FrustratedStandards Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I'm really glad you posted this. In my case, I will admit that I view men as being either or. In my personal experiences, I have never met one that has been both. That is why I categorize men this way.
xxoo Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I've always imagined the "purely physical" attraction associated with ONSs and FWBs to be so much more powerful than anything I've experienced. I've read women on here say that they avoid casual/quick sex with men who they are seriously interested in, because it is emotionally risky for them. They fall for these guys, and want more than a ONS or FWB. A woman saying you are bf or husband material isn't necessarily saying that you don't have raw sex appeal.
ThaWholigan Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 A "good husband type" does not equal a guy without prior one night stands or fwb's... Just because a guy was attractive enough to get girls or even a lot of girls does not make him "non husband material" or a "bad boy". It simply means that he is normal and not socially inept. Many guys who have had lots of experience with women would still make good husband material. Don't delude yourself into thinking that you are "husband material" because you haven't been with a lot of women. It doesn't make "you better", it only means you didn't get any because you weren't able to. Not because you never wanted any. If anything it would make you non-husband material because you would always be wondering what you were missing. Being SOCIALLY INEPT!!! The crux of the issue here. Not being able to communicate your sexuality in a way that is attractive. I often think that the guys who say they are "nice guys" would be the first to cheat if they had the opportunity. I couldn't even decide that for myself unless I was in that position. I have to say, you're on a roll, I seem to be agreeing with much of your posts!
kaylan Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I'm really glad you posted this. In my case, I will admit that I view men as being either or. In my personal experiences, I have never met one that has been both. That is why I categorize men this way. Maybe youd have more success with men if you stopped categorizing us and realized people are complex?
ThaWholigan Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I'm really glad you posted this. In my case, I will admit that I view men as being either or. In my personal experiences, I have never met one that has been both. That is why I categorize men this way. Dunno if that is your fault to be honest. Lots of guys just try to mold themselves into a character type just to get responses from women and then bitch when it doesn't work, instead of embracing the complexities that Kaylan was referring to in the post above this. I think that's why you have always viewed them as one or the other. Could be wrong now.........(BUT I DON'T THINK SO.......yes I watch Monk )
Woggle Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I think that some women have their own version of the Madonna/Whore complex. They can't see a reliable and faithful man in a sexual way. Not all women of course but it is something I have often seen.
fortyninethousand322 Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I think that some women have their own version of the Madonna/Whore complex. They can't see a reliable and faithful man in a sexual way. Not all women of course but it is something I have often seen. Basically. A man who cares too much is way less attractive than a guy who thinks his girl is as replaceable as a light bulb.
xxoo Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I often think that the guys who say they are "nice guys" would be the first to cheat if they had the opportunity. I couldn't even decide that for myself unless I was in that position. That's crossed my mind, too. If a guy marries me because he can't get sex otherwise, what would happen down the line when some woman offers him sex? I'd much rather be with the guy who knows he can get it elsewhere, but decides to be with one woman. I think that some women have their own version of the Madonna/Whore complex. They can't see a reliable and faithful man in a sexual way. Not all women of course but it is something I have often seen. I agree, some women do seem to have this issue. It's a shame.
fortyninethousand322 Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 That's crossed my mind, too. If a guy marries me because he can't get sex otherwise, what would happen down the line when some woman offers him sex? I'd much rather be with the guy who knows he can get it elsewhere, but decides to be with one woman. Such a person is called "Tiger Woods". A guy who grew up a skinny, lanky, loser who grew up into a famous athlete and cheated each and every time an opportunity presented itself.
ThaWholigan Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I'd much rather be with the guy who knows he can get it elsewhere, but decides to be with one woman. One of the many problematic paradoxes of being a man who cannot get laid .
Ruby Slippers Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Are we "husband-material" guys really THAT clueless and bumbling in bed? Are we fools for thinking that we can possibly make a woman truly happy in an LTR? I think that most men have the potential to be strong, confident, take-charge men -- just as most women have the potential to be strong, confident, take-charge women. Those qualities are attractive in either sex. It feels great to a man or a woman to be with someone you know is with you because they confidently chose you. I think the most important factor here is attitude. I'm not perfect, but in any relationship (friendly, business, or romantic), I make it clear that I am open to and desiring of feedback that will help me improve. I don't take it personally. I use it to make the relationship more enjoyable and harmonious. The problem with non-alpha/non-take-charge guys is that they are often very sensitive to any feedback, and interpret it as criticism, no matter how gentle you are. They tend to be scared and have a negative attitude, so it's hard to get anywhere with them. No one can do anything about this kind of attitude but the guy himself. You can keep ruining things for yourself, or improve your attitude and actually get somewhere. And this goes for men and women.
Author GoodOnPaper Posted February 18, 2012 Author Posted February 18, 2012 Don't delude yourself into thinking that you are "husband material" because you haven't been with a lot of women. It doesn't make "you better", it only means you didn't get any because you weren't able to. Not because you never wanted any. If anything it would make you non-husband material because you would always be wondering what you were missing. So a marriage is de-legitimized if the guy was not a woman-magnet when he was single?
Author GoodOnPaper Posted February 18, 2012 Author Posted February 18, 2012 If a guy marries me because he can't get sex otherwise, what would happen down the line when some woman offers him sex? You mean if some woman offers him sex . . . if the guy can't get women when he's single, I don't think being married is going to help his chances.
Saraswati57 Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Basically. A man who cares too much is way less attractive than a guy who thinks his girl is as replaceable as a light bulb. Ah, true love.
xxoo Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 You mean if some woman offers him sex . . . if the guy can't get women when he's single, I don't think being married is going to help his chances. Married men can be very attractive to a certain type of woman.... Also, as he gains position and respect at work, and his confidence grows, opportunities may present!
Mme. Chaucer Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 Quote: Originally Posted by Breals Don't delude yourself into thinking that you are "husband material" because you haven't been with a lot of women. It doesn't make "you better", it only means you didn't get any because you weren't able to. Not because you never wanted any. If anything it would make you non-husband material because you would always be wondering what you were missing. So a marriage is de-legitimized if the guy was not a woman-magnet when he was single? No, it just means that it's not an "either / or" situation.
FitChick Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I'm with A_C -- why can't somebody be both "alpha" and husband-material? The two aren't mutually exclusive. I certainly don't view it as a choice between one or the other. The choice is between a stable LTR and an unstable casual relationship that's not necessarily going anywhere. That doesn't say much about the personality types involved - just what they're looking for at that particular point in time. An "alpha" can be involved in either one of those types of relationships. Whether you find "husband-material" guys more attractive or less attractive depends on how attractive you find the idea of settling down. I agree with this.
alphamale Posted February 18, 2012 Posted February 18, 2012 I think that some women have their own version of the Madonna/Whore complex. They can't see a reliable and faithful man in a sexual way. Not all women of course but it is something I have often seen. i would agree with that
Recommended Posts