A Question for the Men...

[LoveMenLoveSex]

It's the survey taker's dilemma. To get differences between A and B, a survey question often has to exaggerate the differences between A and B or set up false dichotomies, to make the question clear. But then the answers target the question as worded, reacting to the exaggerated differences and polluting the data. The effect is actually "useful", since most professional surveys are designed to get the answers the surveyor wants to get; wording the question to bias answers that way is a valued skill.

As for the rest... I've done a lot of thinking about male and female roles in relationships; studying it became a hobby of mine. I could write pages on why, in a fantasy story, a typical male writer will cast a female into a subordinate role, where in real life a fully subordinate female has more limited fascination.

My stories won't much appeal to you, I think; but as an exercise, take a look at My I Love My Job. In it, an 18 year old girl who is somewhat submissive is suddenly swept into a situation where she's required to be quite fully submissive, in excess of her nature. She's not your (b) type because at 18, virtually no one is. But I had a great deal of fun making her Not (a). This isn't to say that she triumphs over the Male Patriarchy and ends up fully sharing anything. That wasn't possible in the culture and setting I put her in. But I gave her a brain and a backbone and in her circumstances she ultimately does better than you'd expect. I'm sure you'll grit your teeth over the first two chapters but I *think* you'll enjoy the ongoing character development thereafter.

Well, I had a look at the story, after searching fruitlessly for the title you gave - it's actually Why I Love My Job, in case you want to hand it out again.

You're quite right that it's not within my interests but that had nothing to do with the subgenre's basic concepts, and everything to do with the protagonist. I had to agree entirely with one of the male commentators on the story in regards to irredeemable nature of your male character. I'm sure many readers found it to their taste but the smug, self-justified and empty nature of the protagonist left me cold. As a character study, or foil against a more compelling character, I daresay it would be considered well written. Sorry to say I couldn't read enough of the story to tell if your female characters were realistically described or not. Not being paid for editing, analysis or criticism, I read for pleasure and found none to be had

It has been interesting to see how your position has changed from your opening remarks to the latest. Perhaps that's a case of reactions to other posts. It hasn't been the intention to be insulting or judgemental in asking the question nor in following up the responses and if it's been perceived that way in any degree, my apologies.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

You're quite right that it's not within my interests but that had nothing to do with the subgenre's basic concepts, and everything to do with the protagonist. I had to agree entirely with one of the male commentators on the story in regards to irredeemable nature of your male character. I'm sure many readers found it to their taste but the smug, self-justified and empty nature of the protagonist left me cold. As a character study, or foil against a more compelling character, I daresay it would be considered well written. Sorry to say I couldn't read enough of the story to tell if your female characters were realistically described or not.

You gave up on him too soon - he's given reason and opportunity to change his ways, but it takes him about six chapters to even consider the possibility. (I do have irredeemably evil male characters in some of my stories but Gladgrind doesn't turn out to be one of them.) That's ok though - I was interested in showcasing a woman with submissive characteristics who also had a brain and a spinal cord, mostly to prove that it's possible; but I grant that if you're looking for stories full of equality and sweet romance and just the tiniest bit of naughty sex, the headwinds in that story would have been too strong. You could try My I Hate My Roommate instead; you might find Syiera interesting. (You won't love the males in that one either, but they are vast improvements over early Gladgrind.)

 

[LoveMenLoveSex]

You gave up on him too soon - he's given reason and opportunity to change his ways, but it takes him about six chapters to even consider the possibility. (I do have irredeemably evil male characters in some of my stories but Gladgrind doesn't turn out to be one of them.) That's ok though - I was interested in showcasing a woman with submissive characteristics who also had a brain and a spinal cord, mostly to prove that it's possible; but I grant that if you're looking for stories full of equality and sweet romance and just the tiniest bit of naughty sex, the headwinds in that story would have been too strong. You could try My I Hate My Roommate instead; you might find Syiera interesting. (You won't love the males in that one either, but they are vast improvements over early Gladgrind.)

Perhaps I did but to be honest, the way he introduces himself it seemed like nothing short of alien invasion would change that mindset and I don't have enough time in the day to persevere with a character I find mindnumbingly dull from the first paragraph. A man who is capable of change (created by a writer who knows ahead of time what his plot will entail) allows the reader to find tiny hints of that possibility in order to keep them reading. An off-kilter thought. A carelessly worded bit of dialogue. Something that suggests that one is not wasting one time's on one of life's all too common self-centred dickheads.

LOL ... wow, there it is again ... I don't like your sociopathic character therefore I must only love fawns and rainbows and unicorns who shit strawberries ... talk about dichotomy! After lecturing rather extensively on the available shades of grey between black and white, have a look at yourself sometime. Or grow up. I don't read no-hope horror or modern my-life-is-a-drug-addled-hell novels either and for the same reason. I can see real assholes any day of the week, why the fuck would I want to read about them?

