3 Signs A Guy Might Need A More Dominant Woman

MzAsh
3 Signs A Guy Might Need A More Dominant Woman

It's common that a man might like to think of himself as the dominant partner in the relationship. This is the one who instinctively takes the lead more often than the other in social interactions and day to day living.

However, some men today simply don't properly provide leadership in certain situations. There's not necessarily anything wrong with this. Some guys just aren't comfortable being the one in the driver's seat.These are the guys that would do better by being with a more dominant woman.

He doesn't want to pursue

If a guy would rather a woman ask him out and make the moves instead of him being the one to pursue, then he's likely a more laid back, passive type of guy, as some men are by nature.

In some cases, guys can be shy and have anxiety around asking a woman out or making the first moves, which is understandable because men generally run a greater risk of rejection than women do.

A passive guy is going to be more comfortable with an assertive, take charge type of woman who has no problem being the one to initiate flirting, making the first moves, or asking him out on a date.

He is indecisive

If a man is often hesitant, fickle, or indecisive then he's going to need a woman who will be the authoritative force in the relationship.

Two indecisive people in a couple are going to be ineffective and grow frustrated with one another very quickly.

For example, if a man asks you where you want to eat, he's not asking you to reply with, “ Oh I don't know. Where do you want to go?”

That's the last thing he want to hears because he wants you to be dominant and make the decision for the both of you.

He doesn't want to pay

Running hand in hand with favoring the woman to ask him out is also the preference of opting out of paying for the date.

Dominant men are going to willingly pay for the date as it is made evident that they are the financial leader and supplier in the relationship.

If a man has the money to pay for a date, but habitually doesn't want to, then he'll naturally be the more humble and subordinate partner, financially. He will need a woman who is going to be more comfortable being in the provider status.

Luckily, this shouldn't be too difficult considering the fact that there are more bread-winning women than ever, complimentary to more men choosing to be stay at home dads which has in fact almost doubled since 1989.

As stated before, there's nothing fundamentally wrong with either of these choices or lifestyles based on principle. It's all just personal preference of the individual and how well you complement your partner.

Some men might be intimidated at first by the idea of having a more dominant girlfriend or wife, but if they take the time to think rationally, they might realize that this is how they could be happier.

3 Signs A Guy Might Need A More Dominant Woman
59
5
Add Opinion
5Girl Opinion
59Guy Opinion

Most Helpful Girls

  • wynn-ing
    @Naydyonov Makes sense but the economic climate has changed since then and that affects things more than the other 50% finally joining the labour force. Part of the reason why women started to go out to work before and after it was more socially accepted was because of the rising struggle to manage JUST on the man's income.
    Social circumstances ironically have pushed women to go out to work.

    Additionally, women joining all kinds of jobs doesn't necessarily bring down the OVERALL wage growth. There are specific jobs that are have increased in demand because of the influx of female workers (hence raising the wages) and there are also specific jobs that have the opposite effect. Very few jobs have been negatively effected by rising conpetition from the opposite sex joining.

    More people are demanding strikes on pay-related issues than before women going out to work was a thing. There is more movement to increase minimum wage and salaries than before.

    Isn't it great for men to not have to carry the whole weight of making money and ends meet now that women also have to share it? Men can now not be as burdened as before with social and family financial pressures when their partners are also earning and can retain some for themselves instead of spending it all of family bills etc.

    The example you gave doesn't hold much water because her circumstances and job specifics could be different to yours and your time. I don't know what Starbucks looks for in employees (looks? Perceived behaviour?) but unless she got that job you didn't get, it is near impossible to make a reasonable comparsion. It is definitely much more complicated than gender.

    I don't know how some who does exactly what you do but happens to be female could make 3 times more, by just being female. In fact, she could be making less BECAUSE she's a woman in construction/landscaping. Sexist stereotypes of who's fit to do what still exist.

    I feel that it is more population and people influx growth than specifically women. Especially now that we are well into both sexes in the workforces, we're actually more worried about the declining population growth in many places and the workforce shrinking with less young people and more elderly.
    LikeDisagree 2 People
    Is this still revelant?
    • Naydyonov

      Starbucks: had to do with age — I was denied for my age, she was not.

      But my point isn't specifically about a man versus woman thing, it has more to do with the fact that men are no longer the bearers of financial resources. This means expected men to pay for strangers is unfair.

      About the 3× more: a guy can make more than a girl, she can make more than him. My examples are mostly more specifically related to students. The point being that girls get some low-skilled jobs that guys often can't. Like babysitting.

