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 
Do you think it's unfair that women are ridiculed for their preferences in the opposite sex? (Page 3)
Anonymous
(25-29) 
Click "Show More" for your mentions
Most Helpful Opinion(mho) Rate.
Learn more
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
81Opinion
I agree! I was dying for such a question and I can write a whole book about this and rant day and night. I have been mostly rejected for being on the shorter side for height. I always see a tall
man with a tall
women but hardly the other way around and it is totally depriving. I do get jealous at times. However, i disagree about men liking submissive women because majority of my friends like dominant women. I even notice some women like submissive men. But as far as height it is ridiculous.
No, but I think I don't think it's fair to speak for others when it comes to this. Preferences are up to the individual. I'm a straight woman and none of what you listed is my preference and I know many guys would disagree with the preferences you have assigned to them as well.
but I don't think*
women are not ridiculed for it, and I don't know where you get that from. men are the ones who are constantly called pigs or superficial because of they're preference. "stop body shaming women" "quit forcing women to wear make up" meanwhile every man in the world is waiting by the door with his coat and shoes on screaming at his girl to hurry up you don't need to put on make up were just getting groceries
None of those supposed male preferences line up with reality as I have experienced it. We may care about appearances more but men are a lot less picky and judgmental. Women judge men about eeeevvvverything.
I have people telling me all the time my boyfriend is ugly and I can do better, but it has NOTHING to do with anyone what my preferences are so I just tell them it's my relationship not theirs so they should work on themselves and stop worrying about me
So basically men look after women?
Women want a bigger, stronger man who will pay the bills and be in charge.
While men just want the woman for her company? Seems right
I think both sexes get a lot of shit about their preferences. I think there are loud, obnoxious, jealous people of both genders when they don't qualify...
I disagree with making money, it's not a biologically preference. I think women are a little bit more ridiculed compared to men, but it doesn't mean that they are an exception. There should be a "maybe" option.
I like girls that are taller
I don't mind if a girl makes more money
I like fit chicks
Depends how dominant she is, probably where I draw the line, as I'm more of a dominant person, but it might work out who knows
guess im a weirdo or something
Fit does not equal stronger. Either way, I didn't realize it was necessary to state that not everyone in the world shares these preferences, or that some men are even gay...
well I don't mind if a girl is strong at all, thats all about her, at the end it boils down to personality whether it will work or not
you made it sound like all guys fit into this cookie cutter shape and its bad
"The only differences are that men's preferences, by nature, are easier to attain"
That's is not the "only" difference, it is THE difference that defeats the whole point of this argument.
I actually mentioned two, and it doesn't at all... You clearly don't have very high level thinking though.
Lol, now I see why men don't include you in their preferences.
What are you on about?
Do I think it's "unfair"... no.
People seriously need to drop that passive wishy washy verbal nonsense- people judge other people. Fuck them for it but it's nether wrong nor right, fair nor unjust. It just is.
Since when do guys want women who make less money?
That is just so wrong.
I explained pretty well that the only reason a guy would want a woman that makes more money is because that would mean a better life for him. Deep down, he'd likely hate the fact that she makes more than he does, but it would be a sacrifice he'd be willing to make. Why would he hate it? Because men like to be the providers by nature.
"Because men like to be the providers by nature."
What utter crap. And don't for a moment think you can speak for men. There are plenty of men on this question who said that they are fine with women who earn a lot. But you just dismiss them as exceptions instead of just accepting that you're wrong.
That's cause I'm not wrong, you're just ignorant. Look at any mammal, and you'll see that the male (who is stronger) will be the one to provide for the female and their children.
*Looks at lions, sees that females are mostly the hunters that provide the food*
Maybe it's YOU who is ignorant.
Oh, wow, an exception. You got me there...
So you told me to look at any mammal and the first that comes to mind already breaks your little rule. I can assure you, lions aren't the only animals which break "traditional" gender rules, there's lots of animals species where females court males or take the leadership role. I've quoted lots of very detailed scientific research in the other thread, go read up on it.
That's because I didn't realize there was a need to say "most," just like I didn't see the need to mention that some men are gay in my post, but I guess... yes, I should have. Either way, you cannot argue with the fact that it is true in most mammals, can you? Besides, I don't care about lions, where the female is only pregnant for 15 weeks... and who knows what other difference they have.
You're trying to wiggle yourself out of this one. Like I said before, whenever you see evidence which contradicts your beliefs you dismiss it as an exception rather than what it actually is: evidence contradicting your beliefs. You're clearly engaging in confirmation bias.
