Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
This is the woman that wants it all educated, Traveled, working, and only thing she wants a husband.
Why do some guy feel if the woman working it takes away from a man (leader)
even working through our history, women made to get education be skilled in some type of music dress a certain way look a certain way and be sold off to the highest bidder. So what are men surprise when she doesn’t settle
That's just reality for many women in my social circles, especially here in NYC. Career-minded, educated, ambitious, and we travel for fun. That just seems like a natural progression for many college-educated women (and men) in liberal cities tbh - almost cultural.
So I'm tempted to argue that most women like this probably won't be in close proximity to large groups of men who want her quiet and in the house, no traveling. lol I think honestly these are often two different groups of people we're often talking about today, not just a "men vs women" thing. (Or at least, I am speaking from the Western/USA perspective, and I've mainly lived in cities. In some countries or different environments, I'm sure women struggle with this more.)
Women in my world are in serious relationships and getting married while getting their MBAs, starting businesses, being corporate lawyers, running nonprofits, scientists, etc. I'd say the only men in my city who want housewives are men who can actually afford that and are packing pretty pennies. On my nonprofit board, there are rich housewives, for example. For most men who are staying in the city? Highly unrealistic.
Although, I will say that *some* families find it cheaper here for one parent (not necessarily the mother) to stay at home in the early kid years (she may work from home and half part time help or she's a homemaker.) Daycare is expenssssssiveeee, especially the good ones. So it varies. I heard a woman in a cafe the other day she she wasn't interested in working right now and she had new baby with her. So it happens. Luckily, the city has started public school at age 3 now. "3-K" or something. I forget what it's called and it's probably not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction.
You want to be very cautious (read: avoid) men who are threatened by educated, successful women who enjoy their lives. It implies a very conservative, old fashioned, and restrictive idea of femininity and women's role in the family. Unless you share those views yourself, take any indication of this as a gift to run in the other direction.
However, I think many men are insecure if they haven't also been in the same position. And because old school ideas of masculinity are about the man being the provider and more successful, it can feel like a turn off to some more insecure men. They take their worth as a man and compare it to her success, which makes them view her as more masculine and filling the role that he should. Fragile egos. For example, a friend of mine works in corporate law making $$$ and she used to date blue collar men but had bad experiences. The last one she dated was so hung up on this idea that she didn't think he was good enough. That's not how she felt at all, but she wasn't going to accept his insecure way of lashing out at her and being rude. Another friend had an unemployed boyfriend for a while, who ended up leaving her for another woman after she used her credit card to buy a car to drive/move them both up to Alaska where he finally got the science job he had been hoping for. I immediately thought, "he wanted to be with someone who met him / saw him as the man he wanted to be." I don't know maybe he found a unique connection, but I wouldn't be surprised. And to be fair, I wasn't in their relationship - maybe she said things that were insensitive, who knows. Be careful with men who are jealous of you and insecure about your success or activities. You should seek a man who accepts you and supports you.
Not all are like this though. A lot of successful, educated men specifically want women who are similar. Others sometimes don't care, but will see it as icing on the cake. And in expensive cities, it's highly desirable to have two incomes. Being educated makes conversation and connection more interesting and may provide some common ground. I think educated men and women are also just very likely to be in closer proximity to one another. Some choose by similar prestige. For example, doctors and lawyers dating one another. It's relatable and you feel in closer social orbit with more in common. But anything is possible, of course, and it's not the only important thing.
My boyfriend encourages me when I get a new job offer that makes more money. He is comfortable hearing about my work life and listening to me talk about my career goals. He doesn't mind me traveling without him (he doesn't like it much), and only gets grumpy when I forget to communicate enough while traveling. He's comfortable with my independence in activities and my career. Having said that, he is also very educated and very successful. He's confident in who he is as a man. He makes more money than I ever will most likely. He doesn't care what kind of job I work, but he's supportive and not threatened when I shine in ways that he doesn't - which is so important!
Perception is interesting too. A lot of people view me as the dominant personality because I'm very assertive, like to debate/ argue, come across as an "intellectual," sometimes I'm a natural leader in groups, very talkative and expressive, the language I use, etc. It takes a certain kind of person to not be threatened by that, and it also depends on what mood I'm in or how I view you. On person thinks I'm arrogant, a know it all, and argumentative. The next person sees my empathy, thinks I'm warm and approachable, considerate and "magnetic." People have all kinds of insecurities, attitudes, ideas, and biases that affect how they filter who you are - don't forget that.
A lot of people will tell the "boss babe" type to make sure she doesn't bring that energy to her man, but I want to counter that by saying the man's personality and views matter too. Communication is a two way street. If you're triggered, threatened, sensitive about a woman's success - you're not going to be able to see the other parts of her clearly and allow the relationship to be what it should be. So it's up to men to check their toxic masculinity at the door as well. Only after we agree on that point would I agree that, yes, sometimes women also need to learn when to turn off the boss attitude - but that depends on your relationship, compatibility with your partner (some men like that!), and who you want to be with your partner. My mom is very bossy and my dad mostly goes with it and doesn't care. He pushes back when things matter to him. I have a friend who is an introvert and quiet in public (like my mother) and people probably assume I'd be the bossy one, but she is.
I think because I am naturally dominant and don't struggle with feeling that I'm heard (unlike my bossy friend), I prefer collaboration more. Doesn't mean I won't get frustrated, but before I try to command someone to do anything, I prefer to discuss, collaborate. I also don't feel I have authority to command anyone to do anything. I'm soft and empathetic with my partner. I sometimes tease him, but if I cross a line of comfort, I respect that as does he. He doesn't understand why people think I'm dominant or aggressive, but I also think he's secure enough in his own intelligence to handle the way I speak and come across. A more insecure man perhaps wouldn't be. I will say, I choose to focus on accepting him and giving the benefit of the doubt when we disagree. I listen to him, consider his feelings, and prioritize making him feel desired and accepted and cared for. Like any good leader ;D lol Just kidding... These are the things that are important. Secure people focus on these things, not being upset that their partner is living their lives and trying to succeed.
@RandomGuy1032
You sound angry babe, are you okay?
@RandomGuy1032
Judging by your anger issues and how you speak about and to women, I sincerely hope you don't have any children of your own. Please don't. Also, therapy is a great resource and there's no shame in using it. We all should, for different reasons. And you definitely have... reasons.
