Dating Questions About Assertive Women

[Johnny M]

My first question, to build on OceanTropic’s original question, is therefore: Why is it that so many men seem to lack the insight to see that assertive, independent women also want to be taken care of on some level? Do you agree or disagree that it is primarily a lack of self confidence that leads so many men to doubt that they could make an assertive or independent woman happy? (see Point 1 below)

Your statement contains an inherent contradiction. Independent people do not need to be 'taken care of'. If you need to be taken care of in order to be happy, you are not an independent woman.

 

A corollary question I have for other independent, assertive women is: How similar are your experiences and/or feelings to mine? Are you also looking for a partner that can pick you up and support you during those rare times when you hit the bottom?

Once again, you are not an independent woman if you require financial support. It's just not logical to think of yourself as independent or successful if there's even a possibility that you would not be able to make ends meet without outside help.

[Calendula]

I think the problem may be in how you come across to guys. We all need to act differently in different social situations - and being too aggressive in a dating/relationship situation can come across really badly, even if the guy likes a strong, independent type of woman. Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know you, but that might be the issue.

 

I know that my boyfriend loves strong, intelligent women who have an opinion, but the crucial thing is, not in an 'in your face' way. I.e. shouty women who talk a lot and dominate the conversation would be a turn off to him (I know this as someone we know is like this, and he commented on it).

 

Edited to add...you come across in a competitive, slightly in your face way in your thread - I can see how this in real life might be a bit much for a guy! No disrespect meant, it is just how the thread sounds!

 

No disrespect taken . I know that I can come across in that way depending on the perspectives and experiences of the reader/person I'm talking to, and I do what I can to account for it in my interactions when I think it may be an issue. While I take care not to offend people or be overly aggressive and in-your-face, I don't often go out of my way to make everyone around me happy or to do what people think I 'should' do because of social conventions. In general, I don't stand out all that much, and I think I'm relatively good at being a 'social chameleon' when I need to be. I also don't make a point of telling everyone what my opinions are unless I think it is important to do so or unless someone specifically asks (I suppose you could say I'm good at picking my battles).

 

I suppose I'd be the kind of woman you are referencing in your thread, and I've found my match but it took time. It helps that he is very successful but then again if a guy in ANY job has real self assurance he wont be threatened.

 

I think you have quite a valid point with this, both that it took time, and that having self-assurance prevents someone from feeling threatened when they are dealing with an independent, assertive woman who likes to voice her opinion.

 

I think that I have what I can only describe as an internal monologue that is constantly analyzing and challenging what I see around me, as well as my own opinions and those of others. When I choose to externalize this analytical monologue to, say, a guy I'm dating (I do this intentionally sometimes to determine communication compatability), and question what they think or observe (from a purely intellectual standpoint), some don't know how to deal with it positively. They take such questioning to be negative criticism of themselves and don't understand it to be an intellectual quest for improvement. I think some of this comes from a lack of self-assurance or belief in one's own opinions, which ends up causing them to translate my questioning of their idea into what they percieve as me questioning them as a person. I think this is part of what ultimately ends up being described by many as insecurity or lack of self-confidence

 

And my last point - depends how you define success and intelligence. If someone doesnt think you are quite as successful or intelligent as you think you are, then that can also be a huge turn off (i.e. lack of humility). And some men genuinly wont care about whether you're a success or not - but they will care about you having a warm heart, being genuine, feminine (for example) - how do you feel you are doing on those things? You don't need to wear success and intelligence like a badge and it migh tbe coming across a bit like that...

 

I totally agree that lack of humility and playing up one's own success in life can be a major deterrent to anyone with sensibilities. For this reason, I sometimes even downplay some of my accomplishments and knowledge early in a relationship. Eventually, however, as I let someone learn more about me, many subconsciously decide that I am 'out of their league' and let themselves be intimidated by facts rather than by any particular action or attitude on my part. While in some cases the assumption may be correct on some levels, I don't think it would be that much of an issue if the guy didn't focus on it.

