The Private Man

Attraction and dating information for all men

Men And Women Are Different

While it should be obvious, it’s worth reinforcing…

  • Women are the gatekeepers to sexuality
  • Men are the gatekeepers to commitment
  • A woman needs to respect a man
  • A man needs to impress a woman
  • Women have choices
  • Men have obligations
  • The feminine attracts the masculine
  • The masculine attracts the feminine
  • Women create life
  • Men sustain life
  • Women work
  • Men work harder
  • Women preen and plot
  • Men just plot
  • Women respond emotionally
  • Men respond logically
  • Women love conditionally
  • Men love unconditionally
  • Women are told to “never settle”
  • Men are told to “settle down”
  • Women often age like milk
  • Men often age like wine
  • Women follow
  • Men lead
  • Women shop
  • Men buy

I know the standard response… “generalize much?”. Of course I do, we’re not all special snowflakes.

Advertisements

Single Post Navigation

34 thoughts on “Men And Women Are Different

  1. driversuz on said:

    Thank you. Another post to send to Lance Criminal.

  2. Can’t wait to hear the critics on this one.

  3. Most of these aren’t even remotely offensive but I could just imagine the trouble a S&I™ woman is going to have accepting the truths here.

  4. Meggerz on said:

    Care to elaborate on the unconditional / conditional love bit? I disagree. I think everyone loves conditionally.

    Do men love women even after they turn into obese, sexless shrews?
    Should women love men even after they turn into obese, unemployed slobs?

    • P Ray on said:

      Is the obese, unemployed slob attractive to other women?
      Then you can bet she loves him, ’cause “He’s MY OBESE, UNEMPLOYED SLOB!”

    • Meg:

      first, I find your choice of words quite telling. You put “do” as the male sentence predicate, but “should” for the female sentence predicate. This suggests, as women are prone, that the man is to love the woman, no questions asked. He either does or he doesn’t. But in stark contrast, according to your sentence structure, the woman has the option to love the man. Your posing the question as “should she love him even if he’s fat and broke?” clearly suggests the answer you want: “OF COURSE NOT!”

      Women are more prone to put conditions on their love than men are. First,true to my Christian background, I don’t believe women really love men the way men love women. A woman respects her man, looks up to him, follows him. A man loves his woman, gives for her, sacrifices for her, leads her, takes her where he wants to go.

      If the woman cannot look up to her man, she won’t respect him and follow him. She conditions her submission on her ability to look up to him. But a man will continue loving her, sacrificing and leading, mainly because that’s his obligation.

      If you want to see how a woman respects a man, seek out the old videotapes of Ronald Reagan (peace be upon him) campaigning for President in 1979 and 1980, and his first term appearances, in which Nancy Reagan is there with him. Look at the way she looked at him — a consistently loving gaze of admiration. She simply adored the man. There is no doubt that Ron had Nancy’s unquestioning respect and submission in everything.

      • Maybe Nancy was pretending because that’s what Americans like in their President’s wife. Didn’t she have a thing with Frank Sinatra?

      • driversuz on said:

        Hey, deti. Rmaxd dodged me for days on this one, so I’m still wait in for evidence. I think men’s love is every bit as conditional as women’s. The difference is that men’s priorities don’t shift as much, and men are more likely to have the discipline required to follow through with a commitment, once it’s made.

        And suddenly it’s no longer “love” that we’re talking about….

      • blogster on said:

        the conditional/unconditional characteristic is drawing a bit of attention.

        pay attention to the relative biological aspects driving men and women. bottom line for women – protection, survival, provision and replication of alpha genes. hence the need for respect and the potential for conditionality of love should the man’s stock dwindle.

        50 years of feminism and liberation will not undo biological drivers built over thousands of years.

      • Meggerz on said:

        I had originally phrased it with parallel sentence structure, but edited it to better reflect the implications of TPM’s statement. That is, so both questions would provoke the same reaction:

        Do men love women even after they turn into obese, sexless shrews? Of course not.
        Should women love men even after they turn into obese, unemployed slobs? Of course not.

        Really, I just don’t think anyone can reasonably expect unconditional love. No, not even from your dog. Or your mother.

        Maybe I’m just a cynic.

      • Your mother’s the only one you can expect unconditional love from. But even then you can’t expect her to always like you.

      • driversuz on said:

        Blogster, So what is it about men that makes them love unconditionally? If female hypergamy precludes unconditional love, what traits do males have that make unconditional love possible? Aren’t men promiscuous, or at least polygamous, by nature? How does that make it more likely that men will love unconditionally? I’m not being sarcastic here. I’ve asked this question before, and I always get emotional answers, with absolutely no evidence. What is this “love” that men do unconditionally and women don’t (or can’t?)

      • blogster on said:

        @driversuz. Perhaps to make a clearer distinction, I don’t necessarily mean ‘unconditional’, but rather not drop a solid, happy relationship with someone they are attracted to in the same way women do due to their inbuilt hypergamy.

        Generally, if the core essentials are met, men are LESS LIKELY to try to trade up.

        I say this based on a few things:
        * you are correct in saying men are polygamous by nature. True. However, generally speaking there is a distinction between the relationship between love and sexual desire for men as compared to women – they do not necessarily have to overlap for men. Most men can testify to wanting to bang someone who they do not like or only tolerate. For women, overlap is more the norm.
        * also a woman’s biology drives her to make decisions in the best nature for her perceived survival. Any relationship entered into by a woman has elements of this survival instinct fused into the attraction mechanism. Survival instincts do not form part of the male attraction mechanism.
        * As you say, it is not a man’s natural state. Men, being the more logical and rational, whilst feeling emotion when they fall for someone, will still have some logical and rational thought process attached to this decision. Largely, for men love is an ACTION, a conscious process, whereas for women it is a FEELING. Ever noticed how women, when recounting to others the story of how she met her partner, throw in phrases such as ‘swept of my feet’, ‘it just happened’ etc.? By and large it is not a conscious process, but an emotional reaction.

        I’m not aware of studies (and I’m a firm believer in studies to back up assertions), but I do observe what women do, rather than what they say and generally, repeated over the hundreds of examples over my life (including my own), they evidence bears this out.

        It’s also basic understanding of biology.

  5. One way that women and men are the same:

    they are equally superficial.

    Both women and men for, the most part, love conditionally. Its just the way it is, unfortunately.

  6. I don’t want to turn your post into a biology lesson or anything, but…

    ■Women are the gatekeepers to sexuality
    ■Men are the gatekeepers to commitment

    I was thinking about this. The conventional wisdom on this is purely a social construct, no?
    Because biologically speaking, technically, sex can still take place if a woman is unwilling, but it cannot if a man is unwilling (although yes it IS possible to ‘take advantage’ of an unconscious man, I guess…)
    But in general it would be physically impossible, no?

    Or is this too much of a rarity to be significant?

    • “Because biologically speaking, technically, sex can still take place if a woman is unwilling,
      but it cannot if a man is unwilling”

      Untrue. It’s quite easy to provoke an erectile reaction in a penis against the owner’s will. Trust me, I’ve seen more penises than you.

      • “Trust me, I’ve seen more penises than you.”
        Of this I have no doubt…

        But I think I phrased my question wrong.
        My point is that without an erection, sex cannot take place. So what I meant by ‘if a man is unwilling’ is really ‘if his ‘little friend’ is unable/willfully against it’.
        Does this make sense?
        To give an example, a man being offered ‘favours’ by a really ugly girl that he finds unattractive. In this case HE becomes the gatekeeper, no?
        Or at least his ‘little friend’ is the gatekeeper.

        So it is not always the case that a woman is the gatekeeper. Most times what I describe above does not apply, sure, but not always.
        In the strictly biological sense, the man is actually the gatekeeper.

  7. I love the way men and women are different. And that they complement each other. And broadly speaking these things are true, except the unconditionally thing, which isn’t true for either men or women. And why should it be?

  8. ‘women shop, men buy’

    Couldn’t be more true. Sorry, couldn’t resist: http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/5043/dbgap5oh.png

  9. Brian on said:

    “Men love unconditionally”

    Stupid men love unconditionally. Either my love is VERY conditional now, or there just aren’t any available women left worth feeling that kind of love for anymore.

    • P Ray on said:

      A man can love _relatively unconditionally_ if the woman chooses to be with him at her most attractive.
      When the relationship happens much later, not so.
      Because she’s had her fill of fun, and is now looking to move on to something stable while she brings less to the table.
      Would you consider an aged shrew the proper reward for being a nice guy?
      Once men can ask themselves this question, the tolerance for women looking for fallback guys (no matter how hot she is, the older she is when she is in a relationship with you … the less time you get to spend with her. Which means she’s selfish enough to demand your fidelity … but not believing in the idea that having very little time to spend/be with someone, means you don’t love them.) … will massively decrease.

  10. blogster on said:

    “But a man will continue loving her, sacrificing and leading, mainly because that’s his obligation. ”

    Correct, both from a biological perspective and through social conditioning. However, feminism has resulted in shifts in the relative positioning of men and women. The social contract between men and women has changed.

    However, despite this, men are still expected to hold their end of the original contract with respect to responsibility for women.

    Whereas historically there was a ‘risk premium’ (I work in economics and finance) attached to this role to compensate for this (i..e, ‘rewards’ in the form of being a leader, being in control, setting the direction), these days there is no such reward for doing so. In fact there is only more risk.

    • Abides on said:

      «these days there is no such reward for doing so. In fact there is only more risk.»

      Interestingly, we are now in a situation in which in practice only men bear the risk of involuntary pregnancy.

      That should be making men reluctant to have casual sex (which has been slow to happen), and women eager to have casual sex (which hasn’t been slow to happen).

  11. OM-spot on esp. the shop/buy-women use shopping the way men use sports.
    EXPANDING ON THE THEME:
    )Men get the job done
    )Women:
    -say “I didn’t like your ‘tone’ in telling me to get the job done”
    -ask “how do I feel about getting the job done?”
    -“how do you feel about getting the job done?’
    -“how do we feel about getting the job done?”
    -“I feel that getting the job done won’t be enough for you”
    -“I feel that if I don’t get the job done you won’t respect me”
    -“why is getting the job done so important to you? what’s
    missing in your life?”
    -“I’ll get the job done but not with Sally; she’s a bitch”
    – “I’ll get the job done but not with Robin; she thinks I’m a bitch”
    -“I’ll get the job done but not with Karen; she told Sally and
    Robin I was a bitch”
    -“I’ll get the job done if you insist but i wish you’d consider for
    once its effect on our relationship”
    -“I’ll get the job done but I wish you’d think of ME for once and
    not JUST what’s in it for you”

    Gotta’ stop. I feel like I just got a day’s worth of henpecking laid on me and my wife’s still asleep.

    • DC Phil on said:

      Classic.

      However, in the case of younger men in the military, I’ve seen this once too often:

      Early 20-something dude (of higher rank) tells other 20-something dude (of lower rank) to do something. Higher Rank has the attitude of, “I’m of higher rank, so you better do what I say.” Lower Rank thinks, “Dude’s a shitbag. I gotta do what I gotta do (so I don’t get my ass written up), but I’m taking my sweet-ass time.

      Or, this:

      Early 20-something dude (of higher rank) is with other Higher Ranks arguing about who will take the lead on the task to be done (because it’s a pissing match). Lower Rank steps up and gets half the job done while the Higher Ranks are still arguing.

  12. Meant PM above-it’s early.

  13. Brendan on said:

    I would say that men and women both “love” rather conditionally. That is, men can cease loving a woman if certain conditions are not met, or if certain tripwires are tripped. The conditions are different for men and women, which shouldn’t be surprising.

    I also think, however, that women and men emote very differently in this context. Both men and women experience limerance, or falling in love, in roughly similar ways. However, the “being in love” state for men and women is different. For men, it’s more about commitment and responsibility, whereas for women it’s more about respect and and admiration. So a man can stop loving a woman if she no longer merits his commitment and responsibility (the most typical case is an adulterous woman), whereas a woman can stop loving a man if he no longer merits her respect and admiration (which can be lost in more ways, including simply becoming “too beta” in a marriage). This is why women drive the divorce rate: it’s easier for women to stop loving a man (in terms of it being easier for the man to trip a wire that causes her to stop loving him) than it is for a man to stop loving a woman (in terms of what she has to do to trigger that). It happens more easily and more often. That doesn’t mean men’s love is unconditional, but it does mean that women have more conditions that are more easily tripped than men do.

    • driversuz on said:

      Nicely said, Brendan. I submit that another factor is men are more likely to keep a commitment because they have a better grasp of the “big picture,” and are less likely to be led astray by temporary emotions. Women see temporary dissatisfaction as a sign of an essentially flawed relationship; men see it as a problem to be solved. Men seek solutions.

  14. Abides on said:

    «Women are the gatekeepers to sexuality»

    As usual, this is completely wrong.

    Women are the gatekeepers to reproduction. Men are the gatekeepers to sexuality. Women want the cock, just often not any cock. Men want children, because they can’t do that themselves. Otherwise anal or oral or just fapping would be good enough.

    «Men are the gatekeepers to commitment»

    No, Women are the gatekeepers to commitment. They either commit to have your children or they cuckold you.

    Men are the gatekeeper to Male Parental Investment, which is directed at children, not women.

    Your mistakes are all based on the grave error that makes pussy important; pussy is worthless, the womb and its fruits are important.

  15. Abides on said:

    «No, Women are the gatekeepers to commitment. They either commit to have your children or they cuckold you.

    Men are the gatekeeper to Male Parental Investment, which is directed at children, not women.»

    To make this very clear, consider the aims of both sides:

    * Women aim at making richer men invest in the children they want to have with sexier men.

    * Men aim at making women respect their commitment to have children only with them, so as not to waste their investment in a woman’s children.

    Men want commitment from women, women want investment into their children. Two completely different things.

    If a woman is jealous of a man’s potential other women, it is not because men can get pregnant and cuckold them; it is because she is afraid that he will share his resources and reduce his investment in her children to invest in the other women’s children.

  16. @drive re “solutions”

    Exactemendo. Women are much much more invested in the “process” of “finding” the solution, which involves unfolding the emotional layers in the the ritual of “sharing”, a manifestation of support, empathy, and identification with the emotional state of the one seeking the solution. Men accept that the emotion feels shitty; let’s solve the problem. My wife sums it up neatly: “I don’t want you to solve my problem I want you to listen to me.”

  17. Pingback: 5 Ways women Ruin Men | Transparent Society

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: