# Girls, does a man showing emotion make you less interested in him?



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Alright, girls, be very honest. Let’s look into our past and figure ourselves out. I’ve heard us accused by a few men on this.
#1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner? 
#2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


----------



## WhatIsYourConfirmationBias (May 10, 2018)

#1..No actually the opposite. When a man feels comfortable enough to share his feelings with me to that degree, it makes me really happy that he's willing to share that vulnerable part of himself with me...
It appears most men, from my experience, are trying to hide the fact they feel insecure at times, or have issues.. So when a man opens up to that degree, it's like "Finally! He's finally letting down his guard around me!"

I guess it's because I want to share everything with him, without reservation. So when he refuses to tell me what's wrong, it feels as though he just threw up an invisible wall between us. Because as much as I want to share with him, I want him to share everything with me too. His doubts, insecurities, everything. 

So when he refuses to share that side of himself, it feels as though he either doesn't trust me, or maybe he doesn't really care about me after all. I won't think less of him for being human, if anything it makes me feel closer. (And if I love him, I also want to comfort him anyway I can. Suppose I have a "nurturing" side when it comes to my partner, which a part of me has a hard time reconciling with...Being "nurturing" that is.) 

I wish more men would not get so hung up on traditional expectations for their gender, but some things take forever to change. Overall, I suppose I prefer a man who defies traditional gender expectations rather than embraces them.


----------



## entheos (Aug 18, 2013)

Nope.
My most successful dating scenarios, plus my only long-term relationship, were sucessful because they expressed emotion.
My unsuccessful dating scenarios were of men who didn't. Turns me off.

Now, I'm not talking about whiny, all-day-crying individuals, I'm talking about normal regular people. Extremely emotional, out-of-control type of people -of ALL genders- put me off. I'm very self-controlled, Fi stuff, wing 5, Sp, all that, blablabla, u know how it goes. I don't walk around whining or being super emotional, I'm just... normal emotional, normal expressive.

Extremes put me off: the extreme emotionals and the extreme non-expressive non-responsive super stoic.

As an NF, I obvsly need to feel comfort and emotional intimacy with a man in order to find him attractive (let's add "demisexual" to the whole bunch of labels I carry lol), so someone who has nothing emotional to say to me or to show to me... I just won't find him attractive or interesting.
And someone who doesn't break down sometimes, because life fucking sucks, I just can't be attracted to that, because I like real, authentic people. Being perpetually stoic doesn't register as real or human in my brain. I can't like, much less love, someone that appears invulnerable.

*#1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner? *

I dislike extremes, on both ends. 
Short answer is No, doesn't put me off. Long answer is, I'm attracted to normal, vulnerable people that I can relate to and feel human with.
Extreme crying, perpetual woe-is-me, is not attractive. And perpetual stoicism isn't either.

*#2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?*

When younger, I was attracted to extremely sensitive guys, always crying about something, and me having to baby them. I was never attracted to the tough guys, bad boys, that type of thing. Always the good hearts, thank you. I learned from babying people, and how exhausting it is. So as an adult I look for a balanced person.

Expectations: Honesty, unashamed of who he is, realness, vulnerability, strong character, emotional availability, deals well with my emotionality, patient, willingness to understand.
I'm deeply emotional & mental/analytical, so being with a partner who didn't need these things from me would make me feel like I have nothing to contribute to the relationship, no role, no job, no purpose, so what would be the point of me being with this person? None. I expect to be their confidante and help them with emotional & mental stuff.

Yes, I do understand how I work inside. And whenever I learn something new about myself, I adjust my behavior, daily choices, to align with my new understanding of self.


----------



## Fennel (Jan 11, 2017)

Llyralen said:


> Alright, girls, be very honest. Let’s look into our past and figure ourselves out. I’ve heard us accused by a few men on this.
> #1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?
> #2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


A sexual partner for me should be also a romantic partner, so there's no way I would want someone who is not emotional to and about me. The times when I settled for less emotion towards me were times I regret, for sure. I understand that men are usually raised not to express emotions in public. But in private, they should be passionate about me and affectionate. I wouldn't mind an extremely emotional partner, but definitely not on the sad side as we might drag each other down. All those emo kids giving feelings in general a bad rep, lol... I'd be more interested in someone who exhibits the more positive emotions.

Since I like both men and women, I noticed I cut boys more slack when it comes to feelings and being demonstrative. In a sense, girls have been more straightforward to me when it comes to emotions. Either she is into me or she is not, I am into her or I'm not, it's all clear. With boys, there is the friendship zone, the romantic zone, and the sexual zone to consider and nobody's ever been secure in all three zones. Of course the 3 zones exist for girls, but most women I like meet all criteria hands down. There are many 10/10s in the female world, while I get stuck trying to date 6 to 8/10 males.

From what I understand about my emotional self, I'm half and half female and male. I get the full impact of emotions like a woman does but I stumble at expressing them like a man does. I find that women manage their feelings perfectly (for better or worse, and excepting those who have been through very tough shit) while men intellectualize their feelings, or try not to manage them at all. I myself am guilty of running away from emotional problems and situations. But sex is definitely an emotional experience for me, so I need someone who could manage mine as well as his/her own feelings/thoughts. I understand this is difficult, but I'm the kind of person who needs to be led, gently but firmly, to mutually agreed upon goals.

btw, when some men cry or show emotion, it shows that they are not able to control their feelings, and that is a big turn off. Well managed emotions, right place, time, and mood help a lot.


----------



## Allersky (Nov 22, 2017)

*Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner? *

Short answer: no.

Long answer: depends on how extreme his emotional side is. Highly sensitive, emotionally intense, and irrational people are rarely attractive as friends - let alone sexual partners. My ex was one such person, and his emotional outbursts were a huge turn-off. Getting caught up in depressive pity parties is just a drag and shows a complete lack of confidence/ability to cope with life in healthy ways.

On the other hand, could never be interested in someone that's emotionally repressed, either. 

*Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?
*
Personally, I like sensitive guys. Firstly, because they soften me up, and I'm actually motivated to learn how to handle them with care. They make me a better person for it. Secondly, because I think (for anyone, but maybe moreso for guys) that it takes a lot of confidence to openly express emotions. Anyone that can honestly communicate their feelings has earned a lot of respect from me.

That being said, if he's consistently crying over stupid things, that's going to become too much for me. A lot of it depends on how and when he's expressing his emotions. The closer I am to him, the more tolerant I'll be. Someone that I've just met and suddenly bursts into tears over something I think is trivial - not good in any situation.


----------



## Glassland (Apr 19, 2014)

I'm not a girl, but I do have a question.

I see and hear girls everywhere claiming that they like normal guys, even sensitive guys, especially in forums like this, but also in real-life a lot.

Yet, my experience, and that of most men is this: We open up, we get shot down and traded up for a "better guy" (someone who appears to have better control of life because we showed our weak side?) 

Why is that? Why does this happen basically every time? I wish I could find I girl that I can be just real with, without having to put up an act to like me. When I'm just being me from the start, girls seem uninterested 9/10 times. Is it the age? (I'm 25, younger girls look for bad boys?)

If there is anything I learned it is that women despise weakness in men and because we show weakness from time to time doesn't mean we are weak. It means we are human. Yet it's like once you show a woman your weakness once, she gets doubt. Show it again, she's out. She completely disregards all your positive qualities (which usually far outweigh any negative).

I'm not particularly feminine or emotionally unstable either, just as normal human being that experiences the positives and negatives of life. I also take control of situations often and tap into the masculine, I like it. I don't get kicked off the horse of life easily.
I'm not particularly ugly either.
Basically what women here describe they want in a man. 

Yet, all of this keeps happening. And I'm not here to whine about it, I'm just expressing what I experienced in life so far and I'm genuinely curious what women's experiences are with this and what kind of thoughts they have about this topic.


----------



## ponpiri (Apr 30, 2017)

*#1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner? 
*No, although if he's a crybaby or appears to be weak (not taking responsibility, overly dependent on others and super passive) then that's a sexual turn off.

*#2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?
*Why should I be interested in a man as a partner that doesn't seem to be able to help or control himself? That's like being attracted to an overgrown child. May as well keep him as a distant associate and stay by myself. Vulnerability is hot; being an emotional mess is not. Don't really have gender-based expectations. My standards are the same across the board for people that are close to me.

Guys that are comfortable/secure with themselves, able to show emotion without becoming a blubbering mess with mental fortitude are rare.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

Only if he's a cry baby, just like I wouldn't want to be friends with a cry baby woman either. But hell ya for showing your genuine emotions, just notice when you are being an adult baby.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Glassland said:


> I'm not a girl, but I do have a question.
> 
> I see and hear girls everywhere claiming that they like normal guys, even sensitive guys, especially in forums like this, but also in real-life a lot.
> 
> ...


I’m very glad you posted, glassland, this is exactly the kind of thing I’d like to try to answer here for guys. 
So far, we have a mix of NF and NT girls answering. Nice!


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)

As much as I want to show this side I just cant trust people to respond kindly in return and no I very rarely cry and only in private when there is no one around. I cant trust people especially in my age group as people are macevalian where the smallest sign of weakness is grounds for either ending the relationship outright or she decides it is ok to cheat. Old values and good sense is something I do my best to live by and to get monkey branched for something newer and better irks me greatly.


----------



## Sidhe Draoi (Nov 25, 2016)

#1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner? 
Not usually. I feel more connected to people that can show their emotional side. I am attracted to vulnerability, trust, and opening up to me when they don't have to. 
I guess there are some instances where my feeler guy friends could be buzzkills for me, and they'd whine and complain a lot, so I guess I'm not attracted to guys that are more emotional than me and bring me down a lot. [I'm pretty emotional..]

#2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?
Umm.. I do like men to be tough, but I like them to be sensitive too. I guess really it just depends on the guy. 
I like to compete with guys in the adrenaline junkie area. If they vomit on a little kiddie ride, I'm going to feel like I can't have as much fun with them and they can't keep up with me.


----------



## WhatIsYourConfirmationBias (May 10, 2018)

I hate to say this, but from my perspective a fair portion of my own gender come off as highly sensitive, emotional, whiny and irrational to boot...Yet these same traits are considered unattractive in men by a fair portion of women, go figure.

That said, it may sound as though I'm saying that women are more irrational overall, though that wasn't what I'm actually implying here..In fact, I think in some ways men are more emotional than we are...

What I'm saying is from my perspective human beings REGARDLESS OF GENDER overall are highly emotional, irrational and overly sensitive so I wouldn't think less of a man for showing these qualities. I know at times I can be quite emotional and irrational as well so I won't think less of a man for doing the same..Also think that the reason some men appear to be a chaotic mess is because they've been keeping it all inside for so long that when they finally do show emotions, it comes out in an almost violent outburst...

It does however appeal to my dark sense of humor that some women who are overly emotional think less of men who are the same, but that is another trait most people possess in abundance, hypocrisy. I do as well, because to err is human, as they say.


----------



## HaloInReverse (Jul 18, 2018)

Llyralen said:


> Alright, girls, be very honest. Let’s look into our past and figure ourselves out. I’ve heard us accused by a few men on this.
> #1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?
> #2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


1. If a man shows emotion and cries sometimes (as long as he's not a crybaby lol) it makes me more interested.

2. I like a man who shows emotion. It shows that he has feelings and is not afraid to show them.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Llyralen said:


> #1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?


Only if he's a whiner which is why red pill guys (PUAs, incels, MRAs) have always been and are such a turn-off since they're all about self-pity, external loci of controls, narcissism, misogyny and frankly, bitchiness. 

But what is a positive, is if a man can cry in empathy. It proves he's compassionate and confident enough to be vulnerable with me.



> #2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


My expectations of a partner are similar to my expectations of myself but less so. In all honesty, I can't remember the last time I cried in self-pity (maybe as a teen?) but do recall the last time I cried in sadness/empathy.


----------



## Row (Apr 28, 2018)

I've been told I can be a bit emotional sometimes but I don't think it's ever been a turn off for girls, in fact they sometimes appreciate the vulnerability. I think too much of it can be exhausting for them though.

A thing I think turns off women I don't know/I'm not dating, is when I'm being overly goofy/childish. Because I guess they see it as me being immature? Some do appreciate my goofiness if they like that type of humour!

(Also, this thread made me think of this )


----------



## Electra (Oct 24, 2014)

1. no, it would be a good thing
2. It showes he has a "heart"


----------



## pocketDrop (Jul 18, 2017)

Hmmm 90% of the posts on here explain that they like emotional guys, unless they are crybabys. 

Of course, it is definitely a spectrum. So I'd be curious to hear some actual examples: some times in which a guys emotional state turned you off, or even ruined the entire relationshio, and some times in which it has been a major turn on, and or helped the relationship grow.

Personally, I feep that I have been both overly emotional, and too detatched in relationships. I feep that some of the speculation in this thread that we tend to burst when we finally feel comfortable is extremely accurate in my case. I very rarely find people in general who can relate to anything that I feel, so I lock 90% of my serious emotions. When I find someone who listens though, and who I end up feeling comfortable with (male or female) I occasionally let out a torrent of thoughts and emotions and straight rant. In a VERY animated way to say the least lol.

I would like some actual examples because I feel that it would help discern when/how venting my emotions would be appropriate and not too overwhelming for the imdividual involved.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Kommandant (Jun 27, 2017)

It's a turnoff for me if he doesnt show emotions, because i feel like he doesnt care/trust.
And so on idk the first post pretty much covered everything.

As @pocketDrop said though there is a specturm. I'll stick around in this thread and hope to see some people giving examples. Might be possible some people have a different picture of an emotional person... maybe not.
@Glassland your post is odd to me. People who dont show any sign of weakness i see as fake, arrogant or unsympathetic. 
Are you sure the exposure of weaknesses was the reason they left? Not because they fell for someone else or whatever idk. I can see how it's frustraiting to read these things online but then experience the complete opposite, but i just cant imagen how showing emotions and weaknesses is a reason to leave someone (if the person is healthy, which you described yourself as). Im not seeing it.


