Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
I will not even state “In a perfect world” nor
Perfect in theory”.
Confidence not to be confused with cockiness is attractive due to the person having a in tact ego, not super inflated nor sorely lacking but just right,
As well as natural assurance..How can this not be attractive.. There is no need for constant “nurturing” which in fact is constant validation and this can be cumbersome and taxing on a person.
Shyness can be attractive in the sense that the other person has the other attributes in place just lacks the gusto to approach at times unless they are rely motivated to get to know another person..This can be flattering that one can be a motivator..
However there should be no need for “nurturing” one is not marrying their mother or a co-dependant individual out to set this person right or “fix” them.
This is not balanced and because one person is setting forth exerting so much effort to bring this person out of their shell and boost their confidence? What is this person gaining in return? The mere satisfaction that they “did this”?
There always needs to be balance in a relationship even from the beginning, there does not need to be coddling, nurturing, we are adults are we not?
This may sound harsh to you but I assure you that it is not.
When I think of settling down with someone? The last thing I want is to be coddling, validating a man constantly in order to feed his ego and get him to come out of his shell and be confident..that is too much work and I have not come this far in life to fall back in a role like this.
I feel it is up to every individual to work on themselves and be comfortable in their own strengths, abilities and what they have to offer another person.
A relationship that is unbalanced to me? Makes me feel odd and in control of making all decisions and this is not the natural order of things, a relationship consists of 2 people that are fit for one another and can move forth together not one leading and one behind…
Hi there dr74...happy New Year to you!
Thank you, for your very intriguing and valuable comments...I think that you may perhaps be misunderstanding my original premise. You had mentioned and cited the need for "constant" validation, in your post above. Forgive me, if my original post was poorly worded, as I hadn't necessarily meant to convey it in terms of having to be a "constant" or ongoing struggle, for the female romantic interest. What I had really meant is the male archetype whose personality is much more sensitive, and for which, when it is nurtured by a more lenient or flexible female romantic prospect (who will not dismiss him solely on the quality of his initial confidence), his earlier lack of confidence is essentially permanently cured. He has no reason to feel unconfident any longer, because he has had a successful, positive romantic relationship experience -- therefore, going forward, he will continue to be confident in his future romantic interaction, without having to revert to his previous non-confident state. So what I meant is that there would basically be no reason, for him to have to continue to feel unconfident, in the future -- and thus, no need for constant or ongoing validation, on his part (The female love interest has, in essence, permanently empowered him to feel confident.)
If I understand this premise correctly a girl could find a diamond in the rough by dating a guy that is lacking in confidence yet with many attractive qualities. I think it is interesting, but I don't think most women would go for it.
If I understand this premise correctly a girl could find a diamond in the rough by dating a guy that is lacking in confidence yet with many attractive qualities. I think it is interesting, but I don't think most women would go for it.
Or if they even did why would they want to change him? I wouldn't suspect it would be in the women's best interest to morph the diamond in the rough to a confident, self assured player type. That's why I think it would be rare to hear about it.
Or if they even did why would they want to change him? I wouldn't suspect it would be in the women's best interest to morph the diamond in the rough to a confident, self assured player type. That's why I think it would be rare to hear about it.
Lol...I didn't mean the woman changing the man into the player type, so much Just a gaining and an increase of conventionally-defined confidence in him, where it may have been partially absent before...but the guy would still be a nice, caring, and considerate human being though, of course
Thanks for your thoughts and comments. I guess I was mainly trying to point out or suggest that if a woman is attracted to everything about a guy except just his level of confidence (if she is finding it to be lacking), she might want to reconsider, before eliminating him as a romantic prospect. Why reconsider? Because she has the power and the capability, to potentially nurture and bring forth more confidence in him, .
Nope.
Sorry.
Confidence and real self-esteem is not bestowed upon you by others.
It's internally generated by accomplishments and the feeling of capability.
I don't like any people (men or women) who aren't confident. You always have to wonder why they consider themselves so inept or worthless. It's not my job (or anyone else's) to bring them out of it.
That being said, people who are 'all hat and no cattle' (confident or cocky with nothing to back it up) are equally off-putting and I would stay the heck away from them, too (friends, romantic, etc).
Nope.
Sorry.
Confidence and real self-esteem is not bestowed upon you by others.
It's internally generated by accomplishments and the feeling of capability.
I agree.
I am of the opinion that the only person we can change is ourselves. I am also of the opinion that you shouldn't try to change something very intrinsic about yourself just to attract someone.
Just be yourself. And be happy in your own skin. If we're natural then there's always someone who finds that attractive. Not all women want super macho, blow hard over confident men. Some of us like the introspective, quiet types.
I am of the opinion that the only person we can change is ourselves. I am also of the opinion that you shouldn't try to change something very intrinsic about yourself just to attract someone.
Just be yourself. And be happy in your own skin. If we're natural then there's always someone who finds that attractive. Not all women want super macho, blow hard over confident men. Some of us like the introspective, quiet types.
I don't think the OP's premise is about change but more about a little encouragement and I'm sure it has happened many,many times.
In this day and age it's all too easy to just dismiss everyone and people wonder why they continue to be alone.
Thanks for your thoughts and comments. I guess I was mainly trying to point out or suggest that if a woman is attracted to everything about a guy except just his level of confidence (if she is finding it to be lacking), she might want to reconsider, before eliminating him as a romantic prospect. Why reconsider? Because she has the power and the capability, to potentially nurture and bring forth more confidence in him, through her positive romantic interaction with him. Hence, bringing about the "curing" of his earlier lack of confidence, and/or his shyness.
But if she's not attracted to him, why would she invest so much time and energy hoping to change him in the first place? It is like saying, if you meet someone and you get on well with them, but you're not attracted to them because they're 100 pounds overweight, that you should force yourself past your lack of attraction in the hopes that your "love and nurturing" can motivate them to lose weight. I don't think it's good for either party to go into a relationship hoping someone will change, and if there's no attraction from the get-go, forcing yourself to kiss them, make love to them until they change doesn't sound appealing for either party, IMO.
Yet, we never hear of similar situations, in which a woman has potentially taken a man that she finds attractive in all ways, save only his personal level of confidence, and changed him in a positive manner to meet her needs emotionally, in that regard (i.e., similar to what she would have done anyway with trying to reform or tame the stereotypical "bad boy")?
I honestly believe that women have the power to do this, also assuming of course that are mutually willing and they want to...why do you think they don't exercise it, more often? Thoughts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadd1014
I don't think the OP's premise is about change but more about a little encouragement and I'm sure it has happened many,many times.
In this day and age it's all too easy to just dismiss everyone and people wonder why they continue to be alone.
I don't think so. I think Knight was very specifically talking about a woman changing the man to suit her needs, which I do not agree with. I stand by my stance that no-one can change you except yourself, nor should anyone want to change you. You either accept someone as they are or you don't. If down the track the woman brings out some confidence or whatever then fine, but don't expect someone else to change you when you can't or don't want to.
If a man is timid, meek, lacks confidence in himself, etc, any change that occurs because of some woman is going to be temporary at best. He is not gong to overcome his innate psychological issues causing low self-esteem--in fact, I think he will be more likely to use her as a shield to continue to hide and cower from the world. In the end, he will become so dependent on her that it becomes an unbearable burden to the relationship and that is not a partnership of equals.
It isn't just a truism, it is the truth. You cannot love and respect another until you fully love and respect yourself.
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 register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
Just a gaining and an increase of conventionally-defined confidence in him, where it may have been partially absent before...but the guy would still be a nice, caring, and considerate human being though, of course 
