"Men should lead" - for real? (partner, looking, different)

[beachmel]

Originally Posted by The Dissenter

I'm talking about the women on here have said in one form or fashion said they expect from a man. If I have a woman that expects all that jazz, in theory I'm doing the most of the work in the relationship, therefore should I have the right to be called the leader since I am doing most of the work.

Most of WHAT work? Are you earning the most money? Doing most of the household chores? Doing the cooking?.....the yard?.....Are there children? Are you doing most of the child rearing?....the laundry? Explain how you're doing "the most work" in the relationship. Are you doing the most work, or simply being the one who is paid the most for what you ARE doing?

I ask these questions, because for many, many years, I and many other women I know, made far, far less money than our husbands did, but we did FAR, FAR more "work" than our husbands EVER did!

[FromTN2A2]

"I am very romantic and believe in chivalry and traditional roles. Yes, read that again. I am a natural leader, fair, respectful and protective. I am seeking a submissive type woman.... Are there any feminine women left anymore... Makes me wonder. No get the negative cave man rhetoric out of your head. Women are to be respected, and appreciated, but in nature there is the natural order of things and men should lead and women be the strong support and partner."



I would completely skip over this man's profile for several reasons. With that being said, I am very much a believer in a man being the head of my house. Yes I believe that the decisions should shift based on who may be more privy to make the best decisions. BUT,sometimes, few times, two people can not reach compromise. Then who decides? For me and my house, it will be my husband because of my spiritual beliefs.However, this does not mean every man is fit to lead. I will make my choice wisely. Also, I do NOT believe everyone should live according to my beliefs.




--------
The First problem I would have with this man is that to have to put something like that in your profile, would lead me to assume that leading is your number one priority before even getting to know me. If he wants women to know that before even having a conversation with him, power to him. I am sure some women would be attracted to that, though I doubt there would be many.

Second issue: The following quotes: "Yes, read that again." & "get the negative cave man rhetoric out of your head" .. So is that what I have to look forward to? Will he talk to me like that throughout the relationship? Sounds like a father/child convo to me. Not very loving either.

Third issue: "Women are to be respected, and appreciated, but" Why follow it with a but? Would lead me to assume that I will be respected only under very strict conditions

Fourth issue: "and men should lead and women be the strong support and partner." So every man in society is fit to lead? Axe murderers, pedophiles and all? Pretty broad generalization there. Also, so should I expect for you to not be my partner or strong support? So let me get this right, you lead..and I just follow and hold you up. If that's the case..who's really doing all the work? So basically your job is to just give me direction? Doesn't sound like a very good leader for me.

It will take a very loving, kind, God-fearing (not necessarily "religious" there is a difference), and logical man for me to choose to trust him as the head. That way I know that in all of his decisions, it is not power which leads him, but instead his genuine desire to protect me and do whats in the best interest for the family. A power driven man I can't trust, a loving man who knows when to take lead and how to lead...I will.

[JrzDefector]

Originally Posted by The Dissenter

I'm talking about the women on here have said in one form or fashion said they expect from a man. If I have a woman that expects all that jazz, in theory I'm doing the most of the work in the relationship, therefore should I have the right to be called the leader since I am doing most of the work.

Well, then, that raises the question of whether you'd marry someone you consider your subordinate. What do you WANT from a relationship? An equal partner or a backup singer?

[Rhenzanite]

Originally Posted by Nightmare12

Men are leaders and ability to lead is a masculine trait. Women want, seek and need that in a man. It doesnt mean that his woman becomes his slave or anything close to it. It just means that a man is the head of the family and is expected to lead when needed. Him and his wife are still partners in every sense. You have a wrong perspective.

Would the woman be able to lead when needed as well?
If it's my family as well then I'd better damn well get equal billing on the decisions being made.

[theluckygal]

These are the types who get played by women seeking green card or some monetary gain. The woman will act according to his wishes until her purpose is met & then quietly disappear one day on her way to the grocery store. Women's lib is now coded in the dna of our culture & its difficult to erase. Most of the woman's jobs are now done by washers, dryers, slow cookers, dishwashers, day cares. What is she supposed to do with all the extra time on hands? Why not earn her own spending money & respect in society?

[The Dissenter]

Originally Posted by beachmel

Most of WHAT work? Are you earning the most money? Doing most of the household chores? Doing the cooking?.....the yard?.....Are there children? Are you doing most of the child rearing?....the laundry? Explain how you're doing "the most work" in the relationship. Are you doing the most work, or simply being the one who is paid the most for what you ARE doing?

I ask these questions, because for many, many years, I and many other women I know, made far, far less money than our husbands did, but we did FAR, FAR more "work" than our husbands EVER did!

At the very least at the beginning of relationship, most of the tasks fall on the man like asking the girl out, making the dates, paying for the dates, showing interest, etc. If the relationship goes on, it probably comes more back to even but from my POV in the early stages the larger share of maintaining the relationship falls on the man.

[Rhenzanite]

Originally Posted by Nightmare12

Would she be able? at times, maybe. It doesnt mean that a woman is expected never to have a say in decisions and so on. Its just that some women tend to be indecisive at best, so some decisions need to be finalized by the head of the family, who keeps everyones best interest at heart. Can you imagine a woman president responding to pearl harbor or 9/11 attacks?

"lets retaliate"
"no, lets not, we will wait"
"lets bomb them"
" should we?"
"maybe we should retaliate"
" maybe not"
"do i look fat in this dress?"
"i like choclate"
"lets retaliate"

Im aware that this is a traditional role division, but i believe that families led by men, are stronger units in general. Once again, it doesnt mean that a woman has to play a submissive role of any sort or that she isnt considered an equal partner.

