Why do people still say men are intimidated by "successful" women?

[Brimstone_Angel]

Heck I am not only not intimidated by it, I would love to have a successful woman. Especially one who is willing to date a man who may not be so successful on his own, but together can build one (like this one woman who married a poor man, helped him build a business of his own, and now they have two incomes in the hundreds of thousands). Such stories and women really impress me, because they don't follow the world's ideals and ways, but through their defiance of it, raise above it to shine.

[Isolde]

RubySlippers:

My sister has had similar experiences. Almost all of the guys she's dated did not have the level of education she did, and though not all of them were actually intimidated by her, I really think this was a reason those relationships didn't work out. I do think that rels work better when the man and woman are equal in terms of education and salary or when the man makes more. I don't have a problem with that dynamic, FWIW. And as I said before, I don't plan to ever be making more than 80K given the line of work I'm going into, so it's not like I'm going to be some millionaire

[Isolde]

I mean, if you look at high profile women, most of them ARE married or in a long term relationship, and I'm talking about women making millions... Hillary, Michelle O, Oprah, Sarah Palin, etc. And all of those mentioned have kids, except Oprah.

 

There's obviously a "market" for those kinds of women, somewhere. And these women are way tougher and more masculine (in my opinion) than the avg professional woman.

[Yamaha]

the reality TBF is that many successful men put less importance on having a successful woman....but many successful women prefer a man who is equal or higher in socio-economic status that they themselves are.

 

thats the way it works. period.

 

 

SO TRUE. Almost every successful women I have encountered wanted her man to be equal in economic and social class. Men do not have this same requirement.

[carhill]

And as I said before, I don't plan to ever be making more than 80K given the line of work I'm going into, so it's not like I'm going to be some millionaire

 

So, you want to meet a man who can make you a millionaire on that salary? Less? It's not how much you make, it's what you do with it. That's a lesson my daddy taught me

 

these women are way tougher and more masculine (in my opinion) than the avg professional woman.

 

Don't confuse their business persona with who they are as a spouse/mate/mother. It's totally different (or can be and often is).

 

This is something you might come to understand if/when you experience a multi-millionaire on their knees painting baseboards, sucking beer and cracking jokes until you're both red in the face. I'm just glad it's a friend and not a business competitor. He's brutal (in business). I know women like this too. Feminine when required; down and dirty when required; brutally competitive when required.

 

For me, the key is seeing women as equals. It was an example my parents set and I've never thought of women any other way. I have no control over their thoughts, however

[CommitmentPhobe]

SO TRUE. Almost every successful women I have encountered wanted her man to be equal in economic and social class. Men do not have this same requirement.

 

I know LOADS of women that are of a higher social and economic class than their partners. Hmmm....

[Isolde]

So, you want to meet a man who can make you a millionaire on that salary? Less? It's not how much you make, it's what you do with it. That's a lesson my daddy taught me

 

No I'm just trying to illustrate that I'm not going for huge amounts of money because all I care about is being comfortable and having work I enjoy. And again, I'm 22--I'm not looking for financial support right now because it's not like I'm starting a family anytime soon.

 

Don't confuse their business persona with who they are as a spouse/mate/mother. It's totally different (or can be and often is).

 

 

This is what I was trying to say earlier in the thread, but alphamale refused to accept that you can "change gears."

[alphamale]

I know LOADS of women that are of a higher social and economic class than their partners. Hmmm....

indeed...but many of them had to "settle"

[Yamaha]

indeed...but many of them had to "settle"

 

HA.... I was going to say the very same thing!!!!!!!

[soserious1]

Yes, I would be one of those men. It bothers me because the type of women who has a masters tend to often be "careerists", as another poster pointed out to me once. IME, these women generally are less likely to want children and more likely to have higher expectations and needs in life, and more often than not see a man as disposable. That is a turn-off to me.

 

I usually ask these type of women one question: If you had to have a good career or a good family life, which would you choose? I rarely get a response choosing family over career. Generally the response is "Why can't I have both?"

 

I'd rather have the career.. I don't place any value on marriage or long term relationships.

[CommitmentPhobe]

indeed...but many of them had to "settle"

 

That's meaningless as far as I'm concerned. I would love to see a stat or how many people "settle"

 

The number of people that dislike their jobs is estimated at something like 77%. That would suggest that on the whole, against competition from limited resources people aren't able to obtain exactly what they want.

 

The divorce rate is 41% I would bet that if you add onto that all the unhappy couples that it turns into a figure suggesting the majority of people have "settled", even if they didn't know it at the time.

[deciduous]

As some others pointed out...

 

Men could not care less about your job, status, or career.

 

Sometimes women whom proclaim "Men are intimidated by successful women" are only seeing half of the picture. Your "success" in itself will not land a man. For men, it largely depends on how you treat them. The shape of your bottom is also more important than your job.

 

Perhaps women confuse this with otherwise ugly or boring men whom have a status job and have women throwing themselves at them. For men, success in itself will never leave them dateless. For women it is far different. Looks and age are paramount, along with how you treat them. What you do to pay the bills is largely irrelevant.

[Trialbyfire]

Why is it that threads like this always get people defensive? It's okay not to find others attractive. It's okay if women want careers. It's okay if women want family. It's okay to want both and if you're a career woman, you can afford both.

 

It's okay for men not to find career women attractive. It's also okay for men not to find SAHMs or SAHWs attractive.

 

The flip side is that it's okay for women to want a mate they can look at equally or look up to. It's really okay to not be found to be universally attractive.

 

Most importantly, it's very okay to be yourself. Frack'em if they don't find you attractive. There will always be others that will.

[deciduous]

This is just something that surfaces all of the time. "Men are intimidated" by successful women. As though men are inherently flawed, weak, or lacking confidence.

 

I liken this to the city I live in. Or actually just about any city I visit. Women say "This city is 6 women to 1 man. It is impossible to find a man."

Must women always concoct excuses to justify why they are single?

 

I think we need to end this myth, and these women need to realize perhaps they are not providing men with what they need and want.

 

Some women can have a demanding career and still be a lady coveted by many men. They have no problems in relationships.

 

Some women have a low entry level job, and start proclaiming "Men are intimidated".

 

I am sure men would be lined up to date Sarah Palin, and she is rather powerful. However, she also exudes a certain femininity that men find attractive. They would also date her if she was a clerk at Barnes and Nobles. Men would not be lined up to date the feminist cranky CPA in the next cubicle. She is the one that will proclaim "Men are intimidated by successful women"

[You'reasian]

I was in a wonderful, very loving long-term relationship (longest yet) with a woman whom was a PhD and gunning for a leadership position in her department. Not only was she intelligent, she was smart too....I guess opposites attract

 

We used to spend weekends working out complicated math or word problems, I know dorky as it sounds but....

 

The memories are distant but I try not to let her characteristics set the bar because each person is different and has different things to offer.

[Isolde]

This is just something that surfaces all of the time. "Men are intimidated" by successful women. As though men are inherently flawed, weak, or lacking confidence.

 

I liken this to the city I live in. Or actually just about any city I visit. Women say "This city is 6 women to 1 man. It is impossible to find a man."

Must women always concoct excuses to justify why they are single?

 

I think we need to end this myth, and these women need to realize perhaps they are not providing men with what they need and want.

 

Some women can have a demanding career and still be a lady coveted by many men. They have no problems in relationships.

 

Some women have a low entry level job, and start proclaiming "Men are intimidated".

 

I am sure men would be lined up to date Sarah Palin, and she is rather powerful. However, she also exudes a certain femininity that men find attractive. They would also date her if she was a clerk at Barnes and Nobles. Men would not be lined up to date the feminist cranky CPA in the next cubicle. She is the one that will proclaim "Men are intimidated by successful women"

 

I agree with you. I didn't say men are intimidated, I said PEOPLE SAY THEY ARE and I'm trying to wade through all these opinions of why they might be or not. LOL.

[Isolde]

It's really okay to not be found to be universally attractive.

 

A fitting conclusion, I think!

 

I'll say one more thing: judging from educational statistics and law school/med school enrollments, it does look like men aren't setting their goals as high as they used to. As much as feminism is partly to blame for the weirdness of today's dating life, it's also true that if men want to continue being traditional "providers," they should be trying harder to out-man the women!

