Qualities for a husband I have come up with.. :)

[JesusInMe]

Flyingfish, out of sympathy, not because I have issues with your list. You’re listing sensitive and emphatetic traits along with alpha traits that you bring to electric currents level. It’s not like you can’t find that in a man, but just to warn you to be careful. basically, alpha qualities will often manifest themselves by less than courteous treatment of others, women included, and the trick is to notice the red flags while the alpha lure is at work. I know you have a generous IQ, but so did my once dear friend (160 or so), who made that mistake (and it’s a common one anyway, I guess). The other side of the same coin is mistaking kindness or empathy for weakness, another common mistake (take two guys that look and are the same, make the one prod people around and the other hold the door for everybody, which one seems stronger?). Finally, electric currents may fly in the air when someone’s trying to sexy it up or simply doesn’t mind causing temptation (I’ve seen some very beautiful women succeed at being easy to be around while less attractive ones would wreak more havoc as a result of comparatively much more sexualised act). Just so you don’t end up repeating some mistakes I’ve seen plenty of.

nice post and very eloquently put!

 

[flyingfish]

Flyingfish, out of sympathy, not because I have issues with your list. You’re listing sensitive and emphatetic traits along with alpha traits that you bring to electric currents level. It’s not like you can’t find that in a man, but just to warn you to be careful. basically, alpha qualities will often manifest themselves by less than courteous treatment of others, women included, and the trick is to notice the red flags while the alpha lure is at work. I know you have a generous IQ, but so did my once dear friend (160 or so), who made that mistake (and it’s a common one anyway, I guess). The other side of the same coin is mistaking kindness or empathy for weakness, another common mistake (take two guys that look and are the same, make the one prod people around and the other hold the door for everybody, which one seems stronger?). Finally, electric currents may fly in the air when someone’s trying to sexy it up or simply doesn’t mind causing temptation (I’ve seen some very beautiful women succeed at being easy to be around while less attractive ones would wreak more havoc as a result of comparatively much more sexualised act). Just so you don’t end up repeating some mistakes I’ve seen plenty of.

I do feel a little sad, I think my mind, standards, and desires have been completely corrupted by the portrayal of men in movies and books. How sad is it to say that the men I find most attractive are not even real, they’re either on TV or in my favorite books? It’s sadder still when I find real men unattractive because they compare poorly to fictional characters. Sigh.

 

[Havard]

I do feel a little sad, I think my mind, standards, and desires have been completely corrupted by the portrayal of men in movies and books. How sad is it to say that the men I find most attractive are not even real, they’re either on TV or in my favorite books? It’s sadder still when I find real men unattractive because they compare poorly to fictional characters. Sigh.

Really? Is this modern fiction? I usually have to go back a ways to find female characters who are really interesting to me.

 

[flyingfish]

Really? Is this modern fiction? I usually have to go back a ways to find female characters who are really interesting to me.

It’s both, for the most part I read fantasy and science fiction. The only romance novel I like is Pride and Prejudice. I would say attraction to men is more men in movies/TV shows than books, because those guys have the physical component to go with the character.

 

[Havard]

It’s both, for the most part I read fantasy and science fiction. The only romance novel I like is Pride and Prejudice. I would say attraction to men is more men in movies/TV shows than books, because those guys have the physical component to go with the character.

Funny you should say that, Fitzwilliam and Elizabeth are incredibly well-written, but part of that is because they are flawed. Miss Austen did a wonderful job of displaying their humanity. (Credit to CP for pointing this out to me not long ago.)

 

[royal_archer]

Flyingfish, out of sympathy, not because I have issues with your list. You’re listing sensitive and emphatetic traits along with alpha traits that you bring to electric currents level. It’s not like you can’t find that in a man, but just to warn you to be careful. basically, alpha qualities will often manifest themselves by less than courteous treatment of others, women included, and the trick is to notice the red flags while the alpha lure is at work. I know you have a generous IQ, but so did my once dear friend (160 or so), who made that mistake (and it’s a common one anyway, I guess). The other side of the same coin is mistaking kindness or empathy for weakness, another common mistake (take two guys that look and are the same, make the one prod people around and the other hold the door for everybody, which one seems stronger?). Finally, electric currents may fly in the air when someone’s trying to sexy it up or simply doesn’t mind causing temptation (I’ve seen some very beautiful women succeed at being easy to be around while less attractive ones would wreak more havoc as a result of comparatively much more sexualised act). Just so you don’t end up repeating some mistakes I’ve seen plenty of.

