http://blog.pof.com/2014/01/5-reasons-women-cant-stand-passive-men/
discuss
I agree that the whole passive thing is unnattractive. That said, I’m really getting sick of these “what men need to do better” articles. I think women need to get over the fact that it’s not 1950 anymore and that they should be more like a partner…
^ There’s too much money in that industry to just let go as women buy these magazines in drove.
What men want and what women want in a potential mate hasn’t changed in the last 5,000 years and it won’t change for the rest of mankind.
#4 is so offensive.
TLDR? I can’t read the article.
Basically, it says women want to be dominated. Ok, seems legit. People buy 50 Shades of Gray for a reason.
It doesn’t say “Women like to be dominated” or “Women liked to be bossed around.” That may be true for some, but it’s not what the article says.
The article says that women like men who clearly make an effort and/or fuss about them - but not in a pandering “am I keeping you happy??” needy kind of way… instead, in a “I’m doing this and I really would like to have you with me”.
That means pro-actively making plans to be with them, or doing things that make them think you’re thinking about them when they’re not with you. It also says that texting is so straightforward and easy, that it doesn’t really count as showing that you’re thinking abou them, though it is better than nothing.
Every woman would agree with this. Until it contradicts something she wants. In which case, it’s a bunch of garbage. But once it suits her again, she is in complete agreement.
The comments section was painful to read. It was clearly a bunch of frustrated dudes who are chafing because they can’t get any attention from women. The main complaint seems to be that because of feminism (“we’re all equal now”) there is no reason for men to be chivalrous. Ridiculous. I also hate feminism but men should stop blaming women for everything (even though women clearly ARE crazy most of the time). FT nailed it above, society can do whatever it wants, but from an evolutionary perspective, men and women’s preferences haven’t changed for thousands of years. It’s on men to act accordingly.
Basically the men from the comments section of that article need to watch this clip on repeat until they get it:
I agree that most guys just need to step up with being chivalrous, taking the lead most of the time, being there even when she goes bat shit crazy, etc… But I think the over-entitlement is getting out of hand. Sooner or later reality will have to set in…
FT is right that the preferences haven’t changed and probably won’t. That said, other than for kids or love, what incentive is there for a guy to take on the traditionally prominent role when he (assuming he’s got some game) can now quickly move on to the next? Seems more economical and less risky. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that most women find it hard to get guys to settle down in places like NYC…
This.