      The point is simply that it is completely reasonable to assume that nowadays a girl can be making more money that a boy. Why the boy should pay for every date is not clear to me.

      In my own experience: I was denied due to age. Any ordinary self employment was not viable or possible for me, like babysitting, which is not a job boys have access to. Though my classmates, boys and girls alike, got jobs with no experience and would be fired and go on to the next job, where they'd also be fired. As a result for quite a while many girls would have been making 2-10 times more than me depending on the month.
      I would have had literally no money left if I had to pay for every date I would have gone on — if that something I would be doing.

    • Naydyonov

      By the way, your comment: "You make good points and I agree but the last part doesn't make any sense."
      My response: fuck you.
      .
      .
      .
      I'm joking! : )
      I found your acknowledgement nice. Equally, your argumentation is on point; criticizing the argument, not the arguer.

    • wynn-ing

      This clears everything up for me perfectly!
      I wholeheartedly agree that men should not be expected to pay for strangers or pay for every date.

      That is utter bullshit, exactly.

      Okay all this seems like my wrong interpretation of what you said when I actually agreed with you 😂 I apologise.

      Got it, the Starbucks job and the girl one was about the age. I thought it was because she was a girl and you were a guy :P my bad!

      However, I know people who are 16 and work at Starbucks these days! They were ageist (not a joke, this is a real thing) to you and where I am, you can sue them for it. There was this story of this guy around here who was denied a reasonable job at 16 despite the job legally permitting 16yrolds to work there (?) And he sued them 6 years later and won apparently. Good for him.

      Yeah, it's true that some girls can get the low-skilled jobs more easily than guys. Babysitting actually also has a sexist undertone to having more females in the field - males are assumed to be more predatorial and a possibly (often sexual) violent danger to kids, especially female children. I am really confused by this damn world at times.

      Ah okay yes. If the girls are earning more than you are and/or expect you to pay for every date, that's unreasonable!
      Good choice not doing that. If I go on a date and it comes to the payment point, I offer split or paying for what I ordered or even paying for the whole meal especially if I asked him out but never all on him EVERY time! Who would actually have the nerve 😂

    • Show All
  • KaraAyna
    Good mytake
    LikeDisagree 2 People
    Is this still revelant?

Most Helpful Guys

  • Lliam
    Good MyTake, MzAsh.
    I had never thought about the issue, but it makes total sense that there are guys who are less aggressive and assertive or more subordinate. And it makes sense that there are women who are more assertive. They make a perfect combo. They compliment and reinforce each other.

    It's an insightful perspective that might help some guys to understand themselves and seek out the right type of women or vice versa.

    Neither personality type is superior or inferior, normal or abnormal. They just are what they are and should be acknowledged and celebrated. How sad for women who have more dominant personalities to have to fit themselves into the stereotypical role of the wide-eyed, helpless, submissive female if they want a mate. And how sad for less assertive men to go though life feeling uncomfortable in their roles as bread winners, decision makers and top dogs.

    You also picked the perfect photo to exemplify a dominant female archetype.
    LikeDisagree 3 People
    Is this still revelant?
    • Lliam

      It also goes without saying that nobody is 100% one way or the other. They may possess some of these characteristics to one degree or another. There is a wide spectrum. Acknowledging the normalcy of these traits should increase people's comfort with themselves.

    • MzAsh

      Great response, thank you.

  • Jean-Marie_Céline
    Good myTake, I agree on all your points, but I don't think all the signs need to be present - one is sufficient enough.
    I think the only sign I show is the first - unwillingness to pursue - and this did result in the woman of the situation doing the pursuing.
    Maybe it can go along with indecisiveness - I do recognize that sometimes my lack of assertiveness and accomodating side is perceived as a weakness and properly taken advantage of. Perhaps I'm seeing it the wrong way, perhaps it is really a weakness I have to work on, I don't know.
    Like 1 Person
    Is this still revelant?

Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

357
  • razelove
    I agree on the first two but not the last. Sometimes there's just an income disparity, or, in my case, I just can't part with money, I live cheap, and put a lot into savings. That being said I do enjoy a dominant woman from time to time, a partner to be dominant to, and a partner to be submissive to. Balance.
  • ElissaDido
    Good take
    I'm not attracted to these men
    Like 2 People
  • jgokgotit
    I mostly agree with each point in my case. I have a preference for her to pursue, but I will do it too. I think of it as whoever feels comfortable making the first move just goes for it. When it comes to decisions, I am mostly passive and would leave it to her. For example, how things run day to day I would love for her to decide. However, when a major decision is being made, I will make my voice heard. The more a decision matters to me, the more I'll be assertive and negotiate. As for paying for dates, I have a bit of a rule. I'll pay for the first two dates. The third date I would insist on going half, but would let her know ahead of time. This is a kind of test I've set up to see what her reaction is as well as her heart and integrity. From the 4th date on, it does not matter to me who pays. However, given my chosen career field, whatever woman I meet will probably make more than I do, especially in my first 5 years.
    This is an excellent mytake. It got me thinking about what kind of woman I hope to meet and what kind of relationship I hope to have. If I were to place it on a 50/50 type of scale, my ideal is 65/35 with 65 being how often she makes the decisions. If I succeed at being a police officer, that career will take so much of my mind and heart. The little bit of spare time I would have home I would want to spend having fun with my family. Also, I value intelligence and creativity in women, to the point where the ones I choose to date are usually smarter than me. Finally, I would be making so many life-altering decisions in my career so it would be nice to not have to make them at home.
    lol Sorry for the lengthy reply.
    Like 1 Person
  • ankith10reddy
    Dominance generally means when one takes power over others and forces their decision on to others. The scenarios you mentioned shows more of confidence and leadership.

    Firstly, yes a some/lot of men don't want to purse asking a woman out because of risk of rejection. But also risk of offending, in the current generation where some women who find greeting to also be offensive, sure asking a woman out might possibly land him in prison.

    Secondly, yes some men don't want to make decision in some matters , like the choice of restaurant. But that doesn't necessarily make him indecisive, he sure might be having an opinion or choice in other matters.

    Finally, i pretty sure these days people share their expenses on dates. But yeah some don't and expect other person to pay for them. If you think about it, do you want a guy who pays for a stranger to just get to know her (that for me sounds way to desperate). Or he pays for people who he is actually in a relationship with.

    I don't think its dominance if one is working to earn money for family while the other stays at home. If more of like partnership, where they divide and conquer the jobs.

    No offense what so ever but I don't think it's good for men/women to stay at home even after the kids reaches a certain age, because that inflicts a lot of responsibility and risk if the "breadwinner" loses job. I think it's better of both earn together, while still spending time with children.
  • Jamie05rhs
    I disagree, and I will tell you why:

    1. More like we don't want to harass and we don't want to stalk. Unlike some other people, I actually understand the concept of No Means No. If you want to be coerced, then sorry; I'm not your guy.

    2. One can be indecisive and still lead. We just take longer to come to a decision. But we make better decisions because we think things through more thoroughly. And we're democratic; we take our woman's wishes into consideration as opposed to just dictating everything and shoving it down her throat.

    "ineffective and grow frustrated". No; they can make a good team because they respect each other and understand the art of compromise.

    And no, I don't want her to "make the decision.". It's a genuine question asking her for her opinion.

    3. Payment is not about control. And if it is, then I want no part of it. I'm a leader, not a control freak.

    Furthermore, I don't know how this is so hard for some people to understand: just because I don't want to pay for everything for the woman (because she's an adult, not a child) that doesn't mean that I want her to pay for me. I'm a man; I can pay for myself, thank you very much.
    Like 1 Person
  • ronaldo75
    "He doesn't want to pursue" - So if a guy won't chase, he's a coward who needs a dominant woman? No. Just. No. It's 2019 and women are big girls now, if a guy shows interest then either you want him or not - no has time for games anymore - especially in the age of #metoo.

    "He is indecisive" - Women who are dominant are normally less patient with their partners than dominant men are. A man who's indecisive shouldn't even be dating. He needs to be working on himself as indecisiveness 100% stems from insecurity.

    "He doesn't want to pay" - Stop cherry picking facts. Women are becoming larger bread-winners "STATISTICALLY" only when you calculate for homes with 2 married or unmarried romantic partners living in one household. However, that statistic is heavily skewed by the fact that men in relationships still spend over 70% more of their income on their partners and/or households than women. 70 fucking percent. That's because in most households where the women earns more the bills are split 50/50. That's NOT the case when the man is the larger earner, when men earn more women tend to spend up to 50% of their pay on THEMSELVES. That said, the average man in the USA has close to $2,000 in the bank more than the average women. So... yeah.
    • wynn-ing

      I don't agree with this MyTake either and I agree with all of this bar the last point - can you source those figures? They sound very class, background, salaries, with person-specific bills, lifestyle choices, values within the family/couple/person and very location specific than we can go here.

