret this as ''fear of intimacy'' or ''negative / hateful'' whatever gibberish, LOL. I am not afraid of, per se, of intimacy - I am *prepared* /* preparing* for *intimacy*, the reality of it, or any future problems that WILL come, because, like mentioned, I view these matters seriously, intensely - not ''negatively''. 

So, it is not so much, that I have this ''perfected'' image laid out, but rather, I encourage you to view my posts as a pessmisstic one, that, I have this ''pessmisstic'' reality based image laid out, and I am assessing ways to make it more enjoyable. 

Like all walks of life, we are ''dying'' - innately, and inevitably, however, we are *ENJOYING* the ride - _aren't we?_ (re: programmed to think life is good) --> Activities / technologly / compensation for human boredom. The same applies.

Naturally, while accumulating my information, I do, indeed, test people and derive outside sources, opinions, and view(s). I am not ''pushing'' for perfection, I am pushing for _reduction_ of suffering + pain. That is, making the fall / ride as safe as possible. In this quest, I will say mean - nasty - or ''negative'' things, I posit, this is for good intentions, as I am only heading towards positivity, the best way.

If you think my posts are ''hateful / negative'' - you do not understand them.

And, yes - most of it is geared toward any possibilities. :smile: Hopefully, this ''clears'' it up.


----------



## Dante Scioli (Sep 3, 2012)

Catwalk said:


> however, I asses


How do you asses?


----------



## ArmchairCommie (Dec 27, 2015)

Catwalk said:


> Most women many male(s) date have following in common;
> 
> (1) - Emotionally damaged.
> 
> ...


I have never been successful in scoring a date and I have never been in a relationship but I will speak as to which kinds of women I personally find most attractive.

1) I will admit that girls who are emotionally damaged attract me tremendously. I personally am not the most emotionally stable person myself so I highly empathize with those who are in a similar position.

2) On the one hand I hate people who are unbearably stupid and who have no intelligence. On the other hand I do not those who flaunt their intelligence in front of others and who are so smart that they are arrogant. From my personal experience, I have found that both women _and men_ who are smarter are more likely to be arrogant. In myself am of above average intelligence and in the past I highly arrogant. So it is not that I am more attracted to dumb women, I am simply more attracted to those who are not arrogant.

3) I will reiterate my previous statement, I dislike those who arrogant, both men and women who think they are smarter than everyone else annoy me to no end. Many people who overly classly are also overly arrogant, as such I dislike them.

4) I will admit that I am guilty of this fatal attraction. Perhaps it is just that I am too insecure and too afraid to find more people but I find that I will often go back to those who have wronged me before, male or female. I do not know why I constantly allow myself to be a victim, but it is something that I do unconsciously and instinctively regardless.

5) I myself can be overly clingy at times so I crave people who share my sentiments. Oftentimes I will get an ego boost if a female even talks to me, so women who are overly clingy are thus attractive to me.

6) I myself find this facet of my tastes to be rather interesting. Part of me wants a dominant women who will force me to be a better person and who can order me around as her servant. Yet the majority of my conscious seeks a more submissive women who I can instead help and assist in all manners and ways. I have this incessant drive to serve others, mainly to rid myself of all my insecurities about my usefulness or lack there of. As such, weak women provide me with the opportunity to prove my usefulness and to make myself feel accomplished, therefore boosting my ego and self-confidence.

7) See #3. I hate those who are arrogant and I view those who are selfless favorably. As such, I hold those who are overly empathetic and sympathetic in high regards.

8) This one attracts me the least out of all eight characteristics listed here. The only reason for me to be attracted to someone who makes poor judgement calls is so that I can correct their behavior and show them the true path. Otherwise those who make poor decisions are a major turn-off for me.

I have attempted to be as honest as possible in regards to my feelings towards women with these traits. I agree with your statement that weakness and unintelligence are seen as more feminine characteristics by a majority of the population. This stereotype is heavily present in our society due to the lingering influence of the patriarchy which seeks to keep down women and men by punishing women for seeking success and shunning men who aren't successful. In this manner only success men are allowed at the top of the hierarchy, perpetuating a highly competitive environment to the benefit of a few and the detriment of everyone. I hope that sometime in the near future the patriarchy can be eradicated once and for all so that a truly egalitarian society may be formed.


----------



## bigstupidgrin (Sep 26, 2014)

Not to be reductionist, my upbringing in Love Line led me to believe it was usually people with parent issues that dated poorly.


----------



## Kore (Aug 10, 2012)

bigstupidgrin said:


> Not to be reductionist, my upbringing in Love Line led me to believe it was usually people with parent issues that dated poorly.


Does anyone have no parent issues?


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Dante Scioli said:


> How do you asses?


By absorbing + taking in as much data / info that can be obtained, then _morphing / organizing + applying_ (re: critiquing) to my well-being or tossing it like so if useless. :smile:


----------



## bigstupidgrin (Sep 26, 2014)

Kore said:


> Does anyone have no parent issues?


Well, _major_ parent issues then


----------



## Blessed Frozen Cells (Apr 3, 2013)

I've noticed this trend since I was very young but I wouldn't say this is what majority of the men goes for. As men get older they tend to go two routes, one is they begin looking for the total package the looks, the personality and the brains, another route is they go for complete airheads but who are hot. 

