# IS it true that girls like a DOMINANT take-charge kind of guy???



## conscius (Apr 20, 2010)

What's the "healthiest" or most "normal" kind of relationship that most girls like? Is it one that is truly equal, like the guy opens the car door for the girl but the girl opens the restaurant door for the guy? She initiates the first kiss, he the second? She calls and picks him up for the first date, he does the second? Or is it one where the guy is more take-charge and dominant, like he picks her up, initiates kiss and sexual encounters, decides on the restaurant etc? And how does this change if you just start dating versus as relationship develops?

I'm quite a cautious person and not very assertive so it doesn't come naturally to me. I know some girls have this fantasy of a guy who is just dominant and bare-chested and just grabs them and throws them on the bed and they kiss passionately for an hour and then rides his horse into the sunset...or something like that. But I don't know if that's just a fantasy or what. I mean I studied psychology and certain feminist views and I kind of usually assume girls hate guys because guys usually have more power than women in society and try to dominate women so I try to do the opposite, like let the girl decide everything, initiate the kiss, whatever, so she can be in charge. I'm afraid if I just grab a girl I've started to date around her back and give her a surprise passionate kiss she'll scream Sexual Harassment or something. It's so hard to read people and I'm just afraid of messing things up but also I don't want to come across as aloof, like the girl thinking either I'm not a real man or I don't like her or I have no feelings. 

So is being dominant and take-charge just a fantasy for some girls, is that a sexist thing that makes women powerless and is a stereotype, or is it something that shows passion and being manly. I need help!


----------



## Dangerous Meredith (Mar 11, 2013)

Dominant blokes put me off. All women (and men!) are different, of course, so will look for different personality types but dominant men aren't for me.


----------



## I Kant (Jan 19, 2013)

Although the 'everyone is different' line is probably the correct technical answer, I'd like to offer something different:

Someone who isn't interested in life or other people can be too passive to be interesting. If you don't assert your self, not in terms of over others but just letting yourself be and feel and live... you are being less engaging than you could be, but not only that, you aren't letting those parts of you really grow and develop and build tact and polish up.

I'd wager that most girls prefer company that allows them to live and exercise who they are, and that in turn enables them to help others in a similar fashion.

But I may be a tad too idealistic in my expectations. Perhaps some of them are after a healthy wallet and some bolstered social status candy. So perhaps it again returns to 'it depends on the person'.


----------



## Wellsy (Oct 24, 2011)

I tell you what they don't want, a adult child they have to take care of.
As an adult you are expected to have your shit together and able to work through it, when you fuck up you take responsibility and you deal with things in a mature manner. 
No self respecting woman wants a man who can't take care of himself.

And I KNOW what ALL women want because im from the future or some shit


----------



## Eos_Machai (Feb 3, 2013)

A healthy relationship (no matter what kind of relationship) requires _equal dignity_, that every part is just as listened to, respected and taken seriously. In a healthy relationship between adults there should also be equal share of responsibilities. 

This does not exclude assertiveness, sexual dominance etc. as long as it respects equal dignity.


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

It's going to be different for each individual girl and I really don't know if there is any majority consensis on this, but at least I can assure you that not all girls like the stereotypical immage of a 'manly man' and would much prefer someone who is 'softer'. 

Personally I tend to be put off by dominant people, however I don't like having to always be the initiator and decider and motivator etc. myself. I do like feeling like I'm safe, with someone who will take care of and protect me, but I'm not at all attracted to 'manly-men'. I feel intimidated by that sort of guy and feel much more comfortable with guys who people might consider more 'feminine'. Just to speak to a few of the stereotypes - I want a man who will cry openly if he's hurting, who wants my input rather than expecting me to just follow in his wake, who needs my help. I don't want to feel like his child. Now, I also don't want to have to play mom to a guy who is super needy, but I'd still prefer that to someone who just sort of bowls me over all the time. I've heard a phrase that goes something like 'women want love and men want respect' but I don't think that's really true, I think we both need both. If one person is always dominant in everything, it kind of implies they don't respect the other person as an individual. 

I think I may be a bit unusual in this (though perhaps not) but I sort of hold my interest in someone in reserve until I know they are interested in me first, then I allow myself to develop 'feelings for them', so at first I really do want a guy to initiate, so that I know I'm wanted, so that I know I'm not just being annoying and should move on. I do want to be pursued, but not in an overbearing or overly eager way - it needs to be mutual, you step forward and wait to see if I step forward, then you step forward again, and so on. 

