Feeling Men

[audrey_1]

Then, spend some time with such a complex man and examine how you are with him. The answers are within yourself. He is how (and who) he is. If you can honestly say you can accept his perspective and intrinsic personality as compatible with and attractive to your own, then IMO it is a potential worth exploring.

 

My ex-fiancee had an amazing ability to communicate and reveal himself to me candidly. He was not afraid to show his vulnerability. We just didn't connect in a sexual way, and I know with certainty it was not a result of his being sensitive. I want to make that clear.

 

Casual guy was loaded with chemistry, and he had his moments, but is very closed off emotionally.

 

I'm hoping that somewhere exists a man who could be for me that has both of these qualities simultaneously.

[fral945]

My ex-fiancee had an amazing ability to communicate and reveal himself to me candidly. He was not afraid to show his vulnerability. We just didn't connect in a sexual way, and I know with certainty it was not a result of his being sensitive. I want to make that clear.

 

Casual guy was loaded with chemistry, and he had his moments, but is very closed off emotionally.

 

I'm hoping that somewhere exists a man who could be for me that has both of these qualities simultaneously.

 

You hit the nail on the head. For whatever reason, women like masculine men. Sensitivity is not a masculine quality. Women don't really desire a very sweet, sensitive man. They seem to prefer the masculine man with small doses of sensitivity.

 

I've experimented with this myself and I can tell you first hand (and from those around me) that I make many female friends by showing the sweet, sensitive vulnerable side and few relationships. On the other hand, being the masculine, charming, fun guy has provided me much more success relationship wise (at least initially).

[audrey_1]

You hit the nail on the head. For whatever reason, women like masculine men. Sensitivity is not a masculine quality. Women don't really desire a very sweet, sensitive man. They seem to prefer the masculine man with small doses of sensitivity.

 

I've experimented with this myself and I can tell you first hand (and from those around me) that I make many female friends by showing the sweet, sensitive vulnerable side and few relationships. On the other hand, being the masculine, charming, fun guy has provided me much more success relationship wise (at least initially).

 

So far, it's been mostly one way or the other in my experience.

[Trialbyfire]

You hit the nail on the head. For whatever reason, women like masculine men. Sensitivity is not a masculine quality. Women don't really desire a very sweet, sensitive man. They seem to prefer the masculine man with small doses of sensitivity.

 

I've experimented with this myself and I can tell you first hand (and from those around me) that I make many female friends by showing the sweet, sensitive vulnerable side and few relationships. On the other hand, being the masculine, charming, fun guy has provided me much more success relationship wise (at least initially).

fral, women want both. We want the confident man who can be vulnerable and sweet to us. When this happens, we can also be vulnerable and sweet to them.

 

On the otherhand, if a man uses any vulnerability I show to him, that's it. He's toast.

[audrey_1]

fral, women want both. We want the confident man who can be vulnerable and sweet to us. When this happens, we can also be vulnerable and sweet to them.

 

Exactly.

 

So it's a dance of finding those you're safe with, since there has been some toasting going on in most of our experiences.

 

Tricky to know when to open up, though, especially in an instance where BOTH parties might be playing it close to the vest.

[Trialbyfire]

Exactly.

 

So it's a dance of finding those you're safe with, since there has been some toasting going on in most of our experiences.

 

Tricky to know when to open up, though, especially in an instance where BOTH parties might be playing it close to the vest.

That's just it which is why I mentioned the part about using my vulnerabilities. I tend to open up a bit first. If he uses it, he's toast. If he accepts and is sensitive to it, I open up more. Of course he needs to also open up a bit at a time too. If he doesn't, it won't work.

 

Show me the emotional currency Baby!

[audrey_1]

That's just it which is why I mentioned the part about using my vulnerabilities. I tend to open up a bit first. If he uses it, he's toast. If he accepts and is sensitive to it, I open up more. Of course he needs to also open up a bit at a time too. If he doesn't, it won't work.

 

Show me the emotional currency Baby!

 

Yes, when they're accepting of that, it says a lot. In most of my experiences, they have been the first to open up. Lately, it has been me. No real measurement of success or failure depending on which gender is the first to take the risk, only that someone initially has to.

[Trialbyfire]

Yes, when they're accepting of that, it says a lot. In most of my experiences, they have been the first to open up. Lately, it has been me. No real measurement of success or failure depending on which gender is the first to take the risk, only that someone initially has to.