When I was single (and a pilot) women did not go for the nice guys who would treat them as equals and provide a safe and loving home. They went out with the womanizing jerks. My friends who were the biggest loosers were also the ones who had a stream of women. While my friends who were decent upstanding men had a hard time finding dates. They are the ones that all of the women thought would make a good husband, but the women were only interested in being “friends”.

 

[chevalier]

I do feel a little sad, I think my mind, standards, and desires have been completely corrupted by the portrayal of men in movies and books. How sad is it to say that the men I find most attractive are not even real, they’re either on TV or in my favorite books? It’s sadder still when I find real men unattractive because they compare poorly to fictional characters. Sigh.

Fiction gets you what it wants you to see, just like a good actor in the dating scene does. You read about what’s important for the character sketch, you don’t receive the details. What’s good about fictional characters is that they at least allow you to imagine a different kind of thing from what you experience, so you can see some ideal of e.g. a gentleman, a scholar, a medical doctor, a sporstman, a soldier. But while fictional characters aren’t bound by such constraints, real life people generally don’t have the time, money, determination or even ability to develop and maintain so many assets simultaneously. You won’t really find so many polyglotic 160 IQ athletes with a Ph.D. in science and a military commission who write poetry and know everything about history of art. However, people whom you meet in real life aren’t necessarily less interesting than those from books.

 

[flyingfish]

Fiction gets you what it wants you to see, just like a good actor in the dating scene does. You read about what’s important for the character sketch, you don’t receive the details. What’s good about fictional characters is that they at least allow you to imagine a different kind of thing from what you experience, so you can see some ideal of e.g. a gentleman, a scholar, a medical doctor, a sporstman, a soldier. But while fictional characters aren’t bound by such constraints, real life people generally don’t have the time, money, determination or even ability to develop and maintain so many assets simultaneously. You won’t really find so many polyglotic 160 IQ athletes with a Ph.D. in science and a military commission who write poetry and know everything about history of art. However, people whom you meet in real life aren’t necessarily less interesting than those from books.

Unfortunately, were such a man to exist I likely wouldn’t be able to compete for him with all the supermodel heiresses with Ph.D.'s haha.

My biggest concern about this is probably that I would fantasize about fictional men more than my husband, were I to ever marry.

 

[chevalier]

Unfortunately, were such a man to exist I likely wouldn’t be able to compete for him with all the supermodel heiresses with Ph.D.'s haha.

My biggest concern about this is probably that I would fantasize about fictional men more than my husband, were I to ever marry.

Lol. Fortunately for you, I don’t know of any supermodel heiresses with Ph.D.'s.

Just find yourself a guy where you’re sure it’s a match made/approved in heaven (depending on which theory you subscribe to ) and you’ll be happy. In the end, you don’t know if it will be a poor man with a heart of gold, lion’s courage and half your brain and you’ll still love him, or the EVP of something who will somehow turn out to be a good person (just kidding, it’s not like rich=bad ), or someone relatively common in whom only you and few other people will see anything special. And in the end, it won’t matter (including to you).

And no fantasising, even about the husband or wife. We’re supposed to live in the real world! Doesn’t mean we can’t have dreams, but we live here. And it’s better this way (coming from a fantasy nerd).

 

[flyingfish]

Lol. Fortunately for you, I don’t know of any supermodel heiresses with Ph.D.'s.

