OK, this stems from a number of recent conversations I've had with both guys and girls. Now I'm projecting this scenario to you:

GUYS: How do you feel about the lady in your life? Are you intimidated by her assertiveness, independence, and willingness to pursue a successful career, or you prefer it? Would you rather have her act submissively to you and follow your lead, or do you prefer her to be more of a go-getter in life?

GALS: (opposit of the guys) Do you desire your own independence and freedom or do you enjoy attending to your man's every wish and whim? Do you believe that a relationship should should be more about finding yourself or about pleasing him?

**NOTE**This situation assumes that you are one extreme or the other (and happy in that extreme). YES in real life there is that gray area in-between, but we're assuming it doesn't exist for the sake of this scenario...so approach this as a "I USUALLY feel:______" or "MOST OF THE TIME I prefer:______" situation. You get the picture

12/17/2005 11:14:08 AM

i've dated both the assertive, independent, flirt type and the quiet, submissive, girl. both were fine, you just have to have different expectations and methods for handling the associated problems.

that said ill completely ignore your last paragraph and say i prefer an in between. in reality what you have to do is find someone closer to the middle or at least rational enough to make compromises.

12/17/2005 11:24:07 AM

I'd rather be captain of the ship unless the lady is the admiral of a cruiser. Whoever's got the financial leverage should be in charge.

12/17/2005 11:31:54 AM

^^well yes, compromises are they key to any relationship...I totally agree with that! I think I'm looking more for thoughts and experiences from both sides. I know everybody is different, and consequently every relationship will be different...I'm just being curious

I've dated guys that definitely had the independent bug (which I have myself)...but most of them were very "lovey dovey" and willing to do almost anything for me...kinda like my new puppy...all they wanted to do was please me. Now, I'm definitely NOT complaining about that...but the "let me bow down to you" attitude gets a little annoying after a while. I love the attention, but I personally find a guy that is confident, knows what he wants, and still isn't afraid to be romantic the most "desirable". Also, don't baby me in hopes that I'll become your servant...that is NOT a good way to get on my good side.

To answer my own question: I prefer to be loved for who I am...that means, let me be independent, let me love my job, let me try to better myself...don't hinder me, and don't complain. I will shower any guy I'm with with love and attention, but not at the sake of my sanity! Don't order me around, but don't baby me either (lol at least not ALL the time). And for goodness sake, don't expect em to be someone I'm not.

^don't you think that even though financial independence is desirable, don't you think that giving one person all the power in financial decisions will leave the other feeling a little, left out? I guess if the other person doesn't mind sitting on the backburner then it'd be ok...but personally, I have my finances and he would have his. ANy major decision (ie, house) would be a combined effort...the details would have to be worked out per each individual situation.

[Edited on December 17, 2005 at 11:43 AM. Reason : ]

12/17/2005 11:40:42 AM

I will just say that a good relationship is not based on rules and policies and preferences. A good relationship works out naturally you can not force it to work.

12/17/2005 11:42:32 AM

I know ^ I'm just asking for experiences from one extreme or the other

12/17/2005 11:44:42 AM

^^^Well, the basis of all good relationships is compromise. The other can be feeling left out, but how could they be feeling left out if it truly is a team effort. There should be understanding for the long term goals and a projected path of the future given who's in charge and who isn't.

Sure, someone might be feeling left out but they should understand and be supportive in their role. They will perhaps have other assets that allow them to pull weight in other aspects of the relationship if it happens to be a healthy one. The element of trust is a strong within any relationship, why not trust the decision of the person in charge and if they're a good leader. They should listen to the input and make decisions based on all aspects of the informational spectrum provided to them.


[Edited on December 17, 2005 at 11:55 AM. Reason : ]

12/17/2005 11:52:28 AM

Quote :

"The element of trust is a strong within any relationship, why not trust the decision of the person in charge and if they're a good leader, they'll listen to the input and make decisions based on all aspects of the informational spectrum available."

very good point...and this is applicable to either end of the spectrum (me, where I'm very independent...or another girl that might leave all the decision-making up to her man). Of course this assumes trust exists to begin with, but oooh lawdy that's a whole 'nother thread.

12/17/2005 11:56:36 AM

Again compromise is not a basis. If you feel someone is compromising then trust me it will not last for long. Compromise is a weak word. Relationships are not based on compromise they are based on understanding and compassion. You compromise only when you know you are right but you have to give in. Good relationships are based on mutual good decisions not compromises,

12/17/2005 12:07:23 PM

well I think that compromise is definitely an important factor in helping a relationship to work...especially if both parties have established an understanding of WANTING it to work. At some point, someone is going to have to give on something...if the relationship is more important than walking away, then a compromise is in order.