Perhaps that's what differentiates a mature, lasting relationship. As each person keeps opening up, stronger levels of trust are created.

 

I agree that there's no success or failure difference as to who starts the process. I will admit that when someone is an early investor and appears to be wide open and in lurve quickly, I do have some serious doubts. It's solely infatuation, which means it can burn out quickly. If you think about it, how in the world can someone care about you that much so quickly, when they don't honestly know who you are.

[carhill]

We just didn't connect in a sexual way, and I know with certainty it was not a result of his being sensitive.

 

Examine and explain why. This will be interesting

[audrey_1]

Examine and explain why. This will be interesting

 

In the beginning, we had wonderful conversations, time spent learning about one another. We were both in great physical shape. Our physical attraction grew as a result of the emotional work we'd done to connect, though we each admitted the other wasn't our usual physical "type."

 

As the relationship progressed and he became comfortable, I realized he was beginning to become less attractive to me physically; he stopped taking care of himself, doing the things to maintain his physique. I noticed that his sedentary lifestyle was also changing my appearance for the worst, and when I took initiative to do something about it, he asked me why. Asked who I was getting in shape for.

 

And I suppose his infatuation with me waned, because he had difficulties maintaining an erection, and our total sexual incompatibility became more and more obvious.

 

So - it was fabulous that he was able to be sensitive, in touch with his feelings, and share with me, but there was nothing else.

[Stockalone]

I'm curious about something.

 

I've been a bit "wowed" by many of the in-depth comments left by men, that shatter any stereotypes that men don't feel things or contemplate relationships.

 

But do you ever talk to the women in these situations about these things or in this way, or is it reserved for an anonymous online blog?

 

I know I'd love to hear how the men in my life feel.

 

I am certain that men do have feelings. What keeps the stereotype (that men hardly have any feelings) alive, is probably a result of how men choose to deal with their feelings and more importantly, how they interact with women when their feelings are concerned.

 

As far as I am concerned, I don't always deal the same way with feelings. I can have feelings and not acknowledge them. I can have feelings and accept them, but not express them. And I can have feelings and talk, or at least try to talk openly about them.

 

And there is a difference between talking about feelings that concern my own life and feelings that I have in response to situations other people are faced with.

 

I also agree with grogster that it is easier to share feelings in an anonymous surrounding. I have written about things here on LS that I have never even considered sharing with people I know in real life. LS offered a way to reflect on my feelings, trying to make sense of the chaos in my head. It's like an exercise that would otherwise take part solely in my head.

 

 

I believe I am strong enough for my man to share these things with me. In fact, I would want him to if it eased his pain

and freed him from any anguish. I would just ask the same in return.

 

I have a very hard time asking for help. I am not afraid of potential negative reactions, it's more that I am reluctant to ask for help because that might cause the people I care about stress and it could emotionally drain them to have to deal with my problems, to worry about me. I don't want to make my problems their problems. I don't want to become a burden.

 

On the other hand, I agree with you. I want to help the people I care about. And I try my best to be supportive and help them and I do not feel burdened by their problems at all. Still, that doesn't make it any easier for me to ask for help.

[carhill]

Our physical attraction grew as a result of the emotional work we'd done to connect, though we each admitted the other wasn't our usual physical "type."

 

You've identified your work. I congratulate you Think about the extent of which his emotional makeup affected (or did not affect) your perception of his physical and sexual being (and resultant attractiveness). This is where the wicket gets really sticky Explaining your perception without qualification is generally the most accurate. Be brutally honest....

 

OK, next job. Identify one man in your history who has been your "usual physical type" and with whom you've had emotional rapport. Are there any? Tell me about that.

[audrey_1]

Think about the extent of which his emotional makeup affected (or did not affect) your perception of his physical and sexual being (and resultant attractiveness). This is where the wicket gets really sticky Explaining your perception without qualification is generally the most accurate. Be brutally honest....

 

I really began to lose my sexual desire for him when his jealous/controlling streak revealed itself. I began to feel more like an object of his affection rather than his love partner. Also when it became obvious our senses of humor were completely different.

 

OK, next job. Identify one man in your history who has been your "usual physical type" and with whom you've had emotional rapport. Are there any? Tell me about that.

 

Bradley. First love. High school.