----------



## Glassland (Apr 19, 2014)

Kommandant said:


> It's a turnoff for me if he doesnt show emotions, because i feel like he doesnt care/trust.
> And so on idk the first post pretty much covered everything.
> 
> As @pocketDrop said though there is a specturm. I'll stick around in this thread and hope to see some people giving examples. Might be possible some people have a different picture of an emotional person... maybe not.
> ...


My current theory is that men are mostly attracted to looks and personality second (especially later in life).
For women it's personality first, resources second, looks third. Women, especially young ones, want a strong reliable man they can lean on. They don't want to see ANY weakness. It's like men suddenly seeing an ugly side in his woman. 

As women mature, they usually get more interested in a well developed personality in men, which also means emotional expressiveness to a certain degree, but even then we can never break down, even if something horrible happens. We are supposed to be the rock. Always. Women almost never allow a man to really lean on them, even if it's just for a moment.

Do you speak German? I've seen your sig.


----------



## Kommandant (Jun 27, 2017)

Glassland said:


> My current theory is that men are mostly attracted to looks and personality second (especially later in life).
> For women it's personality first, resources second, looks third. Women, especially young ones, want a strong reliable man they can lean on. They don't want to see ANY weakness. It's like men suddenly seeing an ugly side in his woman.
> 
> As women mature, they usually get more interested in a well developed personality in men, which also means emotional expressiveness to a certain degree, but even then we can never break down, even if something horrible happens. We are supposed to be the rock. Always. Women almost never allow a man to really lean on them, even if it's just for a moment.


Your current theory is interesting but a bit depressing. I might be either too close minded (because its about my gender and i dont want it to be true) or too immature/inexperienced to agree with it, but i dont think thats how women work. I hope thats not how women work.



> Do you speak German? I've seen your sig.


Yes, i'm swiss.. sup neighbour.


----------



## Chompy (May 2, 2015)

#1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner? 

Not at all.

#2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?

Because humans feel emotion. I expect the same from men that I do from women.


----------



## Glassland (Apr 19, 2014)

Kommandant said:


> Your current theory is interesting but a bit depressing. I might be either too close minded (because its about my gender and i dont want it to be true) or too immature/inexperienced to agree with it, but i dont think thats how women work. I hope thats not how women work.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, i'm swiss.. sup neighbour.


It's quite dark indeed, and I wish it wasn't so, but overall it works as I described I think. Outliers exist, but they do not negate the rule. Women are biologically programmed to seek out healthy, well developed and well-off men to propagate with because a pregnancy is risky, costly and potentially fatal. They have to make sure it's worth it. Rarely do they find all the things they want in a man in one man, it's almost statistically impossible. This is the reason why women cheat, as compared to men who are biologically compelled to spread their seed without having much repercussion. Sperm is cheap, eggs are rare. Although these biological drives and imperatives are not that necessary anymore in the modern world, they are still *deeply* ingrained into us.

The world is pretty dark place once you look beyond the surface of things. Love, as we think it exists, doesn't really exist, I think. It's conditional attraction and bonding, but people are not really aware of this. Women don't really understand why and how they are attracted to certain things in men, but evolutionarily speaking it makes a lot of sense.

Maybe I'm just jaded, but I would think I'm pretty objective about it. Although what I said above isn't the entire picture of human bonding, it's an essential part.


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

I don't think it's dark. It's just the biological reality. If women tolerated weak men, the species would quickly go extinct. A defunct society where sexual selection is relieved collapses under the weight of it's maladaptions and becomes food for flesh eating worms. Unhinged tolerance is feel good nonsense, but must be moderated. The reason man can express emotions at all, is because it's impossible to not have at least some weaknesses and so to some tolerable degree; weakness is thus not estimated to an absolute standard but relatively to a standard that is set by the high achievers. Some weaknesses are shared by the whole species, although not inherently but a strength inherent in the species inherited as a talent, must be developed to combat it for it's survival, such as that man and woman must rely on each other to form a bond and cooperate to produce and raise offspring, which would be impossible if emotions were not communicated. If there was no strength in unity, there would not be any need to communicate emotions.


----------



## Glassland (Apr 19, 2014)

Euclid said:


> I don't think it's dark. It's just the biological reality. If women tolerated weak men, the species would quickly go extinct. A defunct society where sexual selection is relieved collapses under the weight of it's maladaptions and becomes food for flesh eating worms. Unhinged tolerance is feel good nonsense, but must be moderated. The reason man can express emotions at all, is because it's impossible to not have at least some weaknesses and so to some tolerable degree; weakness is thus not estimated to an absolute standard but relatively to a standard that is set by the high achievers. Some weaknesses are shared by the whole species, although not inherently but a strength inherent in the species inherited as a talent, must be developed to combat it for it's survival, such as that man and woman must rely on each other to form a bond and cooperate to produce and raise offspring, which would be impossible if emotions were not communicated. If there was no strength in unity, there would not be any need to communicate emotions.


It is what it is. But scaling things on a humanitarian and emotional level, it is quite dark. It's definitely necessary that things are as they are, but I can see a lot of men suffering because they don't measure up to the standards women set, be it by their own fault or not. Especially those who have been dealt a shitty card will likely never experience "love" (whatever that may be). I feel for those people.


----------



## Judson Joist (Oct 25, 2013)

I cry every time I watch 'Turner & Hooch'.


----------



## 0rgans (Jul 23, 2017)

Llyralen said:


> Alright, girls, be very honest. Let’s look into our past and figure ourselves out. I’ve heard us accused by a few men on this.
> #1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?
> #2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


Hello again 

I think it depends on what it is about. I know that sounds harsh but I have been in a specific relationship before where I seriously contemplated that my partner only cried as a sort of manipulation tactic. He cried twice in the relationship over things that did not warrant tears. For example, when I said I didn't like watching TV... It was super unexpected. I just sat there, baffled. It seemed he did it just to shut me up or to make me feel sorry for him. Needless to say the relationship only lasted a few months. His friends of years also told me they thought he was a sociopath lol. He was ISTP. I didn't want to be with him, not because he cried but because I could see he was playing emotional games with me. 

But showing emotion in a healthy way is, I believe, essential in a relationship. If that person is ready and comfortable with it, of course. Being able to be emotional is attractive to me as I know that we can be real with each other and not hide our true feelings. Also when a guy doesn't have any feelings at all, I find them really difficult to level with. It's like their brain shuts off. I need to be with someone that I'm able to bounce off. One that doesn't shut me down when I express something I feel. 
I don't wanna say I have an "expectation" (though it probably is one...) but I really hope one day I am able to be with someone that can be totally real with me, and therefore I can in return!


----------



## 0rgans (Jul 23, 2017)

pocketDrop said:


> Hmmm 90% of the posts on here explain that they like emotional guys, unless they are crybabys.
> 
> Of course, it is definitely a spectrum. So I'd be curious to hear some actual examples: some times in which a guys emotional state turned you off, or even ruined the entire relationshio, and some times in which it has been a major turn on, and or helped the relationship grow.
> 
> ...


These are all examples of situations I've had in my 12 years dating various guys lol....;

Crying when his dog had an eye removed: Not a turn off
Laying on the floor in a foetal position hugging the dog and crying: a bit overwhelming but I loved him and understood so I didn't care, not a turn off 
Crying when someone told me he used to be very depressed: Not a turn off 
Crying when I said I didn't like TV: Turn off

Also I remember my brother crying when my mum told him he couldn't do something (he was 18 years old) and I remember thinking, damn I had a boyfriend when I was 18, I hope he didn't cry over something like that! 

So basically someone crying, being overly emotional, having a tantrum over something insignificant is not particularly someone you want to try and endure life with. If they cry because of genuine emotional turmoil or because of something sad happening, absolutely not a problem. A decent female would stand by their partner...


----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

Llyralen said:


> Alright, girls, be very honest. Let’s look into our past and figure ourselves out. I’ve heard us accused by a few men on this.
> #1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?
> #2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


1. Depends on what he is crying about - or showing his emotions on. If hes crying about something tragic or painful - I believe its acceptable. If he shows emotions through caring for a person or opening up about something personal all is appreciated. 

However if hes crying for attention or because hes afraid of some superstitious thing then I'll be very turned off - if he shows emotions of jealousy , unnecessary anger , insecurities ( but blames others for it ) then I'll be quite turned off. 


Expectations for men in a romantic sense - I dont know- all my exes are completely different from one another and with the exception of one- they're all great guys in terms of mental/emotional/physical . 
I guess it boils down to connection, communication and independence ( unless married with kids/living together - I don't want to see my partner more than 3 times a week) I also enjoy doing many things separately so somebody who can adapt to that. 
Onto long term- well humor( makes me laugh the right way) and trusts 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## pocketDrop (Jul 18, 2017)

ai.tran.75 said:


> However if hes crying for attention or because hes afraid of some superstitious thing then I'll be very turned off - if he shows emotions of jealousy , unnecessary anger , insecurities **( but blames others for it )** then I'll be quite turned off.


I'm curious about this. So if a man does show some serious emotional reactions to things like jealousy and insecurity, but at the same time, understands that no one is to blame, is it still a turn off?

So say a guy gets ridiculously jealous over something that doesn't seem fair. He ends up crying or showing some other emotional outburst (non-aggressive) BUT doesn't take it out on you. Doesn't blame you or any other parties that may be involved. He has an understanding that he is over reacting, but can't help but feel the way he does, regardless of its unreasonableness. 

Have you ever seen someone who was overly emotional, yet didn't blame others, and instead fought extremely hard to figure out his reasonings, and in the end, eleviate them on a personal level? Would a situation like that be overwhelming or tiresome?



Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

pocketDrop said:


> I'm curious about this. So if a man does show some serious emotional reactions to things like jealousy and insecurity, but at the same time, understands that no one is to blame, is it still a turn off?
> 
> So say a guy gets ridiculously jealous over something that doesn't seem fair. He ends up crying or showing some other emotional outburst (non-aggressive) BUT doesn't take it out on you. Doesn't blame you or any other parties that may be involved. He has an understanding that he is over reacting, but can't help but feel the way he does, regardless of its unreasonableness.
> 
> ...


* with insecurities ( not jealousy ) I'll be more accepting and honored that hes opening up to me, something like " my father doesnt appreciate my effort " would make me angry for my partner. 
However if its along the line of " what are you doing behind my back? Or I see that you're quiet every once in a while- are you thinking of somebody else ? When I'm not with you I worry you'll cheat on me " <= total turn off 
I don't get jealous ( especially in terms of romance ) so my understanding of it is probably skewed but oh well - to me it means that this person doesnt trust me and made up false crazy thoughts about me - and it's hard for me to admire or be interests in somebody who doesnt trusts me .
If he were to know that his jealousy is irrational and not act upon it - how would I know that he is jealous  in that case I think it's fine- to cut to the chase it all deals with trust - its hard for me to trust somebody who imagined that there is infidelity in our relationship-. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## pocketDrop (Jul 18, 2017)

ai.tran.75 said:


> * with insecurities ( not jealousy ) I'll be more accepting and honored that hes opening up to me, something like " my father doesnt appreciate my effort " would make me angry for my partner.
> However if its along the line of " what are you doing behind my back? Or I see that you're quiet every once in a while- are you thinking of somebody else ? When I'm not with you I worry you'll cheat on me " <= total turn off
> I don't get jealous ( especially in terms of romance ) so my understanding of it is probably skewed but oh well - to me it means that this person doesnt trust me and made up false crazy thoughts about me - and it's hard for me to admire or be interests in somebody who doesnt trusts me .
> If he were to know that his jealousy is irrational and not act upon it - how would I know that he is jealous  in that case I think it's fine- to cut to the chase it all deals with trust - its hard for me to trust somebody who imagined that there is infidelity in our relationship-.
> ...


This makes sense.

When I was in my first relationship, and was still working on self confidence, I found that my biggest issue was over communication. There were plenty of times that I felt jealous or insecure. In a majority if those situations, I would wair until the actual situation had passed, and then I would bring it up. I tried to make it clear that the majority of the time, I didnt expect or want her to change her behavior. I just assumed that it was better for me to communicate, rather than stay silent and risk something big happening.

In hind sight, this was likely very smothering and exhausting. But hey, what first time relationships arent? Lol

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

Llyralen said:


> Alright, girls, be very honest. Let’s look into our past and figure ourselves out. I’ve heard us accused by a few men on this.
> #1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?
> #2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


Many people says enfp as the best match for intj. 

Intj is so distant and cold, yet many here seems to value men's emotion up to certain acceptable level.

It doesn't compute.

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## pocketDrop (Jul 18, 2017)

contradictionary said:


> Many people says enfp as the best match for intj.
> 
> Intj is so distant and cold, yet many here seems to value men's emotion up to certain acceptable level.
> 
> ...


I thought the stereotypical attraction was to ESTP and ISTP?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Kizuna (Jul 30, 2011)

INFJ+ENFP, then INFP, then ENTP


A man showing deep, genuine emotion is one of the most beautiful things I've seen people do. What I do dislike is whiny, immature, self-pitying kind of emotional display. If you cry or brood, it better be for a noble reason (man or woman).

To add something else: I dislike the way some ENFP men have tried to emotionally manipulate me into liking them by playing the unjustly treated, poor kitty cat whose emotional wellbeing I was forcefully made "responsible" for. Like a life-changing contract I never agreed to, but the other person only cares about their heart and how I_ have to_ make it better, and try to achieve this by making themselves look pitiful.

So, to the OP, emotional display of self-pity is one of the biggest NOs for me, just ...no... I want my partner's Fi strong and noble, not whiny. Sorry of anyone got offended. I'm not the best person myself, although I genuinely strive to be...


PS Human emotions are amazingly beautiful if they come from the pure, genuine, innocent part of our core, I think. Even actors playing roles, when they get deep into their character and portray their pains or joys, it's almost overwhelming.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Kizuna said:


> INFJ+ENFP, then INFP, then ENTP
> 
> 
> A man showing deep, genuine emotion is one of the most beautiful things I've seen people do. What I do dislike is whiny, immature, self-pitying kind of emotional display. If you cry or brood, it better be for a noble reason (man or woman).
> ...