I'm assuming that your latest rec is also going be "WHY" instead of "MY". If you're sure I won't like the males, why bother recommending it? I enjoy flawed characters when the writer has the skill to explore them extensively, but not those who have zero meaning in who they are, what they do or why they do it. They're not flawed, they're empty. Don't you have any male characters who are devious enough to hide their flaws? To present charm and grace before they deliver the coup d'etat? Read Silence of the Lambs sometime. There is a villain who is more absorbing than the protagonist, fascinating because of the layers and layers that must coexist in implausible but realistic stratum.

If, to your own satisfaction and enjoyment, you have devised a woman who prefers to submerge her own personality, despite having a "brain and a spine" and in direct contradiction to having either confidence or comfort in herself, more power to you. There are certainly plenty of men and women out there who do prefer the lack of personal responsibility that comes with handing over personal control of themselves and their lives; you only have to look at the governments of each nation to discover that.

You have, indeed, answered my original question very thoroughly.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

There are certainly plenty of men and women out there who do prefer the lack of personal responsibility that comes with handing over personal control of themselves and their lives

Wow. I get that submission is not your thing - that was obvious from the tone of your original question. But you have no idea what it *means.*

I do have characters who hide their villainy - or their virtue - and almost all of them change over time. But I don't think there's much point in showing them to you. All but one of them involve a woman accepting submission to some degree or another, and as you have no idea what that means or why it could ever be a desirable state, you'd be wasting your time wading through them.

I'll be blunt, since that's my nature. Your original question wasn't a question, it was a transparent lament. You'd like to understand why so many men seem to want or enjoy a kind of woman you don't understand and could (clearly!) never respect. But you don't understand it, and you're not interested in trying to. The good news is that I think the tilt towards female submission is more pronounced on Literotica than it is in real life. (Everything, both good and bad, is more pronounced here.) The bad news is that I strongly suspect most men, deep down, are Gladgrinds (of the unredeemed variety), and have learned to mask it to some degree. They want what they want, and what they want is not what you want, and successful relationships tend to be complicated things for that reason. My stories are generally about bridging the expectation gap between the genders and managing the complexity, but I don't write wine and roses, and despite the fact that most of my stories are (ultimately) romances, there are good reasons I don't post in the Romance section.

But there are certainly writers here who are all about equality in all things, so I think if you pick your authors carefully you'll find you can avoid the taint of things that revolt you. I'm no different; there are whole genres I will not touch here and do not want to learn about.

 

[BuckyDuckman]

A very wealthy bachelor has decided to tie the knot. He has it narrowed down to three women. Feeling a bit guilty that he's been stringing the three of them along for years, he comes clean, and gives them each $100,000 before he goes on a year long trip around the world to make up his mind. When he comes back after a year he meets with the first woman.

As she strolls into his office, he hardly recognizes her. While she had always been a beautiful looking woman, in the year he spent away she had toned her body, invested in a new wardrobe, and explained, "You're a wonderful man who deserves the best, and that includes the woman on your arm whenever you walk into a room. Thank you so much for your gift, but I felt guilty taking it. So I invested in a private trainer, took poise lessons, and even received a bit of plastic surgery to tighten up my looks. For you, honey. I did it all for you."

The second woman refuses to meet him in his office. Instead, she meets him on the golf course where she tees up on the man's tees and nearly bests him. Later, there's a round of tennis where she actually beats him two out of three matches. That evening, over drinks, she challenges to a game of backgammon and beats him again before explaining, "I know how competitive you are and I want you know I'm your equal."

The third woman strolls into his office and hands him a check for $100, 000. When tries to refuse it, she hands him a second one for $20,000 more. "That's your initial investment in me and the second is your dividend. I invested the gift you gave me, worked the stock market and after a few real estate deals, you should know I'm now the landlord for this office building. I closed on it yesterday. You are such a successful business and so wealthy, I wanted you to know, I have never been interested in your money. What better way to prove it than by using your gift as seed money? In five more years, I'll be every bit as wealthy as you."

QUESTION: Which woman did he marry?





Answer: Easy, the one with the biggest tits.

And now you know you everything you need to know about some men. (Not me, but quite a few!)

 

[sr71plt]

More relevant to the thread, though, I think, is that all three, knowing he was pursuing two others at the same time, would blow him the raspberries and take off together for a Sandals resort in the Caribbean. The movie version would star Jane Fonda, Dolly Parton, and Goldie Hawn.

 

[LoveMenLoveSex]

Wow. I get that submission is not your thing - that was obvious from the tone of your original question. But you have no idea what it *means.* I do have characters who hide their villainy - or their virtue - and almost all of them change over time. But I don't think there's much point in showing them to you. All but one of them involve a woman accepting submission to some degree or another, and as you have no idea what that means or why it could ever be a desirable state, you'd be wasting your time wading through them.

No, I couldn't possibly understand the psychological reasons behind the diversity of sexual desire for adopting and relinquishing control, not even theoretically or academically since you've told me I am not interested in that aspect of sexuality and/or not capable of understanding.

I'll be blunt, since that's my nature. Your original question wasn't a question, it was a transparent lament. You'd like to understand why so many men seem to want or enjoy a kind of woman you don't understand and could (clearly!) never respect. But you don't understand it, and you're not interested in trying to.