 

For example, I'm finishing my PhD this year and I'm 27. I went on two dates last September with a guy who was 27 but who was still not quite done with his Bachelors degree (he took time off from school for various reasons). He was sweet, cute, I felt I could talk to him well, and I was interested (I set up both dates), but he didn't seem all that keen on continuing with the relationship despite subtle encouragement on my part, and eventually just didn't call me back. While there may have been legitimate lack of interest on his part (he just wasn't into me), I can't help but wonder how much of it was due to him deciding that I was 'out of his league' and therefore not worth pursuing because I was getting a PhD and he wasn't done with his undergrad yet. I didn't play it up at all ("oh, look at me, I'm so smart" etc), but the facts are the facts. In this case, my assertiveness came through in both my accomplishments thus far in life, and in my taking the initiative in setting up the dates with him, and I don't think he knew quite how to handle either of those typical role reversals.

 

I'm more curious about such situations than upset by them, though. My attitude is more one of "Oh well, I suppose it just wasn't meant to be" than "woe is me, why doesn't anybody like the smart girl."

 

As far as being warm-hearted, genuine, and feminine, I think I'm doing fine on all those counts , but I also think you have a valid point. The trick is finding the right guy who thinks it is cool that I'm smart, and appreciates my feminine nature anyway.

[sally4sara]

If you need to be taken care of in order to be happy, you are not an independent woman.

 

Being independent can simply mean you have your own thoughts and interests.

As well, I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't like to be taken care of now and then. It doesn't mean they NEED to be taken care of, just that it is nice to know you have someone in your life who would. Anyone who has no one to take care of them, will take care of themselves (male or female) because we are beings with a strong survival drive. But, given the opportunity, we will accept the care of someone because it can be pleasant.

 

What is with the need to make it a male or female thing? Is finding pleasure in being cared for an act of a weak person? Is being able to care for someone an act of a strong person? If so, isn't nurturing (previously described as a feminine trait) being the strong person?

 

See how muddied it can get when you seek to draw such hard definitions of gender? It quickly becomes about self lauding for universal acts or shaming of others for universal acts.

[Calendula]

Your statement contains an inherent contradiction. Independent people do not need to be 'taken care of'. If you need to be taken care of in order to be happy, you are not an independent woman.

 

I think you may be missing the point of the post. No person I know of can be completely independent all of the time and never need to be cared for by another individual. I simply don't think it is possible, and if I did, I think I would be lying to myself. The question is focusing on why a lack of insight exists that keeps men from realizing that a woman who is primarily independent, assertive, and confident on the surface, can also sometimes be many other things including unsure, self-doubting, confused, and scared. No one has it all figured out all of the time, and when we are at our worst is when we most need support and understanding from other people, especially our significant other.

 

It also isn't a question of needing to be taken care of in order to be happy. Happiness is a state of mind, and I think many people will agree that it is possible to be happy on one's own, but still possible to be even happier when you have someone to share certain life experiences with. The part of the question about a man doubting that "they could make an assertive or independent woman happy" is, in this case, referring to that increased level of happiness that comes with spending time with and sharing life experiences with another person. We are social creatures by nature, and even the most independent people I know still find joy in spending time with other individuals.

 

Once again, you are not an independent woman if you require financial support. It's just not logical to think of yourself as independent or successful if there's even a possibility that you would not be able to make ends meet without outside help.

 

The questions I pose and the text that follows contain absolutely no references to financial support. The type of support I am referring to is more intangible, and could be described as primarily emotional support or support through actions or thoughtfullness.

 

In the case of emotional support, an example that comes to mind is telling someone that you believe in them and their ability to do a certain task. When self doubt rears its ugly head, causing your SO to become anxious or upset, I have found that the best way to fight it is to talk them through it and show them that their doubts and fears are irrational and can be faced and overcome. Reminding them of past incidences of success against obstacles, and stressing the fact that you believe they can do it are also effective methods of providing emotional support.

