if your type's type isn't you

[tigressA]

My 'type' are introverted, more rational than emotional, more conservative/old-fashioned than liberal/modern. Maintain close relationships with their family and friends. Can have great conversations and make each other laugh. Very smart and studious, though not all across the board--usually only in science/math/technical areas. Very career-oriented. Generally not reflective about themselves. Some common interests with me. Usually they're not from the U.S.

 

It's very much the opposites-attract credo with me. I'm emotional, intuitive, and creative--I like to act, write and express myself through fashion. I fare much better educationally in the liberal arts rather than science, math and technology. I'm usually much more literary and well-read than the guys I date, and we admire about each other what we ourselves lack. Where it gets hairy is the differences in values. These guys are super-close with their families, sometimes to the point that major life decisions are heavily influenced by them (usually a standard cultural thing). I would never dream of allowing my family such input with regard to my life, and while I love them, I haven't maintained a close relationship with them since I moved out over 5 years ago. Their conservatism makes them take me less seriously as a LTR option; I have stories about things I've done that would make them blush. Their focus on their education/career usually translates to being a workaholic, so they don't have nearly as much time for any relationship as I would like. They're not emotionally expressive either, so I find that lacking.

 

I've found my 'type' are really fun for flings, but not viable LTR options. The guys that I've been in longer relationships with have not fallen into this type.

Edited January 13, 2011 by tigressA

[northern_sky]

None of these things are bad, but nothing truly important is in this list. The truly important things are things like, how they make you feel, how they treat you, what their values and goals are. I mean, I wouldn't date a man who wasn't smart and good-looking, but that's not really the important part of "what I want." It's like the wheels of a car; I may need it to make them go, but it's not a car by itself.

 

I think they're all important in different respects. But the things I mentioned are traits you can appreciate from the outside, what draws you to somebody. It's harder to assess their deeper values unless you know them really well.

Edited January 13, 2011 by northern_sky

[EasyHeart]

I don't have a 'type' and I find the whole concept pretty ridiculous.

 

I view people as individuals, not 'types'.

[Star Gazer]

As usual, zengirl... awesome post. I feel like I could have written it myself.

 

None of these things are bad, but nothing truly important is in this list. The truly important things are things like, how they make you feel, how they treat you, what their values and goals are. I mean, I wouldn't date a man who wasn't smart and good-looking, but that's not really the important part of "what I want." It's like the wheels of a car; I may need it to make them go, but it's not a car by itself.

 

This is so true, and goes along with what I always say: shop for the relationship you want [the car], not the guy [the wheels].

 

I think almost all men would prefer a girl who's not "emotionally intense" in general. To me, that's kind of a nice way of saying emotionally unhealthy or even crazy. Which is not to say that love cannot be intense, but it's usually the chemical reaction between two people that causes the intensity. People who are overly "intense" in general make bad LTRs. Of course, only you know if you're overly intense.

 

...

 

Passion for life and a joi de vivre are different than "emotionally intense" to me. I'm also just saying that if you run that phrase past most guys, I imagine they'll be thinking, "Crazy."

 

A rich appreciation for the world would be a good thing, if it's tempered with sense. I think most men I know like excitability and passion for something (so do most women), but "intense" is a word with negative connotations. I would have never thought this description from "emotionally intense." I would have thought more, gets connected too fast, gets upset over small things, feels anger freely, etc.

 

Emotionally intense definitely carries a negative connotation, and I would agree with your definition.

 

I do not believe the OP has the "joie de vivre." If she had that joy of life, well, she'd be...joyful. Happy. Content. OP has repeatedly demonstrated to us she feels otherwise, and has admitted getting connected too fast. And s demonstrated by her reaction in threads (including this one), she gets upset and angered over small things quite easily. She's emotionally intense, for sure, but not in the joie de vive, run through a field of wildflowers rejoicing at the colors kind of way.

 

Now on to "types"...

 

Again, I feel like you wrote my post for me! I'm parroting a lot of it...