Just find yourself a guy where you’re sure it’s a match made/approved in heaven (depending on which theory you subscribe to ) and you’ll be happy. In the end, you don’t know if it will be a poor man with a heart of gold, lion’s courage and half your brain and you’ll still love him, or the EVP of something who will somehow turn out to be a good person (just kidding, it’s not like rich=bad ), or someone relatively common in whom only you and few other people will see anything special. And in the end, it won’t matter (including to you).

And no fantasising, even about the husband or wife. We’re supposed to live in the real world! Doesn’t mean we can’t have dreams, but we live here. And it’s better this way (coming from a fantasy nerd).

Eh, while all these lists are fun to make, once the right person comes along they’re forgotten very quickly. The main thing I want is that electricity and excitement, and for it to last throughout the marriage. A scary thought that it wouldn’t last, it generally hasn’t lasted for me. Without it the relationship just becomes a friendship, which is not bad, but not something I’d want for a marriage.

 

[chevalier]

Eh, while all these lists are fun to make, once the right person comes along they’re forgotten very quickly. The main thing I want is that electricity and excitement, and for it to last throughout the marriage. A scary thought that it wouldn’t last, it generally hasn’t lasted for me. Without it the relationship just becomes a friendship, which is not bad, but not something I’d want for a marriage.

Well, in the objective sense, you have to base a marriage on friendship and that friendship would gain colour from whatever chemistry existed between the persons. I suppose if there is a friendship, there is a will to keep going together and so there’s the desire to keep up the chemistry instead of focusing on self-pity when it seems to wane while not being consciously supported. So, say, you have two people who are good friends, see value in each other, want to give themselves to each other, have feelings and desire for each other, they will make and constantly affirm and live the decision to be with each other, giving up and throwing away all alternatives (other people, singleness), putting their all in their relationship, then I don’t think they should have problems with chemistry and electricity. On the other hand, I wouldn’t expect chemistry and electricity to last forever on their own fuel. There are various theories about how long attraction/falling-in-love lasts, more or less anything from 0.5 to 2 years. One of the theories I’ve read about says 2 years but possible to have again with the same person. So basically if circumstances are created in which you can’t really not fall again for the same person (such as a loving, supportive, integrated marriage), I suppose there would be falling in love again and again, although in different ways and not always in reaction to the same factors. Obviously, this is theory and ideal, in reality there will often be problems, but when there’s the decision to stay together through good and bad, those problems shouldn’t tear the couple apart even though there might be little feelings or attraction or anything at a given moment. Also, there’s no denying that attraction is a problem for couples quite often. My father would reply to this that you still need to court the woman as if she were a girl you dated even when you’ve been married to her for long. You just need to keep trying. The same goes for the other person… so find someone with similar ideals, who believes in not letting go? Besides, things look different when you’re 20 and so than they are when the woman has had a couple of babies and the man has a bit of a belly and is balding… and they’re still attracted to each other, sometimes quite strongly. Well, I’d be willing to credit friendship with the good things because friendship tends to deny egoism and romantic love doesn’t always. Thus a person being friends with his or her spouse will probably try to make it easy on the spouse and cooperate instead of just waiting to get his rights fulfilled and resigning himself or herself to getting the duties done, while not wanting to go much beyond… in which latter case no one will be happy. So what you seek would require effort and motivation for that effort would come from friendship, I believe (friendship not implying reduction of the electricity or chemistry ).

 

[sanctamaria17]

I go for nice guys, they just run away! Or, “You’re like my little sister!” Or, “I like someone else!” Or, “I like you but I’m not good enough!”

As for the jerks, I do not go for them. I can see through them and I know that, if they were to date one of my friends, I’d have homicidal tendencies toward the dude. Why would I want that for myself? Even if he’s good looking, he’s probably one of those who ages horribly and then reveals his true character (since it’s not hiding behind his smashing good looks).

 

[Newbie2]

Wow.

I fit every single one of the good attributes that have been listed on this thread!



Too bad I’m already taken.