 

And now at 33, I look back and see it as one of, if not THE, healthiest relationship I've ever been in. I was definitely already physically attracted to him from the beginning. We just talked and hung out, laughing, understood each other somehow without having to explain too much, and were different enough to keep things interesting. He was incredibly in touch with his feelings and would share anything with me, even be at his most vulnerable. Things just flowed effortlessly. He was my best friend. Yet we had amazing chemistry and physical rapport. I regret breaking it off with him due to insecurity that onset with my parent's divorce. It's the single biggest regret of my life.

 

 

So my most important and healthy relationship was at a young age. And writing it out now, at 33, I'm not quite sure how I feel about that.

[carhill]

So my most important and healthy relationship was at a young age. And writing it out now, at 33, I'm not quite sure how I feel about that.

 

There you are. Apparently, you do get it, but don't trust yourself enough yet to believe. Make that your work, to believe in your truth. Remember, there is no right or wrong, just your path to your truth.

 

So, in the future, if you meet a man with whom you do not feel physical and sexual chemistry, do not doubt yourself and "give him a chance"; rather, trust your healthy instincts and be honest and continue your search. With those you do meet who are compatible in the physical/sexual ways, be clear about your quest for the emotional health and openness you're looking for. Don't compromise in that quest. Expect you might have investments (of yourself) that won't pay off in the end. Enjoy and value the journey

 

Lastly, when you're with a man who sends you the "right" emotional signals, be clear with him about how you value that part of who he is. Validate his "sensitivity". Let him know you see that as a strength he has which he can share with you always. Men like it when they are appreciated and/or complimented.

 

Feel free to accept my perspective in any way you see fit. Its the perspective of someone who's freely shared his emotions with women for all of his life, regardless of how they were received. The value is in the sharing

[audrey_1]

Apparently, you do get it, but don't trust yourself enough yet to believe. Make that your work, to believe in your truth. Remember, there is no right or wrong, just your path to your truth.

 

I am very aware I lost that "childlike" approach somewhere along the way. I hate that the definition of "jaded" has been filed away. The path to the truth must be met without fear but with total self honesty. I'm really trying!

 

Lastly, when you're with a man who sends you the "right" emotional signals, be clear with him about how you value that part of who he is. Validate his "sensitivity". Let him know you see that as a strength he has which he can share with you always. Men like it when they are appreciated and/or complimented.

 

Yes, you're right. Because of my own fear of vulnerability, I have been in a dating situation where validating his sensitivity was probably what was required, but I didn't. I believe it is why it didn't work out. I was perceived as cold and flippant about the situation.

[fral945]

fral, women want both. We want the confident man who can be vulnerable and sweet to us. When this happens, we can also be vulnerable and sweet to them.

 

I'm sure you do. In a perfect world, you could find a perfectly balanced man, but few exist like what you describe. Most people fall more on one side or the other.

 

I'd argue that in general women go for the sensitivity less than the masculinity. I hear how important they claim sensitivity is but in reality they generally do not choose the more sensitive men for relationships. They go for confidence and masculinity over sensitivity. Do you agree or disagree?

[audrey_1]

I'd argue that in general women go for the sensitivity less than the masculinity. I hear how important they claim sensitivity is but in reality they generally do not choose the more sensitive men for relationships. They go for confidence and masculinity over sensitivity. Do you agree or disagree?

 

Historically I have gone more for the intellectual/sensitive type. Since I am big on communicating, so we're in sync if life gets in the way and we need a check on the relationship, it's worked better with this type of man.

 

I find the masculine men interesting in the beginning, but their seeming lack of depth makes growth difficult beyond a certain point, like say, the honeymoon phase.

[carhill]

The issue I see, and have seen in my marriage, is that when a sensitive/emotional man asserts his masculinity and maleness, the female (my wife in this case) see these perspectives as conflicting, not synchronous, and, overwhelmingly (in our case anyway) unattractive. A man can be strong and emotional but a woman has to be open to that. As most/many (women) are socialized by and with unemotional men (this in no way means the man has no emotion, but rather internalizes it), they develop a certain perspective about how things are supposed to "go" with a man. Signals to the contrary perhaps are viewed negatively. A woman who is socialized by a strong, emotionally demonstrative father is much more likely to value and respond positively to those aspects of a prospective mate, IMO.