 

1. My type: My type are smart (educated, yet not necessarily book-smart, just common-sense smart, but really, really sharp), confident, loyal/faithful, good-looking, athletic men who can have excellent conversations, want LTRs and children, maintain strong friendships, can be reflective about their own lives/traits, have some common interests with me (preferably skiing/boarding, golf, and travel), are curious about me and the world around them, are good listeners, and value the people in their lives more than the things in their lives. They've also got to be men who are happy with the state of their lives and not still searching for themselves or a career, financially stable, emotionally healthy, no addictions or abuse of substances or alcohol, attentive to me, affectionate, desire to communicate (the skill level can be worked on), doesn't harbor resentments, and doesn't have any major emotional barriers, like major trust issues, etc. (minor barriers can be overcome though), and demonstrates integrity in most areas of his life. Oh yeah, he's gotta love animals. Physically, he's tall and has an athletic build, and his jeans break just right at the foot.

 

2. The type of men do I usually end up dating, and type that is most drawn to me: I get asked out by all kinds of men, but I've noticed in the past 3-4 months that I tend to attract more guys who are outwardly confident and forward, but who are insecure and/or angry/bitter on the inside. This could be just because of "what's left" out there at my age. I'm honestly thinking I should just wait a few more years to really date, because more guys will be divorced by then! I'm getting off-topic...

 

I end up dating all sorts too. It's often difficult to tell whether any given man has a lot of the traits listed above when first meeting them, so I give most guys a chance if they're able to form a sentence and I find them reasonably attractive, and then vet them out from there. If I learn they aren't what I need, then I move on. I'd rather be single than date a guy who doesn't give me what I need. Being single isn't really terrible.

 

As for actual real relationships beyond just dating, the guys I've dated have met most of the criteria above, but there's always been one glaring problem/missing requirement that prevented the relationship from lasting forever. College/law school boyfriend didn't have his sh*t together, wasn't happy with the state of his life, and was still searching for himself. Another had major emotional barriers, didn't trust anyone. Another was unfaithful. Skiman had an alcohol problem, was unable to communicate and harbored resentments.

 

3. Does my type ask you out and then lose interest, or does he flat out reject me when I express interest? When and how do these interactions usually fizzle? Of course, men have lost interest in me. There are all sorts of things that affect the strength of a relationship. I've lost interest in men, too. Generally, if something is going to fizzle before it becomes serious, it happens in the first 2 months.

 

But, I have noticed that my type does tend to lose interest if I chase/initiate too often, or things move too fast, physically or emotionally. I've noticed that my type tends to want, nay, need, a slower pace to really get to know each other, and also to lead. So, while it goes against my natural instincts to go after what I want, I let him.

 

4. My type's type: The guys in #1 want smart, classy, athletic, beautiful women who desire a LTR and would make good mothers. They want emotionally stable women, who have decent goals/careers/life choices, etc. They also tend to look for women with solid, healthy, long-lasting friendships and family relationships (not necessarily traditional families, as mine aren't, and it's never been an issue).

 

5. Is my type different in some way? Like zengirl, I'd say everyone I've ever met is different than I expected in some way.

[pandagirl]

This is a good exercise for me, since I've lately been second-guessing the type of men I go for.

1) what is your type (be specific)?

Attractive, somewhere between boyish and handsome. I am very much drawn to men whom I admire on an intellectual level, who do something I admire. They must be creatively-minded or problem solvers. I'm not so much attracted to musicians, writers or artist -- too sensitive and wandering for me. I'm more likely to fall for an architect, engineer or someone in the design field. MUST HAVE A GOOD SENSE OF HUMOR. That doesn't mean they have to be a comedian, but someone who "gets" thing and can make me laugh and witty. Admittedly, they are usually emotionally withdrawn in some sense, though I don't always know that in the beginning.

2) what type of men do you usually end up dating, and what type is most drawn to you?

I pretty much end up dating this exact type.

3) does your type ask you out and then lose interest, or does he flat out reject you when you express interest? When and how do these interactions usually fizzle?

They usually like me, but end for whatever reasons most relationships end. Here's something interesting, I haven't been on a date with a man I met in "Real Life" in YEARS. No one asks me out. However, when I met men from a dating site, they are always interested in me, and I'm the one who usually has to turn them down.

 

4) what is your type's type?

I can only guess, but intelligent, beautiful, ambitious, creative, stylish and intriguing.

 

5) getting to know men who fall into your type are they usually what you expect or are they different in some way?

At this point, I'd have to say it's what I expect. However, like I stated before, a person's emotional capacity can never really be assessed until you get to know them. And I'm pretty much batting a 100 with dating unavailable guys.

[Star Gazer]

MUST HAVE A GOOD SENSE OF HUMOR.

 

HOW could I have left this out!!???? My lordy, that's like #2 on my list!!

 

I give him 3-4 dates to make me belly laugh, in some way. I'm so easily amused that if it doesn't happen by then, he's just dull and I could never live forever with him.

[pandagirl]

OK.

 

After re-reading what I just wrote, I realized that my type is based hugely on superficial things! I didn't list one meaningful attribute, like morals or friendships or the whatnot. Of course, those things are a given, but I'm obviously wrapped up in things that shouldn't really matter.

 

In terms of career, I have this idea of dating a specific type of person, which is so unreasonable. But I think it's because I'm so wrapped in my own identity that is career-based that I do this. Projection at its finest.

Edited January 13, 2011 by pandagirl

[northern_sky]

I do not believe the OP has the "joie de vivre." If she had that joy of life, well, she'd be...joyful. Happy. Content. OP has repeatedly demonstrated to us she feels otherwise, and has admitted getting connected too fast. And s demonstrated by her reaction in threads (including this one), she gets upset and angered over small things quite easily. She's emotionally intense, for sure, but not in the joie de vive, run through a field of wildflowers rejoicing at the colors kind of way.

 

Who do you think would be better equipped to judge whether i have that quality: a guy who has known me for eight years, and essentially lived with me for two of those years, another ex who knew me for 3.5 years, or yourself (someone who has never even met me in real life)?

 

I'm not claiming I'm constantly happy or skipping through life, obviously, but when I'm passionate about something, I get really excited and I tend to get those around me excited and interested in it too. This is the vibrancy in me that people who know me well irl see.

Edited January 13, 2011 by northern_sky

[Star Gazer]

I'm not saying you're not passionate about some things. You definitely are. But you're also emotionally intense. This is VERY different from having the JOY of LIFE.

 

You may have had the joie de vivre 8 years ago, but I don't think anyone here has seen it in you in all your years on LS.

[tigressA]

I've realized that the guys I go for who illustrate the qualities I listed in my first post are generally emotionally unavailable/inexpressive, compared to myself. They don't put much stock at all in emotion, don't really bother with it. It's not something I could deal with long-term. I need a guy to be affectionate and attentive and I don't get that from the guys I usually date. They tend to be more uncompromising and rigid as well, while I like to compromise and am more spontaneous. I am very reflective about my life and choices; I think a lot about those things and how I can grow as a person. How I can make my relationships more fulfilling, learning from mistakes. The guys I tend to date don't contemplate things like that beyond their education and career, while I don't define myself by the kind of education I've had or how much, or my career. Geez, no wonder things haven't been working out for me.

[northern_sky]

I'm not saying you're not passionate. You definitely are.

 

But you're also emotionally intense.

 

You may have had the joie de vivre 8 years ago, but I don't think anyone here has seen it in you in all your years on LS.

 

I probably had more of it back then, but according to those guys, who are friends now, I still have it when I'm in a good mood (which isn't as rare as you'd think). Even though I'm probably depressed right now, it's not as if I'm sad alllll of the time. That's just what you see on LS, because I tend to write on here when I'm down.

[pandagirl]

I've realized that the guys I go for who illustrate the qualities I listed in my first post are generally emotionally unavailable/inexpressive, compared to myself. They don't put much stock at all in emotion, don't really bother with it. It's not something I could deal with long-term. I need a guy to be affectionate and attentive and I don't get that from the guys I usually date. They tend to be more uncompromising and rigid as well, while I like to compromise and am more spontaneous. I am very reflective about my life and choices; I think a lot about those things and how I can grow as a person. How I can make my relationships more fulfilling, learning from mistakes. The guys I tend to date don't contemplate things like that beyond their education and career, while I don't define myself by the kind of education I've had or how much, or my career. Geez, no wonder things haven't been working out for me.

