Ask men, what qualities do you think women are missing these days? (self.AskMen)

AskMen

7 ups - 4 downs = 3 votes

Please state why you feel the way you feel.

63 comments submitted at 06:42:56 on Feb 27, 2014 by [deleted]

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 07:21:56, 27 February

A lot of women, especially feminists, have lost touch with their femininity.

Sorry, but I don't find your PhD, your career, and your feminist agenda attractive. I find your long hair, your sundress, and your charm attractive.

  • [-]
  • _aladynevertells_
  • 1 Points
  • 07:52:45, 27 February

To put this into perspective- to women who have valued their career in, oftentimes, male dominated industries, it's incredibly difficult to separate themselves from that masculine, cold, mindset. Everything the women have in life came from their careers and education-- not a sundress and long hair. Thus, success in other aspects of life, logically, should come in the same way. It doesn't work like that with love, and that's difficult for successful women to internalize and overcome (IMO), as many men I've met certainly don't want an airhead, but value traits like motivation and the ability to contribute to a conversation, not necessarily a walking checklist of achievements.

I think that's the difference.

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 08:09:08, 27 February

You have some solid analysis on the issue, but the biggest thing that people take offense to, is that I don't care.

I'm sorry. I really am. But presenting me with your resume is not going to boost my attraction towards you. I'm attracted primarily based on looks, personality second, and then afterwards common sense/basic intelligence INSTEAD of education.

I get why some women want to be career women. I want to be a career man. But what turns men on and what turns women on aren't the same. A lot of women will date/marry lawyers, doctors, and other high-value jobs because the status of those jobs is a turn on for women. I can tell you right now that I don't give a shit what job a woman has. In fact, I think I'd be most attracted to a woman who's a teacher or a nurse, because those jobs hearken back to earlier days where those were the only jobs they could have. In short, those jobs help remind me of their femininity.

To women reading this, why do you think men should care about your education AS a factor in how attractive they should perceive you? This is a serious question. Why can't you be content with accepting that a lot of men are attracted primarily due to looks and then personality like myself. Us men are comfortable in knowing that if we're not as tall, don't make as much money, not as fit, then we have a lower success rate in the dating market. We get that. But for some reason, women don't get that if they're not as beautiful, not as feminine, don't have as great a personality, they have a lower success rate.

And it's that last sentence I wrote that really bugs me.

  • [-]
  • Life_of_roses
  • 1 Points
  • 07:22:51, 27 February

Slightly misogynistic...

  • [-]
  • Guglio08
  • 1 Points
  • 07:29:50, 27 February

Wait, how is that misogynistic?

  • [-]
  • elliya
  • 1 Points
  • 07:36:44, 27 February

"I don't want a woman to be smart and invested in something. They just have to look good. The way I want. Because for me."

  • [-]
  • Guglio08
  • 1 Points
  • 07:59:17, 27 February

That's not misogynistic though. Thinking that it is, is a gross misunderstanding of the word.

  • [-]
  • WildGrapes
  • 1 Points
  • 07:41:30, 27 February

You know whats sexist? Telling men that they find the wrong things attractive.

He likes good looking women. AND ITS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 07:52:19, 27 February

You literally are trying to miss my point.

I'm not saying women HAVE to look good FOR me. I'm saying that I find good looking women attractive. I don't find women with PhD's attractive. My brain isn't hardwired to reproduce with someone with a PhD, it's hardwired to reproduce with someone who has a good waist to hip ratio. That's male sexuality/biology 101.

  • [-]
  • Life_of_roses
  • 1 Points
  • 08:00:20, 27 February

Using bold letters doesn't make your opinion better

If the only thing you find attractive about the female population is their appearance, then you are misogynistic. That's sexism 101.

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 08:12:05, 27 February

That isn't the only thing I find attractive, that's the primary thing.

I'm not using bold to try and make my opinion better. I'm using bold to highlight the parts that I think are most important in my post.

And it's not sexist to have preferences. It is not sexist to find the physique of a woman attractive if she is slim. It is not sexist to NOT find fat women attractive. It is ok to have preferences.

I am so saddened that people like you have been brainwashed by radical feminism and genuinely believe that a man having a preference is sexist/misogynistic.

  • [-]
  • _aladynevertells_
  • 1 Points
  • 08:15:11, 27 February

I think he means initially. I don't think he means long term. I.e., upon first meeting, if all you talk about are your achievements, that's not going to keep him around. Are you charming, cute, and fun to hang out with? Great. Oh, you have a PhD, too? My guess is that he'd think that as a bonus, not a negative. However, it wouldn't lure him in in the first place if he had no initial attraction to a girl. I think that's perfectly fair. People either are or aren't attracted to others, you can't force it.

I think you're both saying the same thing, but are miscommunicating at the middle.