 

As a woman, biology (in the form of hormone-induced mood swings) often dictates that I am not always as rational and level headed as I would like to be, no matter how hard I might try. This means that no matter how independent I am, at times I still become depressed or doubt my own abilities. While I have learned to successfully manage such cycles of depression (and therefore consider myself to be independent), when I get like this it is nice to have a partner who is understanding and can remind me that I am stronger and more capable than I may momentarily believe. This is what I am referring to by "a partner that can pick you up and support you during those rare times when you hit the bottom."

 

In the case of support through actions or thoughfullness, I think of cases where my previous SOs have brought me dinner on nights that I've had to work late, or done my dishes or laundry when I was sick or simply didn't have the time, all without me having to ask them to do these things. There are many more ways of supporting someone beyond providing them with money, many of which I feel are crucial for a successful relationship.

[Calendula]

Being independent can simply mean you have your own thoughts and interests.

As well, I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't like to be taken care of now and then. It doesn't mean they NEED to be taken care of, just that it is nice to know you have someone in your life who would. Anyone who has no one to take care of them, will take care of themselves (male or female) because we are beings with a strong survival drive. But, given the opportunity, we will accept the care of someone because it can be pleasant.

 

What is with the need to make it a male or female thing? Is finding pleasure in being cared for an act of a weak person? Is being able to care for someone an act of a strong person? If so, isn't nurturing (previously described as a feminine trait) being the strong person?

 

See how muddied it can get when you seek to draw such hard definitions of gender? It quickly becomes about self lauding for universal acts or shaming of others for universal acts.

 

As I believe someone (you, in fact) addressed earlier in the thread, I think a lot of people like to categorize certain traits as male or female because it allows them to put a label on it and stick it in a nice neat box labeled male or female. Label it whatever you like, but personality still all end up falling into the gray area of being human. In the end I feel that it is all about balancing the traits you have with those of your partner in both your similarities and differences, and the better the balance, the better the relationship.

Edited February 11, 2010 by Calendula
clarification

[Calendula]

The fact that we have assigned gender to these traits says more about human's need to catalog all living beings around us than it does anything else.

 

To be a successful team (and this even includes my son as he is part of my team) you have to utilize the traits of all members to ensure the best possible outcomes rather than who has the gender the dictionary tells you would have those traits.

 

The best relationships don't involve hammering people into the catagories you think make you look best or achieve making you look like the definitions above without you actually being like the definitions above.

 

Thank you for this post . I think you have made some excellent points with this.

[Mr White]

The question is focusing on why a lack of insight exists that keeps men from realizing that a woman who is primarily independent, assertive, and confident on the surface, can also sometimes be many other things including unsure, self-doubting, confused, and scared. No one has it all figured out all of the time, and when we are at our worst is when we most need support and understanding from other people, especially our significant other.

 

 

Well, here's an honest answer, already alluded to multiple times: such type of woman comes across as annoying and unfeminine, and nobody wants to take care of a pain in the azz. While I've seen some women that are able to turn the "assertiveness" and the "drive" off when just chilling in a relationship, most do not. So, there you have it.

[Calendula]

You sound like a woman who has a high powered career. Have you tried dating men on your level who won't be intimidated by your success?

 

I will be finishing my PhD in a chemistry/biology related field this year. After completing 2-3 years of post-doctoral research (next step for what I want to do), my goal is to run my own research lab at either an academic university or a national research center. The field I work in deals with identifying new (as in never been seen before) chemical compounds which could have biological activities that would make them useful as new medicines, and most of what I work on is stuff that no one has ever worked on before. I am a scientist and I do research, so I therefore spend most of my time failing and going back to try something else new until I find something that works. There are rarely any rules or guidelines to follow and no one has all the answers.

 

I guess you could call my career choice 'high-powered' though I'd never really thought of it like that .

 

As far as finding someone on my level, I've long since decided that that is my best hope for finding a compatable partner. Unfortunately for me, the number of available male scientists in my approximate age range who know something about my research field (even a little bit) is practically logarithmically smaller than the number of otherwise available men in the US. Statistics aren't currently working in my favor in this regard, but I haven't yet given up hope. I figure I've still got three years to find someone, so I'm not in too much of a hurry.