I disagree. I know plenty of women, including myself, who are excellent decision makers. I also know plenty of men who can't make up their mind.

You say it doesn't mean that a woman has to play a submissive role, but you also say that in the long run her decisions simply don't matter because the man is the head of the household and ultimately makes the final decision. How is a woman considered equal when her decisions don't matter? Her husband/man could just say 'that's cute darling' and make the decisions himself without really considering what she has to say.

There are plenty of women in leadership positions (business owners, CEOs, Politicians etc.) that are plenty good at making decisions.

[JrzDefector]

Originally Posted by Nightmare12

Would she be able? at times, maybe. It doesnt mean that a woman is expected never to have a say in decisions and so on. Its just that some women tend to be indecisive at best, so some decisions need to be finalized by the head of the family, who keeps everyones best interest at heart. Can you imagine a woman president responding to pearl harbor or 9/11 attacks?

"lets retaliate"
"no, lets not, we will wait"
"lets bomb them"
" should we?"
"maybe we should retaliate"
" maybe not"
"do i look fat in this dress?"
"i like choclate"
"lets retaliate"

Im aware that this is a traditional role division, but i believe that families led by men, are stronger units in general. Once again, it doesnt mean that a woman has to play a submissive role of any sort or that she isnt considered an equal partner.

Stereotype much?

[rebel12]

Originally Posted by JrzDefector

By assuming that pay and education determine the power in a relationship you implicitly assume that they determine power in personal relationships in general. What, they don't matter at all when things are nonromantic, but suddenly when a romantic relationship is involved, they DO matter? Nope. Not buying it.

You don't necessarily share a future with your cousins and the choices they make do not affect you as much as choices made by your SO.
Do you get it now?

Originally Posted by JrzDefector

Yes, it is my comfort zone, but not because it is to gain the upper hand. These are the types of men I grew up with, know and respect -- and get along with. My father helped supported his family as a child during the Depression by hunting, trapping and fishing. My uncle is a gifted carpenter. I have other relatives who are electricians, maintenance guys, etc. They are also all fairly well above-average in intelligence. I am open to dating men of all "types," but I get along best with guys like this. I do not have any of these skills, so I respect that. I suspect in many ways I have a very traditional view of masculinity, in that I like guys who can do useful things rather than sit at a desk all day. I enough money to satisfy my modest needs, and so do not need or want a man to support me with monetary wealth - it would add nothing meaningful to my life. But a mate who could add to our self-sufficiency with his skills, now that appeals to me greatly. The men I have dated who you say are not my "equals" have all been fairly intellectually brilliant, and their types of intelligence have balanced mine.

And yet you can't be with any of them... Again, find you mate on the same level. Get out of your comfort zone.

Originally Posted by JrzDefector

So all your friendships involve a leader and a follower? Which are you?
Flow just happens. One need not call a board meeting for every decision - you eventually work it out. "Babe, I'll handle this" or just a shared look. If you approach your relationships without a huge ego investment, you're open to realizing what the other person's strengths are and how they work with yours. Have you never experienced "flow"?

No I have not. I do delegate authority though.

Originally Posted by JrzDefector

So one person has executive power over the other? Meh. I've had executive power over my own life since becoming an adult. If you can't reach a compromise, then you probably shouldn't be together.

There are things I which I can't compromise and there are those I can.
Like everybody else. Someone has to be a leader though. And it has to be a man. You just have to find a man that you will be willing to submit to.

Originally Posted by JrzDefector

I will die happily single if "submission" is a pre-req for marriage or a relationship. But thanks for your insight into me and the rest of American women

That's your choice and just by looking around the fate of amny many women.

Originally Posted by JrzDefector

As for the men I have been with being on my level ... hm. So according to you, the mechanic who independently taught himself string theory and could rebuild a car or a house from the ground up was not my equal. Nor was the combat vet who served as a sniper in several international conflicts with an elite military division. Nor was the highly skilled carpenter who loved the outdoors and cycling, and could survive in the mountains for god knows how long and bike 100 miles. Despite their amazing skills and gifts and the fact that they could do things I would never have been able to master in a million years, these men were not my equals because they didn't make more than me or have a slip of paper from a prestigious university to stick in a drawer and forget about. Yeah, I'll make a note of that.

I don't know. Where are they today? What happened to these great guys?
It didn't work out, did it?

Originally Posted by JrzDefector

In the future, I'll be sure to date men who make more than me and went to a better school so that they are worthy of submitting to. Because apparently I'm supposed to date what you perceive as my "equal" so I can submit to him as my leader. JUST what I've been aspiring to.

I don't know. Sometime I think women like you do not want to act feminine at all. You have great theories explaining eveything in detail and yet can't find a mate. Should make you think.

[beachmel]

Originally Posted by The Dissenter

At the very least at the beginning of relationship, most of the tasks fall on the man like asking the girl out, making the dates, paying for the dates, showing interest, etc. If the relationship goes on, it probably comes more back to even but from my POV in the early stages the larger share of maintaining the relationship falls on the man.

OMG...you're talking about doing the most work in "initiating" a relationship. At least we agree on one thing....this is just YOUR POV. Speaking from the perspective of an "older" woman, one who has been married for over 30 years...and who knows many, many married couples, it's pretty rare (at least in MY neck of the woods), for men to do MOST of the work. They simply get paid more for what they do!

As for the above poster who commented on "men being the natural leaders"....that's just flat out hogwash! They lead when and where they want to (most of them). Anything they don't want to deal with or feel is beneath them, they delegate to someone else. That's not leadership. That's arrogance and laziness. Very few men, whom I know, are natural born leaders. They're arrogant, childish dreamers.