 

Lastly, as emotional beings, none of us is perfect. We make mistakes, both in perception and how we let our emotions govern our actions. I've been guilty of that many times, likely to the detriment of my marriage and other relationships. The work is identifying the weaknesses, working on them and being open to and understanding of similar weakness in one's partner (or others) as they find their way. This is one area I would expect women to excel at, given their emotional awareness and socialized caring and empathy traits. The search goes on

[fral945]

The issue I see, and have seen in my marriage, is that when a sensitive/emotional man asserts his masculinity and maleness, the female (my wife in this case) see these perspectives as conflicting, not synchronous, and, overwhelmingly (in our case anyway) unattractive. A man can be strong and emotional but a woman has to be open to that. As most/many (women) are socialized by and with unemotional men (this in no way means the man has no emotion, but rather internalizes it), they develop a certain perspective about how things are supposed to "go" with a man. Signals to the contrary perhaps are viewed negatively. A woman who is socialized by a strong, emotionally demonstrative father is much more likely to value and respond positively to those aspects of a prospective mate, IMO.

 

Lastly, as emotional beings, none of us is perfect. We make mistakes, both in perception and how we let our emotions govern our actions. I've been guilty of that many times, likely to the detriment of my marriage and other relationships. The work is identifying the weaknesses, working on them and being open to and understanding of similar weakness in one's partner (or others) as they find their way. This is one area I would expect women to excel at, given their emotional awareness and socialized caring and empathy traits. The search goes on

 

well said, carhill. You are obviously a much more sensitive and eloquent male than me.

[carhill]

So, the BS is working, eh?

 

Seriously, the best thing MC has done for me is put a construct to all the cr@p that was floating around in my brain. It served as a lens to focus the emotion and intellect into something tangible. I still have my days "on the rag" but I can see it and verbalize it so my wife knows I'm trying to find that middle ground, sometimes with varying success.

 

Ah, there, another thing to add. Ladies, if you see your man trying to get this stuff out, empathize with and facilitate him. This does two things...he is happy to see that you want to know how he feels and he is grateful for your help. Your mate is not an alien, as much as he might seem that way at times. He struggles with the same things you do, and many of the same fears, but just processes them a bit differently.

[Trialbyfire]

I'm sure you do. In a perfect world, you could find a perfectly balanced man, but few exist like what you describe. Most people fall more on one side or the other.

 

I'd argue that in general women go for the sensitivity less than the masculinity. I hear how important they claim sensitivity is but in reality they generally do not choose the more sensitive men for relationships. They go for confidence and masculinity over sensitivity. Do you agree or disagree?

I agree. It starts with strength and when the layers come off, we want elements of sweetness underneath. If there's only the former, with no latter or the reverse, it doesn't work. Of course the ratio of the two, as to what is considered attractive, is individual reliant. Note audrey_1 prefers a larger component of sweetness/sensitivity. Myself, I prefer a larger component of masculinity. It appears that both she and I value intelligence which isn't synonymous with either trait.

[fral945]

I agree. It starts with strength and when the layers come off, we want elements of sweetness underneath. If there's only the former, with no latter or the reverse, it doesn't work. Of course the ratio of the two, as to what is considered attractive, is individual reliant. Note audrey_1 prefers a larger component of sweetness/sensitivity. Myself, I prefer a larger component of masculinity. It appears that both she and I value intelligence which isn't synonymous with either trait.

 

Right. I try to be masculine and sweet at the same time. It's a fine line to balance, and like you said, everyone has their preferences. Too sensitive and you're a pushover and a wimp. Too masculine and you're heartless and uncaring.

[audrey_1]

Right. I try to be masculine and sweet at the same time. It's a fine line to balance, and like you said, everyone has their preferences. Too sensitive and you're a pushover and a wimp. Too masculine and you're heartless and uncaring.

 

I suppose the same could be said for women who are (probably stereotypically) expected to walk a line between being available but not too clingy/needy. A delicate line, indeed.

[fral945]

I suppose the same could be said for women who are (probably stereotypically) expected to walk a line between being available but not too clingy/needy. A delicate line, indeed.

 

Yea, I would agree there. I don't care for clingy/needy women, but I also don't like women who play hard to get either. Somewhere in between in what I like.

[audrey_1]

Yea, I would agree there. I don't care for clingy/needy women, but I also don't like women who play hard to get either. Somewhere in between in what I like.

 

Goes back to TBF's assessment. She likes more masculine, where I like a little more sensitivity.

 

So you could prefer slightly more available whereas another could lean toward more of a challenge.

 

Geez. The variables and compatibilities are endless!