Well...I have written many drafts that sound the same...more directed to INFx though, lol. Except, I think I do feel the strength of love should make up for hurts of the past. If those hurts are genuine then I don’t mind supplying that. My love can make up for a slew of hurt and has and does... this is basically a proven thing in my 15 years of marriage as my husband broke with his family and our family is all he’s got, BUT I don’t like it when the self- pity takes on a quality that seems unreal, off-balance or basically makes me feel like saying things like, “Do you know that so and so just dealt with 2 years of cancer? There are people being torn from their babies? My friend’ mom went violently insane when he was 15....???” Like if there is no perspective! And I guess the type of self-pity I absolutely hate is like, “ This crummy life sucks.” “ I’m never going to be good enough. Nothing good is ever going to happen to me.” And I’m like..... so....the kids...me...hmm? There is saddness that I’m willing to bend over backwards for or there is unhealthy stuff and the unhealthy stuff is not attractive....


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

pocketDrop said:


> I thought the stereotypical attraction was to ESTP and ISTP?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Whose ever been attracted to a ESTP? Lol... (just kidding ESTPs) 
I think in our ENFP poles we girls like INTJ, INFJ, ISTP and some married INTP or ENTJ... @Alassea is the expert on these poles. Anyway, back to subject.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Okay...I have crafted, wadded up and thrown out a few drafts of my thoughts on this. I’m ready, I think. 

There are rivers of pain in our lives and there are rivers of joy and I will forever be at the crossroads waiting to catch every emotion that floats down those rivers for my husband and I and calling it beautiful. 

Do you know what a damned hypocrite I would be if I didn’t love and cherish all of my husband’s emotions? There are few people on this planet, I believe, who can say their emotions tumble out of them the way mine do out of me and my whole life I’ve struggled to accept my emotions and tried to suppress them and freaked myself out with them and my mom doing the same in many instances. I am freaking embarrassing. I often just have tears coarsening down my cheeks in the worst of places. I cry with all of my clients/patients, always have. It’s completely unprofessional— I’m lucky that people know I can’t help it. I love their joys. I cry over their babies. I’m a MESS. Even this year I’ve made big strides towards accepting myself. I asked a therapist for emotion regulation after going to a convention and realizing that I’m always the most emotional one in a room of 1000 women who all have big hearts. And the most emotional one in a concert with 2000 music lovers. Enough so that the maestro spends 3 minutes looking at me with kinship and compassion while he bowed. 

It was men who accepted me. It was men who taught me to hold my head up. It was men who didn’t fault me or make me feel wrong. It was men who showed me how to be strong even when my feelings were spilling everywhere. It is men who loved me and didn’t care what anyone else thought. It was my ISTP dad who never found me at fault for feeling, just held me. And he taught me that feelings are not wrong. So I’m feeling this pretty strong. I adore men and have a heart full of gratitude and trust for you. You can fall to pieces and I will remember when you were strong.

There is something different when judgements get made based on our own emotions. The judgements can be wrong, can be immature or unhealthy. Judgements and decisions and behaviors that can be unhealthy are a turn-off. For instance, grieving for a dog who dies. Who would fault you for that? And what kind of woman wouldn’t sympathize, if she doesn’t then forget her, but if you decide to turn away from sympathy, curse life, retreat into a shell, etc. Then you aren’t sharing and grieving together. Instead, there’s a selfishness about it. There’s a disproportion. Don’t we all have sorrows? What if you use something that happened to you in the past to justify negative behavior? Complain8ng can carry negative th8ngs from the past into the now and the future. I’ve heard people say that if you are angry with someone and 5h8nking of that all 5he time then you are basically taking a shower with them, eating and drinking with them, goin* to bed with them. Your partner might not wan5 this threesome. So it’s okay to feel, always, but what we decide to do with those feelings is pretty important and people might not want to deal with negative behaviors. I’m not saying that 5his is what all girls see or understand. A lot of girls might be too messed up themselves to understand the difference, or to know they don’t have to put up with crap. They might not even know that you can trust a man or get close to him even. So there are all levels for men and women, and you learn to recognize people at different development levels, and sometimes I can tell when someone is above mine and I can keep working on it. 

So with emotions I try to feel them, understand them, share them, and then grow together, become stronger if possible and use that compassion to help others. 

Okay that was a lot. I’m going to decide to accept it, though, and decide to run with that feeling of deep gratitude that I expressed.


----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

Llyralen said:


> Whose ever been attracted to a ESTP? Lol... (just kidding ESTPs)
> I think in our ENFP poles we girls like INTJ, INFJ, ISTP and some married INTP or ENTJ... @Alassea is the expert on these poles. Anyway, back to subject.


Rhett Butler...Robin Hood....onto real people Alain Delon,Robert Downey Jr,Winston Churchill,Malcolm X ...maybe it's me but I like estps


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

ai.tran.75 said:


> Rhett Butler...Robin Hood....onto real people Alain Delon,Robert Downey Jr,Winston Churchill,Malcolm X ...maybe it's me but I like estps


Robert Downey Jr. is one of ours, isn’t he? I would have thought so.... Winston Church8ll a ESTP? Oh he can’t be...Good gracious, what the heck? Ai...my world is tumbling...England will fall... 
But I was just kidding! I thought it would bug the ESTPs big time.


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

Llyralen said:


> It was men who accepted me. It was men who taught me to hold my head up. It was men who didn’t fault me or make me feel wrong. It was men who showed me how to be strong even when my feelings were spilling everywhere. It is men who loved me and didn’t care what anyone else thought. It was my ISTP dad who never found me at fault for feeling, just held me. And he taught me that feelings are not wrong. So I’m feeling this pretty strong. I adore men and have a heart full of gratitude and trust for you. You can fall to pieces and I will remember when you were strong.


Excuse me alesha, but you've made it as if ONLY men have ever do these to you. Quite baffling for me.

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## pwowq (Aug 7, 2016)

Overly emotional is a turn-off in both genders. It creates negative stress.

I have the most respect for people who knows when to appropriately show and express their emotions thru the language their partner will understand. I have the least respect for the opposite (manipulative tantrums and anger issues). 

Thankfully most people, men and women, are balanced and reasonable... adults over 27 years old that is.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

contradictionary said:


> Excuse me alesha, but you've made it as if ONLY men have ever do these to you. Quite baffling for me.
> 
> Sent using Tapatalk


What exactly is baffling to you? In my life, men are who taught me it was safe to be myself. Women have been trickier in my life. My husband is loving and accepting and I am so grateful. I know many women get the opposite experience, unfortunately. A shout out to the girls I feel close to here! (I’m afraid to mention them because of missing some but @ai.tran.75 definitely should have a shout out here and I am grateful for @IssaVibe and @Belledonna and @temptingthesea and @Windblownhair). 
I was talking about emotions and judgements and actions being different things....


----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

Llyralen said:


> Robert Downey Jr. is one of ours, isn’t he? I would have thought so.... Winston Church8ll a ESTP? Oh he can’t be...Good gracious, what the heck? Ai...my world is tumbling...England will fall...
> But I was just kidding! I thought it would bug the ESTPs big time.


Robert was fully engaged in extrovert sensing until past his mid-30. He lived in the moment-engages in all 5 of his senses- and as he matured his Ni strengthen for him to be more future oriented. Winston is extremely hands on and action oriented-he served in the military twice...he adapts well with the time being and wherever he goes, he enjoys adventures- 
- he gains energy by making engaging his 5 senses outwardly
Here are some of his quotes that I found pretty Se like
"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!" 
"it doesnt hurt to be optimistic.You can always cry later"
"I never worry about action, but only inaction."


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

ai.tran.75 said:


> Robert was fully engaged in extrovert sensing until past his mid-30. He lived in the moment-engages in all 5 of his senses- and as he matured his Ni strengthen for him to be more future oriented. Winston is extremely hands on and action oriented-he served in the military twice...he adapts well with the time being and wherever he goes, he enjoys adventures-
> - he gains energy by making engaging his 5 senses outwardly
> Here are some of his quotes that I found pretty Se like
> "One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half. Never run away from anything. Never!"
> ...


Actually I do think of ESTPs as fantastic leaders, especially with developed Fe. It makes sense. Those quotes are great examples. I love reading Churchill.


----------



## Windblownhair (Aug 12, 2013)

*1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner? *
I’m a lot more receptive to positive emotion than negative emotion. Being able to show affection is very attractive. Negative emotion? Eh, not so much. I like a guy who keeps a cool head under pressure, doesn’t stress out easily, doesn’t overshare. I don’t like whining, I don’t like overreactions, and I don’t want to feel their feelings constantly. It’s exhausting. Of the two of us, I want to be the more emotional one, and I’m not that emotional.

*2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?
*My dad was emotionally repressed. He had a rough home life as he was growing up and that was a huge contributing factor. That, and he’s an INTJ, so there wasn’t a ton of feels to begin with. With age, his Fi has been growing, and with it, his emotional expressions. It’s difficult not to look askance at it. Sort of the, “You’re getting in touch with your emotions, and I’m happy for you, but do you have to do it in front of me? I’m not used to this.” So yeah, how I grew up is definitely a contributing factor to my preferences.

Hubby is an ENTJ who has a pretty low emotional volume. He had a healthy home life and no real trauma, so his emotions aren’t repressed, he simply doesn’t have a ton of them. It’s lovely and soothing. Being forced to swim in everyone’s emotions constantly means that when I’m around someone both positive and low volume in the emotions department, it’s a nice break.


----------



## Tropes (Jul 7, 2016)

Glassland said:


> My current theory is that men are mostly attracted to looks and personality second (especially later in life).
> For women it's personality first, resources second, looks third. Women, especially young ones, want a strong reliable man they can lean on. They don't want to see ANY weakness. It's like men suddenly seeing an ugly side in his woman.
> 
> As women mature, they usually get more interested in a well developed personality in men, which also means emotional expressiveness to a certain degree, but even then we can never break down, even if something horrible happens. We are supposed to be the rock. Always. Women almost never allow a man to really lean on them, even if it's just for a moment.
> ...


A relevant discussion: Contempt and Disgust for Male Vulnerability?



Llyralen said:


> Alright, girls, be very honest. Let’s look into our past and figure ourselves out. I’ve heard us accused by a few men on this.
> #1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?
> #2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?



“Here’s the painful pattern that emerged from my research with men: We ask them to be vulnerable, we beg them to let us in, and we plead with them to tell us when they’re afraid, but the truth is that most women can’t stomach it. In those moments when real vulnerability happens in men, most of us recoil with fear and that fear manifests as everything from disappointment to disgust. And men are very smart. They know the risks, and they see the look in our eyes when we’re thinking, C’mon! Pull it together. Man up.” ( Daring Greatly by Brene Brown, 95)


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Genghis Kohen said:


> A relevant discussion: Contempt and Disgust for Male Vulnerability?


I’m a big fan of Brene Brown. What a good discussion. Thank you or adding it. Yeah I think it’s real. It’s why I worded my OP how I did. I was expecting mixed answers. Because I can be wrong about myself, I just asked my husband to tell me if he felt slighted at all expressing feelings and if he felt safe expressing vulnerability. Luckily he didn’t get what I was talking about and I explained that some men get slighted when expressing. He said, “Sometimes I feel weakif I cry in front of the kids or even if I am in pain (like if I’ve got back pain). I feel like dads shouldn’t be weak.” But I think that my kids love their dad how he is and they know we comfort each other as a family when things go wrong. I do want to show them that you can be comforted and that together we can get through things.


----------



## Catwalk (Aug 12, 2015)

Llyralen said:


> Alright, girls, be very honest. Let’s look into our past and figure ourselves out. I’ve heard us accused by a few men on this.
> #1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?
> #2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


I am more disturbed by males that lack the _awareness_ of when/how they are being "emotional/vulnerable" - the types that pin "highly" emotional on the female-specimen, but are heavily emotionally destabilized. I cannot take those specimens seriously. Like, is the *same guy* that discusses his woes on my chest, gets upset when I accidentally wash something of 'his' (that he did not want to be washed), argued with me about the remote football season, his forehead vein pops out when we cannot agree on financing, gives me a (2)-hour silent treatment when we do not agree on something, leaves romantic texts, pours his heart out for hours at a time on the phone, discusses our future, claiming to be the "unemotional rock" of the foundation in front of his buddies and that I never let this guy "be vulnerable"? :rolling:


----------



## temptingthesea (May 7, 2018)

Hey, thank you once again for inviting me to chime in!

*Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?
Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?*

I’ve longed to be with someone who is deeply honest and who is not afraid of vulnerability. I want to know his _story_ and I want him to share it with me.

For a man to be my sexual partner, I have to have a deep emotional attachment to him first. That being said, I need him to show me his emotions. 

My first relationship was with someone who seemed to me to be “more emotionally stable” than I am, and I’ll admit that was an initial point of attraction. I thought, at least he would be able to balance me out and tone down the heights of my emotional intensity. But it gradually felt painfully cold as it almost seemed like he was resisting the connection and only had half of his walls down when I’d already been so heavily attached to him, all my walls (which I’d painstakingly built over the years) I’d destroyed just to let him in.

For a man to be _my_ man, I need to _feel _his emotions. More precisely, I need to feel that he _wants_ me to feel his emotions as much as he hungers to feel mine. I could probably attribute this to myself craving such emotional intimacy and intensity at a level where we are both fearlessly vulnerable to each other. I want to see the nakedness of his soul (before his body) as there is no other way for me to pursue the connection than to also bare mine.

I am very much willing to _explore_ his emotionality. If there are times he becomes overly emotional or 'destabilized', I’d be eager to understand why. I’d only pull away once it becomes unhealthy (i.e. that potential partner seeing me more as a ‘parent’ than a partner).

I need to know his _range_ of emotions. I guess, it’s a personal quest for someone who has an emotional depth that would complement mine. 

.
.

If he shows me his tears, I will cry with him.


----------



## ponpiri (Apr 30, 2017)

contradictionary said:


> Many people says enfp as the best match for intj.
> 
> Intj is so distant and cold, yet many here seems to value men's emotion up to certain acceptable level.
> 
> ...


I prefer INFx and have dated those types as well as INTJ and ENFJ. The couple of ENFPs I've interacted with have fit that annoying 'manic pixie girl/guy' trope that drives me nuts.