  • [-]
  • StabbyPants
  • 1 Points
  • 07:45:24, 27 February

damn, you just hear what you want. Smart isn't a bad thing, it just doesn't turn him on.

  • [-]
  • Nogbadd
  • 1 Points
  • 07:31:20, 27 February

So Aerobus should be attracted only to dimensions that meet with the approval of a particular group in society? And which group might that be? The self - appointed guardians of social justice might wish to reflect that having a Degree is great, but it might not make me want to spend more time in your company. If the way that she twiddles her hair around her little finger gives me an erection, then I will not be shamed into pretending that I am aroused by her discourse on Dworkin.

  • [-]
  • Life_of_roses
  • 1 Points
  • 07:41:34, 27 February

> The self - appointed guardians of social justice

Nah, we aren't guardians of social justice.

>So Aerobus should be attracted only to dimensions that meet with the approval of a particular group in society?

I don't know too many groups of society that are pushing for women to go and get a degree. It's just something we do, just like men. And yes, forgive me if it pisses me off a little when someone says that a women putting her PhD first makes her unattractive.

>If the way that she twiddles her hair around her little finger gives me an erection

That's great that the way women twiddle their thumbs gives you a raging erection, just don't downplay our intelligence.

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 07:54:13, 27 February

> when someone says that a women putting her PhD first makes her unattractive.

You are misinterpreting what I said to an extreme. It's not that putting her PhD first makes her unattractive. It's that having a PhD is a quality that does not attract me.

  • [-]
  • jeanralph
  • 1 Points
  • 07:39:03, 27 February

Are we not entitled to our preferences?

  • [-]
  • Life_of_roses
  • 1 Points
  • 07:48:57, 27 February

Of course you are. Just don't be surprised when some people take offence to them because they are cripplingly sexist.

  • [-]
  • jeanralph
  • 1 Points
  • 08:17:53, 27 February

Assessing attractiveness with social status and formal education is a stereotypically female way of doing things, it doesn't take a hardcore sexist to tell you that. It resonates neither with traditional masculinity nor with a fair number of more modern-minded men.

Calling someone who doesn't want to artificially project old-fashioned and somewhat opportunistic criteria onto the other gender is crippingly sexist then?

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 07:53:20, 27 February

Finding certain things attractive and other things unattractive does not make me a sexist.

  • [-]
  • StabbyPants
  • 1 Points
  • 07:44:02, 27 February

not in the slightest. He isn't required to find your PhD enticing, and the feminist agenda isn't a friendly thing.

  • [-]
  • Life_of_roses
  • 1 Points
  • 07:46:35, 27 February

Whoops I forgot. Women's bodies is the only thing enticing about them.

  • [-]
  • StabbyPants
  • 1 Points
  • 07:58:14, 27 February

men aren't attracted to your career. It doesn't work that way. And yes, physical attraction is important. If you want to be GF material, have a personality. Hell, I like smart girls who do cool stuff, but them being VP of something isn't a turn on. It isn't for most men.

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 08:13:26, 27 February

> but them being VP of something isn't a turn on. It isn't for most men.

THANK YOU.

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 07:56:45, 27 February

To be blunt, yes. Why do you think when men are looking for casual sex they'll hit on pretty girls. It's because they don't really want to bang ugly chicks.

Then, if they're considering LTRs, they'll start considering personality alongside looks. And then men will consider similar hobbies/interests, education, and other things.

Male and female attraction is different. We're wired differently. So, to us men, as much as you may hate it, yes you're body is the only thing enticing at the very beginning. After that, other things will be enticing.

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 07:49:39, 27 February

Well I disagree. Men are attracted to looks primarily. I'm not going to deny biology just because it plays into some woman's fantasy. Sorry.

  • [-]
  • Life_of_roses
  • 1 Points
  • 07:53:08, 27 February

I love it when people use biology as a way to excuse their sexual objectification.

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 08:00:53, 27 February

You know what I'm not going to have this argument with you because I can tell you're one of those staunch feminists who is going to dismiss everything I say as misognyistic. You can disagree with me all you want, but the fact is male biology and male sexuality IS DIFFERENT than female biology and female sexuality.

And I did not sexually objectify women at all in this thread. All I did was explain what I find attractive and what I don't find attractive. I find femininity attractive, and most men I know IRL find this attractive too. I don't find education attractive; I'm neutral toward it. Most of my friends IRL also feel this way.

If you have a problem, feel free to bitch to the entire world, but it's not going to solve anything.

  • [-]
  • rosielo
  • 1 Points
  • 07:28:29, 27 February

>Sorry, but I don't find your PhD, your career , and your feminist agenda attractive.

ahem

>your PhD, your career

Really? Really???

  • [-]
  • Aerobus
  • 1 Points
  • 07:49:09, 27 February

...?

I don't get what you're implying.