boyfriend?!?

[Phyzzle]

Ah, now I see you have the same problem that I do: I've always been in an all-male line of work.

Are there any student groups on your campus? One massively helpful thing you can do is join them. I mean ALL of them. All but the ones you really couldn't stand.

When you've got more guys around, pick one to look at. When he looks back, make brief eye contact, give a cheerful smile, say "hi!", and look away. Then have fun watching him squirm while he thinks of some reason . . . any reason . . . to start a conversation.

If he's not terribly smooth, give him another chance next week when he's on guard.

As for developing a relationship a while before sex, that's okay if you're a virgin in college. But in the adult world, if you say "I need a commitment before sex", you're going to get some strange looks. People will assume you're a fundamentalist catholic or muslim or something.

 

[The Shocker]

I'll give you the same advice I'd give any guy: if you're not going out, talking to guys, being fun and sociable, then you have no one to blame but yourself.

Notice that this advice applies to guys as well.

 

[Wyldfire]

I know what you're problem is...you have a strong personality and guys can be very intimidated by that. (The sarcasm is a give away)

Just make an extra effort to make the guys you're around feel at ease around you and try to show a little vulnerability once in awhile. It might be difficult for you, but with practice you can do it. Guys have this twisted habit of making a bee line for girls they think need rescuing. You might want to feign weakness every now and again. Yeah, stupid, I know...but that's part of the "air of femininity" thing.

 

[Obsidian]

it's not stupid at all. You can't have a stable relationship with a woman who won't let you lead.

 

[Wyldfire]

As for developing a relationship a while before sex, that's okay if you're a virgin in college. But in the adult world, if you say "I need a commitment before sex", you're going to get some strange looks. People will assume you're a fundamentalist catholic or muslim or something.

Phyzzle...normal guys of all ages honestly do NOT have a problem with a woman not wanting to have sex outside of a relationship. You seem to be assuming that "relationship" means moving in together and getting married...and it doesn't. It simply means that you choose not to have sex with the guy until you are confident that it's going to be more than casual sex. That typically means that you agree to date only each other while figuring out where things are going between you.

Would you advise any guy on here to go out and spend his entire paycheck on a girl he isn't having sex with? Of course not. Then why on earth would you advise a girl to go out and spread her legs for a guy she isn't having a relationship with? It's the EXACT same thing. You are assuming that her goal is the same as a guy's goal would be...and they aren't the same.

 

[Wyldfire]

it's not stupid at all. You can't have a stable relationship with a woman who won't let you lead.

Sure you can. I always lead my relationships and aside from my first one (learning experience), every relationship I've had has been great. If the woman leads she just needs to do it in a way the benefits the relationship and both people and not just herself. It doesn't really matter who leads the relationship, just HOW the relationship is led. As long as the leader is leading for the benefit of the couple in a healthy and positive manner, it's all good. Too many people mistake control and mistreatment of each other as "leading"...and that's why you see so many power struggles and failed relationships. Sometimes no one leads, too. That is something that must be looked at on a case by case basis. When I lead I'm so good at it that the guy never views it as if I'm leading. He just knows he's happy and I'm extremely supportive of him and always make him feel great about himself, me and the relationship. In truth, most people are not able to really lead in a way this is good for a relationship. The guys here SHOULD be learning the tools to be able to lead the right way, but I can only think of a very few who actually have the correct concept of what leading a relationship actually is. Most think it's being "in control", and that is NOT leading at all.

 

[ryannath]

Women shouldn't be "leading" relationships Wyldfire. That is a man's job. Just FYI, you have a very strong personality, and I'm sure you think that's a good trait for a woman to have, but honestly, it's a total turn off. Men like women. That means feminine women. Not a masculine personality. That's like a man. That may be the thread starter's problem too. Too many women are not acting like women and try to be like guys and it's just not natural. It makes us think of you as men.

 

[Obsidian]

Seriously.

Step out of the matrix, Wyldfire !!!

