Why do I resent being the initiator? approaching and asking out, i feel i shouldn't

[GemmaUK]

Great, I just don't like denim and if that makes me unattractive then so be it.

 

ZA, try some combat trousers in khaki. Not the whole army patterned ones, just plain ones.

The fabric is much lighter, dries quickly and they are also sexy.

I love them on a man.

 

I do also love jeans on a man though - a guy in pale blue jeans and a white log sleeved shirt is just..hmmm.

Or combats and a t-shirt..

[ZA Dater]

ZA, try some combat trousers in khaki. Not the whole army patterned ones, just plain ones.

The fabric is much lighter, dries quickly and they are also sexy.

I love them on a man.

 

I do also love jeans on a man though - a guy in pale blue jeans and a white log sleeved shirt is just..hmmm.

Or combats and a t-shirt..

 

 

Perhaps the real trick when deciding if you are going to initiate is to have absolute confidence, just maybe. Not sure appearance has much to do with confidence but I guess if one feels good then one may be slightly more confident

[truthtripper]

Perhaps the real trick when deciding if you are going to initiate is to have absolute confidence, just maybe. Not sure appearance has much to do with confidence but I guess if one feels good then one may be slightly more confident

 

Believe in yourself, man. This is what makes you sexy, not the combat trousers.

[regine_phalange]

I don't know why but I've always resented the gender role that guys have to be the initiators of dating and relationships, approach and talk to the girl first, go up to her first, initiate conversations and ask her out, do the pursuing, etc. So this is not a typical question of why do guys have to be the initiators, its a question going deep as to why I resent the fact that guys are expected to be the initiator and see unfairness in that, I feel I shouldn't.

 

 

They say that guys, men, are natural born hunters, men have evolved to be the pursuers, that men embrace that role, if that is the case then why is being a relentless pursuer not something that is instinctively, innately, ingrained in me?

 

 

I sometimes wonder if something is just fundamentally, psychologically wrong me, or genetically in terms of mentality, mindset.

 

 

Because I feel that being the pursuer is something that I should embrace or just do automatically since most people say that men are natural pursuers, hunters, like they say it like as it men are naturally like that, but I was never naturally like that.

 

 

I'm asking this question because maybe I have bigger issues that I don't notice that I need to fix first. Some will say I just lack balls(as much as I hate, despise, loathe that term), although obviously i'm not literally castrated.

 

 

I wonder what causes me and other guys to resent having to be the initiator, making the first move? just part of our natural personality or just bad influences growing up, negative conditioning?

 

God no. There's more that makes a man than chasing women and asking them out. My grandparents grew up in an era with strict gender roles and still my grandmother was the one who lured my grandfather in, by giving him attention and flirting first (for instance she loved to sing as a hobby, and in one of her "gigs" she threw him a flower). And my grandpa is far from a wimp, he was alway a toughie (as I child he didn't have shoes, left home and started working from age 13, got exiled during WW2, you get the idea).

 

So you may not have this traditionally (?) masculine trait, but I'm sure you have others.

[elaine567]

God no. There's more that makes a man than chasing women and asking them out. My grandparents grew up in an era with strict gender roles and still my grandmother was the one who lured my grandfather in, by giving him attention and flirting first (for instance she loved to sing as a hobby, and in one of her "gigs" she threw him a flower). And my grandpa is far from a wimp, he was alway a toughie (as I child he didn't have shoes, left home and started working from age 13, got exiled during WW2, you get the idea).

 

So you may not have this traditionally (?) masculine trait, but I'm sure you have others.

 

I agree, women have a lot to do with the success or not of approaches. Women give the "glad eye" to desirable suitors and ignore the rest. Your granny made it patently obvious she was interested and got her man.

Men who seem most successful, push against open doors. They suss out who is interested in them, do some test flirting and then go in for the kill. They have a high success rate, because they know they are onto a winner, any girl who is holding back, obviously disinterested, or openly genuinely hostile is ignored, no matter how hot she is.

 

Inexperienced men tend to go about it wrong, THEY choose a girl to approach and ignore her level of interest. They find out that she is NOT interested, and they then have to sneak off with their their tail between their legs, muttering about how no-one wants them.

[Teraskas]

Inexperienced men tend to go about it wrong, THEY choose a girl to approach and ignore her level of interest. They find out that she is NOT interested, and they then have to sneak off with their their tail between their legs, muttering about how no-one wants them.