[Calendula]

Well, here's an honest answer, already alluded to multiple times: such type of woman comes across as annoying and unfeminine, and nobody wants to take care of a pain in the azz. While I've seen some women that are able to turn the "assertiveness" and the "drive" off when just chilling in a relationship, most do not. So, there you have it.

 

I would agree, many woman have trouble 'turning off' or at least 'tuning down' their assertive nature. I know that for myself I often have to consciously tell myself NOT to be analytical, or to just relax and let things be, but it is always easier said than done. I wouldn't say that it makes me a 'pain in the azz', but I would say that my partner would have to understand this aspect of my personality in order to be able to live with me.

[Calendula]

I'm a guy, and to be completely honest, I would have never even thought about the fact that assertive women might need to be taken care of until I saw these posts on LS. Mindblowing.

 

For me, I think it's because assertive women, because of their traits, sometimes just seem like one of the guys. Guys never take care of guys. We talk, make fun of one another, and have great relationships, but we just don't pack lunches or pamper each other with spa treatments.

 

It's also, in some part, lack of self-confidence. It's kind of like being given a chihuahua for a pet vs. a grizzly bear. (a bit extreme, I know, but follow me). For a chihuahua, you feed it, take it for walks, bathe it, etc, and it's pretty happy. For a grizzly bear, you can do the exact same things and still not know if it's enough, just because you know that no matter how well you treat the bear, it's confident and independent enough to rip your head off if you do something wrong.

 

I also like your analogy , and I think you have some excellent insights. Being percieved as 'one of the guys' means that a woman in such a position will likely be treated as 'one of the guys.'

 

I also liked your choice of adjectives for this thread: 'mindblowing'. It makes me happy to know that I've helped shed some light on the inner workings of the independent and assertive female for you .

[Calendula]

Yep, a succesful woman cannot intimidate me - she's still just a woman, like any other , her intelligence and success are only a plus.

 

But the problem is that often times success and intelligence are often used as an excuse to behave even worse than the average woman . Hey, just because you have a PhD doesn't mean that you aren't going to do any housework, ever, or that I should put up with more shet than usual .

 

I think that you're totally on the spot with this, but I also think that it goes both ways: just because you're ___ (the man/woman, have higher education, earn more, etc) doesn't mean that you don't also have to do housework, clean up after yourself, make dinner, etc. Any person who is truly intelligent and successful recognizes that who or what they are doesn't entitle them to special treatment or give them the right to treat others like cr*p.

[Johnny M]

Being independent can simply mean you have your own thoughts and interests.

In that case, 'independent' is a redundant term since everyone has their own thoughts and interests. I was under the impression that we were talking about financial independence here. The normal meaning of 'independent woman' is a woman who can support herself with her own income.

 

As well, I've yet to meet anyone who doesn't like to be taken care of now and then. It doesn't mean they NEED to be taken care of, just that it is nice to know you have someone in your life who would. Anyone who has no one to take care of them, will take care of themselves (male or female) because we are beings with a strong survival drive. But, given the opportunity, we will accept the care of someone because it can be pleasant.

You need to clarify what you mean by 'taking care of'. Are we talking in financial terms?

[sally4sara]

In that case, 'independent' is a redundant term since everyone has their own thoughts and interests. I was under the impression that we were talking about financial independence here. The normal meaning of 'independent woman' is a woman who can support herself with her own income.

 

 

You need to clarify what you mean by 'taking care of'. Are we talking in financial terms?

 

Well the title is Dating questions about assertive women. When I was dating, no one was paying my bills for me. I kept a roof over myself and my son's head, our bellies full, and covered incidentals. I covered my own dating and entertainment costs.

I am now married, we each work outside of the home and we have one bank account. We are happier this way and it is nice to have someone in your corner. What ever problems come, you can better face them as two I would think. Two independent people who have joined forces.