 

[Raikojo17]

Women shouldn't be "leading" relationships Wyldfire. That is a man's job. Just FYI, you have a very strong personality, and I'm sure you think that's a good trait for a woman to have, but honestly, it's a total turn off. Men like women. That means feminine women. Not a masculine personality. That's like a man. That may be the thread starter's problem too. Too many women are not acting like women and try to be like guys and it's just not natural. It makes us think of you as men.

personally i think a strong personality in a woman is a big turn on.
having a strong personality is not just a mascualine trait. Personality types have nothing to do with being feminine or masculine. sometimes u guys take this stuff way too far.

 

[Wyldfire]

Women shouldn't be "leading" relationships Wyldfire. That is a man's job. Just FYI, you have a very strong personality, and I'm sure you think that's a good trait for a woman to have, but honestly, it's a total turn off. Men like women. That means feminine women. Not a masculine personality. That's like a man. That may be the thread starter's problem too. Too many women are not acting like women and try to be like guys and it's just not natural. It makes us think of you as men.

Everyone has some masculine and some feminine traits...that's quite normal.

The people on this forum see one side of me...the strong personality. To be around me in person, you would be left with an entirely different impression. While I always have a very strong personality, in person, there is an air of mystery and intrigue paired with a very feminine aura. Now, if I looked masculine and didn't temper my personal presence it probably would put some people off...but instead I intimidate men in a good way because they have no idea how to take me. I'm so level tempered and calm, cool and collected that it actually draws people to me.

You're looking at "leading" in the wrong way. It's not about controlling the other person...it's about controlling yourself so well that you can elicit the kind of responses from the other person that you want to elicit. I'm so good at doing it that the other person doesn't even realize I'm leading. I don't abuse the ability or use it to my advantage, either...so the man I'm leading never views it as a threat to his masculinity in any way. I use the ability to lead well to make the man and myself both happy in the relationship and it makes for a very mutually beneficial situation.

Many guys here foolishly think that you lead a relationship by controlling the other person...but that never works and only leads to power struggles, hard feelings, constant battling and frustration for everyone involved. The secret to leading a relationship is in controlling yourself. Very few guys on here truly have the level of self control needed to lead effectively. You have to be able to control your reactions and emotions and never over-react. You also have to be self-less to a degree.

When a woman leads like I do, not only does the guy not even notice...he's just too content with the situation to even think about it. You're assuming that I control the guy, but that's not the case. I control myself and in doing so, the guy reacts in the way I want him to react. He is just reacting naturally to my lead.

 

[Obsidian]

So how many of these "stable" relationships have you had? How long did you stay interested in guys that you could predict and lead according to your whims?

Because if you're seriously telling me that women get turned on by men who don't take charge, I'll tell you flat out that you're wrong. Being passive never accomplished anything for me in my first two decades of existence. Ever since I abandoned my chumpish ways, however, I have made continual progress.

This is why we need forums like this -- to get away from all the feminist nonsense society tries to cram down our throats. Women don't really know what they want so it's pointless to listen to them give relationship advice.

 

[Wyldfire]

So how many of these "stable" relationships have you had? How long did you stay interested in guys that you could predict and lead according to your whims?

Because if you're seriously telling me that women get turned on by men who don't take charge, I'll tell you flat out that you're wrong. Being passive never accomplished anything for me in my first two decades of existence. Ever since I abandoned my chumpish ways, however, I have made continual progress.

This is why we need forums like this -- to get away from all the feminist nonsense society tries to cram down our throats. Women don't really know what they want so it's pointless to listen to them give relationship advice.

I've had 4 very good, healthy relationships where I led and the guys had no clue I was leading. The first one lasted about 5 years. That man passed away. I would be married to him now if he had not died. The second lasted about 8 months or so. I ended it because over time sometimes you find that you just really aren't compatible. It ended on good terms with no hard feelings. The third lasted about 6 months and it was another case of not being compatible enough. The 4th lasted about 6 years and ended when he also passed away. I would have married him eventually as well, had he not died.