Lions are the very epitome of hunting. Yet they brake your rule.
Most animals don't engage in cooperative hunting, they hunt alone. Females as well as males. These females would starve if they weren't looking out for themselves. Again, that breaks your rule.
With those animals that do engage in cooperative hunting (such as lions, hyenas, chimpanzees, wild dogs, etc), both males and females usually hunt in a group.
Your little argument isn't even true for archaic humans like the Neanderthals.
"Hunting large game at close range is perilous, and Neanderthal skeletons bear copious fractures. Dr. Kuhn and Dr. Stiner argue that Neanderthal women and children took part in the dangerous hunts, probably
probably as beaters and blockers of exit routes. "
Source: www.nytimes.com/2006/12/05/science/05nean.html
Females also worked to gather food, etc. But, tell me, what happened when the female was pregnant or when the environment was too dangerous? You think females went out to hunt for food?
blog.londolozi.com/2014/04/do-male-lions-hunt/
1. You're not pregnant.
2. If you don't want to get pregnant, there's plenty of contraceptives available which animals do not have.
3. If you do want to get pregnant, don't complain about getting pregnant.
4. Your whole argument is completely moot. This whole hunting discussion has nothing to do with modern life. Unless you're living in the middle of Africa, the vast majority of jobs in the today's world do NOT require physical strength. In fact, the highest paid jobs are usually the ones that don't while the lowest paid jobs (military, construction) are the ones that do. Thus there's absolutely no reason for women not to be breadwinners in today's world.
I know that... but just because we're technologically advanced doesn't mean we don't have biological impulses.
Except both genders have these "impulses"! Read the damn article I linked to. It clearly demonstrates that biologically both males and females have hunting instincts or whatever you want to call them. It was rather rational thought that lead to the division of labor, not instincts.
But, even in lions, when the opponent is too strong for example, the male goes to fight.
Obviously, women work too, and I never suggested that they don't (it's not like they are pregnant or taking care of children their entire lives, after all), it's just that men are more capable. Just as I didn't suggest that men like short women or weak women, but women that are shorter and weaker than they are.
I do realize I accidentally said "weak" in my post, but that was a mistake.
Let's summarize:
1) First you claim that with ANY mammal the male is the provider and that is his natural role.
2) It literally took me 2 seconds to think of a mammal where this is not the case.
3) Then you claim it's just an exception.
4) I counter by giving various examples where females hunt and help provide.
5) Then you acknowledge that females do indeed gather food, although just 3 hours earlier you called me ignorant for basically saying the exact same thing.
6) You're basing your whole argument on the physical superiority of men, yet most jobs today have no such requirement and women are hence just as qualified to be breadwinners.
7) Then you claim it's just basic instincts that males hunt and women don't, completely forgetting that we had just disproved that theory in points 1) through 5).
8) Then you claim that men are more capable in today's job environment which was already disproved in point 6)
www.relatably.com/.../ims8kw039ih5lpt3.png
Point 8 shouldn't have been a smiley face... lol
Let's summarize from my perspective:
1. In the best example you could give (the lions), it is said that the male lion doesn't hunt because their fur makes it difficult for them to camouflage, and when in a fight where camouflage is no longer needed, the male comes to fight for the female.
2. It is an exception, since in most animals, the male does more of the providing and protecting than the female.
3. There is a very specific reason I said, "women want men that make more money, men want women that make less money." So, I repeat, I never insinuated that women don't or shouldn't "gather food," because I'm very aware that people still need to look out for themselves.
4. They have no requirements, but there's a reason you see way, way, way more men working in construction, auto repair, etc. So, even though the requirement doesn't exist anymore due to societal advancement, men are still the ones working the more physically tasking jobs.
5. Not at all, I claimed it was instinct for men...
... to desire to provide for women.
I admit that some of the things I said were said with little thought when replying to him (maybe cause I've had to reply to what feels like a million people), but you've said nothing to prove my main point in this thread wrong, just the things I said to him.
1. So?
2. No. You just say that over and over again but it doesn't make it true. I get the feeling that you WANT it to be true so you can rationalize your own desires. Besides, even if it was true, you're engaging in a logical fallacy: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-nature
3. I don't want women to make less money, my girlfriend doesn't want me to make more money. Neither do any of my friends, male or female. There are plenty of men and women on this thread who have said the same. But we're aaaaaaaaaaaall just exceptions, right? It couldn't be that you're just wrong, right? It couldn't be that people all have different desires and can't be so easily put into gender boxes, right?