 

Oh man. I can really relate to this.

 

It's not that I WANT to like these guys, but it's always who I do end up with and who I'm ultimately most attracted to.

[northern_sky]

I've realized that the guys I go for who illustrate the qualities I listed in my first post are generally emotionally unavailable/inexpressive, compared to myself. They don't put much stock at all in emotion, don't really bother with it. It's not something I could deal with long-term. I need a guy to be affectionate and attentive and I don't get that from the guys I usually date. They tend to be more uncompromising and rigid as well, while I like to compromise and am more spontaneous. I am very reflective about my life and choices; I think a lot about those things and how I can grow as a person. How I can make my relationships more fulfilling, learning from mistakes. The guys I tend to date don't contemplate things like that beyond their education and career, while I don't define myself by the kind of education I've had or how much, or my career. Geez, no wonder things haven't been working out for me.

 

I'm glad this has been fruitful reflection for you!

 

I think it's interesting that you're attracted to your opposite. I bet you'd do better with somebody who is somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. I really don't imagine you doing well with a rigid, anal guy. I imagine you with another creative guy who is on your wavelength.

 

I also think as you develop yourself and accomplish more, you will feel less desire to find somebody who complements what you feel may be lacking in yourself.

 

Were you always attracted to this type, or is it more of a recent development?

[northern_sky]

This is a good exercise for me, since I've lately been second-guessing the type of men I go for.

1) what is your type (be specific)?

Attractive, somewhere between boyish and handsome. I am very much drawn to men whom I admire on an intellectual level, who do something I admire. They must be creatively-minded or problem solvers. I'm not so much attracted to musicians, writers or artist -- too sensitive and wandering for me. I'm more likely to fall for an architect, engineer or someone in the design field. MUST HAVE A GOOD SENSE OF HUMOR. That doesn't mean they have to be a comedian, but someone who "gets" thing and can make me laugh and witty. Admittedly, they are usually emotionally withdrawn in some sense, though I don't always know that in the beginning.

2) what type of men do you usually end up dating, and what type is most drawn to you?

I pretty much end up dating this exact type.

3) does your type ask you out and then lose interest, or does he flat out reject you when you express interest? When and how do these interactions usually fizzle?

They usually like me, but end for whatever reasons most relationships end. Here's something interesting, I haven't been on a date with a man I met in "Real Life" in YEARS. No one asks me out. However, when I met men from a dating site, they are always interested in me, and I'm the one who usually has to turn them down.

 

4) what is your type's type?

I can only guess, but intelligent, beautiful, ambitious, creative, stylish and intriguing.

 

5) getting to know men who fall into your type are they usually what you expect or are they different in some way?

At this point, I'd have to say it's what I expect. However, like I stated before, a person's emotional capacity can never really be assessed until you get to know them. And I'm pretty much batting a 100 with dating unavailable guys.

 

OK, Panda. Seems like you, OG and I are all after the same guys. Basically everything that you wrote above is what I look for. It's interesting because as I recall you and OG are INFPs, while I'm INTP, but borderline T/F. So our personalities are pretty close.

[tigressA]

Oh man. I can really relate to this.

 

It's not that I WANT to like these guys, but it's always who I do end up with and who I'm ultimately most attracted to.

 

Ahh, I know! It's frustrating. I just recalled another quality these guys tend to share, relating to being uncompromising--I pinpointed this with my ex, C. It's like these guys look for someone who can just fit into their life with little to no conflict, and once there's trouble it's not something they want to work to fix, it's just inconvenient. It's always on me to resolve my feelings about the situation and be "okay" with everything--no compromise. I think it's a cultural thing...they behave as though a woman should accommodate them in a relationship, not that both people should work to accommodate each other.

[northern_sky]

Tigress and Panda: Do you find the guys you like are very hung up on image, identity and how they come off to others?

 

I am going to paste an excerpt from a pm of something Kamille said to me about my type. I hope she doesn't mind. I think it's incredibly insightful, and may help others reading this thread.