"Judging " stopped reading right there. You try to judge me and see what happens
Women who do not prioritize babies and families are currently weeding themselfs out of the gene pool.
This is called evolution and its happening an an extremely fast rate right now, because for millions of years women didn't have a choice either because of biology or men and cultures geared towards actual survival.
In the not soo distant future the only women who will remain will be the ones who don't want careers but families.
@monorprise These feminists want equal pay, for what? They won't invest the time or overtime, or staying long odd hours. They are inherently being a family woman. Yet, they must be "career women." If they don't have kids? They are feminist bitches. So, they say what is so great about me? Don't come after me, go get a hunk.
Bro relax
@RomanticRealist think there's a misunderstanding no man is threatened by a woman having money ther is zero reason to be unless she is mocking or abusing you for making less. some boss chick type woman are like this I personally haven't experienced this but I know men who have. some women feel entitled to treat men like shit cause they have money. and most men aren't insecure if there woman makes more money than them. we don't compare our succes to our woman in fact we hate comparing about anything to our woman cause we don't want to start competitions and arguments which I think boss chicks like doing cause those are things you have to do to become more successful. aalso another point is that many woman who are successful do think les of there man if they make less they might not say it but they treat them with less respect. Men hate the ida of being disrespected it's worse than saying I don't love you. another fact is that career woman can come of tomboyish some men like some don't just a preference. another fact a lot of men try to avoid talking about work with their woman you guys make it into a long convo sometimes I'm tryna forget and relax leave me alone 😆😆😆. sorry if this is wordy and jumbled I'm going through this up to down.
Pt.2 down. i feel like what you said about your boyfriend encouraging you about your work life goals and making more money is something that all men would do it doesn't really matter to us. even in relationships where the man is the bread winner when he gets a job offer or a raise it isn't that big of a deal if he isn't in a tight spot with money. I don't know how other man view traveling for work trips but I don't like them and if there's away not to I wouldn't because I know my future wife wouldn't be happy that I left her alone I know I wouldn't enjoy it either. another thing some men probs are threatened by a dominant person but it's more so there annoying to talk to sometimes I know cause I am one where argumentitive and hard headed cut people of sometimes. things you need to be successful. and how you come across is nothing to do with insecureness if you say something and it is rude that's not his fault he ain't a translator women you gon have to mansplain what you meant by the statement. and a sidenot not everything is about career a lot of men want kids to have a highly interactive relationshipand not have to wait 2 weeks just to talk to her plenty of woman feel sameway about some men as well. not everything is about security and if it is comfort your partner. anyway I wish you the best
@monorprise
But which of gene pool? Data says more women are delaying children until their 30s than having children very young (in their 20s). Women who are educated and have higher incomes tend to be married more often than women who have children young. Women who marry young are also more likely to have divorces in the US. Educated women often delay children because of studies and career. Their children are also statistically more likely to have better living conditions, higher income households, and education. Educated women are also less likely to be divorced. So I guess it depends on which gene pool you're aiming for.
@bayoubomber
So many angry, sexist men here. lol Why are you upset if women want equal pay? Why does this bother you? What do you have to lose by someone else feeling they are treated fairly?
@mrlongdongsiilver
I disagree with you on the first point. A lot of men are intimidated by women who have money. I've seen it, my friends have seen it - everyone I know has. Inferiority complexes are everywhere. Any psychologist or sociologist can confirm this. Men don't like to acknowledge it, but it's just a reality. YOU may not feel that way, but you're not every man. A lot of men do, without any abuse or mocking at all. They'll find a reason to get mad, but sometimes it's not a real one - the real reason is their insecurity.
@mrlongdongsiilver
Part 2.
I'll give you an example of the last time this happened with a guy (shortly before I met current boyfriend). I talked briefly to a guy who moved back home with his parents. Now, I was looking for something serious and I made it clear that I was from the beginning. He hints on the first date that he's trying to move out. I just let that pass because I just met him, I'm taking his word for it. He also mentions wanting to get promoted and move up at work. Next date I ask him about how ambition fits into his life philosophy. He says something about just wanting to have fun because getting a higher paying job and qualifying for that would take forever or be difficult. I didn't say anything, but I noted it in my mind. That's not really acceptable for me at his age - 30s. Not as a potential boyfriend anyway. He had also joined a *second* band recently. So the day before our third date, we were texting. I tried to be gentle about it, but I wanted to know if he was actively trying to move out or what the actual deal was with that. I tried to mention my own debate on switching apartments - that I was searching too. I did that first and then asked how his search was going. It was a lot of nonsense that was indirectly implying that he's not serious about moving out. At one point, I just asked directly.- is moving out a priority or not, why or why not. I didn't say it was wrong to stay home, I just wanted to know. He refused to answer and said he felt interrogated.
@mrlongdongsiilver
Part 3
A man in his 30s feels interrogated by a potential partner asking about some pretty serious things that many women our age would want to know about. This is how it often works - turning a simple, non-problematic question or comment into something huge. For me, shutting down communication like that is a big red flag. I said I don't think we're compatible because I can't date someone and not be able to talk about serious topics in his life. He was immature about it and said he was so glad about that and just told me to have a nice life. The insecurity was causing him to 1. Basically try to lie to me/mislead me about how serious he was about this *huge* thing for grown adults, and it was obvious that I wanted to know about it and 2. Shut down communication in an unhealthy way to me. I dodged a bullet, of course, but I didn't mock him or make any rude comments or ridicule him. He was just insecure and hiding things.
@mrlongdongsiilver
I wish all men did this! They don't all do it lol
I agree, my personality is not for all men. Like I said, my boyfriend loves how I communicate but some men have insecurities that will be a part of why they don't like certain types of women.
I think we all go for different things. I hope everyone finds what works for them! And thank you :)
@RomanticRealist The ONLY gene pool i am referring to is the American population. That educated women may have more money to spend on children in marriage later in life, does not change the fact that they are also having fewer of them.
Nor has the greater resources spent on each child translated into said children being more successful in caring forward the family, or even sustaining the family at all.