4. Yes, emphasis on physically tasking jobs. Which was exactly my point. But those physically tasking jobs are mostly jobs that aren't well paid at all. At least I have never seen someone becoming a millionaire by working in construction or auto repair. Working in IT or in finance? Different story. But that isn't physically tasking and women can just as well work in those fields. Which was exactly my point.
Matter of fact, if you want to bring physical strength into this, I could argue that men should do all the physically tasking, low wage jobs, while women should do all the other, high paid jobs. See how that works?
5. It is not. Again, I don't have that desire to provide for women and neither do any of my male friends. In fact they get an allergic reaction whenever a woman thinks they should "provide" for them. Same with guys here. That hardly sounds like your average man has a desire to provide for women. Sorry, not sorry.
No, actually, it wouldn't work for women to do thise jobs because men are even proven to be smarter than women. So, again you're wrong...
The main reason these men are saying they don't want to provide is because they don't like the (what seems to be) harder work that comes with it, and because of the fact that having a woman that makes more means they'd live a better life. However, if all of these things were not taken into consideration, most of these men would want to be the providers because men enjoy feeling like they're, I guess, "better" than women.
I'm not wrong "again," I was never wrong in the first place. I'm the one here who constantly proves just about every point you bring up to be pseudoscientific baloney yet that doesn't stop you from bringing up even more crap.
And yes, SOME men are certainly smarter than SOME women. *cough cough*
And sure, there are men who feel the need to be "better" than women but those men are mostly very insecure individuals. Most men I know aren't like that at all, they prefer a partner they can see as an equal.
And good for you that you seem to understood us men better than we do ourselves. :D :D If it wasn't for you I would have never guessed that I'm really actually genetically and biologically driven to spend my $$$ on girls yet I'm apparently too lazy to do so in practice. lmao
Except I'm neither lazy nor have I ever felt the desire to provide for women. They aren't children ffs.
But just in case you were actually being serious, wanting a better life as a man and choosing the easiest path in life are also innate and instinctive desires. And if those desires are so much stronger that they can so easily overrule man's desire to provide for women, doesn't that mean that we should rather give way to those stronger desires? I mean, we should listen to our instincts, that was your whole point, wasn't it?
So does that mean I should listen to my instincts, dump my girlfriend and marry a rich girl? Does that mean I should play video games all day and let my wife do all the work?
See how that works?
No, men's ideal partner is someone that is in their general league (but a bit worse), not an entire equal. This way all of men's desires are basically fulfilled..
Anyway, I'm done now.
lmao girl you don't speak for me. I'm pretty sure that I know better what I want than some pink anon on GAG. Thanks for trying though.
www.learnvest.com/.../
Read the beginning.
You may know, but it doesn't mean you'll admit it.
No, I know fully well and I'm happy to admit that there are plenty of insecure guys who feel threatened by successful women. I never doubted that and you misunderstood me if you think I did.
What I doubt is that this has ANYTHING to do with biological desires rather than social conditioning, peer pressure and being flat out insecure.
There are several indications that it is for the most part a societal phenomenon:
1) There are tribes around the world where women hold ALL the property and men own nothing. The Ede ethnic group in Southern Vietnam comes to mind. Why do these cultures evolve at all when the man's instinct to provide is supposedly so strong?
2) I'm a man in every sense of the word but I don't feel threatened by successful women at all.
3) Neither do any of my friends, lots of which are men.
4) I know two stay at home dads and they are perfectly happy in their relationship and their women are perfectly happy to provide for them. But they live in a very progressive area where society doesn't judge them for it.
5) The few men that I know are threatened by successful women have all one thing in common: they were raised in a time and/or place where earning less than your wife is/was being looked down upon.
6) For every man in that article who felt threatened by it there are ten guys here on GAG who are perfectly okay with it.
7) There are women who are threatened by men who make more money as well. Even on GAG: www.girlsaskguys.com/.../q2308977-intimidated-by-men-who-make-more-money-do-men-really-care
TL;DR: Everything points to this being a societal or personality-based thing. You haven't provided any conclusive evidence that this is a biological desire that is only present in men.
I actually have... It's biological because the woman even just working will get in the way of pregnancy and ability to raise her young. Men and women alike care about the survival of their offspring, so it makes sense that men would want to be the main providers... as all preferences between sexes are based on the offspring's chances of survival. The only reason it's different now, is because people aren't having as many offspring as they used to, so men can afford to be lenient because more money means a better life for themselves. And, it matters that lions don't hunt due to their inability to camouflage as well as women... Why? Because there is no such difference in humans, which means men would be more able, overall.
