Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

No Middle Ground with Women?

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 03:09 AM
link   
It would seem most women want to either dominate a man or be dominated by him. Every interaction comes down to that level of perception. It may not be obvious at first, but it is there if you look closely (sometimes you don't even have to look). Could this seemingly innate trait be a result of treatment received by women throughout the ages? Which begs the question: why would someone who was born, let's say, thirty years ago, identify with issues which were prevalent hundreds of years ago? Does this continuity even make sense? Maybe it's stronger than us?




posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by FlowThruSpace
 


I'm not sure ... it appears a lot of people don't think there is an in between rather than the in between not existing. I wouldn't say that is a 'woman thing' ... because equally you can also make the seemingly accurate generalization that if men aren't acting in a dominant capacity in relationships their peers judge them accordingly.

It's a perspective / judgement / projection thing IMO.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by FlowThruSpace
 


I'm part of a team. We know each others strengths and weaknesses, there for we better understand the roles we need play. Sometimes I lead sometimes she does.....teamwork
.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlowThruSpace
It would seem most women want to either dominate a man or be dominated by him.

If that were true, my fantasies would have been fulfilled long ago.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 03:32 AM
link   
As with nearly every topic this is trying to break down a complex issue into an extreme of one way or the other. Sadly, life doesn't quite work that way. A poster just above posted what would be the best description of human interaction in regards to partnerships (relationships, marriages, whatever).

Each has their own strengths and weaknesses and each, if in a successful partnership recognizes them and passes no judgement (well....for the most part) and instead works to complement.

I am wondering though, you posits a pretty profound question with nary some context; are we talking Margaret Thatcher level of control? Joan of Arc? Susan B. Anthony? Hillary Clinton? What exactly are you getting at in this regard so we can move the discussion forward.

To your most basic question presented, I don't think women are trying to control or dominate more so than man is. Your question begged is unclear from what I see...



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 03:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by SilentKoala

Originally posted by FlowThruSpace
It would seem most women want to either dominate a man or be dominated by him.

If that were true, my fantasies would have been fulfilled long ago.


You and me both brother....you and me both.....



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 04:48 AM
link   
'Course the ideal case is not a dominator model. However, in many underdeveloped or backwards societies - such as the one I currently live in in Eastern Europe - that is the model wired into people. In the dominator model, men bring in the power and the money while women bring in beauty and a social-human element.

If you try to remain in a relationship as a non-dominator man (who does not want to be dominated or controlled in terms of everyday life either, but act as an equal) in such a society, your mate will soon try to find a man with a streak for domination (and being manipulated).

When I lived in the US I saw it as a mixed society between the two models.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlowThruSpace
It would seem most women want to either dominate a man or be dominated by him.

So that pretty much covers all the bases then

Plus in my experience the 'middle ground' is quite popular! That said it's inevitable that one of a couple will have a stronger personality.
Oh and I think there are a fair few men who want to 'dominate' or 'be dominated by'. In fact a whole industry has sprung up catering for the latter!
edit on 9-2-2013 by starchild10 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:39 AM
link   
Why confuse the determination to not be dominated with the desire to dominate? Polarisation is too easy! Relationships are not.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 06:17 AM
link   
reply to post by FlowThruSpace
 


Well, I think you are going to extremes. I like being dominated in certain....contexts, but other than that it's a marriage not a dictatorship. I will say my husband is more laid back than I am and is more than willing to let me run the house most days. I don't really consider it being dominant though. I don't think it's anything other than a human function rather than some male/female dynamic. Some people are alpha, some people are beta, some people are in between.

I think you are falling into the trap of labeling things. Everything needs a tidy space, well life doesn't really work like that.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Yeah I agree with other posters about it not being a clear cut situation. There are the extremes, and believe me I've seen them with family members and friends, but a lot of couples do have the happy medium. One interesting addition to this discussion with my own relationship is that a lot of times neither one of us wants to take the lead. When that happens, we are at a stand still and get frustrated, so one of us takes the lead in a more assertive way than we would normally. Also, I have tried to be more submissive to my husband so that he would feel more comfortable making decisions and whatnot, but he doesn't seem comfortable with it. I think this could be because he comes from a family where mom and both sisters are extremely dominant types and they are very overbearing towards the men. I guess growing up with that could make a difference in how you see your role as a man. I think I alternate between more assertive and more subdued. Maybe an outside observer might see it differently though.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by FlowThruSpace
 


I have never had any trouble in relating to either men or women. I have always treated everyone the same.
I just figure if they have a problem, I let it be their problem.
While I treat others with respect, I expect them to do likewise toward me. I have always found it easy to "do unto others" so to speak.
If they, either guy or girl, want to be too dominate in work or play, I find it easy to walk away. It is very hard to promote a conflict with someone who does not allow themselves to be disrespected.
.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 09:11 AM
link   
You are probably describing young women and young men with your post. At some point, there is a choice to be made and looks alone won't close the gap.
Either will money.
I believe there is a term for those girls who "don't make it" in "hollywood"..
Snookered?



