U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Unread 11-28-2009, 01:55 PM
 
Location: The Mango Tree
2,117 posts, read 2,638,947 times
Reputation: 2554
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
This is EXACTLY what I learned 5 years ago when I started to figure out partner dancing. I always thought of myself as "enlightened." I was so brainwashed when I was younger I wanted to be wrapped around a cute girl's pinky. I wanted her to tell me what to do because that's what I thought women wanted today. I thought women wanted to be the boss.

Then I took up salsa dancing and I started to have a serious cognitive dissonance thing. The girls in class seemed so ready and willing to accept the follower role. Most of them just fell into the role and never struggled with giving up control. I just couldn't reconcile women wanting to lead and at the same time wanting to follow. Why didn't they rebel when they danced? Why didn't they storm out of the class when the teachers told them to follow, to not think about anything, to not learn the pattern that they were teaching to the men, to just dance and be pretty. In fact they volunteered to be followers by signing up for the classes! It seemed so misoganistic. But the girls stayed. I couldn't understand it. I even posted that question on a dancing forum.

Eventually salsa taught me the truth, most women do not want to be the boss. Passive men force them to be the boss. Sure, some did have trouble giving up control and remain "back-leaders" to this day. The back-leaders need a man who will TAKE the lead from them. Men in their daily lives didn't lead and they recognized that someone has to lead so they feel that they are forced to lead in life. They get so much practice at it, it becomes second nature to them. They have gotten so used to being in the driving seat in life they have a hard time giving up control, trusting a man, and LETTING him lead. They don't wait to see if he'll lead on the dance floor (which is absolutely essential if a man who is learning to lead in dance is ever going to learn how to be a good leader.) They assume he won't because that's their experience in life. But when a man does take the lead from them, they are very happy and truly enjoy the dance so much more. They always prefer a man who is a good leader. All followers do.

Incidentally you can't really blame women who react this way. And you can't blame passive guys for being that way. Modern women (in their actions) are teaching boys that women should be in charge. So the boys start to take a more relaxed approach to life. They have less get up and go than they would have otherwise. They get a taste of being in the passenger seat and they don't get much practice being in the driver's seat and it's scary, so they adopt a passive role in life. This just feeds off of itself. The boys never learn to lead and they force the women in their lives to take up the leadership role. And that reinforces the behaviour in the people around them, especially in their children. This is how the world is changing and it's the reason why I encourage everyone to learn partner dancing. Dancing can teach you truth in reality. It can teach men how to lead and it can teach women how to take the back seat when it's necessary.

If being in control all the time is so stressful, why not start off assuming a man is going to take the leadership role, why not wait for him and give him the chance to do it? Men today have learned that in order to have peace when dating, he needs to wait to see if she wants to lead. I suppose she interprets this as passivity and then sighs and starts to be the boss. If you don't like being to boss then don't do it. Make the man do it. He'll do it. In fact, when given the chance, he'll probably like it.
There is some truth to what you said. However, women don't like it when men are dictators AND women like to sometimes be the leader when it comes to their career.

Actually, women want to be the leaders in their lives, but they like it when a man is the strong one in the relationship. All women want a man that will protect them no matter what.
Quick reply to this message

 
Unread 11-29-2009, 07:14 AM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,082 posts, read 787,466 times
Reputation: 477
And what about the women who aren't so narcissistic?
Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 11-29-2009, 07:24 AM
 
18,332 posts, read 10,185,198 times
Reputation: 12257
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
Never met one. Ever.But true. Sure, not all women are puddles of emotion all the time, but any woman can change to an emotional puddle at any time with no warning at all.
Keep in mind- birds of a feather.

Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
And what about the women who aren't so narcissistic?
So, women that want to lead their own lives are narcissitic?
Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 11-29-2009, 07:36 AM
 
Location: N of citrus, S of decent corn
14,656 posts, read 16,328,762 times
Reputation: 22489
An alpha male is what we are programmed to seek in a mate. The smartest, strongest, healthiest specimen of man. It has nothing to do with "bad boys". In my experience, they are lacking in many of these qualities.
Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 11-29-2009, 07:38 AM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,082 posts, read 787,466 times
Reputation: 477
A man doesn't need to be a narcissist to be a leader. Sure, some are domineering and lead for their own benefit but many men understand that the leader's job is to benefit the follower. I've never met a woman who understood that. Maybe with their kids but never with their significant other. Leadership creates equality as long as the two are cooperative... as long as he leads with the follower in mind. But if the leader is individualistic and a narcissist he or she isn't leading for the right reasons. Most women I know who take a leadership role in their romantic lives do so out of self-preservation... because they don't trust their man.

I'm aware that I'm generalizing but really, have you ever met a submissive man whose wife was NOT overbearing? On the flip side, how many wives are submissive towards their husbands because they trust his judgment? Go to any church. You'll find women there who obey the Bible's commandment to submit to their husbands. Likewise you'll find husbands who lead their families as Christ leads the church, with love, not oppression. I know this reeks of sexism but I'm sorry. I've never met a woman who understands that leadership creates a burden of responsibility of having to put your own interests LAST! A good leader repeatedly puts his own interests last. Show me a woman who practices that.
Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 11-29-2009, 07:43 AM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,082 posts, read 787,466 times
Reputation: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
Ao, women that want to lead their own lives are narcissitic?
Do you know what narcissism means? You used the term "their own." That term itself is individualistic, not inclusive of another person. It implies that their own life does not include someone else's life, or that their own life is about their own life, not about the COUPLE'S life. They are incapable of entering into an equal partnership.

That is narcissism.
Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 11-29-2009, 07:52 AM
 
18,332 posts, read 10,185,198 times
Reputation: 12257
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
A man doesn't need to be a narcissist to be a leader. Sure, some are domineering and lead for their own benefit but many men understand that the leader's job is to benefit the follower. I've never met a woman who understood that. Maybe with their kids but never with their significant other. Leadership creates equality as long as the two are cooperative... as long as he leads with the follower in mind. But if the leader is individualistic and a narcissist he or she isn't leading for the right reasons. Most women I know who take a leadership role in their romantic lives do so out of self-preservation... because they don't trust their man.
You didn't answer my question, which was concerning your reponse to the post above. Try again, if you can. As far as taking the leadership role in romantic lives- I see this mentioned often on CD, tho, I never really understand it. Where's the application? How does it play out in the day-to-day? I imagine that I live a very different life compared to many on this forum. Dh and I go to work/school; clean the house, have meals, watch movies, walk the dog, do yard work, etc. For the life of me, I'm confused where leadership comes into play with some folk.

Quote:
I'm aware that I'm generalizing but really, have you ever met a submissive man whose wife was NOT overbearing? On the flip side, how many wives are submissive towards their husbands because they trust his judgment? Go to any church. You'll find women there who obey the Bible's commandment to submit to their husbands. Likewise you'll find husbands who lead their families as Christ leads the church, with love, not oppression. I know this reeks of sexism but I'm sorry. I've never met a woman who understands that leadership creates a burden of responsibility of having to put your own interests LAST! A good leader repeatedly puts his own interests last. Show me a woman who practices that.
Belief in dieties or not, I still don't get how this plays out for people. Perhaps I just have a simple and easy going relationship. This stuff never comes up. Neither of us make any final decisions. The biggest decision we ever made was buying our home. If I liked something he didn't, it was off the list. If he liked something I didn't, it was off the list. Sure, we would give our reasons, which were always sound.

When I wanted a new car when I graduated, there wasn't a discussion about it. Hmmmm...this does make me think a bit, tho. My dh would never worry about me making a purchase thoughtlessly. I'm financially conservative. Now, if he were married to a woman he couldn't trust, then I could see why he might need to take the lead. But, that's more about maturity and personal responsibility, imo.
Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 11-29-2009, 07:58 AM
 
18,332 posts, read 10,185,198 times
Reputation: 12257
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
Do you know what narcissism means? You used the term "their own." That term itself is individualistic, not inclusive of another person. It implies that their own life does not include someone else's life, or that their own life is about their own life, not about the COUPLE'S life. They are incapable of entering into an equal partnership.

That is narcissism.
I think most of us knows what that term means.

"The term narcissism refers to the personality trait of self-esteem, which includes the set of character traits concerned with self-imageego. The terms narcissism, narcissistic, and narcissist are often used as pejoratives, denoting vanity, conceit, egotism or simple selfishness. Applied to a social group, it is sometimes used to denote elitism or an indifference to the plight of others."

Again, your reponse was following this post -

"There is some truth to what you said. However, women don't like it when men are dictators AND women like to sometimes be the leader when it comes to their career.

Actually, women want to be the leaders in their lives, but they like it when a man is the strong one in the relationship. All women want a man that will protect them no matter what. "


How does any of this reflect narcissism? If you were not responding to that post, than I don't know why you brought it up.
Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 11-29-2009, 08:00 AM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,082 posts, read 787,466 times
Reputation: 477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn View Post
You didn't answer my question, which was concerning your reponse to the post above.
Yes I did. You just posted your question before I was able to finish my followup reply. The reply you just quoted, to me, was before your question. I wasn't aware of your question when I posted it because I was typing my followup reply. What you just quoted was not my answer to your question. Look at my reply in which I quoted your question.
Quick reply to this message
 
Unread 11-29-2009, 08:01 AM
 
18,332 posts, read 10,185,198 times
Reputation: 12257
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
Yes I did. You just posted your question before I was able to finish my followup reply. The reply you just quoted, to me, was before your question. I wasn't aware of your question when I posted it because I was typing my followup reply. What you just quoted was not my answer to your question. Look at my reply in which I quoted your question.
Yea, and it still doesn't make sense.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $74,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top