 

In my experience, self-involved people are incredibly difficult to build a relationship with because if something goes wrong, they will generally not look for a "middle ground solution" but rather put their partner in the "you don't understand me; maybe there is something wrong with you" category. Self-involved people are particularly invested in not putting themselves into question.

 

*1000 posts!

[pandagirl]

Ahh, I know! It's frustrating. I just recalled another quality these guys tend to share, relating to being uncompromising--I pinpointed this with my ex, C. It's like these guys look for someone who can just fit into their life with little to no conflict, and once there's trouble it's not something they want to work to fix, it's just inconvenient. It's always on me to resolve my feelings about the situation and be "okay" with everything--no compromise. I think it's a cultural thing...they behave as though a woman should accommodate them in a relationship, not that both people should work to accommodate each other.

 

Wow. Yes. This was very much my ex, and it's kind of what led to our breakup.

 

I even said to my friend that it's like he just wanted me to fit into his life, and once I started to voice my concern about certain issues, instead of communicating with me like a normal person, he just didn't want to deal with it and pushed me away. Like, it was a nuisance or something. During an argument once I said something like, we just have to compromise, and he said: "I'm not much into comprising."

 

I was always a bit suspicious of my ex's attitude towards women. He has a Latino background, though he was raised fully in the US, very educated and pretty liberal. However, it seemed like he always wanted to be taken care of.

[pandagirl]

Tigress and Panda: Do you find the guys you like are very hung up on image, identity and how they come off to others?

 

I am going to paste an excerpt from a pm of something Kamille said to me about my type. I hope she doesn't mind. I think it's incredibly insightful, and may help others reading this thread.

 

In my experience, self-involved people are incredibly difficult to build a relationship with because if something goes wrong, they will generally not look for a "middle ground solution" but rather put their partner in the "you don't understand me; maybe there is something wrong with you" category. Self-involved people are particularly invested in not putting themselves into question.

 

*1000 posts!

 

Woohoo! 1000!

 

I can't say for all the guys I've dated, but with my last boyfriend, yes and no. He was image/identity conscious in the sense he really cared about his career. He went to a very competitive/elite grad school, and that attitude was bred there. At the same time, he didn't care a **** about what other people thought of him... though I think that was a front.

 

HA! Of course, as always, Kamille is totally right. I think I'm a pretty level-headed, reasonable person, who is willing to communicate and discuss anything to get to a place where both parties are content. But my ex often times made me feel crazy or unreasonable, because he wasn't able to get to that "middle ground," and it really made me feel so confused because I'd never encountered that kind of resistance before. In fact, he said to me many times frustratedly: "Panda, I need to be with someone who understands me and how I am!"

[tigressA]

Tigress and Panda: Do you find the guys you like are very hung up on image, identity and how they come off to others?

 

I am going to paste an excerpt from a pm of something Kamille said to me about my type. I hope she doesn't mind. I think it's incredibly insightful, and may help others reading this thread.

 

In my experience, self-involved people are incredibly difficult to build a relationship with because if something goes wrong, they will generally not look for a "middle ground solution" but rather put their partner in the "you don't understand me; maybe there is something wrong with you" category. Self-involved people are particularly invested in not putting themselves into question.

 

*1000 posts!

 

God, Kamille's post fits C to a T. He was ALWAYS saying that I didn't understand him; why couldn't I ever understand him. And the bolded--C and I would have the dumbest fights about that stuff all the time!

 

Were you always attracted to this type, or is it more of a recent development?

 

I've always been attracted to that type, but it's manifested itself in more extreme ways over the last year. At first it was subtle--I was inexplicably drawn to guys who are really religious and rigid in those beliefs. My first boyfriend is Lutheran and was abstinent until marriage. He had a very "My way or the highway" attitude. Not too accommodating. I was in love with a FWB who is a conservative Christian, but we got along really well in that he was more creative and emotionally open, like me.

 

I also noticed that no guy I've dated has divorced parents. Their families have always been intact and, for the most part, happy. My family dynamic was much less so. My parents never married and were together on and off until I was 5 or 6 years old; their relationship was volatile. Both my parents were in and out of relationships, my dad got married once but that didn't last.