You are right though...I never thought of it like that. I've always assumed that understanding and compassion came before a compromise...for without either, a compromise would never exist to begin with.

12/17/2005 12:16:25 PM

A compromise has a negative attitude to it. What do you do when your lawyer asks you to compromise? You smirk. Same goes with relationships.

12/17/2005 12:17:18 PM

well, a compromise isn't the same thing as a choice...a compromise (unlike the original intention of this thread) is gray, while a choice is black and white.

in my eyes, a compromise doesn't have any negative connotations to it. again, without it, the relationship would cease to exist (unless one party relinquished their free will to the other party and automatically gave in to his/her every desire). A compromise assumes that both parties are willing to keep the relationship alive, and since both parties stand firm in their respective arguments, then the only thing to do is meet in the middle.

also, with respect to the lawyer comment...that's where you either go to trial or come to plea agreement/settlement. now, law is a bit different than relationships...the only place for any compromise IS the plea agreement/settlement...a relationship is built around the ability to work through situations while taking into account the opposite party's opinions and feelings. I doubt that few relationships, if any, exist that don't have some sort of rocky disagreements.

[Edited on December 17, 2005 at 12:23 PM. Reason : ]

12/17/2005 12:21:14 PM

trust me

12/17/2005 12:30:15 PM

well...I'm definitely open for discussion. Would you mind explaining yourself a little more? I have no problem admitting that I'm wrong, but I guess I need a stronger argument to consider second guessing myself

12/17/2005 12:33:41 PM

Why would you compromise on something? How long can you compromise? Why should you be the only person compromising? Is compromise mathematical in nature ie. you lose one compromise point if the other person compromises on something else? What would you prefer - someone that understands you or someone that just compromises for you?

12/17/2005 12:38:19 PM

Quote :

"What do you do when your lawyer asks you to compromise? You smirk. "

you do that. not everyone.

Quote :

"Why would you compromise on something?"

Because the only other option is selfishness

Quote :

"How long can you compromise?"

All your life, you will have to compromise on things

Quote :

"Why should you be the only person compromising?"

you fucking moron. you obviously don't even understand the concept of compromise

Quote :

"Is compromise mathematical in nature ie. you lose one compromise point if the other person compromises on something else?"

Yes, compromise is a give and take social behavior.

Quote :

"What would you prefer - someone that understands you or someone that just compromises for you?"

someone that understands you, will compromise on things with you. Your question is poorly worded and beyond that, stupid. "what would you prefer - someone that compromises or someone that cuts off your balls and hangs them around your neck? omf you said you'd prefer compromise omf omf i win!!"


[Edited on December 17, 2005 at 12:44 PM. Reason : s]

12/17/2005 12:38:37 PM

^^lol wow...I'm not sure what to say to that, but its more b/c I'm speechless due to the lack of sense that you're making then anything else

^hehe

12/17/2005 12:39:40 PM

You are just unwilling to compromise

12/17/2005 12:40:33 PM

compromise is not mandatory in all instances

12/17/2005 12:45:12 PM

it never really is mandatory, is it?

12/17/2005 12:46:56 PM

back to the original question...

i much prefer the go-getter, alpha-female type.

i like to be in about 51% control.

[Edited on December 17, 2005 at 12:56 PM. Reason : asdfas]

12/17/2005 12:56:24 PM

lol 51% huh? not to get too specific or anything

12/17/2005 1:03:32 PM

you know what i mean

12/17/2005 1:05:20 PM

I know, I'm just teasing

12/17/2005 1:05:36 PM

Quote :

"GUYS: How do you feel about the lady in your life? Are you intimidated by her assertiveness, independence, and willingness to pursue a successful career, or you prefer it? Would you rather have her act submissively to you and follow your lead, or do you prefer her to be more of a go-getter in life?"

I prefer the fact that my wife is independent and in pursuit of a successful career. Since we both have busy, active lives, one of us isn't waiting around for the other to have time to spend together.

I've dated the submissive type before, and it was boring. I like a woman who can challenge me.

12/17/2005 1:09:44 PM

whoohoo Janine does rock, doesn't she

12/17/2005 1:11:12 PM

yes ma'am

12/17/2005 1:11:42 PM

Quote :

"I've dated the submissive type before, and it was boring. "

yeah, those girls are just along for the ride. Lame.