Maybe it's the damsel in distress act that attracts males? The one thing I know about anyone picking really "damaged" people as partners is because generally they want to be feel less "damaged" about themselves and compared to their "damaged" partners they might seem "normal". Another reason could be they are easier to manipulate.

There's this one girl in my post-graduate class and granted she's younger than me but we are not teens anymore. She has a mental capacity of a 16-yrs-old and she breaks up and gets a new boyfriend every two months or so always after blowing things out of proportion and much drama in class and also on social media as well. And what do you know? Men still go for her. She's on her third boyfriend already. I would never go after that kind of person. It's just silly to me.


----------



## Noctis (Apr 4, 2012)

Catwalk said:


> Most women many male(s) date have following in common;
> 
> (1) - Emotionally damaged.
> 
> ...


You can flip it around and ask why some females pick up such screwed up men.


----------



## Blessed Frozen Cells (Apr 3, 2013)

Noctis said:


> You can flip it around and ask why some females pick up such screwed up men.


ha ha Touche!


----------



## Blessed Frozen Cells (Apr 3, 2013)

Grandmaster Yoda said:


> It's probably easier than being with strong independent females who only want to make money accumulate award points on their credit cards.


So you're saying my plan to lure men with all the gaming consoles I bought with my credit cards is a fool's errand?


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Noctis said:


> You can flip it around and ask why some females pick up such screwed up men.


I address this - (Post #47). However, I think ''*WOMEN GOING FOR BAD BOYZZZZZZ*'' fad - is rather _popular_, rather then opposite. _Frankly_, the topic is boring to constantly repeat (via) interweb.

I will also notion - that female(s) take the ''brunt'' of criticism (via) mate-selection; (re: from family / friends / females + MALES) alike, as they are expected to 'filter' + chaste to a higher degree than males.

(re: shallow / gold diggers / picking bad boys / sluts / floozies / high-standards /) et al.


----------



## MisterPerfect (Nov 20, 2015)

Blessed Frozen Cells said:


> I've noticed this trend since I was very young but I wouldn't say this is what majority of the men goes for. As men get older they tend to go two routes, one is they begin looking for the total package the looks, the personality and the brains, another route is they go for complete airheads but who are hot.
> 
> Maybe it's the damsel in distress act that attracts males? The one thing I know about anyone picking really "damaged" people as partners is because generally they want to be feel less "damaged" about themselves and compared to their "damaged" partners they might seem "normal". Another reason could be they are easier to manipulate.
> 
> There's this one girl in my post-graduate class and granted she's younger than me but we are not teens anymore. She has a mental capacity of a 16-yrs-old and she breaks up and gets a new boyfriend every two months or so always after blowing things out of proportion and much drama in class and also on social media as well. And what do you know? Men still go for her. She's on her third boyfriend already. I would never go after that kind of person. It's just silly to me.


Looks, Personality, and Brain dont matter if shes a whore

Its hard to keep a whore happy, since a whore wants to flaunt it around town.


----------



## Blessed Frozen Cells (Apr 3, 2013)

MisterPerfect said:


> Looks, Personality, and Brain dont matter if shes a whore
> 
> Its hard to keep a whore happy, since a whore wants to flaunt it around town.


Add "Not a whore" in your personalized total package then.


----------



## MisterPerfect (Nov 20, 2015)

Blessed Frozen Cells said:


> Add "Not a whore" in your personalized total package then.


That makes it even harder...

Also, Whores are fun


----------



## Blessed Frozen Cells (Apr 3, 2013)

MisterPerfect said:


> That makes it even harder...
> 
> Also, Whores are fun


eh, this is one of those times I would say "even if an angel came down to fulfill a human's wishes, they wouldn't be able to." Cuz people want contradictory things and that "grass is greener on the other side" mentality.

Disclaimer: not religious. Just a figure of speech.


----------



## Wolf (Mar 20, 2016)

These weak women considered to be "damaged goods" are usually very easy for a man to take advantage of, these women crave the stability that a responsible man can provide for them and will possibly even pursue a relationship with a man solely based on the things that he can provide for her. The men who go after these types of women on purpose generally need reassurance of their competence and are insecure in how they view themselves in relation to society. These women are an easy fling for men because they are so vulnerable. They are willing to do ____ sexual activity with said male if it ensures that he will keep her around for longer. I believe that these women for the most part know that they have nothing to offer to a man other than feelings of self-pride and sexual gratification, so they knowingly take advantage of it in hopes that he will provide for her.



> (A) What do they derive from these _self-defeating_ scenario(s)? (re: what is gained).


A temporary and short-lived feeling of self-worth, sexual pleasure, pride.



> (B) What is the goal .. (?) (re: reasoning for action(s)).


A rebound, men that seek these types of women are looking for an ego-boost. They have low self-esteem and see these women as tools that they can manipulate to better themselves.



> (C) Is this decision ''rational'' .. (?) (re: have they ''assessed'' this).


No, I think it has to do with their subconscious desires.



> (D) Do they realize this, if so see (A).


They may not at first, but I think as time progresses it becomes extremely difficult not to understand even for the most naive of people.


----------