 

Inexperience isn't the only factor in this.

 

Personally I'm diagnosed with NLD. (Non-verbal learning disorder.)

Mathematics used to be (and still is) challenging to me as a result of this condition.

People diagnosed with this disorder may not perceive nonverbal cues such as facial expression or tone of voice.

 

As a result of this condition I am extremely bad at reading signals, especially female ones.

More or less to the point where it's impossible for me to deduce anything from women when going out.

To say it's frustrating would be the understatement of the century.

Believe me, I would fix this or improve it if I could, but there simply isn't any existing treatment.

No amount of experience will fix it.

Granted, I have improved due to experience to the point where I can sometimes deduce a few indicators of interest, but that's all really. xD

[William]

Due to a report on this thread, moderation is stopping by to relate a couple items:

 

1. This is the general topic:

 

"I wonder what causes me and other guys to resent having to be the initiator, making the first move? just part of our natural personality or just bad influences growing up, negative conditioning?"

 

Hence, keep it at the individual level and avoid general gender politics/philosophies as points of discussion.

 

2. Focus on the thread starter and their dilemma and be advised, for the time being, their responses may be briefly delayed.

 

Thanks!

[BronzeAgeJaeger217]

I wonder if testosterone levels affect confidence levels

Edited August 29, 2015 by a LoveShack.org Moderator

[Rejected Rosebud]

You simply don't see that stunning lady asking guys out, no quite often its the female nobody wants to ask out because she is simply too physically unattractive (apparently like me).

 

That is really not true, the more bold, aggressive, socially confident person will be more comfortable asking somebody out and that all often comes with good looks.

 

I have said it before - a shy, socially awkward girl does have an advantage over the same kind of guy because at least society doesn't expect her to ask a guy out.

 

But the idea of that awkward girl getting flooded with dates because she is a girl is just not true. Lots of girls NEVER get asked out at all. You know there are alot of cliches in the English language about girls who were looked over by men: Wallflower; Always a bridesmaid, never a bride; one of the boys; old maid; spinster; this is because there really ARE alot of women in this situation!

[johndoe2]

I agree, women have a lot to do with the success or not of approaches. Women give the "glad eye" to desirable suitors and ignore the rest. Your granny made it patently obvious she was interested and got her man.

Men who seem most successful, push against open doors. They suss out who is interested in them, do some test flirting and then go in for the kill. They have a high success rate, because they know they are onto a winner, any girl who is holding back, obviously disinterested, or openly genuinely hostile is ignored, no matter how hot she is.

 

Inexperienced men tend to go about it wrong, THEY choose a girl to approach and ignore her level of interest. They find out that she is NOT interested, and they then have to sneak off with their their tail between their legs, muttering about how no-one wants them.

Well first of all, detecting interest in women is, in itself, a skill, and at least on some measure a natural one. Relating to what Teraskas said above, some people are either naturally not very good at or even basically unable to read noverbal cues of this sort. In fact, the inability to do so is one of the symptoms of Asperger Syndrome I believe. This disease is, incidentally, more common in males than females; males are said to be naturally less adept at reading nonverbal communication than females in general too.

 

Also, I maintain that there is considerable ambiguity in 'body language.' I'm willing to bet many women think they are communicating their interest quite well and unambiguously but are in fact still expecting some measure of telepathy in the male to whom they are trying to project interest. Nonverbal cues always seem more obvious to the person giving them than the person who is supposed to be receiving them.

 

Then lastly there is the problem of getting a woman interested in the first place, which precedes the whole dilemma of 'picking the one who's interested.' A separate matter perhaps.

 

No, you really don't understand a thing about it. And it's also one of the few things that could possibly help relieve your feelings of social inferiority about not fitting into your gender role.

 

But I think your interpretation is great, beta. It's clearly making you very happy.

Gotta love that a radical feminist is trying to shame a man for being a 'beta male.' You seem to have more in common with PUA/'player'/male chauvinist types than I do. Btw, for future reference, resorting to ad hominem betrays a lack of confidence in the soundness of your position. And the "convert to my ideology or you'll never be happy" isn't any more convincing than the slightly varied "convert or be damned" 'argument' Just a couple rhetorical tips.

 

Btw, you may if you please start a new thread on the matter and link it, given the moderator's decree that it is too tangential to this thread. I will, henceforth, try to be topical.

Edited August 29, 2015 by johndoe2

[William]

We moved the posts on feminism and gender roles to a new thread:

 

http://www.loveshack.org/forums/general/general-relationship-discussion/545335-feminism-gender-roles

 

In general, topics which aren't directly addressing the personal issues raised in the starting post can easily be assigned threads of their own. It's easy and free and we encourage it so all topics get the exposure and targeted discussion they deserve. Thanks!

[ZA Dater]

Well first of all, detecting interest in women is, in itself, a skill, and at least on some measure a natural one. Relating to what Teraskas said above, some people are either naturally not very good at or even basically unable to read noverbal cues of this sort. In fact, the inability to do so is one of the symptoms of Asperger Syndrome I believe. This disease is, incidentally, more common in males than females; males are said to be naturally less adept at reading nonverbal communication than females in general too.

 

Also, I maintain that there is considerable ambiguity in 'body language.' I'm willing to bet many women think they are communicating their interest quite well and unambiguously but are in fact still expecting some measure of telepathy in the male to whom they are trying to project interest. Nonverbal cues always seem more obvious to the person giving them than the person who is supposed to be receiving them.

 

Then lastly there is the problem of getting a woman interested in the first place, which precedes the whole dilemma of 'picking the one who's interested.' A separate matter perhaps.

 

 

Really a good post because its logical. Perhaps there are some steps one should follow BEFORE even thinking about approaching.

 

 

Maybe decide how and if you can get them interested, then determine how they respond to said interest, all of this of course is going to mean some sort of approach.

 

 

I agree totally with you that people can be bad at reading non verbal language. If people were perhaps better perhaps approaching would be more successful.

[BronzeAgeJaeger217]

Like there are times I don't feel like a normal male for resenting the gender role that guys are expected to make the first move, do the approaching and asking out, initiating, because since people argue and say that men evolved over the millenniums to be the pursuers

[ZA Dater]

Like there are times I don't feel like a normal male for resenting the gender role that guys are expected to make the first move, do the approaching and asking out, initiating, because since people argue and say that men evolved over the millenniums to be the pursuers

 

I don't see much of an issue with pursuing even if the initial approach perhaps isn't too good. Perhaps approaching isn't the most important thing but its the follow up which really determines how good or bad ones chances are.

 

 

If one had a fair bit of balance between success and failure at approaching then over time one can succeed but taking the good things and getting rid of those aspects which don't work.

 

 

Perhaps what hasn't been said is how one decides to approach, what would be the initial attraction which would prompt an approach to begin with.

[BronzeAgeJaeger217]

I don't see much of an issue with pursuing even if the initial approach perhaps isn't too good. Perhaps approaching isn't the most important thing but its the follow up which really determines how good or bad ones chances are.

 

 

If one had a fair bit of balance between success and failure at approaching then over time one can succeed but taking the good things and getting rid of those aspects which don't work.

 

 

Perhaps what hasn't been said is how one decides to approach, what would be the initial attraction which would prompt an approach to begin with.

 

Ya and its difficult to not feel jealous of men who were successful with women in their teens and early 20's

[BronzeAgeJaeger217]

I feel this is a mental illness of mine

[BronzeAgeJaeger217]

I wonder testosterone levels are a factor in this

[regine_phalange]

I feel this is a mental illness of mine

 

You are being hard on yourself. We don't always identify 100% with our gender, meaning we have masculine and feminine traits.

 

Would you mind writing here what other traits you have that are masculine?

[Revolver]

It has to do with success rate and work you're putting in. I can see why someone wouldn't want to waste their time going out approaching Dozens of women only for maybe 1 to think your "ok" but it going absolutely nowhere in the long run.

[elaine567]

Ya and its difficult to not feel jealous of men who were successful with women in their teens and early 20's

 

I feel this is a mental illness of mine

 

I agree, you need to get this sorted out, you will never move on healthily if you don't.

[ZA Dater]

I probably shouldn't make suggestions but...

 

Take a look at yourself from the perspective of others, look how you project yourself and then decide, look at yourself what you can improve.

 

The major lesson I learnt very recently is the way we see ourselves isn't always how other people view us.

[BronzeAgeJaeger217]

You are being hard on yourself. We don't always identify 100% with our gender, meaning we have masculine and feminine traits.

 

Would you mind writing here what other traits you have that are masculine?

 

I have no issue being the protector of a woman, that's for sure, I would say that's the main thing I have no issue being masculine in terms of with women