12/17/2005 1:21:16 PM

nm

[Edited on December 17, 2005 at 1:35 PM. Reason : ]

12/17/2005 1:33:53 PM

why ask a question on a forum if you are not up for being challenged?

[Edited on December 17, 2005 at 1:59 PM. Reason : .]

12/17/2005 1:59:39 PM

ultra, you are not challenging... you already got debunked. Compromise can be little small changes in your life that will make your relationship a little better. Could be something as small as letting her have that hideous flower comforter to put on your shared bed. (and yes, there are bigger things too)

As for the questions, I guess I like to be an independent girl. I can't stand for the guy to always pay and I can't stand not to work and be able to support myself, but I also refuse to be with a guy that can't hold his own. I'm not saying that if I am with a guy we both have to work 40-60 hour weeks, but we need to find each others strong points. As for Guys that think that women should attend to their every whim, after the first time of that it is over. I don't mind being teased about womens 'traditional roles,' but once they start to sound serious I'm gone.
I only like to please my man if he likes to please me. i love doing sweet and sexy things and going out of my way for him, but if he never does anything in return I stop doing it. It's a give take situation. Same in the bedroom... these assholes that think that once they are pleased it is over... doesn't work. I agree with what everyone else is saying about compromise. A relationship has to be give and take. If you have a partner that is forever taking, it gets old.
yet, i don't necessarily think that a relationship is about finding yourself. It's more about working and growing together with your partner, sharing the responsibilities and complications of life... someone that is your best friend above all else.

12/17/2005 3:52:48 PM

there is nothing more unattractive in a woman than a dearth of ambition.

12/17/2005 4:51:55 PM

assertive

fiesty even

just not a bitch

12/17/2005 5:01:06 PM

Threads like this are exactly why when I'm married, my wife and I shall live in seperate places.

12/17/2005 5:03:10 PM

It's simple. If a girl lets a guy pay for the first and second date, she's submissive.

12/17/2005 5:30:30 PM

^ or maybe im just that much more assertive

i simply dont let her pay

12/17/2005 7:08:29 PM

not reading all this

each has its own good and bad points...if you're one extreme or the other, you're obviously not open to someone who's going to challenge your comfort zone

/thread

12/17/2005 7:14:14 PM

Quote :

"GUYS: How do you feel about the lady in your life? Are you intimidated by her assertiveness, independence, and willingness to pursue a successful career, or you prefer it? Would you rather have her act submissively to you and follow your lead, or do you prefer her to be more of a go-getter in life?"

The girl I'm with now is 3 years older than I am. Next December, she'll have her second degree... and I'll likely be getting my first. Personally, I'm happy that I'm with her and that I can be there to support her in whatever capacity's possible while she gets this degree, because I know the benefits it has for us in the long run. I'd be more upset if she dropped out than if she got her degree before I finish mine up. She knows I'll have three degrees in about 5.5 years, so the fact that she's "ahead" right now doesn't hinder us - as it stands I'm right on schedule and we've known about the disparity since the beginning of our relationship.

In this case, it's really a disservice to the relationship itself to call one of us the leader, and the other a follower, but I do prefer that my woman be a go-getter in life. It'd be a shame if she spent her life responding to my every beck and call, and then all of a sudden I'm not there anymore and she's left to fend for herself.

12/17/2005 7:15:10 PM

Quote :

"GALS: (opposit of the guys) Do you desire your own independence and freedom or do you enjoy attending to your man's every wish and whim?"

My independence is something I partially relinquish of as a gift to someone. If anyone expects me to give it up, they're out of my life. I consider freedom a part of independence. A relationship with someone who doesn't understand this probably wouldn't last, were I ever foolish enough to enter into it.

Quote :

" Do you believe that a relationship should should be more about finding yourself or about pleasing him?"

It should please him that I like, and am willing and able, to do my own thing. I refuse to let someone else make me feel like their goals should be mine.

I want someone as fiesty as me, who doesn't mind that I can get along without them. I'm much closer to someone who lets me make my own decisions than to someone who tries to control me.

I'm a very controlling person, and my bf is very laidback, but by no means is he spineless. If I become overbearing, he quickly and forcefully lets me know, and I back off. This works both ways. I'm a little more vocal about doing things my way, in general, but the things he likes to do his way usually get done "his way", even though I sometimes think he's being unreasonable.

12/17/2005 7:59:33 PM

great responses everyone!

I guess I should have left the topic more open than to restrict it to just a black or white answer...ah you live and learn

12/17/2005 9:49:23 PM

i like to start with assertive women and then beat them down until they SUBMIT TO ME

[Edited on December 17, 2005 at 11:39 PM. Reason : bleck]

12/17/2005 11:35:42 PM

Yeah, I think it's a bit silly to ask for answers in terms of extremes, because most people just aren't that way.

12/18/2005 12:09:33 AM

my ex wanted a slave...but instead he got my ass to kiss. Im an extreme...I want him to be my bitch.

12/19/2005 1:33:51 AM

I definitely want someone assertive, independent and outgoing. I am a pretty submissive type in a relationship, which sucks because it seems like most women are the same way, which means I end up having to be the aggressor. It's fun some of the time, but definitely not most or all of the time.

12/19/2005 5:09:33 AM

I like to be the provider and one with the pants in my relationships.

12/19/2005 7:14:09 AM

I agree with Noen

12/19/2005 8:01:01 AM

GUYS: How do you feel about the lady in your life? Are you intimidated by her assertiveness, independence, and willingness to pursue a successful career, or you prefer it? Would you rather have her act submissively to you and follow your lead, or do you prefer her to be more of a go-getter in life?

Okay this is a loaded question. Every guy is different. Some like women to be housewives, some want them to work. Me i like a balance. I am a little old fashioned to who does want in the house at least as far as cooking and a couple other things. Don't get me wrong, I can vacuum, clean windows, wash laundry etc... but I prefer to do the more manly things. Mow the lawn, paint the house etc. However, I will do the others and not complain. This was just to give you an idea of my personality when it comes to women.

My girlfriend is a double major with a minor (Biochem, Chem Eng, And biotech) who wants to work with infection diseases and has the grades to get basically any job she wants. (3.9 GPA). She asked me if I'd be offended if she made more than me which caught me off guard. Of course I wouldn't. We also talked about if she had to move if I would to, and I said I would if I had to but my family is here, my whole life is here, and asking me to move when you have a career that you could easily get a high paying job around here isn't really fair.

I'm all for her career and doing what she loves. I believe that any job you have you should love doing it or find another job. It also matters what you define by career success. Does that mean money? Power? To me it's a sense of accomplisment accompanied by a good earning. We agree on this which is one of many reasons we match so well.

The guy you are with doesn't come off to me as a very stable person when not in charge. I get the impression that he wants to have 70% trophy wife and 30% normal person. I honestly don't know and I'm not trying to insult him without knowing him.

This is like the 10th post I've seen about this guy from you so I want you to do this. Don't post it as it's none of our business... write down everything you like about him. Every little detail down to the direction of the hair on his arm if thats to your liking.

Then write down every single thing he does that makes you angry, hurts you or anything about him you don't like. Don't sit there and compare while you do it. Just let things flow out of your head. Love makes you blind. Thats why women who are beaten run back. Some women think that this guy is the best they could ever have and that's simply not the case.

Take these two lists and look at them both. This is your guy. Is this honestly someone you could live forever with? If you think "He'll change" uh... he would have by now. If you cannot live with what you see it's time to pack up and move out. You've given him plenty of chances and judging by how beautiful you look there are plenty of guys out there anxious to meet you. I know it's hard, and not something you wnat to do... but from all of your posts... it's obvious this isn't working and he isn't interested in you truly being happy, just in himself.

12/19/2005 9:09:30 AM

Quote :

"The guy you are with doesn't come off to me as a very stable person when not in charge."

you do realize she ditched him, right?

12/19/2005 9:25:06 AM

I would also like to point out that a woman can be very independent with her own ideas and passions and not necessarily be pursuing a "career" so to speak. Someone who is content to stay at home and raise the kids while the husband is working to provide is not necessarily the submissive one.

I think too many people wrap up their indentities with their job/career and because of this women who don't, end up being less valued. To me, I won't ever "make" (as if I could if I wanted to) my wife stay at home with the kids when we have them. We have talked about it and when we start a family she has decided thats what she would like to do. She can be just as independent and assertive as a career woman, but she will have a different and equal (if not greater) role in our relationship/family.

12/19/2005 9:51:34 AM

Raige VERY good points...and in response to your comment about the guy I've posted about previously...we're not together anymore. He's not willing to work things out (as far as working on the things that are the most hurtful to me), and while I do miss him for the good times, I've realized that sometimes being in love just isn't always enough

12/19/2005 9:56:29 AM