My point stands that all thing being equal and money not being an issue, men would desire a woman that makes a bit less.
While this has been fun, I'm tired of this thread... so goodbye.
as well as females*
EXCEPT MEN CAN RAISE CHILDREN JUST AS WELL. Men can just as well stay be at home dads and raise children. This is true for humans as well as lots of animals.
I can provide you with literally HUNDREDS of pages of well-documented, peer-reviewed papers on how children raised by single fathers have actually performed BETTER in nearly every aspect of life than children raised by single mothers. This isn't even some theory, but REAL WORLD observations of HUNDREDS of children raised by ACTUAL fathers in studies lasting DECADES. I'm happy to provide you with enough reading material in case you're actually open minded enough.
And again NO, IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE FOR MEN TO BE THE MAIN PROVIDERS simply because women don't have a monopoly on raising children.
SAYING THE SAME SHIT OVER AND OVER AGAIN DOESN'T MAKE IT TRUE AS HARD AS THAT MAY BE FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND.
Can you please stop talking out of your ass?
Yeah, men can also give children breast milk too...
Congrats, you have just come up with a remotely reasonable argument for the FIRST time in this entire conversation.
Except there's formula for that now.
Except you claimed that it is a biological desire for men to provide and you couldn't provide any evidence for your little assertion, you just claim it's true because it makes "sense" to you.
Except I provided you with plenty of counter examples of men who don't feel that way at all.
Except there are major holes in your logic as I pointed out multiple times.
Except you claimed that every man wants a woman who earns slightly less, all while every other reply you get from men on here directly contradicts that. Do you even read the responses you get? Even most women don't agree with you. Just read the last 6 responses you got from women. See what I'm talking about?
I guess you still don't. Sigh.
It wasn't anything I came up with right now, I've been mentioning "rasing young" a million times. What the hell did you think that consisted of?
Formulas don't change basic instincts, and breast milk is still recommended as the best nutritional choice either way.
I already explain why I think that these men are saying what they're saying... and I think there's even more to it than that, but I'm not gonna get into it. It STILL does not change the fact that all other things not considered (or being equal), a man would want to make more than the woman.
This time, for real, I'm done with this pointless conversation.
Except you STILL have NOT proven that men have "basic instincts" to provide for women in ANY way, shape or form. You just repeated that claimed for the gazillionth time, and surprise, surprise, STILL without any evidence to back it up.
Yes, but that's exactly it. It is what YOU THINK. What YOU THINK is however far removed from ACTUAL reality or you wouldn't get so fucking many responses from both genders COMPLETELY disagreeing with YOUR preferences and "instincts".
"It STILL does not change the fact that all other things not considered (or being equal), a man would want to make more than the woman."
And you STILL haven't provided ANY evidence for that being ACTUALLY TRUE in the REAL world. YOU are making that claim, so YOU have to proof it. Coming up with a nice sounding evo psych explanation does NOT, I repeat NOT, make it true. Coming up with anecdotes about SOME men feeling insecure about it does NOT in any way proof that MOST or ALL men feel that way OR that it is biological.
You said you wanted to go for hours. Then go.
What's with the stereotyping you never know a guy could like a dom female and he'll im 5'10"3/4 and a girl I have a crush on is 6'2"(I believe don't know her hight)
This seems really steryotypey. Every guy have different preferences.
Nope. Women have unrealistic preferences while men have realistic ones.
how so?
@ImACowgirl
Women's preferences
-----------------------------------------------------
- Over 6 feet tall
- Makes a high income of 6 figures
- Very tone with 6 pack abs
- Confident
- Big dick. But not anything over 12 inches.
- High status.
- Intelligent
- Ambitious
- Well traveled
- Romantic
- Charismatic
- Funny
~ Approximately less than 5% of single men fit this criteria
Men's preferences
---------------------------------------------------------------
- Be pleasant
- Not be fat
~ Around 40% of single women fits this criteria
*snort So true...
But goddamn it, it us women that are being ridiculed!!! /sarcasm
Someone's very dramatic in order to fit their own agenda.
That's you, opinion owner.
Shame me all you want. I don't care. You're the one that's being dramatic on this post. Also, it seems you fail the "be pleasant" criteria for men.
I might very well fail the "be pleasant" criterai, but I sure as hell know I'm not dramatic.
How so? I think you love the drama. Read all your "dramatic" responses to everyone here.
@DrTruth Ok do i think you'd get along better with a guy if you think that. Looks like you're gay.