      Women ARE becoming larger breadwinners where I am and in terms of social impact and household earning distribution in general. Bills are paid by the breadwinner (man or woman) and the other partner can spend on more conventional items and services for the family. The breadwinner retains the leftover money from the bills but this may not necessarily be 50% of their earnings. This is not the case everywhere but is extremely common according to social impact and changes in society with these household income management types.

      I'm not invalidating your point, just curious about the legitimacy. It sounds very different to what I can deduce in my society.

  • David_Kek
    There's no shortage of these guys in society; in my experience most of them are Bi men that have been abused by their mothers.
    Just a shame that very few if any "dominant" women actually care for these men. The only ones that do tend to be a-typical trans tomboys, which goes without saying are pretty rare.
    Like 1 Person
  • 420cat
    I agree with the majority of what you said but as far as not wanting to pay, I don't agree. It might be true with some guys, I don't know. I have always been passive but I also believe that the guy should pay for the date. If the woman wants to pay periodically that's okay, I got used to that. Going dutch is out. I did that once, ( I had no choice ) and I felt like a heel. Some of us men are just naturally submissive.
  • BigJake
    The problem for these guys is that dominant women don't want them. Dominant women want men who are even more dominant than they are.
    LikeDisagree 2 People
    • MzAsh

      I wouldn’t say that’s largely the truth. If it is, that’s foolish and a recipe for disaster.

    • BigJake

      There's a ton of evidence to back it up, too. Women have posted stuff all over the internet asking what alpha-type women are supposed to do in dating, because they don't see themselves with beta guys. In all fairness, though, I don't think any women want beta-type guys.

    • MzAsh

      A beta guy is exactly what they should go for. They’re good in a lot of ways too.

    • Show All
  • crazy8000
    🤣😂🤣

    Much missing and to much generalized presumption.

    Have you heard of to only pass an equal that has own drive that goes for what they are after and takes initiative.
    Or for that matter that dominant isn't the same as dominating.
    Very few of those men wants her to pay for him or for her since both gives signals of user mentality.
    Like 1 Person
  • Shamalien
    he needs a more submissive partner so he can realize his dominance. Women are not meant to be dominant, total inversion of the natural order
    LikeDisagree 2 People
    • MzAsh

      Many women are just born dominant by nature.

    • Shamalien

      and many men are born more dominant ;) before the elites started the infamous 'war on testosterone' and sent all the high T men off to get slaughtered in droves, no woman would need want for a man to tame her. Now that men have been turned soft, you see this problem of some women not having dominant enough men, but fuck that it's unnatural.

    • MzAsh

      Nothing wrong with a man knowing how and when to be soft.

    • Show All
  • cooldude64
    I've found a few dominant woman more attractive but they were not because of the points you raised. Rather i just found them more fun because they are feisty, and spark interest in sporadic thinking.
    Like 2 People
  • westwordbound
    Some “dominant” guys are smart not to over pursue early. They act mysterious because they know girls like that. But once they get their foot in the door they go for it.

    I once dated a girl who tried to be dominant. I didn’t like it. In the beginning it was nice because she was so direct there was zero guesswork. But as time went on I felt emasculated. I cut it off. I could never stay in a relationship like that.
  • bamesjond0069
    1. If he is a wimp.
    2. If he is a pussy.
    3. If he is a cuck.
    LikeDisagree 7 People
    • MzAsh

      🙄🙄🙄

    • I thought you would comment seeing as I just described your dream man. 😂

    • MzAsh

      Geez. Why are you so miserable?

    • Show All
  • Unit1
    1.5/3

    not believing or buying into this dominance/submission thingy. It's not for me.

    based on this logic, European (and maybe also American) women are dominant. They're not. And neither are we i suppose.
  • NorthwestRider
    Dominant women are badass and sexy

    Getting married to one
    Like 1 Person
  • Aiko_E_Lara
    Next up. Million signs a girl might need a more dominant man.
    Like 1 Person
  • UncleJessieRabbit
    Hmm I wonder. Why can't it be a mix-and-match too? Like a woman can still approach a man (however unlikely it is too catch on as much because of nature) but a man can still choose to be the payer for things if he chooses to.
    Like 1 Person
  • ShadowofRegret
    I strongly prefer dominant women since I tend to be on the shy and passive side, and I just like women who like to take charge!
    Like 2 People
  • ConfusedOfTheWorld
    Bruh, if I ask back where the person wants to eat is because idc about it, I want the other one to feel good.
    Like 2 People
  • Show More (40)
Loading...