In fact its been known for hundreds of years if not longer in western culture that the more money a woman has the fewer kids she has, and the more diminished her prosperity. This seems to be connected to industrialization as the same thing has happened to every industrialized culture on Earth.
Regardless with soo many "smart" people having fewer and few children (So few in fact in "industrialized" countries at this point as to be declining in overall numbers ), the over all population is becoming less and less intelligent and thus inclined to such industry.
This of course is exactly the opposite of what we need to happen if we are to be a space fairing species, as would be necessary for the human race to survive at all. This is why it is in long run the most significant problem we today face. Hence why someone rational would be concerned.
@monorprise
Right, that's why it's irrational to be aggressively against immigration. I always think conservatives sound like idiots when they're anti-immigration, legal or illegal tbh. They seem to lack a clear understanding of how immigration supports the economy in m any ways, including contributing to birth rates and the size of the labor force.
It's also why conservative policies are some of the worst ideas, as they usually contribute to conditions that make it harder for people to have families to begin with.
I'd say start there, not shouting at women to give up the means they need to have good living conditions for themselves and their future kids, so they can pump out babies. That's especially given conservative policies / capitalism in general today. Doesn't sound rational to me...
@RomanticRealist
1: You acknowledged the nature of the problem with women spending too much time building their careers to the point they have too few or no children at all resulting in population decline.
2: I assume you also acknowledge how this unnatural selection against women (and families) smart enough to be capable/inclined of such distracting careers is leading to a population ever more purely incapable of making such careers.
3: As a solution you:
A) You suggested its silly for republicans to oppose immigration as alien cultural replacements are needed for the children our own culture is not having.
I agree if all you care about is the economy then importing the alien culture might keep it going until such time that either the same thing happens to them and their women, or they refuse your values and all of our culture including your working women part is replaced by theirs which has no such tolerance for women working.
In fact on a longer time frame the woman free work place is inevitable whether the current immigration refuse your women working values or not a culture that rejects them will replace whom ever accepts them, or nearly all future women will cease to be capable of such jobs.
B) If conservative polices make the cost of living higher for families starting out then why is the cost of living lowest in the places & states conservative have been running for decades? Why are conservative parts of the country still having the highest birth rates?
This claim contradicts the resulting difference we are seeing between countries and jurisdictions.
I could go into policy by policy details why if you like.
C) As previously agreed, what your suggesting isn't working right now.
This is no different than going into enormous dept buying a fancy car which you then can't afford the gas or energy to drive. What was the point, to look at it and imagine the trips you never went on?
@monorprise
No, I didn’t acknowledge those points.
I acknowledged the reality of declining birth rates and the impact that can have on economies. That is all. I don’t blame women for this and I don’t think it’s a problem for women to focus on careers. We don’t agree or acknowledged any similar realities other than declining birth rates and developing economies that go through stages where birth rates eventually decline. That is all that we mutually acknowledge.
@monorprise
2. "I agree if all you care about is the economy then importing the alien culture"
This shows your lack of understanding about American history and culture. American culture has always evolved with immigration. There have always been people resistant to immigration, and then immigration happens anyway and contributes to the culture. This has happened throughout American history as a rule even, not an exception.
"In fact on a longer time frame the woman free work place is inevitable whether the current immigration refuse your women working values or not a culture that rejects them will replace whom ever accepts them, or nearly all future women will cease to be capable of such jobs."
I have no idea what you're talking about, but this is the conservative wet dream, yes.
@monorprise
3. "B) If conservative polices make the cost of living higher for families starting out then why is the cost of living lowest in the places & states conservative have been running for decades? Why are conservative parts of the country still having the highest birth rates?"
Conservative parts of the country also have the highest poverty rates, highest maternal mortality rates, lowest health outcomes, the least assistance for low-income residents, the least assistance for health care, etc. And now there will be even lower health outcomes for women with abortion bans. The only positive to starting a family in conservative areas is that in many places in the south and midwest, real estate is cheaper (in part because of the population size compared to land available, size economies, maybe even the smaller job markets, etc.) and cost of living is cheaper. That's huge, while also not being enough to improve the long list of lower health and life outcomes that I've mentioned.
Again, just having children in lesser conditions with poor access to resources for those who need it most shouldn't be our goal. Our goal should be to make having children affordable and accessible and to provide resources to alleviate struggle and altogether prevent these negative outcomes. This is the difference between conservatives and socialists. We want people to have good quality of life, not just shoot out babies.
@monorprise
4. "C) As previously agreed, what your suggesting isn't working right now."
False - we haven't agreed on that.
"This is no different than going into enormous dept buying a fancy car which you then can't afford the gas or energy to drive. What was the point, to look at it and imagine the trips you never went on?"
This is an insufficient answer to a question of improving peoples lives. If you have no solutions to make peoples lives better without rolling back women's rights (and even that doesn't solve these issues, it only solves one - more children), then that has more to do with your own values and desires. I don't share them, I think they're not only sexist but illogical and anti-human. So it's not really possible for us to agree on common solutions, but at least we can both acknowledge that declining birth rates can be problematic for developed economies, to varying extents.
@monorprise
And I also want to note that conservative policies also affect people in areas that aren't largely conservative, regionally and nationally. Conservative lawmakers, politicians, presidents, and even actors in the finance industry affect peoples lives with their decisions. The courts are big part of this as well.
@RomanticRealist 1: So your telling me you agree with Point #1 that birth rates have been contentiously declining in industrialized economies, and have reached the point (decades ago for most of them) where they can't even sustain the population.
Why don't you don't think this common problem for women? Are women somehow not people members of the same human population as men requiring mothers and fathers to birth and raise them into said culture?
So you not believe in natural selection where if a particular choice of a particular sex leads to ever fewer children that the ability to make such choice is prepositionally diminished?
2: Regarding the cultural effects of immigration that very much depends upon the prepositional size and heterogeneous of the immigration.
Too larger from too heterogeneous a source and instead of enrichment you have replacement. Too large from too many heterogeneous sources as is happening now and you have replacement as well as ever greater levels of conflict.
Assimilation requires a smaller or more homogeneous source of immigration, to allow the host culture to integrate the new members with additions into a cohesive community.
The more similar the source culture is the easier that is, the more different the harder and longer said integration takes.
What is happening right now is throwing a lot of very different people with very different values and ideas together into the same land where they are forced to fight over who's idea governs the common resources of the state.