Just a note concerning your mention of initiating kisses/sex. Personally if I'm always the one initiating affection (or more) then I'll feel like they don't really want me to in the first place and will feel unattractive. But I would also note that I think it's important to initiate affection that isn't always looking to take it to the next level and the next - because society makes rather a big deal about guys always thinking about sex, I think sometimes girls can feel like they are being pressured for it every time a guy initiates affection. It really needs to be a mutual thing where you read eachother's cues as you move forward - if one of you isn't in the mood for that right now then accept that and back off - though I think ocassionally it is good to keep pressing forward after an intial 'no' as long as you can tell when no is really NO, (because giving up too easily kind of implies you're not that interested). There has to be give and take on both sides.


----------



## kaleidoscope (Jan 19, 2012)

Aelthwyn said:


> I think I may be a bit unusual in this (though perhaps not) but I sort of hold my interest in someone in reserve until I know they are interested in me first, then I allow myself to develop 'feelings for them', so at first I really do want a guy to initiate, so that I know I'm wanted, so that I know I'm not just being annoying and should move on. I do want to be pursued, but not in an overbearing or overly eager way - it needs to be mutual, you step forward and wait to see if I step forward, then you step forward again, and so on.


I'm the same in a way, but also very different. See, my interest shows whether or not I like it. I'm very obvious when I like someone, and it sort of transpires in how eager I am to know more about them, my willingness to open up to them, and the like. I don't outright flirt but I'm more playful, especially I get a positive response.

Nevertheless, I don't consider myself the initiator as much as I just simply.. act like myself. I don't play games, or wait for the guy to make the move. My interest is obvious, and how the person responds is basically up to them. So in a way, yes, it's like you say: a step forward is met by a step forward on their part, and so on and so forth. I love it, it's natural, it feels right.

I don't think of it as anyone taking charge, as much as it's just responding. If that makes me the "initiator", I don't mind, as long as I don't do *the entire work *for them. ^^


----------



## snail (Oct 13, 2008)

No. Each girl is different and likes whatever qualities she likes. I always preferred shy, sensitive guys, so I married one.


----------



## Sun Lips (Jan 28, 2013)

Another vote for the old "every girl is different."

Personally, I have a hard time initiating anything, so I do like men that are a little more assertive than myself. I wouldn't go as far as to say my type is the "bare-chested manly man." If I had to pick a stereotype for the men I like, most of them are actually pretty geeky. I prefer intelligence over your standard ideal of "masculinity" any day. But they are also confident.. Confidence is key.

I definitely would not want to be with someone I had to take care of. And I'm a natural caregiver. I just prefer that my acts of pampering are done of my own accord, rather than because someone expects me to act that way. When I want someone to depend on me for survival, I'll have a baby.

I don't care at all about chivalry, either. Stuff like opening the door for me? My boyfriend and I open the door for each other. Whoever gets there first. We treat each other as full equals. He has his strengths and I have mine. He is definitely more assertive than I am, pursued me first, kissed me first, etc. I like that about him, I like that quality in our relationship, but that's a personal thing. All women will have preferences of their own, but I think the best default way to approach your relationships with women is to treat them as your equal and with respect. If you want to do things like open the car door, pull her chair out, etc, that's great. But do it out of politeness (and also hold the door for other people!) not because she's "the woman."

Ya dig?


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

SpiritedAstray said:


> If I had to pick a stereotype for the men I like, most of them are actually pretty geeky. I prefer intelligence over your standard ideal of "masculinity" any day. But they are also confident.. Confidence is key.


I'm with you on the 'geeky,' intelect is attractive  

you know, the more I think about it the more I realise that I feel quite uncomfortable and 'foreign' around the male stereotype of person, like I just can't relate to them at all, and that's a very important thing - feeling like you can relate emotionally, like you 'get' eachother. It's the same with women who are more dominant or who seem more stereotypicaly 'masculine' I just don't really feel a connection to them. With my husband some of the things I find really attractive about him are ways in that he's similar to my girl friends because there is that greater sense of identification, and I don't find it attractive when he seems a bit 'too confident'. I do appreciate that I don't always have to be the confident one, but on the otherhand that's not necessarily what makes someone attractive to me. I guess I like a more subtle, inward confidence in who you are, not necessarily an outward confidence that takes charge or assumes authority.



> I don't care at all about chivalry, either. Stuff like opening the door for me? . . . All women will have preferences of their own, but I think the best default way to approach your relationships with women is to treat them as your equal and with respect. If you want to do things like open the car door, pull her chair out, etc, that's great. But do it out of politeness (and also hold the door for other people!) not because she's "the woman."


Agreed! 'Chivalry' can be a nice way to make someone feel special, but it's something both women and men can do for others I think. And personally I feel a bit turned off by a guy who only does that for me - it makes it look like he's just trying to charm me to get me to like him rather than actually BEING a helpful, generous person.


----------



## strangestdude (Dec 8, 2011)

conscius said:


> I mean I studied psychology and certain feminist views and I kind of usually assume girls hate guys because guys usually have more power than women in society and try to dominate women so I try to do the opposite, like let the girl decide everything, initiate the kiss, whatever, so she can be in charge. I'm afraid if I just grab a girl I've started to date around her back and give her a surprise passionate kiss she'll scream Sexual Harassment or something.


Christ!

Sorry to hear that crap has fucked with you that much my dude.


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

default settings said:


> Although the 'everyone is different' line is probably the correct technical answer, I'd like to offer something different:
> 
> *Someone who isn't interested in life or other people can be too passive to be interesting. If you don't assert your self, not in terms of over others but just letting yourself be and feel and live... you are being less engaging than you could be, but not only that, you aren't letting those parts of you really grow and develop and build tact and polish up.
> 
> ...



it depends on the specific woman, but I like the part I marked in bold. That kind of describes my personal feeling. I don't want a dominant, "lord it over me" guy who tries to make all my decisions and be in charge, but i don't want a passive, uninvested guy who leaves me to make all the decisions about us and always needing to take charge for anything to happen.

I want someone who is my partner, who actively engages me and isn't afraid to exert himself and express himself while still being respectful of me, and in turn I can do the same for him, and we can build something _together_.


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

Aelthwyn said:


> I think I may be a bit unusual in this (though perhaps not) but I sort of hold my interest in someone in reserve until I know they are interested in me first, then I allow myself to develop 'feelings for them', so at first I really do want a guy to initiate, so that I know I'm wanted, so that I know I'm not just being annoying and should move on. I do want to be pursued, but not in an overbearing or overly eager way - it needs to be mutual, you step forward and wait to see if I step forward, then you step forward again, and so on.


I can identify with this. I've just had bad luck with guys i had to chase; they might go along with things with the possibility of sex or whatever else, but aren't really invested. I mean, I will engage (I don't play "hard to get"), but I'm just wary because I want to see whether he's really interested in me or just wants sex or something else. I don't know whether that plays into male mating patterns or what vs female, since there's some overlap, but I want to make sure there's some interest in ME there and a willingness to invest in something with me. Once I let myself love someone, I'm in it and am willing to suffer in pursuit of the relationship, so i want to make sure it's a good investment before I give my heart like that.

I still engage and reciprocate, but I'm feeling the guy out the whole time to see how much he really cares. If I am doing all the investing early and the man seems to just be a 'rider,' well, things certainly won't get BETTER and will likely crash if I stop investing. Not a good investment.


----------



## chimeric (Oct 15, 2011)

conscius said:


> I know some girls have this fantasy of a guy who is just dominant and bare-chested and just grabs them and throws them on the bed and they kiss passionately for an hour and then rides his horse into the sunset...


Yes please. :blushed:


But seriously. Not every woman likes this, and for those who do, there is a way to take charge and still be respectful. You can ask "is this OK?" as you move to undress her, e.g., or say "I really want to kiss you" before just going for it.


----------



## dulcinea (Aug 22, 2011)

While I don't care for guys that are TOO domineering, I do like a personality that's a bit on the dominant side. I like a guy who's decisive, but takes other peoples feelings into account when making the decision.

I don't mind the guy to be a little in charge. If a guy says, in effect, "lets do EVERYTHING your way. Ill do anything for you." I get q little wierded out or think "what a wimp!"

I think confidence is an important quality in a man, but not arrogance. Its also cool if that confidence is tempered with a little vulnerability. I think its kinda sexy when a man tears up occasionally at an appropriate occasion. But if he weeps watching a lifetime movie, then forget it!


----------



## strangestdude (Dec 8, 2011)

Jennywocky said:


> I don't know whether that plays into male mating patterns or what vs female, since there's some overlap, but I want to make sure there's some interest in ME there and a willingness to invest in something with me.


I've been reading David Deida and I think that the majority of hetero women are inclined towards his metaphorical conception of femininity. And that's why they tend not to let guys know they like them explicitly, and wait for the guy to explicitly express interest. Like yourself and *@Aelthwyn*

It's puzzling how gender roles in hetero dating haven't changed much, whereas great change has occurred in other contexts.


----------



## FaerieLandsForlorn (Oct 11, 2012)

Every girl is going to have a completely different answer to this question. Regarding myself, I want a "gentle initiator" (that sounds pretty awkward, sorry). Like, when you said "DOMINANT" I was thinking, "super confident, almost arrogant, does everything for you, makes all the choices, loud, aggressive, etc" which is not my ideal AT ALL. Those types of people scare and intimidate me. I couldn't imagine trying to date one 

But I am rather old-fashioned when it comes to romance. I would like a guy who initiates the relationship and some of the dates, holds the door open, etc. When you said "equal" I was thinking more in terms of "intellectual equal" rather than a completely 50/50 relationship where if one person does A, the other person has to reciprocate. I think those types of relationships are doomed to fail anyway, because it becomes all about the payback and the "equality". Anyway, I wouldn't want someone whom I would feel subordinate to, but I wouldn't want someone who was very passive, either. Just my personal tastes 

As far as "manly" men go...never really been attracted to the bare-chested wolf myself. I like nerdy, geeky guys. Not really into muscles and aggression. (I liked Captain America before he got buff.) Although I have to admit, I have always been partial to the "knight in shining armor" fantasy...although my knight would be more of a warrior-poet XP Forgot to add, I would like someone with moral courage, who is not afraid to stand up for what is right. (That's what I liked about Cap.) I do want to feel as though my significant other can and will protect me should the need arise. Not sure if any of this makes sense; it sort of seems like a contradictory conglomeration of traits now that I've written it all out. XP But I have to say, all of this is pretty negotiable. I would be willing to sacrifice "St George saves me from the dragon" for someone whom I could have deep, stimulating conversation with and whose personality meshes well with mine. Ultimately that's all I really want. 

So in conclusion...I would say, just be yourself and you will find a girl who appreciates that. Even if you get rejected a few times--which means she wasn't the right girl for you anyway  Good luck!


----------



## Iustinus (Jun 13, 2012)

conscius said:


> What's the "healthiest" or most "normal" kind of relationship that most girls like? Is it one that is truly equal, like the guy opens the car door for the girl but the girl opens the restaurant door for the guy? She initiates the first kiss, he the second? She calls and picks him up for the first date, he does the second? Or is it one where the guy is more take-charge and dominant, like he picks her up, initiates kiss and sexual encounters, decides on the restaurant etc? And how does this change if you just start dating versus as relationship develops?
> 
> I'm quite a cautious person and not very assertive so it doesn't come naturally to me. I know some girls have this fantasy of a guy who is just dominant and bare-chested and just grabs them and throws them on the bed and they kiss passionately for an hour and then rides his horse into the sunset...or something like that. But I don't know if that's just a fantasy or what. I mean I studied psychology and certain feminist views and I kind of usually assume girls hate guys because guys usually have more power than women in society and try to dominate women so I try to do the opposite, like let the girl decide everything, initiate the kiss, whatever, so she can be in charge. I'm afraid if I just grab a girl I've started to date around her back and give her a surprise passionate kiss she'll scream Sexual Harassment or something. It's so hard to read people and I'm just afraid of messing things up but also I don't want to come across as aloof, like the girl thinking either I'm not a real man or I don't like her or I have no feelings.
> 
> So is being dominant and take-charge just a fantasy for some girls, is that a sexist thing that makes women powerless and is a stereotype, or is it something that shows passion and being manly. I need help!


I know it sounds cliche, but the other respondents are absolutely correct - every woman is different. However, women differ not only on an individual basis but also on a cultural basis. In some cultures, women are expected to submit unconditionally to their husbands, and rebellion is anathema to both the woman and her peers. In other cultures, that notion is grossly offensive. I recommend observing to see what your area's norm is.

Nonetheless, don't rely _too _heavily on culture to dictate what the ideal relationship looks like. Those individual differences do exist. Don't be afraid to approach a woman, casually get to know her, and, as you get to know her, ask her what kind of man she finds attractive.


----------



## Cross (Sep 9, 2012)

Wellsy said:


> No self respecting woman wants a man who can't take care of himself.
> 
> And I KNOW what ALL women want because im from the future or some shit


This is interesting indeed. I'd like to add that our world is home to both self-respecting women and women who have no self-respect. Although I apologize if I'm being too objective and missing the whole point of your rhetoric ability. I do appreciate every interesting way of twisting words to form authentic expression.
:laughing:

Another idea would be that there are self respecting women who want a guy to take care of... It's so odd that these things come together, and yet I believe such a lady exists. Different people, different strokes I guess.



SpiritedAstray said:


> If you want to do things like open the car door, pull her chair out, etc, that's great. But do it out of politeness (and also hold the door for other people!) not because she's "the woman."





Aelthwyn said:


> Agreed! 'Chivalry' can be a nice way to make someone feel special, but it's something both women and men can do for others I think. And personally I feel a bit turned off by a guy who only does that for me - it makes it look like he's just trying to charm me to get me to like him rather than actually BEING a helpful, generous person.


These are very good points. I don't believe chivalry was made as a tool for charming women though it might work well with some. I've always believed chivalry should stem out of good will instead, although good will can be quite subjective and come in different context to others.

To the OP, I believe all I could contribute to your thread would be dependent on your own ends, although alternative paths can be taken. 
As the others have already put it: all women differ in their desires. 
If your goal would be to find a fitting for just one, best to get to know her. 
If for the entire world, you'd have to learn cultural distinctions even across time spans and so much more. Although even if this were achieved, it would probably not be likely that you'd be able to fit what all women would desire.
If you set your sights a little lower, as the whole world is too grand, you might want to cater to the population of women you intend to "fit". If you would for example want to look good in the eyes of local women in your area, getting to know them, learning from society, and related information must be gathered. There are still women that want a strong manly man in the sense (I'm referring to the stereotype of course). To find out if these women are the majority in your population, those that you wish to fit in preference to, information must be gathered and research must be done.
I'll end this by pointing out that you can't please everyone. If you intend to go for the majority, then the majority must be known and understood prior to the attempt to enhance the success of the attempt.


----------



## OrangeAppled (Jun 26, 2009)

conscius said:


> I'm quite a cautious person and not very assertive so it doesn't come naturally to me. I know some girls have this fantasy of a guy who is just dominant and *bare-chested* and just grabs them and throws them on the bed and they kiss passionately for an hour and then rides his horse into the sunset...or something like that.


You think we want Fabio? 

I have a "no shirt, no shoes, no service" sign tattooed above my nether-regions, personally.



> But I don't know if that's just a fantasy or what. I mean I studied psychology and certain feminist views and *I kind of usually assume girls hate guys because guys usually have more power than women in society* *and try to dominate women so I try to do the opposite, like let the girl decide everything, initiate the kiss, whatever, so she can be in charge.* I'm afraid if I just grab a girl I've started to date around her back and give her a surprise passionate kiss she'll scream Sexual Harassment or something. It's so hard to read people and I'm just afraid of messing things up but also I don't want to come across as aloof, like the girl thinking either I'm not a real man or I don't like her or I have no feelings.
> 
> So is being dominant and take-charge just a fantasy for some girls,* is that a sexist thing that makes women powerless and is a stereotype, or is it something that shows passion and being manly.* I need help!


Perhaps stop viewing things in terms of "power" and "in charge". The idea is to be _considerate_ of someone else while still being _authentic_ & _secure_ in your own worth so as not to be a doormat or a domineering jerk. Either extreme is born of insecurity, trying to prove something. The idea of "I do this, she does that" doesn't sound like equality _to me_, but keeping score. Being bullied is not attractive either, although some unstable women may respond to that. Otherwise, women's tastes will vary as much as their personalities vary, so being an emotionally healthy _you_ is your best bet. 

If you want to passionately spring a kiss on a woman you're newly dating, just watch for signals & lead up to it so you know it's welcomed. You have to get out of your head to do this. Focus on the other person more than your inner dialogue of worry & you won't need to assume anything. 

I was talking to a guy about how I'm rarely approached by men, but I give off a lot of body language signals which say I'm approachable or interested (per a body language thing he sent me). This guy said many men are too oblivious to these subtleties, and I think perhaps even when they see them, they don't believe them for whatever reason (insecurity maybe). So pay more attention, & believe your instincts, not your insecurities. 

And P.S., most women don't hate men, and you don't need to apologize for the past or current "bad" behaviors of other men. If you have genuine respect & not just fear of offending, then that will be evident.


----------