 

[flyingfish]

Well, in the objective sense, you have to base a marriage on friendship and that friendship would gain colour from whatever chemistry existed between the persons. I suppose if there is a friendship, there is a will to keep going together and so there’s the desire to keep up the chemistry instead of focusing on self-pity when it seems to wane while not being consciously supported. So, say, you have two people who are good friends, see value in each other, want to give themselves to each other, have feelings and desire for each other, they will make and constantly affirm and live the decision to be with each other, giving up and throwing away all alternatives (other people, singleness), putting their all in their relationship, then I don’t think they should have problems with chemistry and electricity. On the other hand, I wouldn’t expect chemistry and electricity to last forever on their own fuel. There are various theories about how long attraction/falling-in-love lasts, more or less anything from 0.5 to 2 years. One of the theories I’ve read about says 2 years but possible to have again with the same person. So basically if circumstances are created in which you can’t really not fall again for the same person (such as a loving, supportive, integrated marriage), I suppose there would be falling in love again and again, although in different ways and not always in reaction to the same factors. Obviously, this is theory and ideal, in reality there will often be problems, but when there’s the decision to stay together through good and bad, those problems shouldn’t tear the couple apart even though there might be little feelings or attraction or anything at a given moment. Also, there’s no denying that attraction is a problem for couples quite often. My father would reply to this that you still need to court the woman as if she were a girl you dated even when you’ve been married to her for long. You just need to keep trying. The same goes for the other person… so find someone with similar ideals, who believes in not letting go? Besides, things look different when you’re 20 and so than they are when the woman has had a couple of babies and the man has a bit of a belly and is balding… and they’re still attracted to each other, sometimes quite strongly. Well, I’d be willing to credit friendship with the good things because friendship tends to deny egoism and romantic love doesn’t always. Thus a person being friends with his or her spouse will probably try to make it easy on the spouse and cooperate instead of just waiting to get his rights fulfilled and resigning himself or herself to getting the duties done, while not wanting to go much beyond… in which latter case no one will be happy. So what you seek would require effort and motivation for that effort would come from friendship, I believe (friendship not implying reduction of the electricity or chemistry ).

Yeah, I dunno what it is. Maybe the key is not getting too close to them so there is still an air of mystery about them and the feeling that you have to keep fighting for them? Or at least not get to the point where you’re farting/burping in the same room or doing each other’s laundry.

 

[chevalier]

Yeah, I dunno what it is. Maybe the key is not getting too close to them so there is still an air of mystery about them and the feeling that you have to keep fighting for them? Or at least not get to the point where you’re farting/burping in the same room or doing each other’s laundry.

I’d be in favour of the latter part - decorum and respect are always necessary - but against the former one. Life is too short for “not getting too close”, wanting “mystery” is a misguided notion (more below).

So, for mystery, see, it’s not like you can really know the other person fully, there’s always something as a rule. Limiting yourself to little knowledge basically always keeps you at a low stage. By contrast, if you get to know the person and get close to him, you can make effort to know more or to make some use of the knowledge… learn to live with closeness and enjoy it? After all, marriage is a union and a mutual gift and shutting off closeness defeats the purpose (I’m not talking about deviated closeness which is subsumption). Besides, you want the closeness, as the “empathy” part of your list suggests. In short, there’s the eat cake or have cake dilemma here, you can’t have both. You obviously want the closeness and not the lack of it because lack of closeness and presence of mystery is exactly how jerks operate and how girls who fall for jerks operate. You can’t possibly want distance in your relationship and marriage and if you want independence and room for personal growth (although at that point the growth is rather mutual, as a couple), the answer to it is not finding someone bad enough so that you won’t totally fall in love! This also is a mistake commonly made by women, at least in my perception. They will prefer their own defensive mechanisms, which are plain results of traumas, to the idea of finding a good guy for whom those mechanisms will not be needed. See how it defeats the purpose? It’s jerks that hurt girls, not love itself or commitment or closeness! That not every man is fit for receiving that commitment or closeness from a woman is another point. The trick is finding one who will not so much be worth it (who is?) but one who will try to repay the same and won’t use it against you, which will allow you to live yourself fully (generally you live as two, but when you’re containing yourself, shrinking to fit into a shell and so on, then you aren’t living even yourself (isolated) fully; by contrast, if you allow yourself to bloom in that marriage, then you obviously grow, live more fully, because of and not despite the total mutual commitment).

This doesn’t mean that you should commit yourself totally from start to a guy, or to the first apparently nice guy you meet (before you get a chance to know him), but I’d like to spare you a couple of very common mistakes that are as dangerous as they are common, and they can hurt in the long run. If you look at yourself several years from now, you don’t want to be the professionally successful woman who chose a lousy guy to avoid getting hurt too much by his potentially leaving or turning hostile on her, should he elect to (or do so on a less than a human choice). That kind of relationship would be little better than having a dog or a toy, plus, it could turn bad on your side too, because having limited trust, commitment etc. for and with the guy, you would basically have an arrangement with him in which you would receive limited emotional support of limited quality together with sheer presence of limited value and a limited level of serotonin/endorfins/dopamine in return for providing, well, the same? That would be horribly objectifying to both you and him. So, nope, you don’t want that.

 

[CountrySinger]

I go for nice guys, they just run away! Or, “You’re like my little sister!” Or, “I like someone else!” Or, “I like you but I’m not good enough!”

That happens to me all the time, guys like me, but they never LIKE me.

 

[JesusInMe]

That happens to me all the time, guys like me, but they never LIKE me.

it might be becos most guys like the chase… they might say they dont but they do! you sound like a very open, funny gal and for most guys, that translates to “too available”. just like women are accused of always picking jerks for SOs, guys pick the gals who make them feel like they have to make an effort for them.

someone once suggested “The rules…” book on this forum (I forget in which thread…) and i went to b&N just to check it out to see what it was all about and what i was doing wrong and believe me, I almost fell out of my chair laughing! the book teaches you to be the most manipulative, sadistic woman you can be and make the guys miserable, which is apparently how you end up with the guy you want…
After reading parts of it, I was left with one question - you might get the guy that you want with these ideas but how do you keep him? continuing with this way of living will be hell (you can never be truthful) and if you do show ur open honest side, then you wont be as interesting as before!

sheesh! needless to say, i was very disappointed and i would ask the guys to look around and try and see all the nice gals (who might not be the prettiest or the slimmest) and give us a chance as well!

 

[CountrySinger]

the book teaches you to be the most manipulative, sadistic woman you can be and make the guys miserable, which is apparently how you end up with the guy you want…

I can do manipulative and sadistic. Before I came back to the Church, my now-former friends called me “Maneater”, and I never had shortage of men wanting me. Maybe I need to have a refresher of that. Too bad those friends left when I reverted.

 

[JesusInMe]

I can do manipulative and sadistic. Before I came back to the Church, my now-former friends called me “Maneater”, and I never had shortage of men wanting me. Maybe I need to have a refresher of that. Too bad those friends left when I reverted.

wow! Maneater… maybe you can give the author of this book some tips…

personal question: how long did these men last ? they stick around long?

sidenote: i am going to the shooting range on friday (my first time ever!! so excited :extrahappy::dancing any tips ? (your sig says you shoot… )

 

[CountrySinger]

wow! Maneater… maybe you can give the author of this book some tips…

personal question: how long did these men last ? they stick around long?

sidenote: i am going to the shooting range on friday (my first time ever!! so excited :extrahappy::dancing any tips ? (your sig says you shoot… )

The guys didn’t last long, but I didn’t want them around. They had their use, and I was done with them. Plus, there were usually 3-4 men waiting (I usually had 3-4 men at a time, and when I was tired of them, I’d quit one, then bring another one into the rotation).
I usually went after guys with money, since they would buy me nice things. I didn’t go physically far with any of them, but as long as that was a carrot, they would do anything. Since these weren’t guys I’d want more a couple weeks, nothing lasted long. But it was nice to not be the rejected side for once. It was better than now, where I always seem rejected.

ETA: That is exciting about shooting! My advice is to pretend the target is someone who hurt you. It works for me. Maybe after shopping for work clothes, maybe I’ll hit the range.