There is no clear dominating majority opinion on any issue allowing time for them to grow together as their children grow up and inter-marry. The fight is happening right now when the gap between them is unbridgeable.
This is why there is conflict and will only be more conflict with time.
@RomanticRealist 4: B)
"Conservative parts of the country also have the highest poverty rates,"
If your keep driving out all you middle class and most of your poor then of course the places they end up going will have higher "poverty rates" particular if said rates are defined on a federal number that doesn't reflect the local cost of living. Federal minimum wage in Mississippi is not the same as New York.
" highest maternal mortality rates, lowest health outcomes, " The differences are not so big, maternal Mortality is between 22.8(for a woman under 25) and 107.9 per 100,000 with the primary difference being the age of the mother. If your concerned about it don't delay child birth for a career.
That said your certainly not going to find as good a selection of nearby doctors and facilities in a more rural area with a lower ratio of people too wealthy to care about your tax rates.
4. C) @RomanticRealist said "False - we haven't agreed on that."
I'm not sure how you expect a population of humans capable of modern industrialized work to exist without mothers birthing enough of them... So yes the population of such industrialized people IS declining both in numbers and overall intelligence.
This is of course is exactly what Charles Darwin would have predicted of any species with such behavior.
@RomanticRealist" said: "This is an insufficient answer to a question of improving peoples lives."
Its rather difficult to improve any human life that doesn't exist for want of having been conceived or frankly even allowed to be born.
@RomanticRealist said: "If you have no solutions to make peoples lives better without rolling back women's rights"
Its not a question of whether or not your rolling back "women's rights" they will collapse inevitably at this rate both with their families and the culture they support. The only solution to that problem would require genetic engineering and birthing faculties that would make women obsolete. This might also destabilize the human race by subjecting it to (authoritarian or simply flawed) human cultural rather than natural judgement.
@RomanticRealist said: "I think they're not only sexist but illogical and anti-human. "
How can abandoning the human race in favor of mere work be anti-human? Sounds like you have defined 'Human' as really anti-human.
It is machine's defining characteristic to do work but requires others reproduce them.
@RomanticRealist said: "So it's not really possible for us to agree on common solutions, but at least we can both acknowledge that declining birth rates can be problematic for developed economies, to varying extents. "
Its a bit more than a mere economic problem, long term consequences include extinction as a people medium term consequences is losing the ability to operate as a industrialized.
I'm not sure we would agree upon the solution of creating artificial women to do the job individualized women no long wish to take the time to do. As that does in fact beg the question why would anyone in such a population want to have a woman's body if your not going to make use of it for babies?
@RomanticRealist said: "And I also want to note that conservative policies also affect people in areas that aren't largely conservative, regionally and nationally."
That is true of any ideology and is a defining problem of having a common goverment, or shared resources that must be governed. This is why too much heterogeneous immigration too fast creates a conflict. It takes 2-3 generations to unify a people.
@RomanticRealist I read your entire comment. It was extremely long, but I read it. Lol.
I get the feeling that you enjoy public speaking. :)
Would that be accurate?
@Jamie05rhs I was literally just reading this back like wow, that was really too much girl lmao
You know what's funny? If it's casual public speaking thing, I enjoy it and naturally flow with it. If it's a formal situation where I need to prepare... depends on how prepared I am haha I can get some stage fright for sure, which makes zero sense because I actually do talk as much as I type 😇 I'm silly
@Jamie05rhs And thanks for reading it!
@RomanticRealist Lol
You're very welcome!
And I agreed with what you said, by the way.
I'm a year away from my masters in business administration. I've visited 24 countries and all 50 US states. Hell, I can afford my own condo in New York without help (I do have a roommate so my savings is growing that much faster).
I don't have any illusions of marriage. I don't feel that a piece of paper will make me feel committed to. All I want (and luckily have) is someone who will want, love and cherish me for me, and not for what I can provide. Been with my boyfriend for almost 2 years and I make almost double his salary. Does he complain? Nope. He actually brags that he could be a stay at home boyfriend... not that I'd ever allow it just yet 😏
I love everything except for the last part about marriage, but you’re amazing
don't get me wrong, if my boyfriend proposes I'll very likely say yes. But I've never thought of marriage as holistically important.
And that's why men aren't usually seen dating a boss babe. its not insecurity it's cause our mindsets are different most men want kids and to be married. career woman or "boss babes" are more focused on their career than having children. and also our personalities on average won't match career women are dominant and so are most good men out there and you can't have two dominant forces and expect there to be no conflict (which we try to avoid if possible). But you seemed to have found the right man for you who is able to be happy. so thankfully there is some hope for career woman. wish you the best
OK I understand in that aspect only because I never thought about marriage. I only thought about children and especially from what’s around me.
@mrlongdongsiilver It's also because if a woman has tons more money than the man she WILL have a more expensive lifestyle than he can provide. This is bad from his POV & hers unless he's a leech/user type like a drug addict.
@mrlongdongsiilver
I disagree. Where I live, most "boss babes" (women who have careers and enjoy traveling, have seniority at their jobs, etc.) who are straight or bi are dating men when they want to. This idea that women with careers don't date any men is nothing but an illusion online that makes men who have an issue with it feel better. Maybe if you live in a very conservative, rural area or very conservative country. It's very class-based too - this is likely also a "birds of a feather" thing as much as it is a regional thing.
@mrlongdongsiilver But it is true that dating can be a challenge the more successful a woman is and that many men have issues with it. But in 2022, at least in major cities and liberal areas, it's common for career-oriented women to have partners.
It isn't that fact that turns men off most of the time. Most rational men know that it is a two income house setting these days unless you are a millionaire. Women having an education, a career and all of that is NOT the issue.
The issues that arise with women like this revolve around two things. One, they are very Type A. They will be the one to fight tooth and nail to have it their way and will not compromise or be willing to submit to anything decision based with her partner/husband/SO. The other is if a man wants a family, this will more than likely cause friction on who does what. Who works, pays bills, who looks after the kids, etc.
I know I answered in a previous question you had about why men think women hate us, some of my answer overlaps with what I am saying here. Men don't want to deal with women that are in their masculine or act like men.
If women want to live large and care free- be a "Boss Ass Bitch" or whatever they call it, more power to them. They want to travel, seek insanely high education, have no kids, and a working husband? They can knock themselves out, no one is stopping them. However, they should not be upset if men don't want to date them for that reason or because women are trying to change them into their ideal man after the initial attraction phase is done.
u times are changing...
two of the most successful women I know... one dropped high-school, and the other didn't even bother with college
one has a company of her own, and two businesses... the other has a business, and investments and property
neither of them had a thing against men either, never... nor they would see themselves as "women in a men's world" or anything like that, they just had ideas, took chances, created their own opportunities, and worked till it paid off... a lot of their clients, associates and partners were men as well, a very important figure in their lives and also mentors, where their fathers
they're both more than happy with the guys they've settled with and have children with, too... not once ever hear of them to "want it all" or that men are this or that...
neither of them will boast about their many zeroes "success" because it doesn't really matter to them, the drive in their life is happiness and joy with the ones they are with, which, happen to be men... although one is bisexual
they also, both like to chill a lot... and cheesecake, love it
never ever heard of them going around with this attitude of "I'm the boss so fuck you all men" lol
The men essentially did the most wuss ass thing I can think if these scenarios. They became the stay at home father. Well, not so much in those words, certainly they probably have a career themselves, but they don't wear the pants. Would it be fun to meet a beautiful doting type woman who wants kids and far out earns you in spades? Sure? But she wears the pants. So fucking weird.
@bayoubomber these are not scenarios...
and in the cases I mentioned, the men are not "stay home dads" when these women had children they did stay home with them because well, they could afford to run their businesses from home, although one of them stopped working at all for two years
the men, one of them had his own business to run, the other has a career... and again, they did not make it about "one is up and orders, the other is down and obeys" no...
these are balanced relationships, and things are spoken and dealt with compromise, there is no such thing as one or the bother dictating everything their partner will do or won't do
@NathanDavis What you are talking about is like a relationship with Gisele Bündchen and Tom Brady. No one can truly wear the pants in that family simply because they both earn so much money it's rigoddamndiculous. Unless their spending habits are on par with Nicolas Cage or Elton John, Brady well always will be able to tell Gisele to take a flying leap.
@bayoubomber relationships are more than one or the other feeling the need to be called captain... that's just some archaic nonsense that died long time ago
@NathanDavis So, why do you espouse Whamen having their bodily rights? Boss Bae right? Well, there are four things they can do. They can close their legs first off, not be a slut. Called Abstinence. They can also do Number Two. Contraception. Beyond that, they can put their baby up for adoption. 4th thing is they can have their child. But you want to erase babies at what point? That is the quintessential question. You people don't think erasing babies is okay beyond a certain point. Which means, you can have the right to bury the babies at any point. Simply, because you see the child as a clump of cells. But, in your mind, the difference between life and not life is 7 inches of Birth Canal. You simply say the life is not life as long as it's connected to the Women via umbilical cord. You must support abortion up to and including the day of birth, many states do that, and they are not hindered by the reversal of Roe V. Wade. So, you must tell us that you'd be totally fine if your mother offed you, why? Simply because you wouldn't know it? Yet, babies feel pain. They get the forceps chopping off their limbs. Simply so they can be offed and guess what? These babies sometimes survive? But you are totally okay with killing it at any point essentially. Meaning you are totally fine with a woman carrying the baby to term, and putting it in a trash can. If she can do that, you can off the baby after it's been alive for several months out side of the Womb.
@NathanDavis What you are saying is, you have no problem if your Mom killed you. 2 year olds can remember anything. So, why not make abortion legal till 2 years of life have gone by?
@bayoubomber if my mother killed me... I would not be able to worry or care, no
corpses don't do that... lol
@NathanDavis Okay, so you don't care but someone cares if you got killed. Otherwise murder would be legal. So, now that your Mom didn't off you, you are alive. If you are asleep, and someone plants a 9mm through your brain, I guess you don't care, because you were in a la la dream land and had a good time doing to it dying, and you want no investigation as to how you died.
But why did you say Corpses don't do that? You made a Biden gaffe. You are supposed to say clump of cells. Unless you intended to say you could be offed by your Mom up to 2 years of age?
@bayoubomber dead people can't be bothered with living though...
Opinion
38Opinion
People will be how they want. I won’t say their right or wrong. I myself don’t care about things that arnt in my sights currently. Idc who like it.
That being said… I can’t go back to not working. I have worked so many hours over the last 10 years I get bored. And I want a family. And a comfortable home. I’m a hard worker but when it comes to house work I’m very lazy lol. I don’t wanna have to clean it’s really that simple.
Children… I want them. Children do better with two parents and even more so with someone always in the home. That’s hard to do when both parents work. Someone I feel needs to be there and able to get them constantly. If your a “boss babe” it means you’ve sacrificed the family life for your career. Are you going to just take off work to pick them up from school if they get sick? I can’t.
Cooking. I can. I hate it. I’ll grill but I live off the microwave.
I think the biggest issue is personality. To be a boss you need a real tough personality. Masculine traits like being less agreeable, being frank, being aggressive. These are the traits people look for when hiring bosses. These are the traits I avoid when finding partners. I don’t want a hard woman. I like my women soft and vulnerable so I can feel accomplished providing for and protecting her. I don’t believe you can be both so I won’t waste my time with a boss bae.
You women think the same as men. Where men want to look at women as frail so they have a self righteous purpose in life women look at this and decide no I will NOT be what you prefer to give you purpose because I want to be this. People are who they are but partners fulfill a role for each other… boss baes don’t fulfill the roles I want so I’m uninterested.
"This is the woman that wants it all educated, Traveled, working, and only thing she wants a husband."
The way this ^ is worded it's impossible to know what you are actually asking because you left out some key words. The first part is clear enough but what do you mean by "and only thing she wants a husband"? Are you saying she wants a husband but no children? That would help me give a better answer.
"Sold off to the highest bidder"? This would only be true if you mean she chose the suiter with the best financial prospects. Women were not sold to bidders, they were asked by a man to marry them and they had the prerogative to say yes or no. There are exceptions but that is generally true. Life was brutal in some ways back then, and that was true for both men and women. If you believe otherwise then you don't know your history. And I'm talking about actual history, not feminist revisionist history that paints a very inaccurate picture to support the female victim narrative.