I could not imagine dating someone of that stereotype without wanting to choke them every single day.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

Sir @ponpiri Sir @contradictionary You two are way off topic. We are discussing sensitive men and women’s reactions to them.


----------



## ponpiri (Apr 30, 2017)

Llyralen said:


> Sir @ponpiri Sir @contradictionary You two are way off topic. We are discussing sensitive men and women’s reactions to them.


It's on topic and I'm female.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

ponpiri said:


> It's on topic and I'm female.


Sorry, LOL! Okay, so when feeling guys share their feelings with you, what is that like for you? 
I did not want to have a "type" based discussion about this, as this topic seems much deeper and about gender roles and conditioning, and have wanted the type judgment stuff out of this discussion other than to hear from women of all types, in which case your experience is welcome although I didn't like being compared to a manic pixie very much.


----------



## ponpiri (Apr 30, 2017)

Llyralen said:


> Sorry, LOL! Okay, so when feeling guys share their feelings with you, what is that like for you?
> I did not want to have a "type" based discussion about this, as this topic seems much deeper and about gender roles and conditioning, and have wanted the type judgment stuff out of this discussion other than to hear from women of all types, in which case your experience is welcome although I didn't like being compared to a manic pixie very much.


That comment wasn't about you, but the people I know in real life.

I'm used to people sharing all kinds of weird shit with me, so I don't have a problem with someone else's feelings as long as they aren't pressed upon me. Most of the issues stem from misunderstanding what's being said. I think I'm very direct and mostly literal, while the guy - usually an Fe type - is trying to read between lines that aren't there. This depends on the situation of course. I tend to give those type of people a little bit of leeway because my cool demeanor can throw them for a loop by making them react irrationally because they aren't used to a woman behaving the way I do.

What I dislike is the whininess, the oversharing and expectation that I should care or react immediately just because a person has feelings. I call that emotional dumping and extremely selfish. If they're overbearing, overly-emotional, overly-dependent, etc then that's what they are no matter their type and I'm bound to keep them at an arm's length distance.


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

Llyralen said:


> Sir @ponpiri Sir @contradictionary You two are way off topic. We are discussing sensitive men and women’s reactions to them.


Well, you put this in NF forum instead of the general romance forum, means 'inadvertently' you have types in mind when you posted. Hehe

Me, i am insensitive to other people's feelings but i am quite sensitive with mine although i hardly ever express it. So in that regards i am not supposed to be enticing to women who have such expectations. That's why i said the 'fairy tale' of certain type couple combination doesn't compute.

But if you don't want to prolong this side, it's ok. Just my 0.02.




ponpiri said:


> ..etc then that's what they are no matter their type and I'm bound to keep them at an arm's length distance.


Damn girl, you are cold h:

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)

Look back this the theme of this thread is basically conditional love where some minor faults are reason enough to not love someone anymore in the context of relationships. Rather than dumping someone right away help them through in some capacity at least and work it through but then again expecting someone to do that in their twenties and thirties is like asking someone to walk on water.


----------



## pocketDrop (Jul 18, 2017)

The Lonley Hobbit said:


> Look back this the theme of this thread is basically conditional love where some minor faults are reason enough to not love someone anymore in the context of relationships. Rather than dumping someone right away help them through in some capacity at least and work it through but then again expecting someone to do that in their twenties and thirties is like asking someone to walk on water.


Actually, brings up a good distinguishment that may be interesting (Yes, i'm totally keeping tabs on this for future reference *embarrassed*).

It appears that the topic of initial interest has been covered rather thoroughly. It seems that during initial attraction, emotion and vulnerability is generally appreciated to a degree that is subjective to the female. It would be interesting to know how much that changes over bonding. So the question is this: how much emotion seems appropriate in the beginning, and how does that acceptable emotion level change as time passes from just meeting, to being together for a few weeks, to a few months, to a few years, etc?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## iblameyou (Oct 1, 2016)

My crush was an ENTP and he was just aggressive about physical touch. He also struggles showing his vulnerability side which is how I want to connect. I guess there were no trust between us. He was emotionally absent. 

My ex was an INFP. We were both unhealthy and I really want to establish trust with him and I tried to feel loved, but I guess it just wasn't there. He was emotionally present, but his talk was cheap that I just didn't want to try anymore. 

Personally, I do want a man who is not afraid to show his vulnerability side and his action and words line up. _shrugs_


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)

On further thought some of the people who posted in this thread give off the vibe of wanting men to have an on/off switch and only be emotional when it is convenient otherwise they don't want to have emotional men around.


----------



## pwowq (Aug 7, 2016)

EDIT: RIP-post.


----------



## pwowq (Aug 7, 2016)

The Lonley Hobbit said:


> On further thought some of the people who posted in this thread give off the vibe of wanting men to have an on/off switch and only be emotional when it is convenient otherwise they don't want to have emotional men around.


That's what I expect from a partner and myself. Little to no raw emotional content. But lots of feelings.
Emotion = Pure reaction upon anything.
Feeling = Processed emotion.


----------



## Dare (Nov 8, 2016)

Llyralen said:


> 1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner? 2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


I see this more in the context of 'my match' than men in general. People should be who they are and I like to believe we all have our match out there (if not found already). 

My match is a calm/positive-outlook/responsible type who has a ton of mental fortitude/self-control but has a deep well of emotion (with high EQ) and values intimacy in a relationship (showing me who he truly is and sharing his experience of life). BIG powerful emotions drive him in life generally. He's able to turn that passion to his romantic life. A tear shed in a tender moment from a man like this isn't weakness, it's the holy grail as far as I'm concerned. Even a rare tear shed for the loss of innocence recalled while describing a wayward childhood -- it would draw me to him. I'm trusting him to tell me when work is tough (in that way that makes me empathize and support, not inviting me to panic). I want to know, I want to feel (for him), I want to connect. The more raw, more real, the deeper, the better. Secure in our relationship, emotional strength is being vulnerable to me (I'm not into being too weak to 'call it' or feel it).

I'm aware my preferences are based, at least in part, on satisfying my preferred relationship dynamic and my emotional needs. Men who gift wrap their day-to-day problems in tears and hand them to me to solve are putting me into a 'mommy' role which murders sexual attraction for me. I do not like men who systematically put their emotions before mine in a relationship. I have emotional needs that fit more 'traditional' roles. I need to feel 'safe' (he's strong/reliable/capable) but I also, very much, don't want to be 'alone' emotionally. I like men who value emotions (in healthy, sensible people anyway) and check to see how I am emotionally (just as I want to know how he is). Men who are stoic (no 'passion', no hidden well of emotion, no interest in other's emotions) leave me cold romantically. I love big, controlled emotion in a man. With a man like that, his rare/private 'letting go' moments are so precious. It's an honor and privilege to witness. Tear to my eye just from thinking of it, lol. 

I think my preferences also come from what I understand bc I'm that way myself (to some extent -- the girl version anyway). I'm not one to go around showing my emotions to just anyone, anytime (I'm INTJ). 



pocketDrop said:


> It would be interesting to know how much that changes over bonding. So the question is this: how much emotion seems appropriate in the beginning, and how does that acceptable emotion level change as time passes from just meeting, to being together for a few weeks, to a few months, to a few years, etc?


That's a good question. It's a combination of who he is (how much trust has built/how well I understand him), the quality of connection and time for me. Generally, it should be gradual and appropriate to the growing relationship. However if he was someone who was earning my respect and he had a big emotional response to something early on, that could increase my interest (if it showed passion or strength in some way). A man who is unafraid to be himself is attractive.

There are things that will never be okay, at any stage, however: out of control whining/using emotions to manipulate me (via my empathy) into a 'rescuer' role, for example. Trust with emotions is important. If my SO is crying in pain, I need to know whether it's bc the pain is excruciating or if this is some ploy for sympathy/attention/assistance (only the latter decreases attraction). I need to see a certain amount of strength and self reliance first until trust can grow in the relationship. Once that trust is there, I'm far more open to him expressing himself emotionally in his own individual way. I hold myself to this same show strength & self-reliance standard.

That's just what's right for me though. I've heard of plenty of XNTJ women who love dating NF guys for their 'emotionality'. Some women love stoic men (girls go nuts for my no-feelz ISTP best friend). Everyone's different.


----------



## InfiniteLightvoid (Jul 11, 2018)

Glassland said:


> If there is anything I learned it is that women despise weakness in men and because we show weakness from time to time doesn't mean we are weak. It means we are human. Yet it's like once you show a woman your weakness once, she gets doubt. Show it again, she's out. She completely disregards all your positive qualities (which usually far outweigh any negative).


Not saying this cause I'm weak or anything, but if you can't love someone because they don't fit some sort of ideal... well then you can't love anyone at all, cause Love isn't a puzzle piece fitting snuggly into perfection. Moreover, if someone IS just flat out weak... you're basically saying and rendering that they be unloved. If all women universally cannot love a weak man, then no woman can... and that seems unfathomably wrong to me.

My thoughts aren't that I have moments of weakness. But rather how strong I am is not something that revolves around /you/ and I don't want to be with someone who basically is only with me by the circumstance of the fact that I JUST HAPPEN, to be strong anyways. That if I wasn't, you wouldn't love me. My strength isn't for you, my strength is for me ONLY.


----------



## InfiniteLightvoid (Jul 11, 2018)

My question to women who are into stoic men: What exactly is your real motive? Cause the reason most Players don't like emotional women, is simply cause intimacy = attachment. To me, it must be the same thing. You're really just using your guy, and thus have no place for a breathing, feeling, thinking, etc human being. You just need a disposable tool that is only using you, and you're using them for the moment tho that could change at any moment, at the snap of a finger.


----------



## InfiniteLightvoid (Jul 11, 2018)

Dare said:


> I see this more in the context of 'my match' than men in general. People should be who they are and I like to believe we all have our match out there (if not found already).


Hate to break it to you, but that is not real Love.


----------



## Dare (Nov 8, 2016)

InfiniteLightvoid said:


> Hate to break it to you, but that is not real Love.


What's "real love" according to you?


----------



## ponpiri (Apr 30, 2017)

contradictionary said:


> Well, you put this in NF forum instead of the general romance forum, means 'inadvertently' you have types in mind when you posted. Hehe
> 
> Me, i am insensitive to other people's feelings but i am quite sensitive with mine although i hardly ever express it. So in that regards i am not supposed to be enticing to women who have such expectations. That's why i said the 'fairy tale' of certain type couple combination doesn't compute.
> 
> ...


The sentiment is cold or was it the way it was written? If you tell me that there are people that actually enjoy their emotional boundaries being stepped on (outside of kink spaces), I won't believe you. lol

I figure the people that do the boundary-stepping are happy with themselves, but not the person that's experiencing it.


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)

Dare said:


> What's "real love" according to you?


That would be unconditional love.


----------



## contradictionary (Apr 1, 2018)

ponpiri said:


> The sentiment is cold or was it the way it was written? If you tell me that there are people that actually enjoy their emotional boundaries being stepped on (outside of kink spaces), I won't believe you. lol
> 
> I figure the people that do the boundary-stepping are happy with themselves, but not the person that's experiencing it.


I kindly teased your Fi and you show it. Haha. Peace...

Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## ponpiri (Apr 30, 2017)

contradictionary said:


> I kindly teased your Fi and you show it. Haha. Peace...
> 
> Sent using Tapatalk


:tease: more like you wasted my time :dry:


----------



## Dare (Nov 8, 2016)

The Lonley Hobbit said:


> That would be unconditional love.


Also known as "maternal love". Yeah, I'm not into that. I stopped dating an ENFP once bc he asked me to help him find his keys.


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)

Dare said:


> Also known as "maternal love". Yeah, I'm not into that. I stopped dating an ENFP once bc he asked me to help him find his keys.


That is pretty shallow to be honest but not surprised, disappointed with people as always.


----------



## Dare (Nov 8, 2016)

The Lonley Hobbit said:


> That is pretty shallow to be honest but not surprised, disappointed with people as always.


I'm sorry we couldn't be of more _use_ to you.


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)

Dare said:


> I'm sorry we couldn't be of more _use_ to you.


You give off the vibe of being the type that likes to monkey branch and cheat in relationships.


----------



## Fennel (Jan 11, 2017)

Boys, if you are so busy discussing/debating what should interest girls, then you're not getting it. Philosophizing is for eunuchs. 

Anyone who is really interested in romance would be out there with his girl, or pursuing her. You don't have to be the perfect guy. You just have to be serious. Whatever your resources are, all of them should be used to get the woman. Anything less is a disgrace.

Listen, a woman's heart is soft, fragile, complicated and sacred. She deserves only the best. A seriously seeking guy next door would beat the uninterested tall genius with lots of money any day. Unless the girl is a whore.

Of course I want someone stronger and more intelligent than myself. But that is only relative. He doesn't have to be Superman, he just needs to be able to protect and provide for me. Being passionate is key. Being emotional is only a plus, not a requirement if all other criteria are met.


----------



## Dare (Nov 8, 2016)

The Lonley Hobbit said:


> You give off the vibe of being the type that likes to monkey branch and cheat in relationships.


I'm going to have to disappoint you once again. Forgive me if I fail to reply going forward.


----------



## Glassland (Apr 19, 2014)

Sei35 said:


> Boys, if you are so busy discussing/debating what should interest girls, then you're not getting it. Philosophizing is for eunuchs.
> 
> Anyone who is really interested in romance would be out there with his girl, or pursuing her. You don't have to be the perfect guy. You just have to be serious. Whatever your resources are, all of them should be used to get the woman. Anything less is a disgrace.
> 
> ...


What if another guy shows up who's interested in you and pursues you with his heart, who also has more resources, is stronger, taller and more intelligent than your current partner? Will you stay loyal?


----------



## LeSangDeCentAns (Apr 10, 2018)

Sei35 said:


> Anyone who is really interested in romance would be out there with his girl, or pursuing her. You don't have to be the perfect guy. You just have to be serious. Whatever your resources are, all of them should be used to get the woman. Anything less is a disgrace.
> 
> Of course I want someone stronger and more intelligent than myself.