[deciduous]

"Traditional provider" has also changed in meaning quite a bit.

 

In the old days, women did not work, and if they did they did not earn that much. They might have lived at home until they were married.

 

So, just moving a woman into your home, and marrying her, while paying the same bills, meant you are "providing for her." She might cook to keep costs low, snip coupons, not have a car, etc.

 

Today, women work, and earn quite a bit. They have a nice car, their own home, take vacations, eat at fancy restaurants, buy nice clothes etc. So "providing for a woman" has just became much much much more expensive.

And the return on this depreciating asset is also much lower than in the past. Probably have to get her a maid and nanny too.

[Love_Forest]

don't really know...women have made great strides and society has changed. some women are makeing $150K/year and adopting kids from Korea. men are basically redundant so why would modern women need them around? this is what some modern women wanted and now they have it....one must eventually lie in the bed they make.

 

as a side bar, in my experience the women who have the hardest time finding and keeping a man are both financially successful and physically attractive

 

basically, some men feel that if a woman doesn't need taking care of then there really is no need to have us around.

 

I agree with this,

I am successful in my career but so empty at home and the men see in me the work I do,

I was investing in past sleepless nights for that and now I pay this price of being alone.

[Trialbyfire]

Whoah... I strongly disagree with both your comments about feminism and men not trying hard enough.

 

Feminism is what's given women choice in life. As for men not trying hard enough, that's an unrealistic expectation of all men. It's okay to be equal.

 

People have to define who they are within themselves. Expecting every single person to be an A type or an F type is unrealistic, especially to suit your needs. If you can find men who suit your needs, that's great. If you get passed over, by the same token, that should be okay with you too.

[kashmir]

Feminism is what's given women choice in life.

 

Very true, but uber-feminism has made dating and attraction all weird. You never know what's right or wrong anymore.

[Trialbyfire]

Very true, but uber-feminism has made dating and attraction all weird. You never know what's right or wrong anymore.

No different than the neo-con or paleo-con who still believes in using a club and dragging women off by the hair.

 

It's all subjective.

[Trialbyfire]

In every male neo/paleo-con, there's a frightened little misogynist.

 

Overall, I detest extremists and fundamentalists. Talk about an unrealistic view on the world. Extremism breeds extremism so the cycle of escalation never ends.

 

Extremists in general should be lined up against a wall and shot.

[kashmir]

Well yeah there might be men out there who still believe their women are essentially their property, but as you said that's extremist thinking.

 

I'm talking about what's accepted in the mainstream.

 

On one hand, men and women are different. We have different roles when it comes to attraction and dating. Men need to initiate and pursue. They need to let particular women know they're interested through flirting and physical advances. It's in the human male's primitive nature to do this.

 

On the other hand, you have feminism telling us that men and women are equal by law. This is true and it's just. This is the good part of feminism. The problem is that most feminists don't stop there, and from the perspective of a young male in today's society, it's pretty prevalent that they have a huge influence over society. They believe that men who flirt and make physical advances on women are wrong and abusive. That's a huge exaggeration, but they assert this ideology over young men and women. As a result, you've got a generation of confused men who feel like they need to get permission to even look at a girl. You also have a generation of frustrated young women, as the majority of guys that have no problem expressing their interest in them are *******s (probably due to the fact that they had dominant a-hole fathers who taught their boys to ignore ALL feminist ideology, so they don't have ANY respect for women).

 

While the Leave It To Beaver-esque 50's time is generally really boring and just not desirable at all, I've gotta say that dating was probably so much easier and less confusing.

"Gee Martha, would you like to be my girl?"

"Oh Wally, of course I would!"

"Boy golly!"

 

Granted that they had the patronizing house-wife stereotype, but you get my point. It was boy likes girl, he smiles, she smiles back, he asks her out, not boy likes girl...then something in the back of his mind triggers and tells him that if he approached her he would be judging her based on her looks as well as burdening her with dealing with another men, which might inhibit her progress towards whatever goal she's working towards...etc etc...

[alphamale]

In every male neo/paleo-con, there's a frightened little misogynist.

quite...just an in every female neo/paleo-con there a frightned little misandrist