"So what are men surprise when she doesn’t settle" What does this mean? A woman doesn't settle down? A woman doesn't settle for something she doesn't want? Please clarify.
I do realize English is not your first language (or at least I hope it isn't) but if you want good answers you need to be more clear about what you're asking.
Nope!
Educated I'm fine with. Arrogant, entitled, and an "Alpha Female/Queen Bee" I want nothing to do with. Few men are attracted to masculine, arrogant, entitled women, either.
Women who say they "don’t settle" are usually the ones who bring absolutely nothing to the table (that a man would want, including money) yet expect men to bring everything to the table to "impress" them. Then when you ask them about it, they give a conceited non-answer like "I AM the table!" (No Botchamania.)
Also, f*ck feminists! Just not literally; figuratively only.
I don’t really have a desire to be with someone where I’ll always come second to their job. And in a lot of cases with those kinds of women it happens.
Also when it comes to wanting it all they are usually overworked and spread themselves to thin trying to do to many things at once. Especially when kids/family is brought into the equation.
I also don’t need or even desire someone who makes six figures I just need and want someone who complements me. And that’s always gonna be my priority when seeking a partner do you complement me, do our goals and plans/desire for the future align?
If not I have no desire to be with you.
@Phoenix98 If I decided to date, I'd rather date a woman who shares the same interest in video games over a woman who's career driven.
@Shiningtempest it’s always better to be with someone who shares your interests or who you have a good connection with.
Your perspective is off.
One person's idea of "having it all" or "settling" is not the same as another's.
Can she game like a pro? Play multiple instruments at once? Draw from memory? Be inventive? Give amazing sex? No? Well then she isn't the high value wife material she thinks she is, not for me anyway, maybe for some other guy, but not me.
And thats irrelivant to how successful she is career wise or financially.
I'm dating a woman, not her success.
I am well educated and well on my way to a successful career. My sister is a doctor. Our mother was the COO of a healthcare company. And I know a lot of successful women aside from them as well. Some of them have been very successful in love too, and others not so much. The clear difference I see between them is their personalities and attitudes, and how they treat men. It's nothing to do with being educated or successful. We women need to stop telling each other this because it discourages some women from trying to be successful and distracts from their real problems, which could be easily corrected if they actually focused on the right things instead of the wrong ones.
50% of faked orgasms happen because men earn less than their partner
@RandomGuy1032 Source?
Relationships are supposed to be complementary not competitive. The average man doesn’t want that kind of energy, when a woman tries to out man men. Men compete all day at work, they generally don’t want to compete all night as well. Working is not the issue at all, the issue is the power struggle. Figure it out and move on. What it sounds like you’re describing, is a woman who wants a house husband. Those do exist, but are they worth it?
But she is not why is there a power struggle. She still wants a man to be a man and what she does shit and stop you from doing just that and in most cases she can’t stop you.
High value men who exhibit all those traits aren’t going to settle for being her house husband. It would become a battle of wills for dominance, I. e. a power struggle.
I don’t think you understand at all
I don’t understand what you’re saying, or Anna understand what I’m saying?
I understand what you’re saying completely. It doesn’t make sense to what I’m saying.
I’ll be honest I couldn’t exactly understand what you were saying. My phone likes to mangle my sentences when I use speech to text, is that what happened?
As a female boss, I despise the term "boss bae" or anything like it. Lol.
While some men like a more traditional relationship and that's fine, I think the only reason a man would have a problem with women working is if he is either intimidated by them and/or insecure, or wants to be able to control them. If they have no finances of their own, they have fewer options to leave if things go sour. JME.
It could also be he's concerned about the future of the culture. Women who spend soo much time and energy on their careers don't normally have time for even replacement levels of children.
As such they are rapidity removing the traits that enable them to go down that path from the gene pool along with themselfs.
Nearly all future women will come from the women who can't or won't go down that path by necessity and as such will be homemakers.
If you think that's good for mankind don't moderate and keep removing your family from it.
It could be that she's bossy at home and needs a guy who isn't a leader type. A lot of guys aren't into that. And this isn't to say that all guys ARE leader types, but most either are or want to be. I also recall an interview with a top level CEO exec of a multi-billion dollar corporation who bragged about NOT spending any time with her kids so she could get more work done. Not all dudes want to play the traditional role of a mom. Don't know why that is hard to understand.
There's a huge middle ground between never spending time with your kids and not having a job at all... a job with average hours and raising kids can very easily be balanced, especially with school aged children.
@hahahmm If mothers can't balance work and spending time with their kids, how can fathers? It's important for them to spend plenty of time with their kids as well. Also, taking care of the house and kids was much more work years ago before modern appliances and the like were invented than it is now, which is why fewer people still opt for women to be homemakers and stay-at-home moms. It's much easier for them to balance work and home life now than it used to be.
@hahahmm Still doesn't change the fact that both parents need to be present in their children's lives and spend time with them, and that it's very possible for people to balance jobs and home lives. Feminism has nothing to do with it.
I think less masculine men are just salty they're not man enough to bring the femininity out of a woman like that. It causes an imbalance of masculine and feminine energy in the typical relationship that can only be counterbalanced with the most alpha of personality archetypes. Women like that want to be with someone they see as their equal or greater, either in profession or what they bring to the table with their personality. No high achieving woman wants to be with a supplicating man-child
Of course women want to date/marry up whenever possible. The problem for women is that there's a limited supply of dudes at the top end. So if she decides to go to the top end of income/career/social standing she is reducing her dating pool to almost nothing. Combine that with her having average looks or worse and IT'S A WRAP. Game over. But these women want to think that they can get whatever they want in life.
Although a lot of it is just in there heads too. You have women without a pot to piss in pretending to make six figures and then thinking that entitles them to an upper level dude, when actually she's got a bunch of red flags (unwed mom, unable to keep a man, fat, disrespectful & on and on).