Me, speaking as an individual and my own woman.
1. I'm only 5'3 so I don't wanna be at crotch with a guy.
2. I could careless about his income. As long as he works hard, idgaf.
3. He doesn't have to be toned. I'm not into skinny guys or fat guys. so anything in between floats my boat.
4. Confident? I don't know why I should care if he's confident or not.
5. Don't give 2 fs about the size of his dick. I'm looking for a man not a dick.
6. Status means nothing to me.
7. Of course no one wants someone who is not intelligent?
8. Ambitious isn't a bad thing so that's good.
9. What is well traveled?
10. Should you not be romantic with your partner?
11. Charismatic is good. Guys want that too.
12. Not really something that is that important.
and you're telling me guys don't have a list that long. Phi only 2 things. foh.
And here I thought her dramatic comment was directed at me and not you, @DrTruth.
To the asker, you are the dramatic one, and not intellectually honest and not pleasant. And you obviously have an agenda and open discussion is not a part it. So why should any of us bother trying to have a discussion with you?
Here is the response you only want to hear:
Ok, us poor women! We are being ridiculed for having standards. Mean men are picking on us and some women too. All just because we have standards that nature dictates to us. Woe is us. /sigh
Does that about cover it? Have I missed anything? Woe is you, yadadadada
@ImACowgirl First, you insult me. If you have to resort to shaming, I already won the debate and any further interaction is a waste of my time. You are right though. I do get along with men because we can have a rational discussion without ad hominem attacks.
@DrTruth Babe, you insulted yourself by putting women into an unrealistic category and basically saying men are better. Does that sound gay? Yes, yes it does.
@imacowgirl
I'm sorry, are you not the one that agreed with his "big dick. But not anything over 12 inches" comment? And you think I'm the one not open to a discussion when everything you say is obviously biased... for whatever reason.
I meant lizzipooh
@Asker I didn't agree with him on really anything he said actually. I find say anything about you so how am I biased?
oh ok. carry on
"*snort So true...
But goddamn it, it us women that are being ridiculed!!! /sarcasm"
Your words, which you obviously forget easily.
@ the asker - I figured you meant me. And it figures the one thing that you can pick apart, his big dick comment, you go for. Obviously, he was being ridiculous which was his point about women's expectations...
And obviously, yet again, you are being disingenuous, intellectually dishonest and not interested in really discussing the topic YOU brought up.
You do not care to hear others opinions. That is quite clear.
And you are dramatic and disingenuous. So whatever...
I am not interested in responding to you anymore even if it is your thread. You have worn out my patience. Which is a really hard thing to do except when someone is purposefully being disingenuous as you have proven to be.
Sad, cuz otherwise, this might have been an interesting topic and those are few and far between here. Oh well.
That's because it was the most obviously ridiculous thing he said... that proved the others were exaggerated too, otherwise poor people wouldn't even be breeding. Women's expectations are not ridiculous, but you think that so it must be so..
Either way, you were quick to agree wth him, which isn't shocking.
i don't care what anyone thinks but believe is a minority of people that have these discriminatory thoughts
honestly am not sure i never really thought it was unfair i think its just a preference who doesn't want someone good and people will always find something to talk or ridicule its not new dont care!!!
i dont think it is fair to judge anyone for their preferences! however if there is hypocrisy then I do not approve! I like smart, confident, go getters type women but not controlling. i dont care if she makes more money than i do. its all about being honest and real at the end of the day
But no one is shaming women for their preferences lol except Internet guys when it comes to height xD
They shame women for wanting a man that makes more money as well, and sometimes they complain that they have to do more to become physically attractive to women, like work out.
Well, because wanting him to make more money than you means you want to use his money, and that's messed up.
And yeah, it's true that guys need to do more work to be hot than women, but it's not really something that is brought up unless women complain because guys want them to have big ass, big boobs, curves...
But, I really don't think that's the reason most women want a guy that makes more money..
And, I have personally seen it be brought up whenever men mention a list of all the things they must attain to attract women, but not usually all on its own, no.
What other reason would there be? Why can't the woman earn more? I understand wanting a man that makes enough money to at least sustain himself, but why does he have to make more than her?
I think it's to satisfy a woman's desire for a more dominant man than herself. If it were just so that she could use his money, then women wouldn't even want to be working, but they do...
So you base dominance on how much money a man makes? xD
This list has nothing to do with me. I was just mentioning the things I've seen mentioned by men.
Women are who is judging other woman. You guys act like the world is out go get you. But In real life it's the men who are under constant attack for there natural state of evolution.