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 09:18 AM
link   
Men and women are born with personality tendencies and levels of testosterone, androgen, and estrogen. Those come into play too. All your pets are submissive or dominant leaning. It's a mammal thing.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 09:31 AM
link   
I think we live in a world where our media, from news to shows, movies, radio etc., constantly bombards the population with psychological dualism. Rarely are we shown a situation that isn't divided into a mere two extremes. Especially in politics where the conspiracy to keep sound and helpful resolution from being reached is strongest, and the desire to keep the masses divided and under control, the tool of only giving two extremes ( neither of which ever end up being desireable in the end ) is powerful.

I think generalizations, generally, are never spot on at all times. I believe that it's feminine nature to be taken care of and masculine nature to be dominating, however; In recent diets the female body has been changed. There are hormones in milk, chemicals in everything.. Basically the female body today is no longer chemically and hormone-wise what it used to be. Because of this obviously females act differently and it's my observation that along with an increasing reduction of sexism females now have the physical/mental capacity to have masculine traits such as lack of empathy. Empathy is REQUIRED for females to take care of their babies, whereas for males it is required NOT to be empathetic in order to be able to kill for food easier. ( These are extremes obviously you don't want to be COMPLETELY empathetic or completely apathetic ).. What I mean to say is the biology of females due to diet now makes them different even if we didn't live in a society that constantly pounded dualistic, either-or, thinking.
edit on 2/9/2013 by indigothefish because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 09:41 AM
link   
I think, and this is just me right, but I think if you just act normal, its fine, its all alright and it just works out fine.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by FlowThruSpace
 


The urge to dominate or be dominated by is not just a female thing, it is a human thing. It is also a highly subjective circumstance. In certain relationships a person may be content to be lower on the pecking order, and in others that same person may attempt to take a more dominant position, and to further complicate the matter, this dynamic plastic and changes throughout the relationship, and may even simply be dependent upon specific circumstances, and change dependent upon that.

"Middle Ground" is usually dependent upon both people in the relationship, not just one. Our own culpability in contributing to a power struggle can be difficult to pin down however. Introspection, and self honesty is a tricky thing.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 11:47 AM
link   
I can see patterns where domination is not part of the game between the sexes. I sooner understand S&M than unnecessary obscure psychological domination or lifelong control games. In fact, I corresponded with a woman who participated in S&M activities - they are strictly formal between consenting adults - and her experience was that she managed to pour all these obscure urges into those activities and it basically liberated her from dominating or submissive games in other aspects of her life. Of course you can always rearrange yourself internally with all sorts of therapies if you are too dependent on anything like that and you want to change.
I personally believe that sex is hard-wired into us but dominator games are not.
I support gentle revolutions started internally.
I think freedom and equality can actually be more exciting.



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Ellie Sagan
 


I think a lot of it has to do with your comfort level in any given situation. In certain things my husband defers to me because I might have more knowledge of the subject, in others I defer to my husband as he has a better grasp on the matter. Sometimes neither one of us knows what to do so that just turns into a mess.

Dinner is usually this:
"What do you want?"
"I dunno, what do you want?"
"I don't know, say something".



posted on Feb, 9 2013 @ 11:36 PM
link   
In the past I was pretty sexist against women. My mom is very selfish and only really cares about money. I was with a woman for 4 years who was pretty similar, although she tried to fake that she wasn't. But after working with an office full of women for a year, that sexism was cured. I realized that women are very complex just like men. They have needs and desires, they want to feel safe and secure. I definitely think both genders are evolving a lot to where men have many traits associated with females (compassion, communication, etc) and women have many male associated traits (assertiveness, dominance, etc). There are all kinds of combinations of these traits out there in women. Some want you to decide everything, but then want to tie you up in bed and take control. You just never know. But it's definitely not an "either or" type of situation.





new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join