"Romance". lol.

Sounds more like slavery. gtfo with that shit. 

If any man does what your asking him to do, he doesn't deserve respect, and women know that. You can't have a man grovel at your feet and have "muh hypergamy" at the same time. Women should only get attention when they give it. The exchange is sex, possible friendship, but above all, a partnership at self-replication and a devotion to children. It's mutual, not "all of men's resources for her perishing box".


----------



## BenevolentBitterBleeding (Mar 16, 2015)

How ugly of a crier are they?


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)

What a man these days can expect both emotionally and financially as well other aspect including the loss of children if there are any as well loss of property.


----------



## InfiniteLightvoid (Jul 11, 2018)

Penny said:


> don't mean to be eavesdropping and i'm not trying to piss you off, but with all your seeming preconceived notions and stipulations it sounds to me like you are being too rigid to ever let love come into your life and flow naturally.


It's not about rigidness, it's about Dignity. With how many times life has made me walk in the rain all alone, to pick up and carry myself all by myself. It has told me, over and over again. That I'm all on my own. That nobody is going to come along and help me.

I know the my strength, is just who I am. I've been tested over and over again, and always give the same response. Yet the fact that it's just who I am, means it has nothing to do with anyone else. So for a woman to talk entitled to what I am, and that they wouldn't have to love me if I was any different, sounds like sheer Blasphemy to me.

Because I am not what I am, for you. I am what I am, for me. For the trials and tribulations that I've overcome. I earned this, you did not. So you can whine at me all you want about your entitlements, while I keep on walking and get to have my strength all to myself.


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

InfiniteLightvoid said:


> It's not about rigidness, it's about Dignity. With how many times life has made me walk in the rain all alone, to pick up and carry myself all by myself. It has told me, over and over again. That I'm all on my own. That nobody is going to come along and help me.
> 
> I know the my strength, is just who I am. I've been tested over and over again, and always give the same response. Yet the fact that it's just who I am, means it has nothing to do with anyone else. So for a woman to talk entitled to what I am, and that they wouldn't have to love me if I was any different, sounds like sheer Blasphemy to me.
> 
> Because I am not what I am, for you. I am what I am, for me. For the trials and tribulations that I've overcome. I earned this, you did not. So you can whine at me all you want about your entitlements, while I keep on walking and get to have my strength all to myself.


entitlements? who is asking anything of you? love is about giving of yourself to someone else and serving them, not about being served. i mean, sure not everyone might think that way, but that's how I see it. when you care about someone, when you truly care about someone you want to see them happy and you do what you can to make that happen even if it means sacrificing your own happiness.


----------



## InfiniteLightvoid (Jul 11, 2018)

WhatIsYourConfirmationBias said:


> Speak of the devil and she will appear...Did someone call my name? Anyway, you sound REALLY angry @InfiniteLightvoid, which is understandable if you've been hurt enough...I have too. However, everyone on this forum isn't your enemy. But if you keep attacking everyone, they will be.
> 
> I think you've just been hurt so much you're lashing out...But if you continue to do so, you'll run off anyone who might have actually cared for you...
> 
> Yes most people regardless of gender are pure shit, but the entire planet isn't your enemy. Just calm down, and realize these are just strangers on the internet, why do you care what we think? Let it go, and find yourself a girlfriend. Seriously I said it on another thread, but I think you're sexually frustrated and that is what is fueling this anger..Just let that shit go..


Because I care that people are on the wrong path in life, and will only walk themselves into negative karma. It is my obligation, as it is everyone's, to help others as much as possible. If I see someone is walking down a doomed path, do I just let them pass by without saying a word? Maybe if they've given me a reason to hate them, but otherwise no.

I'm several kinds of frustrated at life all at once. Unless you're gonna try and change that, it's none of your business. As for "finding a girlfriend" that's easier said than done when as you said, most people are shit. Regardless of whether I should consider them my enemy or not, I definitely wouldn't consider them dating material.


----------



## InfiniteLightvoid (Jul 11, 2018)

Penny said:


> entitlements? who is asking anything of you? love is about giving of yourself to someone else and serving them, not about being served. i mean, sure not everyone might think that way, but that's how I see it. when you care about someone, when you truly care about someone you want to see them happy and you do what you can to make that happen even if it means sacrificing your own happiness.


But, the only way for that to not just lead to self-degradation and un-requited sacrifice. The other person has to return that love. Thus they have to be the same way with you.

Love is a choice, so it only makes sense to choose to give it to the person that gives it to you.


----------



## WhatIsYourConfirmationBias (May 10, 2018)

InfiniteLightvoid said:


> WhatIsYourConfirmationBias said:
> 
> 
> > Speak of the devil and she will appear...Did someone call my name? Anyway, you sound REALLY angry @InfiniteLightvoid, which is understandable if you've been hurt enough...I have too. However, everyone on this forum isn't your enemy. But if you keep attacking everyone, they will be.
> ...


That's not a bad thing, trying to help others..But your method might be a bit hard for most to take. Not to mention what IS the correct path? Sometimes it's not so clear who is right, and who is wrong...

You are right, it's none of my business...And I'm not suggesting finding a girlfriend off of PerC, but if you fight like this with people in real life you'll scare away any potential women who might have been interested...Have you ever tried meditating? Or taken up boxing? This anger has to go somewhere, because if it doesn't it will eat you alive...


----------



## InfiniteLightvoid (Jul 11, 2018)

WhatIsYourConfirmationBias said:


> That's not a bad thing, trying to help others..But your method might be a bit hard for most to take. Not to mention what IS the correct path? Sometimes it's not so clear who is right, and who is wrong...
> 
> You are right, it's none of my business...And I'm not suggesting finding a girlfriend off of PerC, but if you fight like this with people in real life you'll scare away any potential women who might have been interested...Have you ever tried meditating? Or taken up boxing? This anger has to go somewhere, because if it doesn't it will eat you alive...


Well even if it WERE subjective, I know the paths other people take are irreconciable with my nature. I can't be as shallow as they are. I can't be as mindless and I can't live a fake life.

I would rather cease to exist, to be frankly honest. As for women, being interested in me? *L O L*

Let's be real here. The hottest of chicks give me looks, but I'm not delusional enough to deny that my mentality is going completely against the freaking grain of what almost every woman wants. Sometimes, SOMETIMES. I'm so close to just caving in and becoming the complete tool they want me to be. But I don't think you realize how dead inside I would have to be, to seriously end up in that position.

At this rate, by time someone comes along that it could really work with. My appreciation even for real love, will be completely dead. Maybe it already is. I'm so spiteful towards my own passions and feelings, because nobody else seems to think it's worthwhile so why should I?


----------



## Tijaax (Dec 14, 2017)

InfiniteLightvoid said:


> Which if you're not a mindless animal that only thinks with their dick, this is seen as a message to not even try because to be what they want is to be someone who walks away from the game in the first place.
> 
> If I have to basically be so strong, that I'm not even human. Then why would I use that strength to pursue human endeavors? Derp.


This is just how it work in many scenarios at young ages, but not and absolute truth. 

Anyways "the game" drains me almost instant in that period of my life so i just don't give too much relevance too it, if things flow easliy without the need of a masquerade then it is welcome, rejection no longer affects me.

There lays the dilemma with your on indentity and self-respect and the instictual behaviours looking for external validation.

Only real thing we can control is ourselves, own sovereignty is the way to achieve anything.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

Penny said:


> *entitlements? who is asking anything of you? love is about giving of yourself to someone else and serving them, not about being served.* i mean, sure not everyone might think that way, but that's how I see it. when you care about someone, when you truly care about someone you want to see them happy and you do what you can to make that happen even if it means sacrificing your own happiness.


This is a very Fe perspective. Too Fe for me tbh. And it's a projection. 

To me, love is unconditional. I was convinced by mom (who's an INFJ) that love requires sacrifice the same as you believe, but that led to a situation where I was exploited and abused in my first marriage because while I was taught to sacrifice, I was not taught how to spot signs of being abused. 

Now I recognize that love is just a feeling. It has no other caveat attached to it. You either feel it or you don't feel it. Whatever you do in a relationship is not because love is tied to it in any way, but rather it's stuff done to achieve your individual and collective persuit of happiness. 

I do agree that it doesn't mean someone should feel entitled to someone else's labor, but then the same level of empathy is extended to myself where my lover isn't entitled to my labor either. 

However, how the relationship works is by understanding that cohabitation itself requires that certain most basic duties are discussed and then fulfilled.

The feelings of love for me are not attached to labor. But I suppose my love language is very different. Quality Time is pretty much at the top. We literally spent a few days doing our own thing this week (not spending quality time together) and yesterday I went through a personal crisis. We cuddled before falling asleep and I was totally back to normal. Had a good night's sleep and now I'm recharged today.


----------



## WhatIsYourConfirmationBias (May 10, 2018)

InfiniteLightvoid said:


> WhatIsYourConfirmationBias said:
> 
> 
> > That's not a bad thing, trying to help others..But your method might be a bit hard for most to take. Not to mention what IS the correct path? Sometimes it's not so clear who is right, and who is wrong...
> ...


I think I'm heading to bed after I write this..It's the middle of the night and I have to get up in, oh...4-5 hours...Anyway, yes there ARE a ton of fake ass, shallow people out there, but unfortunately you can't save most people from their own stupidity. You'll see the older you get. You just have to focus your energy on the ones you CAN reach...It gets easier as time goes along....

Said it before, but extremely good looking men and women are usually shallow...She may give you looks, but is it worth it? Is it worth getting your heart stomped on? Because usually that is all the "beautiful" people have to offer, their looks, and not much else...

Sounds like you may need to approach women, rather than let them come to you. It also sounds like you're surrounded by women who are extremely superficial to begin with...Which may have to do with where you spend your free time. Women of depth don't usually go clubbing every weekend...I could be wrong about this, but if you're looking for "love in this club" like Usher, you're going to be looking a long time...

And to put it bluntly, if you are really good looking, you are more likely to attract the most superficial women as well. It is a rock and a hard place for those who are attractive who have depth, because most really good looking people do NOT..So people will just naturally assume you're superficial on that basis alone, and women of quality won't approach you. Not to mention most will never be able to see beyond what you look like...

I have been told that I'm attractive, though it's all subjective. What I do know is that the men I've been involved with usually don't actually want me, just whatever idealized image they've imprinted on me. It is isolating, knowing that you are not actually wanted for who you ARE. So that could be happening to you as well, which would explain a lot. And I am going to bed because my eyes are about to shut involuntarily.


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

Arrogantly Grateful said:


> This is a very Fe perspective. Too Fe for me tbh. And it's a projection.
> 
> To me, love is unconditional. I was convinced by mom (who's an INFJ) that love requires sacrifice the same as you believe, but that led to a situation where I was exploited and abused in my first marriage because while I was taught to sacrifice, I was not taught how to spot signs of being abused.
> 
> ...


i don't think money has anything to do with love. the only time money comes into play is when you have kids. kids need money. that's what complicates things. when they are young, someone needs to take care of them, generally the woman, that can put her in a dependent state. it's not fair nowadays women are expected to be equal earners and raise children when the man is only expected to work and do nothing else besides maybe take out the garbage or mow the grass. my exes father made his mom stop working as a stipulation to them getting married. he was basically hiring a servant. i don't see anything wrong with it though, call me old-fashioned. lucky for her he was an upstanding type. i think this is what's lacking in today's society. now men have lost their place and women too. too many low integrity men ruined it for everyone.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

*scratching my head cuz I didn't talk about gender roles at all* 

But since you are, I'll address some parts in here. 



Penny said:


> i don't think money has anything to do with love. the only time money comes into play is when you have kids. kids need money. that's what complicates things. when they are young, someone needs to take care of them, generally the woman, that can put her in a dependent state. my exes father made his mom stop working as a stipulation to them getting married. he was basically hiring a servant. i don't see anything wrong with it though, call me old-fashioned. lucky for her he was an upstanding type. i think this is what's lacking in today's society. now men have lost their place and women too. too many low integrity men ruined it for everyone.


Money is something that is very deeply intertwined into the health of a relationship and it's one of those things that end marriages and relationships even when love still exists because love itself does not have the power to make a relationship work on its own. All love does and can do is convince people that they can make an attempt to live out their lives together. That's really all it can achieve imo. 



> it's not fair nowadays women are expected to be equal earners and raise children when the man is only expected to work and do nothing else besides maybe take out the garbage or mow the grass.


In the vast majority of relationships where this happens, it has nothing to with choice, but rather because the purchasing power in western society has been steadily declining for decades. What could have been achieved with one income can no longer be achieved with one. 

The reasons for this are highlighted on the chart itself: 










I disagree with the idea that it was male laziness or entitlement that has ruined it for anyone, but rather the way societies' economies have been managed at the top levels that has resulted in this. The wealth distribution in western societies (especially America) is absolutely broken as fuck and peopel continue to vote for politicians who are owned by corporations and lobbyists and eventually end up in situations where they have to alter how they run themselves and their lives as opposed to controlling the way income distribution happens. 

The amount of couples where there are intentionally lazy men who refuse to work despite being fully healthy and physically able is a very small amount out of those couples where both have to work because they simply can't make ends meet. 

Employers simply no longer pay enough to make the old dream of single income families possible anymore.


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

Arrogantly Grateful said:


> *scratching my head cuz I didn't talk about gender roles at all*
> 
> But since you are, I'll address some parts in here.
> 
> ...


i don't think it's male laziness or entitlement so much as like men who cheated on their wives or divorced them causing the need for women to be more self-sufficient. i am of the hindu mindset that in principle the feminine should uphold the masculine, like being a support to them. kind of like how lions are, the females are the hunters but the males are the pride's protection. if only life were as simple as animals' lives.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

Penny said:


> i don't think it's male laziness or entitlement so much as like men who cheated on their wives or divorced them causing the need for women to be more self-sufficient. i am of the hindu mindset that in principle the feminine should uphold the masculine, like being a support to them. kind of like how lions are, the females are the hunters but the males are the pride's protection. if only life were as simple as animals' lives.


Interesting. I see relationships as working out better when they're more functional rather than based on ideology. 

Very different perspective because I come from the East (Pakistan) where relationships are very much run on the principles of strict roles you're advocating and those relationships aren't that much better. 

In fact, my own family has three completely different dynamics and in a relationship where mine and my wife's gender roles are completely swapped, we have a healthier and happier marriage than my siblings and even my parents. Siblings have two opposing dynamics. Sibling 1 has a STAHM but they barely interact with one another. Sibling 2 is where both are working and are always fighting. In fact, I'd call my BIL downright abusive. 

I tried the whole man earns everything and provides for the woman thing before my current marriage and it was a disaster because it lacked love. So many different factors in marriages and success therefore imo the best way to approach relationships is from a method of functionality first. Love can be a motivator.


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

Arrogantly Grateful said:


> Interesting. I see relationships as working out better when they're more functional rather than based on ideology.
> 
> Very different perspective because I come from the East (Pakistan) where relationships are very much run on the principles of strict roles you're advocating and those relationships aren't that much better.
> 
> ...


i guess it's true that's an idealistic way to look at things. my first long term relationship was mostly like that and then SAHM for a few years and stuff for the most part. and it turned out badly and it was probably my fault more than anything else. The last one I was actually more of a provider and that seemed to work out better though I think this particular situation was an unusual one. so functionality, will have to think about that. i mean, truly ideally love would come first though right? and everything else would be like the icing on the cake. (or lack thereof or detriment to the cake as the case may be) functionality could be a way to look at it, but that i think could lead to a marrriage of convenience more than anything else not saying one couldn't fall in love with someone purely for their service to them, but like i read in a book once, there are levels to healthy relationship. a mental, spiritual, emotional, and physical connection. if you don't have all four then the relationship is supposedly doomed.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

Penny said:


> i guess it's true that's an idealistic way to look at things. my first long term relationship was mostly like that and then SAHM for a few years and stuff for the most part. and it turned out badly and it was probably my fault more than anything else. The last one I was actually more of a provider and that seemed to work out better though I think this particular situation was an unusual one. so functionality, will have to think about that. i mean, truly ideally love would come first though right? and everything else would be like the icing on the cake. (or lack thereof or detriment to the cake as the case may be) functionality could be a way to look at it, but that i think could lead to a marrriage of convenience more than anything else not saying one couldn't fall in love with someone purely for their service to them, but like i read in a book once, there are levels to healthy relationship. a mental, spiritual, emotional, and physical connection. if you don't have all four then the relationship is supposedly doomed.


I think NF's and SF's place more value on romance and love while ST's and SJ's place more value on functionality. We're both ST's and that definitely plays a factor in our life. Probably huge factor in our compatibility. 

Compatibility is a big one too. My wife and I have a scientifically calculated (we're both ST's so that just happened as a result of us figuring each other out) compatibility of something like 97-99% with regards to our ideologies, political views, desires, needs, wants, expectations in life etc. We didn't leave anything to chance and we talked about every little minute thing that could possibly go wrong or would go wrong, or would need to figure out and solve in case such a situation transpired before we finally married. Love made it possible to consider the possibility of cohabitation. Practical discussions around all the little minutia of life were had while keeping love on the back burner and making sure everything was compatible before the final decision to co-habitate was finally made. In fact, we tested out living with one another for 4 months before we finally said "yes, now we are ready to marry". 

We fell in love, but having had past failed relationships we decided that it's not just love that'll keep us together and therefore we needed a stronger foundation than it. Love is there. It's still there. I can see it in her eyes when I kiss her. But there's more. Love is maybe 10% of a successful relationship. Figuring out how the other person loves and shows it is also equally important. Love languages are very important and need to be tested every now and then. 

We do monthly relationship health checks to evaluate the core functionality of our relationship. What are the new expectations, has anything changed, does the partner need something new that can be built into the current relationship etc etc. You're spending your life with someone else --- there's no reason to not talk about everything under the sun and no reason why change can't be implemented as time goes on. 

Things change. People change. Expectations change. Circumstances change. Life enters different stages. Ideas about romance changes. Just gotta make time to make sure everything is working and in order. 

The health of a relationship is as organic as the body itself. It requires regular medical checkups. 

Just on that, there was a time when I was too blinded by love to consider other things as equally important. So I had my fair share of failed relationships. Post divorce in 2011 I decidely and intentionally said that love doesn't conquer all - it just gives you a foundation to work with. What really matters is compatibility, compassion, empathy for yourself and your partner and independence to find and determine that happiness is individual. If I'm happy, I'm more likely to keep my partner happy. If she's happy, then she's more likely to keep me happy so even as a couple we live a life where we have a certain level of shared happiness, and a level of independent happiness. They are both necessary.


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

@Arrogantly Grateful that's funny I _was_ thinking "Love conquers all" before but didn't write it. But I guess it's true functionality is important. No matter how much you love a person, over time things like their slovenly habits or excessive spending habits or irresponsibility can take a toll on "LOVE" you have for them if they aren't willing to change for you. I am glad you are in a happy relationship! You have given very good advice on how to approach a relationship, thank you!


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

Penny said:


> @*Arrogantly Grateful* that's funny I _was_ thinking "Love conquers all" before but didn't write it. But I guess it's true functionality is important. No matter how much you love a person, over time things like their slovenly habits or excessive spending habits or irresponsibility can take a toll on "LOVE" you have for them if they aren't willing to change for you. I am glad you are in a happy relationship! You have given very good advice on how to approach a relationship, thank you!


On a lighter note, the realization that love doesn't conquer all reminds me of this song. I used to play this song over and over again after my first divorce lol. 







* *




*Fast Car*


Tracy Chapman

You got a fast car
I want a ticket to anywhere
Maybe we make a deal
Maybe together we can get somewhere
Anyplace is better
Starting from zero got nothing to lose
Maybe we'll make something
But me myself I got nothing to prove
You got a fast car
And I got a plan to get us out of here
I been working at the convenience store
Managed to save just a little bit of money
We won't have to drive too far
Just 'cross the border and into the city
You and I can both get jobs
And finally see what it means to be living
You see my old man's got a problem
He live with the bottle that's the way it is
He says his body's too old for working
I say his body's too young to look like his
My mama went off and left him
She wanted more from life than he could give
I said somebody's got to take care of him
So I quit school and that's what I did
You got a fast car
But is it fast enough so we can fly away
We gotta make a decision
We leave tonight or live and die this way
I remember we were driving driving in your car
The speed so fast I felt like I was drunk
City lights lay out before us
And your arm felt nice wrapped 'round my shoulder
And I had a feeling that I belonged
And I had a feeling I could be someone, be someone, be someone
You got a fast car
And we go cruising to entertain ourselves
You still ain't got a job
And I work in a market as a checkout boy
I know things will get better
You'll find work and I'll get promoted
We'll move out of the shelter
Buy a big house and live in the suburbs
I remember we were driving driving in your car
The speed so fast I felt like I was drunk
City lights lay out before us
And your arm felt nice wrapped 'round my shoulder
And I had a feeling that I belonged
And I had a feeling I could be someone, be someone, be someone
You got a fast car
And I got a job that pays all our bills
You stay out drinking late at the bar
See more of your friends than you do of your kids
I'd always hoped for better
Thought maybe together you and me would find it
I got no plans I ain't going nowhere
So take your fast car and keep on driving
I remember we were driving driving in your car
The speed so fast I felt like I was drunk
City lights lay out before us
And your arm felt nice wrapped 'round my shoulder
And I had a feeling that I belonged
And I had a feeling I could be someone, be someone, be someone
You got a fast car
But is it fast enough so you can fly away
You gotta make a decision
You leave tonight or live and die this way


----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

Arrogantly Grateful said:


> I think NF's and SF's place more value on romance and love while ST's and SJ's place more value on functionality. We're both ST's and that definitely plays a factor in our life. Probably huge factor in our compatibility.
> 
> Compatibility is a big one too. My wife and I have a scientifically calculated (we're both ST's so that just happened as a result of us figuring each other out) compatibility of something like 97-99% with regards to our ideologies, political views, desires, needs, wants, expectations in life etc. We didn't leave anything to chance and we talked about every little minute thing that could possibly go wrong or would go wrong, or would need to figure out and solve in case such a situation transpired before we finally married. Love made it possible to consider the possibility of cohabitation. Practical discussions around all the little minutia of life were had while keeping love on the back burner and making sure everything was compatible before the final decision to co-habitate was finally made. In fact, we tested out living with one another for 4 months before we finally said "yes, now we are ready to marry".
> 
> ...


love does conquer all- regardless what type you are - sp st nf nt etc etc my entp father(biological uncle but i call him dad my entire life and view him as such) brushes his wife hair on a daily basis ( she completely lost her mind 6 years after they married one another- she had a still born- this was way back in the late 60s) . He's happy caring for her- but i highly doubt it is functionality that kept their 53 years of marriage together, it's the love that they've shared and my aunt in law (even till this day) is extremely sweet and gentle however she's very out of it ( as it can't talk or analyze logic, cannot read a novel , talks like an 8 years old- her beauty fades ...her eyes wide and anxious at all time) . It is not the kids that kept him with her- for now his kids are all over 50 and well off . He never raised his voice at her , talks fondly about how sweet she is and her personality before she have completely lost her mind- and laughs at the mishaps and find it endearing. If that is not love staying for love then I don't know what that is.


----------



## SilentScream (Mar 31, 2011)

ai.tran.75 said:


> love does conquer all- regardless what type you are - sp st nf nt etc etc my entp father(biological uncle but i call him dad my entire life and view him as such) brushes his wife hair on a daily basis ( she completely lost her mind 6 years after they married one another- she had a still born- this was way back in the late 60s) . He's happy caring for her- but i highly doubt it is functionality that kept their 53 years of marriage together, it's the love that they've shared and my aunt in law (even till this day) is extremely sweet and gentle however she's very out of it ( as it can't talk or analyze logic, cannot read a novel , talks like an 8 years old- her beauty fades ...her eyes wide and anxious at all time) . It is not the kids that kept him with her- for now his kids are all over 50 and well off . He never raised his voice at her , talks fondly about how sweet she is and her personality before she have completely lost her mind- and laughs at the mishaps and find it endearing. If that is not love staying for love then I don't know what that is.


I don't want to get into a protracted debate over this, but there are just as many examples of couples that broke up even when they were still in love because their cohabitation was dysfunctional, so I disagree. 

It's beautiful when love does conquer it (and very idealistic), but love is also one of the primary factors behind Stockholm Syndrome. It's both beautiful and ugly. In fact, towards the end my own relationship we both agreed on the only thing and that was that Love is pain because it was driving us both mad and we stayed together longer than we should have.


----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

Arrogantly Grateful said:


> I don't want to get into a protracted debate over this, but there are just as many examples of couples that broke up even when they were still in love because their cohabitation was dysfunctional, so I disagree.
> 
> It's beautiful when love does conquer it (and very idealistic), but love is also one of the primary factors behind Stockholm Syndrome. It's both beautiful and ugly.


So if your wife was to get into a car accident and become physically paralyzed- you will not stay with her?


----------



## LeSangDeCentAns (Apr 10, 2018)

The Lonley Hobbit said:


> Going to throw this in and yes a lot of women lack empathy for men in general as some people in this thread have clearly demonstrated.
> 
> https://talkaboutmarriage.com/ladies-lounge/407554-do-women-lack-empathy-men.html


I was just about to mention that as I was cooking, thinking of my responses. Perhaps that is part of what makes women valuable, valuing men's well-being.


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)

Llyralen said:


> You know what? Clearly shown has been a lot of lack of understanding on both sides.
> 
> I know this is an issue about men not feeling they can express emotion, but you guys are blaming women in this thread and we are all living in this same society... at least if you are American. So, "Boys don't cry" was something taught to men and to women. I want you to open your mind a bit to look at all the incredibly empathetic women in this thread who LOVE men and love their emotions. The majority here have expressed that they want their men to be real people who have emotions like they do. Do not discount these wonderful women and their heartfelt thoughts here.


The things that I said in this thread was for the greater good that it all was meant to provoke people to thinking outside their box and outside of their gender role as well test to see how many here are subscribed to toxic liberal societal programing that is so prevalent amongst the young generations. As is there will never be any balance and common ground until the programing changes and getting rid of old traditions isn't going to cut it as all is going to happen is even worse problems than what had existed before.


----------



## Dare (Nov 8, 2016)

The Lonley Hobbit said:


> You give off the vibe of being the type that likes to monkey branch and cheat in relationships.





The Lonley Hobbit said:


> *The things that I said in this thread was for the greater good*


The _shit_ some people around here believe about themselves is truly unbelievable. 'I'm just here to help with my insults and assumptions that conveniently align with what I want to believe. I'm not responsible for creating an atmosphere of hate here'. The scary part is I believe they actually believe it.

I can never get past the arrogance of 'I have the objective truth/my way is the one way/I know what's good (for the greater good) and I'm going to ram it down your throats whether you want it or not'. No attempt at mutual understandings, no listening, it's just 'take my truth or I'll make it hurt' (and deny it later).


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)

Dare said:


> The _shit_ some people around here believe about themselves is truly unbelievable. 'I'm just here to help with my insults and assumptions that conveniently align with what I want to believe. I'm not responsible for creating an atmosphere of hate here'. The scary part is I believe they actually believe it.
> 
> I can never get past the arrogance of 'I have the objective truth/my way is the one way/I know what's good (for the greater good) and I'm going to ram it down your throats whether you want it or not'. No attempt at mutual understandings, no listening, it's just 'take my truth or I'll make it hurt' (and deny it later).


----------



## L P (May 30, 2017)

I honestly don't think being emotional is the problem. I think what being emotional hints at is the problem. I think a girl would be fine with a guy who is emotional if he can handle areas she expects him to. but if him being emotional hints at him not being able to handle things she expects him to, then ya it would be a problem. She might think, if you cry for this little thing then you'll cry at every hardship we face, and then the mother thing happens where she thinks she'll have to be the strong one in the moments where she expects to get support. So yea, I think being emotional is fine as long as you do what the hell you need to. Then you become the tough guy that cries at puppy videos, and she's all like "awww, he has a soft side." and not some wannabe android, because everyone has feelings whether they hide them or not, the emotions are really meant for her to relate somehow. Tough is subjective in that previous sentence.


----------



## Wisteria (Apr 2, 2015)

The Lonley Hobbit said:


>


???


----------



## 0rgans (Jul 23, 2017)

Wow this entire thread hahahaaaaaa.

If you do not view females as multifaceted, you will not get a multifaceted partner.
And the same can be said; if you do not view men as multifaceted, you will not get a multifaceted partner. 

Ya reap what you sow.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

*Thread Warning:

This is a discussion board for people of all genders to engage in, not a platform to distribute sexist content.

Discriminatory remarks are against the rules--this includes sexist remarks.

https://www.personalitycafe.com/announcements/594529-personality-cafe-rules.html

*


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

Llyralen said:


> You know what? Clearly shown has been a lot of lack of understanding on both sides.
> 
> I know this is an issue about men not feeling they can express emotion, but you guys are blaming women in this thread and we are all living in this same society... at least if you are American. So, "Boys don't cry" was something taught to men and to women. I want you to open your mind a bit to look at all the incredibly empathetic women in this thread who LOVE men and love their emotions. The majority here have expressed that they want their men to be real people who have emotions like they do. Do not discount these wonderful women and their heartfelt thoughts here.


The truth is women's pituitary glands are not designed the same way as that of men. 
There's a lot of things women don't understand about men and vice versa, because we're really that different. If there is a reason a woman can't have empathy for a man, it's because she cannot phantom what it is like to be a man. Empathy is really to a great extent projection, and it only works when the other person has a similar enough mind. 

* *










https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-theater-the-brain/201506/empathy-is-false-god


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

Euclid said:


> If there is a reason a woman can't have empathy for a man, it's because she cannot phantom what it is like to be a man. Empathy is really to a great extent projection, and it only works when the other person has a similar enough mind.
> 
> * *
> 
> ...


 So doesn't that mean men also wouldn't feel much empathy towards women, because they cannot fathom what it's like to be a woman either? The solution is to stop it with this gender-specific empathy bullshit, and recognize other people for their shared humanity, adopt a base form universal empathy for all human beings rather than beings with certain genitals. Really there's even men/women who can't empathize with others of their own gender, which just goes to show the differences there can be between individual organisms independent of sexually dimorphic biology. I believe men and women are the same, yet different. We generally want the same things, but have different strategies/mechanisms for obtaining those things. Empathy+responsiveness _does_ work, but you have to go the the core, or essence, of what makes empathy=responsiveness. You have to go to universally true statements, such as "everyone wishes for fulfillment".


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

crazitaco said:


> So doesn't that mean men also wouldn't feel much empathy towards women, because they cannot fathom what it's like to be a woman either?


No it doesn't.


crazitaco said:


> The solution is to stop it with this gender-specific empathy bullshit, and recognize other people for their shared humanity, adopt a base form universal empathy for all human beings rather than beings with certain genitals. Really there's even men/women who can't empathize with others of their own gender, which just goes to show the differences there can be between individual organisms independent of sexually dimorphic biology. I believe men and women are the same, yet different. We generally want the same things, but have different strategies/mechanisms for obtaining those things. Empathy+responsiveness _does_ work, but you have to go the the core, or essence, of what makes empathy=responsiveness. You have to go to universally true statements, such as "everyone wishes for fulfillment".


There would be very little empathy left in the world, probably none at all, if you wouldn't be allowed to empathize with a specific group of people with shared experiences, since there's almost certainly going to be at least some people who have not experienced whatever you are empathizing about.


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

Euclid said:


> No it doesn't.


Explain why.



> There would be very little empathy left in the world, probably none at all, if you wouldn't be allowed to empathize with a specific group of people with shared experiences, since there's almost certainly going to be at least some people who have not experienced whatever you are empathizing about.


I'm not necessarily against gender-specific empathy, but its not the only form of empathy that matters, it shouldn't be a higher concern than fostering universal empathy. If someone feels empathy for both genders rather than one, then there would be _more _empathy, not less.


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

crazitaco said:


> Explain why.


Regardless of how much women and men can empathize with each other, there are some things that are difficult if not impossible, simply because of fundamental differences in the brain, due to the effects of hormones.


crazitaco said:


> I'm not necessarily against gender-specific empathy, but its not the only form of empathy that matters, it shouldn't be a higher concern than fostering universal empathy. If someone feels empathy for both genders rather than one, then there would be _more _empathy, not less.


I'm not the one who argued for restricting empathy. I'm saying on the other hand that empathy only goes as far as you have shared experiences, therefore to foster understanding for people with different view points and experiences something more is required than plain empathy, such as dialogue, which is unfortunately sadly lacking. Now feel free to go back to your empathy echo chambers.


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

Euclid said:


> Regardless of how much women and men can empathize with each other, there are some things that are difficult if not impossible, simply because of fundamental differences in the brain, due to the effects of hormones.


You didn't explain anything. You just suggested that women can't empathize with men because we aren't men, but that men CAN empathize with women somehow? And in the next paragraph you stated "empathy only goes as far as you have shared experiences. How then can men empathize with women? If that's really what you believe, then I expect you to be able support such a statement besides just saying "cause we're different" or otherwise admit there's a contradiction between these two ideas.

My argument is that your statement that so-called "fundamental brain differences" is bullshit because "fundamental" brain differences are extremely common in humans. For example consider the differences between introverts and extrovert brains. But introverts and extroverts can still get along, empathize with each other in other ways, and learn/grow from each other. Maybe an introvert doesn't know what it's like to be an extrovert, but that in of itself is not a reason to restrict all other forms of empathy towards extroverts. If he did he'd be closing himself off to 2/3 of the human population. And I'd argue that a sensitive male might have just as much in common or more with a sensitive woman than he might with an insensitive male. Or vice versa, an insensitive woman might get along better with insensitive men than the rest of her sex.












> I'm not the one who argued for restricting empathy. I'm saying on the other hand that empathy only goes as far as you have shared experiences, therefore to foster understanding for people with different view points and experiences something more is required than plain empathy, such as dialogue, which is unfortunately sadly lacking. Now feel free to go back to your empathy echo chambers.


Just to be clear, I'm arguing against exclusive empathy, as in only having empathy for people the same as you and othering/hating everyone else. There is no benefit to "othering" the opposite sex. I'm not against gender-specific empathy, because obviously the different sexes have specific struggles best understood by members of their own sex. It's not as though it's out of unwillingness that I don't empathize with men about certain things, if I _could_ empathize with them, then I _would_. 

I'm all in favor of dialogue, because that is something that would foster universal empathy based on respect for ones' humanity rather than arbitrary biological characteristics. I'm not the one living in an echo chamber here, and this is a public forum so I can post and respond here if I want. If you have a personal problem with me and get triggered at the sight of my empathetic-echo-chamber ass posting in your personal comfort zone, then ignore me and you can be as blissfully ignorant of my attempts at dialogue with you as your heart desires.


----------



## Aiwass (Jul 28, 2014)

Euclid said:


> The truth is women's pituitary glands are not designed the same way as that of men.
> There's a lot of things women don't understand about men and vice versa, because we're really that different. If there is a reason a woman can't have empathy for a man, it's because she cannot phantom what it is like to be a man. Empathy is really to a great extent projection, and it only works when the other person has a similar enough mind.


Wouldn't this line of thinking imply that we can't have empathy for anyone who is "different" from us? Would it even be possible to have empathy for a mentally handicapped person, for example, given that they have different brains and life experiences?

Empathy exists because we share some similarities _despite_ being different. This is the only thing that makes me emphatize with a handicapped person, a black person, a male human. We may be different, but somewhere we can relate.

Edit: who decides where the differences become too big and empathy can't exist? At what point do we say, "I can't emphatize anymore because the differences are too big"?


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

crazitaco said:


> You didn't explain anything. You just suggested that women can't empathize with men because we aren't men, but that men CAN empathize with women somehow?


Case in point this very conversation. You are reading between the lines while I only write exactly what I mean. I made no such suggestion, yet your brain tells you that I did. I assert that women can and do empathize with men, in some situations. yet there are situations in which a woman cannot for expressed reasons. Hence, *if* there is a reason... it is the expressed reason. That is a hypothetical statement, not a categorical one. To say women can't empathize with men is a categorical one.


crazitaco said:


> If that's really what you believe, then I expect you to be able support such a statement besides just saying "cause we're different" or otherwise admit there's a contradiction between these two ideas.


There are formal rules for proving that there is a contradiction. If there is one in what I have already said, you should be able to do so without me having to add anything further.


crazitaco said:


> My argument is that your statement that so-called "fundamental brain differences" is bullshit because "fundamental" brain differences are extremely common in humans. For example consider the differences between introverts and extrovert brains. But introverts and extroverts can still get along, empathize with each other in other ways, and learn/grow from each other. Maybe an introvert doesn't know what it's like to be an extrovert, but that in of itself is not a reason to restrict all other forms of empathy towards extroverts.


Again, I did not argue anywhere for restricting any forms of empathy, while you on the other hand have explicitely restricted gender specific empathy, even though you later contradicted yourself:


crazitaco said:


> The solution is to stop it with this gender-specific empathy bullshit, and recognize other people for their shared humanity, adopt a base form universal empathy for all human beings rather than beings with certain genitals.





crazitaco said:


> I'm not necessarily against gender-specific empathy, but its not the only form of empathy that matters


I agree that other forms of empathy, where there is common ground that make such possible should be let to be extended to extroverts, just as I agree that it should be so between the genders. 


crazitaco said:


> Just to be clear, I'm arguing against exclusive empathy, as in only having empathy for people the same as you and othering/hating everyone else. There is no benefit to "othering" the opposite sex.


I have no idea why you are using quotes here... I did not use the word. I'm allergic toward nebulous neologisms such as this. I'm not hating on anyone here but if I come off as hating, then this is again perhaps a due to the difference that since you are a feeler and projecting feelings on to me that i do not have, without taking into account that there is a fundamental difference between feelers and thinkers that makes such a projection unwarranted. If by "othering" you mean some sort of enmity, I also agree; it is curious however, perhaps ironic that you interpret my position to be much more different than yours, when it is in reality much more similar.


crazitaco said:


> I'm all in favor of dialogue, because that is something that would foster universal empathy based on respect for ones' humanity rather than arbitrary biological characteristics.


Humanity is organized into compartments with different biological characteristics that all work together in harmonic unity. If one does not respect these, one does not have respect for humanity either. If you are not in favour of dialogue to come to an understanding and respect these differences, then you are not in favour of humanity.


crazitaco said:


> If you have a personal problem with me and get triggered at the sight of my empathetic-echo-chamber ass posting in your personal comfort zone, then ignore me and you can be as blissfully ignorant of my attempts at dialogue with you as your heart desires.


I don't, but the above seems to indicate that you have one with me, and for as long you are not willing to come to an understanding over the differences, but merely over what we already have in common, then you remain in the echo chamber.


----------



## eej (Jul 3, 2018)

This question is very subjective. Especially if we’re talking in terms of personality type, we all have our preferences and what we consider appropriate behavior for a partner. Some women love the traditional Western definition of a man, which would be one who is good at handiwork, tough and generally not emotional. However, I find emotion incredibly important in a partner. Vulnerability is attractive to me. I don’t like overly emotional people, in general, however I would love to feel close enough to my partner that he is comfortable expressing his honest feelings to me. All I want is for him to be himself and be his full self, despite social constructs that say he shouldn’t show emotion. This creates barriers in relationship that inhibit growth.


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

Aiwass said:


> Wouldn't this line of thinking imply that we can't have empathy for anyone who is "different" from us? Would it even be possible to have empathy for a mentally handicapped person, for example, given that they have different brains and life experiences?
> 
> Empathy exists because we share some similarities _despite_ being different. This is the only thing that makes me emphatize with a handicapped person, a black person, a male human. We may be different, but somewhere we can relate.
> 
> Edit: who decides where the differences become too big and empathy can't exist? At what point do we say, "I can't emphatize anymore because the differences are too big"?


I'm not saying that we can't, just that there certain things that are difficult or impossible to empathize with, but we can nonetheless come to an understanding over and respect the differences, and even benefit from the differences. This is what biology is all about, different entities coming together and benefiting from each other.


----------



## Princess and the INFP (Jul 24, 2018)

For me, either I'm attracted to bigger than life personalities or Eeyore's. Either extreme is hella attractive to me. But I typically want the latter. I want someone who won't muffle their feelings, but also won't overwhelm me in them. But I think I have much more of a tolerance for really sensitive guys, because I'm really sensitive. I hate when you finally allow yourself to breakdown in front of someone and they just stare at you, like your'e a mutant. But I've realized that you can't throw all that emotional vommit at people. You've got to be sly about it. Self deprecating and nonchalant. You need to find someone who you know will comfort and empathize with you even when you're mood is neither bad or good, just okay. Some people don't want to take on the bad days even from those they consider their closest friends. I think that's awful. We all deserve someone who will be with us even in our bad days. But, I think we all also deserve to figure out how to make the bad days infrequent or at least less volatile because it is hard to watch those you care for suffer. I was raised by a man who is really emotional, but what really messed me up was his verbal abuse. As long as you're still a kind, good, non-abusive person, it doesn't matter to me.


----------



## crazitaco (Apr 9, 2010)

Euclid said:


> Case in point this very conversation. You are reading between the lines while I only write exactly what I mean. I made no such suggestion, yet your brain tells you that I did. I assert that women can and do empathize with men, in some situations. yet there are situations in which a woman cannot for expressed reasons. Hence, *if* there is a reason... it is the expressed reason. That is a hypothetical statement, not a categorical one. To say women can't empathize with men is a categorical one.


 I made reasonable deduction based on your previous statement.
You said and I quote:


> If there is a reason a woman can't have empathy for a man, it's because she cannot fathom what it is like to be a man.


If we swap the genders around then we get this statement: 



> If there is a reason a man can't have empathy for a woman, it's because he cannot fathom what it is like to be a woman.