The world of psychology has clearly missed an extraordinary talent. You should be practising! Just imagine the hours of therapy and thousands spent on medication people would save if only they went to see you! A diagnosis of not only motivation but personality and even future motivations garnered from a single question! It's awe-inspiring!

But not, unfortunately, true. If you would take the minute or so to return to the beginning of the thread and re-read the first post, you would see that I made no reference at all to a woman of a submissive nature. I was interested in quite different aspects. You were the one who correlated the adjectives and description with your own definition of what it meant, the associations that arose in your mind from the idea of ‘taking care’ of someone. You further extrapolated the question to include a motivation that simply isn't there, one that suits your world, life and personal beliefs.

Had every person who responded to this thread said – honestly and yes, bluntly - yes, I prefer to have someone that I can take care of, that needs me and wants me around (as I recall one poster actually did), I would have been quite happy and satisfied with those responses. That was, after all, the purpose of asking the question in the first place. It is in your mind that I have become a caricature of a person, someone who is seeking reassurance about whatever it is you think requires reassuring. The option (a) in the original question was not derogatory and there was no need to assume it was. Option (b) was no more weighted than option (a), although the wording could have been handled better as I have expressed remorse for several times now, apparently ignored or dismissed for reasons I suspect are more to do with a desire to reduce the question to a "lament" and derided.

Since bluntness is required, looking at both the question and the responses delivered over the course of the thread suggests something quite removed from your 'diagnosis' of my personality and motivations. You have read the question in a way it was not intended, parleyed through your experiences and beliefs, and have come up with an answer that suits your existing mindset, with no help or provocation from anyone else. The desire to protect those under their care is one of the most seductive traits of (most) men, and one I value very highly. It has absolutely nothing to do with any particular type of sexual encounter nor does it have anything to do with a type of woman. I did not ask if men preferred submissive women or if they wanted to be in control, or if they enjoyed being obeyed at all times, for that matter.

Most of the responses have insisted they prefer to share a partnership. While I did not go into detail of what "sharing every aspect" meant to me, the general concept was presented so as to allow anyone responding to detail the aspects for themselves and most have done just that. In point of fact, I believe you are the only one who responded with a vehement denial of wanting to share your life, exaggerating the idea out of all proportion and paraphrasing it terms of personal suffocation.

In most discussions that might edge toward personal matters, defensiveness tends to arise when personal beliefs are perceived as being threatened. Attack normally follows and is remarkably consistent in being heralded by a denigration of the opposition, attempts to belittle or patronise or accusations of personal involvement, regardless of the apparent invalidity of such tactics. It doesn’t really matter one way or the other. These are opinions being discussed, not facts. Nothing said changes the world. So why would it be so important that there’s a need to pretend something that’s not there?

The bad news is that I strongly suspect most men, deep down, are Gladgrinds (of the unredeemed variety), and have learned to mask it to some degree. They want what they want, and what they want is not what you want, and successful relationships tend to be complicated things for that reason. My stories are generally about bridging the expectation gap between the genders and managing the complexity, but I don't write wine and roses, and despite the fact that most of my stories are (ultimately) romances, there are good reasons I don't post in the Romance section.

Your view of "most men, deep down", in relation to your character, empty of empathy or compassion, of viewing others as potential if not actual equals, of using intimidation and threat to gain personal satisfaction and lacking in basic courage, seems to be quite a narrow-minded one. It’s possible that you’re quite correct in your assumption, but an assumption is all it is and an unprovable one.

As for knowing what “most men” want or what “I want”, it seems that you don’t. You’ve certainly grabbed the wrong end of the stick in terms of what I want, although I wouldn’t dream of having any kind of expectation that you could possibly admit to an error there.

To be brutally frank, I freely admit to being in error in asking the question originally posed. In this, of all possible public forums – virtually anonymous and with most preferences laid out already – I thought it would be a simple matter for people to be fairly honest about what they wanted and thought was important and even offer occasional details as to why. The question has been muddied to the point of containing elements it never intended. Thank you to those who responded and best of luck with your writing.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

LIT is Affirmative Action Land. A magical place where folks with zero knowledge or experience are instant experts.

 

[hakuna_patata]

I've thought about this a number of ways, and have to say this is too problematic for me to answer one or the other. I'll just give my own answer:

I prefer a mature woman, be her static, dynamic or synergistic to me. She could be one type, another, or (even more likely) many types and at different times. I don't think women (or us men for that matter) should be cast (typecast?) like this, nor should we cast ourselves.

As far as fiction goes, for me it's all about character, believability and meaning. I don't have a preference for a type of character; I fall in love with characters that are well-written, meaningful to the story or other characters and memorable.

Didn't read any replies to make sure I delivered only my thoughts, so this may sound dumb, but I never think about characters and people like this. I take them all as unique individuals, and they take a lot to define, and I'd hope attraction to them is deeper than this kind of perspective. Please don't take any offense to anything here, it's almost 4am for me and I ramble when tired.