Is there a reason why girls, women, look for leadership in guys, men? why are they instinctively or innately, want or expect to be led by their man?

[Anonymous]

overall, why do they want or expect leadership from us guys, men? I know people will say things like: "will knowing the answer change anything for you? Women aren't going to change, so you have two options: you can either get angry and resentful, frustrated about the way things are, and stay the way you are, and struggle with women your whole life, OR you can just accept things the way they are"

It pisses me off a lot, is because people say it can be learned, developed, that talking to women is a learnable skill. Because it reminds me, I don't see how girls, women, need to learn and behaviors or skills when it comes to meeting, attracting guys since they normally play a passive role in the dating/mating system.

Guys, men, have to know or learn how to: "approach, walk up to women and open our mouth, start an interaction or initiate an interaction, lead the interaction, make the conversation or interaction interesting, dictate how it goes, flirt or tease, be confident or have confidence, lead or just take the lead, have leadership behavior or leadership abilities, pass her tests or shit-tests, ask her out, plan and set up the dates, have a mission or purpose, be ambitious, and probably more things I don't know or just forgot to mention.

Meanwhile for girls, women, it looks like they just have to be attractive and just go out and show up, or simply just be there and everything will fall into place for them, which to me, that doesn't take any practice or learning, trial and error, training, meanwhile whats expected of guys above, absolutely does, even if a guy is handsome or good-looking and he lacks those traits, behaviors I mentioned above, he won't get far with women at all.

Updates

+1 y

and it pisses me off when guys get labeled as having a victim mentality or just being a victim if they think or feel something is unfair or women have the better end of the stick in dating, women however, don't get labeled victims if they think the same way.

[devilish-cutie]

you have disorted view on this, it isn't really as you see it
that is generally how it SEEMS. But I dont see guys approaching women that much as its viwed. Ones that approach are usually creeps that go with no expectation just wanting to get laid. When real feelings are involved, most men expect women to give them signs she is interested, and when he is like usually 100% sure she is, than he makes a move. Then who actually made the first move if she already SHOWED you she is interested? If a woman is interested in a man she will also try to get closer to him, like initiate talks, stare, makes sure she is introduced to him or something depending on setting. isn't really passive as you see it. I know some women that also approach (including myself).

Women just have to look pretty? Not true, but even if it was, do you know how much work that requires? Make up, shawing practically your whole body all the time... and sometimes no matter how hard you try if you are not good looking what can you do about it? They can also cry how no man wants them cause they only care about looks. And that isn't really possible to change as its to change your behavior as a mans requirement.

Why women want men that are initiative? Because women are physically weaker, they are the ones that one day may have a baby and they want a man that will be able to protect them in such fragile state and provide for their baby. Women carry out pregnancy and give birth, its understanadble they want security from a man, what else could he provide in the relationship? Now, im not really into gender roles, im not saying that, im just explaning why women generally want such a man.

Now, if you are not that type ofperson with such traits - YOU DONT HAVE TO BE. That is the real issue here, thats really extra hard to you cause you are not that way. Its ok to be ysf, if you like a girl and are too shy to approach or whatever, you should as a woman would, try to give her some signs you like her; go on it your own way. Sometimes you meet half way. And sometimes there are also women that would approach you, if she likes you and you give her signs you are interested, she is more likely to initate things.

[Asker]

yes but women typically or normally won't open their mouth first in front of a guy or ask him out first

[devilish-cutie]

yeah well there are those that would and as i said, give her signs and try to get closer, doesn't have to be direct
it doesn't matter typcally as long as there are those that would
and you have to be attracted to someone for it to work in the frist place

[Asker]

ya but it normally doesn't happen though, women are stubborn and adamant about feeling its the guys job to initiate/escalate with them

[Anoniemus]

Insecurity.
Misguided belief in stereotypical gender roles.
Submissive nature.

Let a man try to control me and he’ll be kicked to the curb. Stay in your lane and understand that not everyone wants that.

[SuperManiac]

Don't mean to pry but I just wanted to point out that leadership and control can be very different things. A person leading others to safety in a disaster isn't necessarily controlling them, but guiding them, and it could be a very voluntary thing on the part of those who follow without the leader being the slightest bit controlling... and of course the leader in this context could be male or female.

[SuperManiac]

And of course, there can and often is an element of authority and control, but I think that becomes more of a necessity as the number of followers increase. It's like the leader is just trying to guide people but might have one unruly one in the group challenging the leader's authority, or causing trouble for the other followers. Then the leader -- he or she -- has a bit of a dilemma and it might be necessary to exercise some level of authority/control just taking into account the well-being of the group. But I think that need becomes less and less with smaller and smaller groups -- and in my opinion, very easily dispensed with between couples.

[Anoniemus]

I doubt OP meant leader in such a manner. Stereotypical gender roles adhere to the man being the “leader” in the relationship.

I agree with what you said but I don’t think it fits the question.

[SuperManiac]

I see -- understood now. Apologies for misinterpreting.

[Asker]

so you don't feel the guy has to take the lead or always lead?

[Anoniemus]

No, I don't. Honestly, I think women are conditioned by society when we're young to believe this. What does the media show young girls in the West? Disney movies that depict women in stereotypical gender roles who are "submissive" and "subservient" to the bigger, stronger, attractive males. We come to think that having a man lead is is what we want.

[SuperManiac]

Might it be sort of a chicken or the egg problem though? It's a common theme throughout all cultures, and sometimes I wonder whether our instincts influence the culture or whether the culture influences our instincts. I don't know. It's difficult to separate the two. My thinking is that there is some element of our biology in there -- like a seed planted for a tree -- but the tree might grow in endless varieties and shapes, within certain constraints. I'm just unsure as to where the line is between the tree and the seed.

[SuperManiac]

Or I might have used the wrong word with "instincts" -- "behaviors", "thinking patterns", that sort of thing. I do know to some extent how radically culture can shape those perceptions having lived in various parts of the world and getting culture shocked many times. But there seems to be a common theme of some sort.

[Anoniemus]

I would have to disagree. While there are studies shown that plenty of children who haven't been socially conditioned to gender stereotypes still choose along the lines of the stereotypes (such as boys still choosing to play with trucks instead of dolls), I don't think there is an innate instinct dictating women be submissive. Certainly there are plenty of women like that... men as well though. For me, I know I was conditioned to believe that this is what I desired and believed it for a while. I know better though.

[SuperManiac]

I've seen some of those studies and I like the idea of us being capable of being molded substantially -- like clay (otherwise the world would be a terrifying place if there's no hope to stop violent acts, for example, with improvements in parenting and education and changes to societal norms) -- or to shift away talks of what makes a "great man", or "great woman", to just what makes a "good person", since I don't see why the rules should vary so wildly between the sexes.

[SuperManiac]

Yet I can't help but think that being behaviorally different to some degree is a constant, I just don't know what that constant is. Well, the basic kind of thought I have is like this -- my whole life might have been shaped by allergies. I have allergies and that made me sneeze a lot in a way until I figured it out and sorted that made me a bit of a social recluse, and that actually made me favor some introverted activities (even though I'm apparently very extroverted according to a variety of tests), and it shaped my entire career path to an introverted type (software engineer, even though I'm the oddball extrovert among them). So I can't help but think if I was born a woman, and possessed a female body, and the burdens of menstruation and different hormone levels and so forth, that it would have shaped me in a radically different way independently of the social conditioning for that difference alone.

... I just don't know how exactly. I might be a super dominant woman. I might be submissive. I might be a tomboy or a girly-girl. And I have no idea of what "should" be, or how it will be. It just seems like it'd be different -- so I don't subscribe to gender roles exactly, but I don't subscribe to the idea that males and females are essentially behaviorally identical absent social conditioning either.

[SuperManiac]

Sorry for rambling a bit. Do you ever find it kind of difficult though to abandon these social norms? For me it's like whether or not society conditioned me, I enjoy taking the lead -- but I'm not the controlling type. And ideas like romance -- I've found they vary wildly in various cultures -- and I want romance and some sentiment in my life. So I do the cheesy ritual of candlelit dinners for my wife, and it means something even though it's probably some dumb tradition that makes us psychologically associate dark rooms lit by candles as "romantic" because our ideas are shaped by culture... and it makes my wife happy, and I get happy -- and all over some concept and ritual concocted by society -- an illusion -- but a happy one. So I find it difficult to resist culture too much -- that at some point it sucks all the joy and magic out of things.

[Asker]

since you said you don't expect the guy to take the lead, just wondering, have you ever asked a guy out before?

[Asker]

have you or not?

[Anonymous]

This was written in a book, the author is a woman, she was mentioning evolutionary psychology, even she was admitting that women are a bit more complicated and harder to attract and seduce them men are, she says:

Men’s “Survival Needs”: Production, Reproduction = Survival.
Women’s “Survival Needs”: being protected, providership or being provided, Reproduction = Survival So our sexual selection process—and thus our attraction process—is dictated by our survival goals, whether you believe in evolution or God’s design for us.

And as you can see, women have more “survival goals” or needs than men do. Men were designed to essentially be able to produce and provide on their own, and can protect themselves. Whereas women were designed to need the man for those things.

This is why women are a bit more complicated and harder to attract, seduce than men are."

I feel she basically nailed it perfectly.