So I asked, shouldn't the latter statement also be true if the former is true? Regardless if we're talking hypothetical "ifs". And you said no without providing an explanation why. I asked for an explanation why, and just you gave me vague reasons why women hypothetically might not have empathy for men. That's irrelevant to what I asked, I'm aware that empathy can be situational. 

I'm asking why it is you said yes to the former statement and no to the latter, aren't both "if' situations equal possibilities? Do you agree that a man cannot fathom what it's like to be a woman any more than a woman can fathom what it's like to be a man?



> There are formal rules for proving that there is a contradiction. If there is one in what I have already said, you should be able to do so without me having to add anything further.


This is an informal debate on the internet.



> Again, I did not argue anywhere for restricting any forms of empathy, while you on the other hand have explicitely restricted gender specific empathy, even though you later contradicted yourself:


 I fully admit it was poor-word choice on my part. I've since clarified my position that I'm not for the restriction of gender-specific empathy, but gender-exclusive empathy, as in limiting empathy to only your own gender which is the sort of thing people have been trying to justify. And I'm also against any assertion that women would be less capable of empathy for biological reasons, though I don't think that's the case you're trying to make.



> I agree that other forms of empathy, where there is common ground that make such possible should be let to be extended to extroverts, just as I agree that it should be so between the genders.
> 
> I have no idea why you are using quotes here... I did not use the word. I'm allergic toward nebulous neologisms such as this. I'm not hating on anyone here but if I come off as hating, then this is again perhaps a due to the difference that since you are a feeler and projecting feelings on to me that i do not have, without taking into account that there is a fundamental difference between feelers and thinkers that makes such a projection unwarranted.


It's just a thing I do, just as insinuating other people like echo chambers is just a thing you do.


> Humanity is organized into compartments with different biological characteristics that all work together in harmonic unity. If one does not respect these, one does not have respect for humanity either. If you are not in favour of dialogue to come to an understanding and respect these differences, then you are not in favour of humanity.


I'm in agreement here.



> I don't, but the above seems to indicate that you have one with me, and for as long you are not willing to come to an understanding over the differences, but merely over what we already have in common, then you remain in the echo chamber.


Of course I'd get irritated if you insinuate I'm in an echo chamber, I don't know what you were expecting. I was perfectly fine and non-confrontational before you made that comment, and I don't tolerate snideness towards me.


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

crazitaco said:


> I'm asking why it is you said yes to the former statement and no to the latter, aren't both "if' situations equal possibilities? Do you agree that a man cannot fathom what it's like to be a woman any more than a woman can fathom what it's like to be a man?


I did not answer no to the latter. It's just that it's not what I said. Anyways, my answer would be the same as that for the former. 



crazitaco said:


> I fully admit it was poor-word choice on my part. I've since clarified my position that I'm not for the restriction of gender-specific empathy, but gender-exclusive empathy, as in limiting empathy to only your own gender which is the sort of thing people have been trying to justify. And I'm also against any assertion that women would be less capable of empathy for biological reasons, though I don't think that's the case you're trying to make.


Correct, however that's not the case I was trying to make, however I don't think I have asserted that either. I would even go further to say that women generally are more capable of empathy than men.



crazitaco said:


> Of course I'd get irritated if you insinuate I'm in an echo chamber, I don't know what you were expecting. I was perfectly fine and non-confrontational before you made that comment, and I don't tolerate snideness towards me.


It was not meant as a snide remark, just a plain statement of fact. In your first post you responded with responsiveness and empathy only working if the responsiveness itself is empathy, in other words reducing everything to empathy. If this is true then you will only be able to interact with others in so far they have had the same experiences, which is what I called an echo chamber. Now it may be another one of your poor choice of words (especially since you later agreed with me), in which case I can understand your confrontational response.


----------



## NIHM (Mar 24, 2014)

I really don't care if someone shows emotions or not. I care if they have things in common with me and are mature enough to be in a relationship. Love is strange and is like learning about the chaos theory, you can't predict it or how someone of any type will affect you. If I wasn't with my husband I could fall in love with anyone that meshed with me and that I had a mutual attraction with. This could be another ENFP, ESFP, ESTP, ISTJ, ISFJ, INTP, INFP... ect. It does not have to be with a preconceived person I've made up in my head.


----------



## pocketDrop (Jul 18, 2017)

Euclid said:


> Regardless of how much women and men can empathize with each other, there are some things that are difficult if not impossible, simply because of fundamental differences in the brain, due to the effects of hormones.
> 
> I'm not the one who argued for restricting empathy. I'm saying on the other hand that empathy only goes as far as you have shared experiences, therefore to foster understanding for people with different view points and experiences something more is required than plain empathy, such as dialogue, which is unfortunately sadly lacking. Now feel free to go back to your empathy echo chambers.


I have no idea how this progressed. This thread is too exhausting to read all at once *yawn*

I would like to interject here though. Empathy doesn't REQUIRE shared experience. One can put themselves in someone else's shoes if they just take the time to evaliate what situation the person going through, and how they naturaly react to it.

One thing that I have never expereinced: being deceived into eating meat as a vegan who is vegan as a means to avoid harming animals.

I think it's dumb to be vegan on that mindset. Personally, I don't give a damn, and couldn't give a damn. In-fact, I may even find it funny to be the one who deceives someone in that way. But I find it easy to understand what a vegan may go through if a close friend were to trick them into eating meat.

They would feel mass betrayal from someone who they thought understood them, hurt by the fact that they evidently don't, disgusted by what they just ate, and with themselves for having ate it and going against a personal code that they evidently hold so dear. Angry at someone having tricked them into betraying theit own personal code, stupid because it worked, and for believing that they couod trust this person to begin with.

Perhaps this is no a brainer. But the same empathy can be applied to any situation if one simply has an open mind to the struggles that others face. Emotions are universal. The only thing not universal are the triggers for thos emotions. Learn about what triggers certain emotions for any given person and boom. Empathy.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Euclid (Mar 20, 2014)

pocketDrop said:


> I would like to interject here though. Empathy doesn't REQUIRE shared experience. One can put themselves in someone else's shoes if they just take the time to evaliate what situation the person going through, and how they naturaly react to it.
> 
> One thing that I have never expereinced: being deceived into eating meat as a vegan who is vegan as a means to avoid harming animals.
> 
> ...


This one is easy because pretty much everybody has been betrayed at some point, but imagine someone who has never been betrayed before - they would have difficulty understanding what the other person would be going through. Furthermore if you have been betrayed into doing something that is against your principles, then you will be able to empathize further, even if you are not a vegan yourself; the share of common experience is again increased, but it's never going to be complete, because you do not know every detail of that experience. If you don't have any principles yourself then again, it's going to be difficult to relate. I'm not saying that you have to have the exact same experience, to be empathize at all, it's just that the empathy is going to be limited to what you are aware from your own experience.


----------



## Dare (Nov 8, 2016)

"The perception of empathic effort by one’s partner was more strongly linked with both men’s and women’s relationship satisfaction than empathic accuracy."

And back on topic:

"Women’s ability to read their husbands’ negative emotions was positively linked to both men’s and women’s relationship satisfaction."

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/fam-26-2-236.pdf

Women want to know her man's emotions. Even those of us who choose a man slightly "tougher" in relation to ourselves (how dare I have a personal preference and choose a man accordingly, I know), we want to know.


----------



## g_w (Apr 16, 2013)

Dare said:


> "The perception of empathic effort by one’s partner was more strongly linked with both men’s and women’s relationship satisfaction than empathic accuracy."
> 
> And back on topic:
> 
> ...


OK, but don't overdo it.


----------



## g_w (Apr 16, 2013)

Duplicate, removed. Need more sleep.


----------



## CowardlyPal (Jul 9, 2018)

Mmm nope.
But only Fe. You can cry as much as you like, but don't be talking to me about your identity issues. Makes me nervous as heck.


----------



## Eren Jaegerbomb (Nov 13, 2015)

Llyralen said:


> Alright, girls, be very honest. Let’s look into our past and figure ourselves out. I’ve heard us accused by a few men on this.
> #1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?
> #2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


1. Hell no, if anything it makes him more of potential partner. Because you know, emotional support and just knowing he isn't cold hearted.
2. Why... Well because its human to have feelings, and empathy etc... My expectations for men? I know every man has a different personality, but the type of guy I want is a softie xD. Do I understand... Yes. I know what type of guy I do and don't want to be romantically involved with.


----------



## Persona Maiden (May 14, 2018)

Llyralen said:


> Alright, girls, be very honest. Let’s look into our past and figure ourselves out. I’ve heard us accused by a few men on this.
> #1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?
> #2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?


#1. No, if anything, I'm usually attracted to a guy who shows a bit of his emotion. The way it would start to be come a turn off, is if it was so over blow, he seemed an emotional mess i.e; Sobbing because he burnt dinner kind of thing, might be a bit to much. XD

#2. I tend to be fairly emotional myself, and having a guy who can talk about his own emotion, and who I can share with, is a comforting thing. I just expect a guy to be himself. I would say yes I do if you mean my expectations.


----------



## Snowflake Minuet (Feb 20, 2016)

#1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner? 
Only a little, but not more so than it would make anyone else less interesting for a male or female friend in general. 

#2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?
It really depends on the extent, but in general a lot of expressiveness makes me less comfortable. I'm happier in more formality, emotional reserve, etc., particularly in public. I guess to me emotions should be more of a private thing. 

On the same note it would also definitely be a turn off if someone didn't feel he could express his emotions to me if we were closer. I tend to hide mine too much, I think, but I do think it's healthy to cry and be open when you need to and there's no reason that someone of any gender should feel it isn't ok to do so, certainly with loved ones.

Now what does bother me is when a man gets emotional about something--say a movie--and he starts complaining about how his allergies are bad and his darn eyes keep watering. Please just admit you're moved by the movie, no? There's simply nothing wrong with it. I would never judge you for having human feelings, whether or not I'm also having them at that time (I usually get much less emotional over movies than my dad does, for instance); however, I do judge you a bit for supporting such a silly stereotype!


----------



## Smile_phantomhive (Jul 26, 2017)

.


----------



## lavendersnow (Jan 13, 2016)

*#1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner?*

A man crying doesn't make me want to have sex with him any less...just not while he's crying of course. I'd want to know what's wrong first and then maybe later. But someone who cries all the time is going to be unattractive to me regardless of whether they are male or female.

*#2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?*

Men have their hang-ups about what is expected of them, just as much as women. They just happen to be different hang-ups, usually. I couldn't be with a man who is emotionally stunted as his way of trying to be a 'manly-macho man'. I don't find macho behaviour attractive. Nor aggressive behaviour as it is often a signal of insecurity in some form. And I've come across too many men who are so emotionally repressed that when they do express their feelings, it is always in a destructive manner.

I would like to be with a man who was comfortable in his manhood and didn't feel the need to behave in a reckless or dangerous way to prove how much of a man he is.

The older I get, the more I realised just how unattractive I find a man who can't express his feelings. Because it comes across as childish to me. I'm aware it's not that easy for some depending on their MBTI, how they were raised, their culture, abuse etc. I've witnessed it. But I've got enough stress in my life and I don't want my partner to add to it. I'd like to think they're in my life in order to make it better, not worse.


----------



## Aelthwyn (Oct 27, 2010)

*#1. Does a man crying or showing emotion make you less interested in him as a potential sexual partner? 
#2. Why? What are your expectations for men? Do you understand this about yourself?*

No, the opposite. Not showing emotion is a big turn off because I need an emotional connection with someone, and if they're not willing to share the emotional part of life with me then I'm not going to feel like we have a truly intimate relationship. I need someone who is comfortable with my emotional expression, who can enter into my feelings with me and doesn't stiffen up and get all awkward or brush off and dismiss emotional expression. 

An important part of my own sense of identity and personality is being comforting and emotionally supportive, so when I'm with someone who refuses to share their feelings or dislikes my attempts to connect with glimpses of emotional vulnerability that slip out, it makes me feel like I'm kind of worthless, as it's devaluing one of my important values and purposes in life. As others have said, this doesn't mean I want to always be in the comforting mother figure role - before I got married I certainly wasn't looking for a super needy man, but I was definitely attracted to my husband's general expressiveness and his appreciation of my comforting when he's feeling down. 

I think emotional security is the most important type of security - but perhaps that would change if I was in a really physically unsafe culture/environment, then physical security might take precedence, I'm not sure. Emotional security can guard against depression when life is hard and can really help you get through tough times. An important part of emotional security is openness, if you don't know what the other person is really feeling how can you feel certain of your relationship with them? Personally, for me to feel emotionally secure I need someone who will connect with me when I'm feeling weak and troubled, someone who is understanding and accepting of emotional expression. 

I feel great respect for men who don't buy into culture telling them they have to hide their emotions - because of that cultural bias, those who Do cry and show 'weak' emotions in normal situations in life (not only in extreme situations) often strike me as brave and authentic - and that is attractive.


----------



## Llyralen (Sep 4, 2017)

I suppose some people would call temper tantrums or angry outbursts or complaining or whining as “showing emotion”. I know that in my husband’s XSTJ family angry outbursts and emotional tantrums are completely acceptable. They also cheer each other on for telling people off. I do think MBTI comes into play on that since I think of Fi and age as being highly regulatory of those kinds of emotions—. Like that those kinds of emotional outbursts I’m describing are unacceptable outbursts to feelers. I guess I’d have to find out— but in my xSTJ husband’s family since they do not catch healthy discussion of feeler-acceptable emotions then They cannot read my emotions at all— and I think they think I have none. They rely on these outbursts to get issues in the open and to regain control of their kids.... sigh... I refuse to express that way. I’m guessing not every xSTJ family is this way, hopefully. I really like the ISTJs I meet on this forum, btw. 

Anyway, in this discussion we haven’t brought up the above kind of thing. It would be a good part of this discussion to describe emotional intelligence, acceptable emotional communication of negative emotions, etc. 

I am attracted to and married to a highly emotionally intelligent man.

Emotional volatility is close to abusive. “You burnt the toast!!!!” Followed by a hurled toaster is kind of.... not what I meant in this thread and all this should probably all get described. Especially since we are on page—what?— of this thread.


----------