If, forbid, something happened to where we were not partners anymore, I would just go back to as before.

It isn't just a financial aspect. If two people join forces towards one goal, that goal might require one to see to earning an income while the other - goes to school for future higher earnings, raises children, devotes to charity work the couple feels passionately about, etc. It could be anything really. In what way would this require their genders dictate who did what part?

I saw nothing in the OP that would lead me to believe we were only talking about money. "Taking care of" could mean many things.

[Johnny M]

I saw nothing in the OP that would lead me to believe we were only talking about money. Taking care of could mean many things.

Like what, for example? I'm not trying to be coy; I'm genuinely curious to know what women mean by 'taking care of', other than financial support.

[sally4sara]

Like what, for example? I'm not trying to be coy; I'm genuinely curious to know what women mean by 'taking care of', other than financial support.

 

Like...

You have to get oral surgery that will leave you really out of it after its over. You can't drive. Your GF/wife, leaves work early to be there when you get out. She takes you home and gets you in bed and when you wake up, she has made a soft food meal with your pain meds.

The game you've been raving about finally gets a release date. Your partner remembers you saying how much you want to get it. While they are out running errands, they stop in and pre-order it for you.

Your parent dies and they see to any task you don't feel up to dealing with even including talking to the funeral home director.

Your partner only drives a compact and says they need to borrow your truck to haul something. Instead they have the oil changed, tires rotated, and fluids topped off because winter was coming.

I dunno man, why can you only conceive of financial ways?

[txsilkysmoothe]

Like what, for example? I'm not trying to be coy; I'm genuinely curious to know what women mean by 'taking care of', other than financial support.

 

Though we may seem capable and strong in general, we want our men to realize we have a softer, weaker side and would like them to nurture us. We need their encouragement, a hug, a shoulder to lean on, their solution to a problem we may have. We want to draw from their manly strength. We want them to realize how much we value their gender. We don't want to be the leader in the relationship, we want him to do that or at least equally share.

[Johnny M]

Like...

You have to get oral surgery that will leave you really out of it after its over. You can't drive. Your GF/wife, leaves work early to be there when you get out. She takes you home and gets you in bed and when you wake up, she has made a soft food meal with your pain meds.

The game you've been raving about finally gets a release date. Your partner remembers you saying how much you want to get it. While they are out running errands, they stop in and pre-order it for you.

Your parent dies and they see to any task you don't feel up to dealing with even including talking to the funeral home director.

Your partner only drives a compact and says they need to borrow your truck to haul something. Instead they have the oil changed, tires rotated, and fluids topped off because winter was coming.

I dunno man, why can you only conceive of financial ways?

The things you are describing are all par for course (except for pre-ordering video games, obviously). If your partner is unwilling to drive you home after a dental surgery or help you cope with the death of a relative, it should raise very serious doubts about that person's commitment to you. These are all normal ways in which people in relationships help each other. I don't see this as "taking care" of someone.

 

To me, taking care of somebody implies assuming disproportionate long-term responsibilities. For instance, if you go to university, and then grad school, then do you PhD and your boyfriend/husband is financing your schooling and/or living expenses all this time, he is taking care of you (and you sure as hell are not an interdependent person). If your husband earns more money and makes a much greater contribution to your combined living, entertainment, and traveling expenses than you do, he is taking care of you and you are not independent.

[pantherj]

Is there a source for this analysis? Or something you have come up with? It's not exactly the yin-yang distinction that I have seen in the past is the reason I ask the source. But seems generally valid other than I would use "traits" rather than "energy," and would come up with some other axis than masculine/feminine to differentiate the traits. Not sure that what you describe is a particular kind of energy, but rather ways of human behavior, which of course all require energy, but not sure if the nature of the behavior "is" energy.

 

My social life did not truly mature and get good until I incorporated lots of the traits you list as feminine into my approach to dating, and to life generally. Before that point, my life was mostly a copy of your list of masculine traits. Attraction and seduction for men requires more than just being a solid man these days, unfortunately, hence all the puzzled threads here from guys who are working on building the typical masculine indicia, yet are still not successful in relationships or socially. For women who are seeking to establish themselves in the criteria listed as "masculine," would imagine this is true also. Everyone needs the traits listed as feminine to be successful in relationships over the long term IMO.

 

There is no source, just my observations. Every human being will utilize both masculine and feminine energy/traits. However, a person will most likey lean in one direction or another. I naturally lean toward masculine energy, so I'm attracted to women who lean toward feminine energy. Anyone can understand this simple concept, and everyone has experienced it at some point. Think about your dream girl on a wonderful date with you. What energy/traits does she display? What makes her personality so attractive to you? In my opinion the side of energy/traits you lean away from, is the exact side you need to see fully expressed in your partner. All men utilize a certain amount of feminine energy, but feminine women are in another league, and men feed off of it. We've all seen this in our lives, so I just tried to put it into words.

[sally4sara]

The things you are describing are all par for course (except for pre-ordering video games, obviously). If your partner is unwilling to drive you home after a dental surgery or help you cope with the death of a relative, it should raise very serious doubts about that person's commitment to you. These are all normal ways in which people in relationships help each other. I don't see this as "taking care" of someone.

 

To me, taking care of somebody implies assuming disproportionate long-term responsibilities. For instance, if you go to university, and then grad school, then do you PhD and your boyfriend/husband is financing your schooling and/or living expenses all this time, he is taking care of you (and you sure as hell are not an interdependent person). If your husband earns more money and makes a much greater contribution to your combined living, entertainment, and traveling expenses than you do, he is taking care of you and you are not independent.

 

For what reason would would one grown person NEED another to bankroll their endeavors in a relationship?

When it achieves a mutual goal.

 

If one spouse (it could be either) is furthering their education to be a more marketable person, it will increase the earnings for both.

If one spouse (it could be either) is raising children while the other works, it would be to benefit the children they have together.

Say both spouses really believe in the Doctors Without Boarders program but one has to keep a secure job in the states while the other spends a 6 moth stint in the program, it is to achieve a goal both want to see done.

If one spouse in in the service (in my older brother's case, it is his wife and the Air Force) while the other cares for their kids, it is a combined effort. It doesn't matter that she is earning the money. Together, they are covering the tasks that are desirous of both.

Once you're married, as long as both are together, seeing all aspects through, both are contributing to an arrangement that eases the earning of money for their collective expenses.

Don't enter into a marriage if you intend to keep score of earnings. And if you lament (or find no importance in) the concept of your spouse taking care of domestic work while you have a clear schedule for pursuing your career goals, don't have kids, run your own errands, clean your own wash, cook your own food, and never ask for help in anyway beyond halfsies on the bills. Oh wait......wouldn't that just be roomies?

In my case? He finished up school while I made more money. Then we earned the same. Then I did some charity work, house broke our puppy and put time in at my son's school while I worked part time and saw to more of the household tasks. Then I went back to my occupation and just recently was offered a full time place on a team making more than I've ever made before.

Life will ebb and flow requiring more of one in a particular arena and less of the other person. It will go back and forth, sometimes whether we choose it or not. To have someone pitch a fit at me for being to "masculine" when the flow results in me earning more and having less time for domestic tasks would be a serious pain in the azz. To have a partner who would pass up an opportunity that might require him to earn less than I for a while simply because it would be "feminine" of him would equally be a pain in the azz.

As I said before, life will put us in situations where we have to display masculine and feminine definitions at different points. Wouldn't it be mutually beneficial to have a partner that is comfortable being assertive when life calls for it?

I also notice that when these threads are brought up, people tend to start confusing assertive for just plain being a brat. No one wants a brat of any gender.

[carhill]

sally4sara, it's quite likely if my stbx had the vision you do on this topic, we'd still be married. I brought up this 'team' concept often in MC, that we needed to work as a team, both towards goals, as well as to support the M and our relationship. It isn't always equal and it isn't always easy. Success is defined by the process and the commitment. The journey together is the reward.

 

She just didn't get it, or didn't want it with me. So, instead, I made it worthwhile to have an uncontested divorce and I'll rebuild that team with someone else, hopefully someone who stands next to me to face life, as a team.

[sally4sara]

sally4sara, it's quite likely if my stbx had the vision you do on this topic, we'd still be married. I brought up this 'team' concept often in MC, that we needed to work as a team, both towards goals, as well as to support the M and our relationship. It isn't always equal and it isn't always easy. Success is defined by the process and the commitment. The journey together is the reward.

 

She just didn't get it, or didn't want it with me. So, instead, I made it worthwhile to have an uncontested divorce and I'll rebuild that team with someone else, hopefully someone who stands next to me to face life, as a team.

 

Then, while she may have been an assertive woman, she was also an uncompromising brat.

I remember my first marriage. I tried to be a working team. It was like his personal favorite hobby to make sure any path to whatever goal we discussed could not be seen through. It resulted in me being a reactionary brat. I didn't like me in that relationship. Present day updates make me glad that marriage failed.

[carhill]

I'll say she was definitely an assertive woman.

 

I'll try another flavor of assertive woman now while dating. They come in many flavors

[nddb]

The line between assertiveness and bossiness is a fine line. A lot of women I knew don't actively discipline themselves to be on the assertive side of that difference and not an insignificant number of women confuse the latter with the former.

 

I guess I was scarred by seeing how UNHAPPY some of my friends were with their bossy wives/girlfriends. Too bad these guys were thinking with their little heads. Being bossy/bitchy was one trait that was a deal breaker with me with some of my exes.

 

Now that I think about it, I may have missed out with some great women in my past, but I don't need to be fighting the battle of the sexes in the home--or take that risk that I'd end up sharing my friend's unhappy lot. The risk is not worth it. I'm sorry but it is what it is.

 

But I can't say I regret it how it turned out.

 

I lucked out in the mating lotto with my assertive, strong-willed but content and happy wife/partner, and I thank my lucky star there.

Edited February 11, 2010 by nddb

[norajane]

Like what, for example? I'm not trying to be coy; I'm genuinely curious to know what women mean by 'taking care of', other than financial support.

 

TLC.

 

Everyone needs it, and they need it from their partner, no matter how assertive they might be, no matter how kickass they might be at life.

 

When an assertive woman comes home to her man, she needs to feel "safe" that she can let go and relax and take off the badass boots she has to wear all fricking day to keep things running smoothly, and then be free to be soft and warm and cuddly and vulnerable and sexy and affectionate and loving with her man. She doesn't want to be in control with her partner all the time. She wants to find a safe person to let go with, knowing that he's strong enough and smart enough and capable enough to take over so she doesn't have to all the time.

 

The analogy I've used in the past is that an assertive woman may know how to ride a motorcycle on her own, and she may be damned good at doing so. But, she'd love to find a man that she trusts so she can ride with her arms wrapped tight around him and just let go of everything and enjoy the wind in her hair and the feel of her man in front of her.

 

I'm honest to god stunned that men believe assertive women don't need or want a man's TLC and solid strength in their lives. Strong women want a strong man, maybe even more than less assertive women do. A strong man is the only person she can let her guard down with, because she trusts that he'll be able to catch her if she falls.

Edited February 11, 2010 by norajane

[Johnny M]

For what reason would would one grown person NEED another to bankroll their endeavors in a relationship?

When it achieves a mutual goal.

 

If one spouse (it could be either) is furthering their education to be a more marketable person, it will increase the earnings for both.

You are discounting the possibility that once that dependent person furthers his or her (usually her) education, she will dump the guy who has been bankrolling her endeavors all these years. I've seen this scenario play out more than once: boyfriend bankrolls girlfriend through medical/dentistry/law school just to get dumped because the girlfriend is now higher than him on the social ladder and wants someone of equal status.