[northern_sky]

 

2. The type of men do I usually end up dating, and type that is most drawn to me: I get asked out by all kinds of men, but I've noticed in the past 3-4 months that I tend to attract more guys who are outwardly confident and forward, but who are insecure and/or angry/bitter on the inside. This could be just because of "what's left" out there at my age. I'm honestly thinking I should just wait a few more years to really date, because more guys will be divorced by then!

 

Why not just cut to the chase and date those slightly older guys now?

 

I also think in general it takes work to find people who are confident through and through. It's not uncommon for outward and inward confidence to be misaligned.

[northern_sky]

God, Kamille's post fits C to a T. He was ALWAYS saying that I didn't understand him; why couldn't I ever understand him. And the bolded--C and I would have the dumbest fights about that stuff all the time!

 

 

 

I've always been attracted to that type, but it's manifested itself in more extreme ways over the last year. At first it was subtle--I was inexplicably drawn to guys who are really religious and rigid in those beliefs. My first boyfriend is Lutheran and was abstinent until marriage. He had a very "My way or the highway" attitude. Not too accommodating. I was in love with a FWB who is a conservative Christian, but we got along really well in that he was more creative and emotionally open, like me.

 

I also noticed that no guy I've dated has divorced parents. Their families have always been intact and, for the most part, happy. My family dynamic was much less so. My parents never married and were together on and off until I was 5 or 6 years old; their relationship was volatile. Both my parents were in and out of relationships, my dad got married once but that didn't last.

 

It sounds like you see these guys from close families and traditional upbringings as a source of strength and stability, since you lacked that foundation growing up? But having dated them, I'm sure you've become aware that in many cases those families are more suffocating than anything.

 

I *do* think you'd be happy with a guy who comes from a strong family, and that's something you should actually seek out, but a family that derives its strength from solid parenting and love rather than external conventions like culture and religion.

 

Also curious: does this have any relation to your attraction to Indian guys, as they come from an extremely family-oriented culture?

Edited January 13, 2011 by northern_sky

[northern_sky]

Tigress: You might consider dating mediterranean-American guys. (definitely would *not* date those born in Europe since they're rather sexist).

 

I come from a mediterranean family, and they tend to be very close and warm but not in a suffocating or judgmental way.

[SteveC80]

Its hillarious how long womens laundry list is and u wonder why youre single

[tigressA]

It sounds like you see these guys from close families and traditional upbringings as a source of strength and stability, since you lacked that foundation growing up? But having dated them, I'm sure you've become aware that in many cases those families are more suffocating than anything.

 

I *do* think you'd be happy with a guy who comes from a strong family, and that's something you should actually seek out, but a family that derives its strength from solid parenting and love rather than external conventions like culture and religion.

 

Also curious: does this have any relation to your attraction to Indian guys, as they come from an extremely family-oriented culture?

 

Oh yes, it definitely does. But then this always backfires on me, as I'm not close with my family to the extent that they are--like daily phone calls, for instance. I'll talk to my dad or my brother maybe once every couple of weeks at the most. Also as I said earlier, I would never, ever, ever have my family influencing my major life decisions, such as education, career and especially who I get married to, which is a huge conflict in my attraction to these guys because they tend to seek their family's approval in pretty much everything. All of them I've dated were born and raised in India and have only been in the U.S. for <5 years on average, so this makes things even more disparate. Another thing...they do seem more attached to material things/seeking wealth, and I'm not like that at all. Wealth is not important to me. I just care about earning the minimum to sustain myself.

 

I've come to see that I'm attracted to the inherent "battle" involved in such differences of values and personality traits. I was with a guy last year on and off who I clicked with so well--we had so much in common. We shared dysfunctional family dynamics. We also had similar views on education/career and materialism. We just understood each other. But then I came to feel like he was more of a friend than a love interest and I lost my attraction to him. This is where my people-picker needs work. I need to stop throwing myself into dating situations wherein high drama is likely to occur due to big differences between us.

[northern_sky]

Its hillarious how long womens laundry list is and u wonder why youre single

 

Most of us don't keep these lists in their heads. At least i don't. We're just looking for the commonalities in the guys we like.