Eh. You see that behavior in men as well, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the balance of masculine and feminine energy in a relationship. You really think Kim K is making less than pete davidson? Naw, he's just got big dick energy
Uh, only guys who are major losers want to date/marry up which is why if you look at the kinds of dudes someone like Madonna or Kim K's mom get: they have to pay dudes to pretend to be their boyfriends. That's how few quality dudes want to date/marry up. Far as your example of Kim K & Pete.. if he thought it was serious than he WAS the major loser I'm talking about. Regardless of how much cash he has. It's relative. If he didn't think it was serious then he was just having fun and that's not what I'm talking about.
But yes, some dudes are losers. Those aren't the dudes women with options want to be in serious with or marry. People like Kim K have limited options because quality dudes don't want a woman like that. And if you say Kayne is quality, well he thought it was a good idea to marry a woman who happily made porn & make her the mother of his kids. Not the brightest bulb.
Ohhhhh, so you're one of those weak men who's masculinity is destroyed if wages are reversed, huh? Lmao never realised someone making over half a mil a year could be considered a loser, but I suppose emasculation can make you feel a lot of things
there's more than one way to "marry up". It's not all about money. Some times it's about social status and or/personality. In Pete's case, probably all three lol
"Ohhhhh, so you're one of those weak men who's masculinity is destroyed if wages are reversed," -- No I'm one of those guys smart enough to know that women want a guy who is a provider type. Even if she is worth 1 billion she expects the guy who is worth $500k to provide stuff. He isn't in a position to provide the lifestyle she is used to. It's foolish for him to get into that situation just for that reason alone. Also, a real man doesn't need a woman to be successful so there is NO value to me in getting with a woman who has more. I don't count on/depend on or want a woman's money. Next... there's this thing called a "match". Ideally your strengths & weaknesses are balanced in a relationship. A woman who is (or thinks she is) providing her with the stuff men traditionally provided doesn't actually have any need for a man. He is just an accessory for appearances and nothing more. I've also noticed that guys who get themselves into that situation are almost always bitter & cheating. So again, losers get into that situation.
You say there's more than one way to marry up.. it's not all about money. Duh. I mentioned that too when I wrote, "if she decides to go to the top end of income/career/social standing she is reducing her dating pool to almost nothing." Everything you said sounds like it was written by a woman who can't keep a man so she is trying to sell the dream of simps finding happiness with a woman who is higher social/economic status. If you look at the celebrity women -- for example -- with the longest marriages you'll find that they all married dudes who were very successful. There's a reason for that. And it's not that simps marrying up make for a good relationship -- even if we ignore what I've said about the type of woman who needs to marry down.
Ew, fuck no. Nobody likes simps, not even themselves lol. I find it interesting that we sort of agree, but for entirely different reasons
She could be boss anywhere but at home I want us to be equals, doesn't matter if she brings home billions more than me. I don't want to feel at work, or in the wild 'outside', both when I'm the boss or an employee, when I'm at home. I want to try forming our home to be the most secure and comfortable space we can have for both of us in this life.
I don’t really care what she does, as long as she’s happy with herself and doesn’t try to control me. I’m pretty relaxed but I’m fiercely independent person. I won’t tell anyone how to live their lives as long as they keep the same energy with me. She can be the conqueror of worlds for all I care lol
In terms of her just working, guys don't have a problem with that. It's the attitude that they have a problem with. Successful women often times are assertive, noncompliant, combative and loud. All things that mem find unattractive in women. The attitudes are what men have a problem with, not the fact that the woman has a good job.
It’s great if you can do all things. But it’s annoying that you feel an impetus to have to brag about it.
If anything modern society does all it can to educate and promote women in the work force. Your not “special” if you achieve them. This isn’t 1955.
Once a guy here on GaG told me there are three things a man us brought up to be: Provider, Protector, and an Procreator.
When a woman is not allowing him to be what he was born to be there's going to be a problem.
If she's a provider then that messes up his part in the relationship.
How would a woman like it if the guy gave birth to a baby instead of her? It messes up things and would take her out of her realm.
Same thing here!
I mean I'm kinda fine with it, never had issues with such women practically to be honest, but as a concept it might imply something else, like if she's like that but is feminine around me then who cares really, but as concept when you put it like that, if she's gonna act like a "boss bae" around me then wants me to be the boss? I don't understand it, where is the polarity in such a relationship? Might work if she looks like a 10/10 but that relationship won't last
From what I understand about that stereotype, it's usually a woman who refuses to get married until later in life. I think that's foolish and petty. There's no need to rob yourself of marital bliss just to prove a point. No one ever said married women can't have a career as well.
Wait, how is your petty if she decides to wait she’s not hurting anymore
@Justneedtokno What about the men? Should they just wait 20 years until the women are ready to marry?
@Jamie05rhs no one stopping you from getting married. You can do that whenever you want to. I’m not making you wait and why 20 years that’s a long time.
@Justneedtokno Who am I going to get married to, a dude? I'm not gay. Lol
There are other women out there
@Justneedtokno. It's a numbers game. And when a few players on one side drop out, then it makes the game harder for he other team. And more people will be left without a chair.
Yeah, but you act like we’re stopping you from dating any of those girls that don’t want more. I feel like we’re always gonna want more for ourselves wanting to do better better our careers better ourselves. Overall.
@Justneedtokno Who says those other girls don't want more? I never said that.
Marital bliss? What the fuck is marital bliss? You sign up for something in which all likely hood, 75% and higher will end up divorce and fucked up bull shit concerning alimony/child support what have you. Yup. Sign me up for that fucking bliss. It isn't usually the woman who refuses, at least not in my experience. The man does not want to, yet once she hears about how much he doesn't want to marry, all of a sudden it's an ultimatum from the Whamen, when she says "Propose in 3 months, or fuck off!"
@bayoubomber Re-read what I wrote. Lol. I'm talking about the WOMAN's marital bliss.
I still don't know what a Boss BAE is. Well, now I do. Due to everyone responding. But can anyone tell me what BAE stands for? It's insane. I asked the question once and guess what? I didn't get crickets, my question was banned and removed. I'm still looking for that answer. What people don't understand is POP music has such a deleterious effect on all man kind. People like to think they think for themselves. So, can anyone tell me what BAE stands for?
"before anyone else" Okay, so BOSS BEFORE ANYONE ELSE? This wreaks of People wanting to kill babies up to and including the day of birth. Just say it.
@bayoubomber I don't know what that term means, either.