Taking charge is really of no consequence to women. What women don't want is a needy, clingy, desperate, boring girly man. Likewise, women don't want a mean, miserable control freak either. A man does not have to be overbearing, controlling or domineering to be attractive.

Again...you are not looking at "leading" for what it really is. "Taking charge" is NOT leading...it is an attempt to control, which won't ever work long term. Leading is all about how you carry yourself, control your reactions and behavior in order to elicit the desired response from the other person. Men can lead and women can lead. Men can attempt to control others and women can attempt to control others. Attempts to control simply do NOT work. Leading, however, DOES work. Much of the advise I have given here over the years has involved examples of leading. I try to encourage leading behavior whenever I can, because it is the most effective way to have a good, quality and lasting LTR. Sadly, most of the time my attempts at teaching these methods get buried beneath flames and attacks for me being a woman.

Yeah...many women have no clue what they want...especially younger women. I had no clue what I wanted until I was nearly 30 years old. Even when women figure out what they want they are more likely to still tell you what they think you want to hear because women are convinced that they have to come across as sweet and nice all the time. If a woman offends you or pisses you off...she's telling you the truth as a rule.

 

[Wyldfire]

One who can speak English properly lol.

If you intend to flame someone for their English usage you really should make sure you use a full sentence instead of a fragment.

:kick:

 

[patra]

wasap,
can u give more details aby urself now

 

[Georgey]

im not finding a problem in u. let me tell u that guys like girls that can lead, by leading i mean being social, being able to control or lead a group of girls.. leading for a girl here means having attitude, and i think that u have that, and if u really have that attitude then dont loose it. a girl who has attitude in life , who uses her mind <---well thats great

oh for the love of everything, I didn't think all of this DRAMA would start over a fvcking question..but okay

1. the guys that approach me are weird example:
one guy followed me half way home
one guy started walking next to me, rubbing himself on me
one guy kept following me in his car, yelling at me to get in (c'mon)
another one was across the street saw me started running towards me, when he finally reached me he gave me his, pager, cell and house number (which was funny)

wut the heck? where is that that u live in?

yes sure these r weird dumb aproaches and if i were u, i wouldnt have even answered any of those wussies. give em a finger and let the fvck away from u next time.

i think its better for u, even if u were 24, to stay out of such relationships coz they would drive u craze.u'd better be staying single then feeling the **** out of ur life.

just go out have fun , dont worry bout the nice/sexy guy(s) anymore, enjoy ur life and then u'll be noticed. smile but stand ur ground, have attitude, be a girl <--im sure u dont have a problem with this, be that girl that can get wut she wants and guys will do anything to get u

 

[Georgey]

well, bout ur look, i dont think u have quite a problem since u said that guy give u the nice ass or boobs or wutsoever.. anyway even tho ure not (lets say) the best looking round there, its not that big deal,.. give urself sum confidence and do as i said in the other post

 

[TillTheEndOfTime]

I know what you're problem is...you have a strong personality and guys can be very intimidated by that.

The above is a femininist misconception about the male ego. We're not "threatened" by you. We just find nothing attractive about a female with an aggressive (i.e. male-like) personality. Just like there is nothing attractive about a man who acts like a girl and is a total pushover.

 

[Wyldfire]

The above is a femininist misconception about the male ego. We're not "threatened" by you. We just find nothing attractive about a female with an aggressive (i.e. male-like) personality. Just like there is nothing attractive about a man who acts like a girl and is a total pushover.

For the love of Pete...this has nothing to do with feminism or feminists.

People with strong personalities are extroverted, outgoing, confident and very secure in themselves. Those qualities are intimidating to a lot of guys because the guys assume that they are more likely to be rejected by women with strong personalities. I didn't imply that by intimidation I meant the guy was afraid the woman was going to kick his arse. I meant that guys tend to fear rejection more from women who are very confident, secure and outgoing.