The "who's your daddy (or momma)" debate.

Taichiliberal

Taichiliberal

Shaken, not stirred!
Skimming through the many topics on YouTube, I've come across an interesting trend. It seems that among a LOT of women "sex relationship" therapist/coaches there is an emphasis for the man to be more "vulnerable" in order for a relationship (short term, long term, traditional marriage) to work better.

Now the dictionary definition of "vulnerable" is being capable of being physically or emotionally wounded or open to attack or damage. Now humans wake up in the morning "vulnerable" to acts of God, disease, crime, accidents, a variety of failures and death. So, in my mind this kind of severely lowers the fear and importance of "emotional vulnerability" when it comes to a relationship ... be it rejection or ridicule.

What really struck me was one popular lady in this venue who states; "Having sex is extremely vulnerable because we are letting of control to feel pleasure." My question to that is, what "control" is lost during sex? I the "threat" debilitating humility or embarrassment regarding performance? If not, then what is the threat?

In my humble opinion, the definition of "vulnerable" has become VERY subjective in its use in the dynamic of the man/woman relations among sex/relationship coaches, therapist, analysts, etc., to be point of exaggeration. And that is more damaging and misleading than anything.

What's your take on the subject?
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Men have been told for decades that women want them to act more like women.

It is a lie that causes great harm.
Click to expand...
That's a knee jerk reaction to feminism and the "women's right movement" that essentially is not true. One of the major complaints that popped up in magazines, radio shows and feature sections of newspapers since the late 1070's was that there are no "good men" left .... they are either gay or married. So it's not about "feminizing" men.

This is why I ask the questions in the OP.
 
women, in general, don't actually know what they want. They say they want men to be 'vulnerable', or in other words, they want men to open up to them emotionally. Then, when men do show emotion, most women get the 'ick' or they use those emotions against a man.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
women, in general, don't actually know what they want. They say they want men to be 'vulnerable', or in other words, they want men to open up to them emotionally. Then, when men do show emotion, most women get the 'ick' or they use those emotions against a man.
Click to expand...
They say it because this is what they have been told to say, been told that they should want, and they comply.

They dont want feminized men, and they always knew they dont want feminized men.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Skimming through the many topics on YouTube, I've come across an interesting trend. It seems that among a LOT of women "sex relationship" therapist/coaches there is an emphasis for the man to be more "vulnerable" in order for a relationship (short term, long term, traditional marriage) to work better.

Now the dictionary definition of "vulnerable" is being capable of being physically or emotionally wounded or open to attack or damage. Now humans wake up in the morning "vulnerable" to acts of God, disease, crime, accidents, a variety of failures and death. So, in my mind this kind of severely lowers the fear and importance of "emotional vulnerability" when it comes to a relationship ... be it rejection or ridicule.

What really struck me was one popular lady in this venue who states; "Having sex is extremely vulnerable because we are letting of control to feel pleasure." My question to that is, what "control" is lost during sex? I the "threat" debilitating humility or embarrassment regarding performance? If not, then what is the threat?

In my humble opinion, the definition of "vulnerable" has become VERY subjective in its use in the dynamic of the man/woman relations among sex/relationship coaches, therapist, analysts, etc., to be point of exaggeration. And that is more damaging and misleading than anything.

What's your take on the subject?
Click to expand...
Vulnerable is not a good choice of words. Open, to me, is a better description!
 
SmarterthanYou said:
women, in general, don't actually know what they want. They say they want men to be 'vulnerable', or in other words, they want men to open up to them emotionally. Then, when men do show emotion, most women get the 'ick' or they use those emotions against a man.
Click to expand...
Your first sentence is EXACTLY what a lot of women say about men ... beyond getting off sexually, we don't know what we really want from women. What you say here is a major complain and is not wholly accurate, because men do show emotion ... that's why we engage in relationships. Phantasmal points out that "OPEN" is a better word, and I agree because then one can be more specific as to EXACTLY what they want from the partner. That requires blatant honesty ... and that can be a death knell or a new beginning for a relationship or marriage, IMHO of course.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
women, in general, don't actually know what they want. They say they want men to be 'vulnerable', or in other words, they want men to open up to them emotionally. Then, when men do show emotion, most women get the 'ick' or they use those emotions against a man.
Click to expand...
They generally want three things:

1. A guy that socially moves them "up," that gives them better social status than they have.

2. A guy that has piles of cash and other wealth they can spend.

3. A guy that is reliable and will stay with them rather than go find another woman.

Everything else is related to one of those three things.

Thus, a total dweeb and nerd can get a hot chick if he's a CEO of a multi-million-dollar company who takes her on a date to a $500 a plate restaurant to meet some investors and a senator and that dweeb hasn't got the first clue as to what to do in bed.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Your first sentence is EXACTLY what a lot of women say about men ... beyond getting off sexually, we don't know what we really want from women. What you say here is a major complain and is not wholly accurate, because men do show emotion ... that's why we engage in relationships. Phantasmal points out that "OPEN" is a better word, and I agree because then one can be more specific as to EXACTLY what they want from the partner. That requires blatant honesty ... and that can be a death knell or a new beginning for a relationship or marriage, IMHO of course.
Click to expand...
In general, men are really simple creatures. Men want women that are young, beautiful, fertile, and submissive.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Skimming through the many topics on YouTube, I've come across an interesting trend. It seems that among a LOT of women "sex relationship" therapist/coaches there is an emphasis for the man to be more "vulnerable" in order for a relationship (short term, long term, traditional marriage) to work better.

Now the dictionary definition of "vulnerable" is being capable of being physically or emotionally wounded or open to attack or damage. Now humans wake up in the morning "vulnerable" to acts of God, disease, crime, accidents, a variety of failures and death. So, in my mind this kind of severely lowers the fear and importance of "emotional vulnerability" when it comes to a relationship ... be it rejection or ridicule.

What really struck me was one popular lady in this venue who states; "Having sex is extremely vulnerable because we are letting of control to feel pleasure." My question to that is, what "control" is lost during sex? I the "threat" debilitating humility or embarrassment regarding performance? If not, then what is the threat?

In my humble opinion, the definition of "vulnerable" has become VERY subjective in its use in the dynamic of the man/woman relations among sex/relationship coaches, therapist, analysts, etc., to be point of exaggeration. And that is more damaging and misleading than anything.

What's your take on the subject?
Click to expand...
Emotional vulnerability is pop psychology mumbo jumbo bullshit. Women want someone to make them feel safe and protected. They don't need another girlfriend.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
They generally want three things:

1. A guy that socially moves them "up," that gives them better social status than they have.

2. A guy that has piles of cash and other wealth they can spend.

3. A guy that is reliable and will stay with them rather than go find another woman.

Everything else is related to one of those three things.

Thus, a total dweeb and nerd can get a hot chick if he's a CEO of a multi-million-dollar company who takes her on a date to a $500 a plate restaurant to meet some investors and a senator and that dweeb hasn't got the first clue as to what to do in bed.
Click to expand...
Thus in your opinion women are just opportunistic users.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top