Geez, a high profile woman woman that got graded education maybe a CEO status or entrepreneur and Bae simply just means baby in short term
Alpha, female as some would say
@Justneedtokno Okay; gotcha.
Same reason you think you're not a feminist & told me you're not one but you keep promoting feminist ideas.
Where in this is promoting feminism traveling going to work that sounds like suppression
Where do you expect this woman to be like in her parents house not working not doing anything she’s not established on her own no house no car no job just sitting and waiting for a guy to take care of her. That’s not real you gotta be realistic.
I've had several female bosses in my career, and we've gotten along with all of them. I've had some pretty weak male bosses. Overall, my female bosses are on par with the better male bosses I've had.
"So what are men surprise when she doesn't settle"
That's her choice, but basically all quality men are uninterested in women who won't commit. It's not an admirable trait for anyone in respect to seeking healthy relationships.
I'll answer both questions.
Do I believe in the idea of a boss babe?
Yes, I believe it's a bad idea.
Why (what?) are men surprised when they don't settle?
We're not, it's a good way for us to identify women to avoid.
"Doesn't want to settle"... that's fine Boss Babe, don't "settle" until the wall crashes through your party life and you end up alone with nothing but 200 notches on your bed post. Enjoy that.
Why would there be 200 notches? Why can I just not have sex. Why do I have to be alone? Why is there Hass to be a choice?
Not me, I like a woman with Expectations. There are of course, Contract negotiations involved. 😎
No- this is just a pale-imitation of a man, which woman was never designed to be. Only gay men want another men to marry.
I don't have a problem with a woman being successful and having her own money etc.
She just can't be disrespectful towards me.
How would she be disrespectful?
Talk down to me or mocking me because she makes more money than me.
Oh ok gotcha
@Hispanic-Cool-Guy Why the fuck would she mock you or talk down to you? Ovbiously, she's going to be the one to wear the pants in the family, but if you ask the reverse question if Women believe in the idea of a man who wears the pants, they don't say, "Well, only if he doesn't mock me or talk down to me."
@bayoubomber: No. Money is a means to survive. I won't let the woman wear the "pants" in my relationship, besides the point I wouldn't be with a b*&%$ anyways.
@Hispanic-Cool-Guy So, nobody wears the pants? You won't let it happen. Yet, you aren't the bread winner? Tell us a scenario where you as a Male is not the BOSS BAE when you aren't the one wearing the pants. Don't tell us you wear the pants where the Woman obviously does.
@bayoubomber : I would lead. I don't need more money to do so or have the will to do so.
@Hispanic-Cool-Guy So, you wear the pants no matter what and any how? That is so weird. You talk about being put down, yet you are putting down the POWER that is what?
@Hispanic-Cool-Guy Want freebies. You can't have freebies. They aren't free. If you taxed the richest 90% OR 100%, where does it get you? NO WHERE. It gets you one benefit that gets you three years of one said benefit.
@Hispanic-Cool-Guy You don't lead. Even if you wanted free health care and free Education. You aren't free. You can't have it. It's never free. and it's never not Commie. I'm not paying for your ineptitude. Ain't happening. If you want to live in a Commie world. Do it. No one says you can't. You must move to where it's happening. Don't tell me how to live. Yet, I will give you 4 reasons to not be stupid in regards to abortion.
@Justneedtokno I don't believe in the idea of a Boss BAE because it comes down to whether a person sucks as a leader or not.
Nah. Guys couldn’t care less about that unless they’re paying for that kind of thing. The boss bae is just gonna realize in 10 years that there are younger, better looking ones that the guys really want.
Can a woman be a sold out capitalist wanker? of course
No I'm not surprised a girl should not settle with someone that can't exspect she makes more than him
No we don’t care because none of those things increases her value on the dating market
When women go up in status, most men become invisible to them. Don't blame men for something women do to themselves
Nothing wrong with any of that. Really.
Just don't blame us if you won't find a boyfriend.
Status doesn’t really add value to women like it does men.
Right. It's a liability more than anything. Because people will call you a bum and a gold-digger for dating her. As a man, that's a huge risk to our reputation.
As long as she's not a stuck up feminist, I don't give a damn who she is.
"sold off to the highest bidder" what the fuck? that's some fucked up shit if you're saying that
You make six figures, I will gladly make dinner.
I see no issue.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 Do I need explain why I think this is so fucking hilarious?
@bayoubomber By all means, tell me what issue do you see here. This will be fun.
Listening as well
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 @Justneedtokno You see no problem with Boss Bae. I don't either. There's a set of circumstances that plants you in their Power. If you are so lucky to find a Woman who far out earns you, and can carry you, Congratulations. If you want to be a Silly Nanny, whilst telling us you still have Power over Women? You don't have it.
If you want a Woman who will cook, wash the blue jeans, get your ketchup out of said jeans, change your kids diapers, you must take a different role. The Woman owns you. Yet, you have so many roles. A lot of roles. You are emancipated. Yet you want equal rights? You can't have your cake and eat it too. Wait a minute? You can't be the wearer of pants. What dictates that?
@bayoubomber "while having power over women". You know that in a relationship neither side should have total control of the other right? It's not a competition it's a team up.
Who wears the pants? Both.
But let's say the husband stays at home and she works. So what? Every relationship dynamic is different. And in fact stay at home father's grew in number a lot the past few years.
You could not ever be in this type of relationship, and that is fine, neither could I, I like to work. But if a couple is happy like that let them be.
Why shouldn't they do what makes them happy? Because of social norms? Fuck that.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 "while having power over women". You know that in a relationship neither side should have total control of the other right? It's not a competition it's a team up.
Who wears the pants? Both." Do you know what you just did? I've never seen a Contradiction that blatant before. You have no issue with BOSS BAE? But neither side should have total control...
@bayoubomber what is your definition of a boss bae? Is it someone that has total control over everything? That doesn't listen to her partner ever? That always does what she wants with no regard for her partner? She says jump and he says "how high"?
If so we have different definitions of a boss bae.
To me is someone that yes makes most decisions, but doesn't has total control. Her partner also has vote on the matters, all of them. She simply takes the lead more often. Of course also an independent woman who takes no shit. Well educated with her own job.
I have no problem with her working.
Men don’t care.
I don't care what they do really.
sure why not
Sure why not
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions