Guys care as much about feelings as Gals

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by andrew

Women care most about how you can make them feel, both mentally and sexually. If you can cause a women to feel incredible attraction, happiness, and incredible pleasure, she would care a lot less what you look like.

Originally Posted by mattpd

In my experience everybody can experience emotions, and to be good at dating you certainly need to be good at having women "feel" things, and that is for them to experience certain emotions in your company.

Originally Posted by mattpd

Women respond to how a guy can make them feel. Let me tell you, I'm never anything like a woman's "type", in fact they always seem to tell me that. I'm short, not good looking, not rich, and any of that stuff. But I have an ability to make women experience emotions, and this makes them want me.

With all the discussion on dating and female/male attraction, comments like these have come up. They say that women mostly/only care about how a guy makes her feel. I won't argue against this, since it makes total sense to me and it's a belief that is part of my worldview.

However, there seems to be another, less intuitive implication built into this...

When statements like these are made on part of the female populace, in this context, it would seem that it is to differentiate it from the wants and desires of the male populace. This would then imply that how a gal makes a guy feel is not what's most important to him. If this wasn't the intent of such statements, than it would be a bit redundant to state it at all. (Like - all women want to feel healthy - yeah, who doesn't?). This doesn't make sense to me, since I don't see any one "thing" that could be more important to all humans than happiness - in this context, being an umbrella-term for all desireable feelings and emotions. What could possibly be a more "base" thing that can be the motivator for romantic/sexual pursuits or anything other for that matter, when it comes to men?

A guy likes an attractive face/appearance - it makes him feel good (sexual, appreciation of beauty). They like that they are interesting - it makes him feel good (suspense, interesting conversations). He likes that he is able to show off his attractive girlfriend - it makes him feel good (pride). He likes that she is feminime - it makes him feel good (it makes him feel more masculine - me Tarzan, you Jane!). He likes that he is able to protect her - it makes him feel good (strong, useful)

Even if I had chosen not to write the more specific reasons why a guy might feel good (pride, sexuality), it wouldn't have mattered to the guy if he was feeling good because he was feeling good - and that's his whole motivation, anyway! Maybe I'm jumping to conclusion, but I can't see any other motivation or reason.

Please understand that I'm not directing this at those that I have quoted, I am just using them as an example of the fact that many seem to think that women care more about "feeling" than men. Of course, the way people mean this doesn't have to be on such a base level as peoples ultimate goal and motivator - that people ultimately want happiness. Many people believe that. But here are some other things that can be meant by this:

One explantion: Guys largely care about sex, especially in the initial stages of a relationship. Maybe sex is not thought to be about "feeling good" in this context, but it is pretty weird if it isn't.

Another thing that can be meant is that women want to experience a wider range of emotions. Maybe guys are generally more straightforward when it comes to emotions and doesn't want a woman to lead them through some specific emotions and feelings. Maybe guys just want to experience a few of the obvious ones, like feelings related to sex, general happiness, and so forth.


Maybe there is something other meant by this, I dunno. I generally interpret the whole notion that women are "emotional creatures" to mean that they are more extreme in their emotions: that they can be really sad or really happy, whereas a guy is more likely to be more stable on an ongoing basis. This is all generally speaking, of course, don't cruficy me because you feel that your individuality is at risk! (it happens a lot on this subject, that is a fact.)



If I had the choice between two women, I would pick the one that made me feel the best, that I was mostly in love with, and all that. That is without thought to her appearances, because when it comes down to it, it is how a GF makes me feel that matters. If a gal cares more about her BF's charisma, and he cares more about her looks, well... they both only care about one thing, and that is how they make each other feeeeel.

[Angela]

I don't think women have the monopoly on wanting to feel good. Men are interested in feeling good too, of course! I think women tend to be more comfortable referring to feelings as "feelings," ("How does this feel?") and men tend generally to refer to it in more utilitarian verbiage (How does this work?") -- because of the whole boys-don't-cry socialization thing. But it's all the same stuff.

I think, for instance, that if a man is on a date with a woman who complains about the meal, the movie, the service, etc., and generally presents herself as difficult to please, a man might feel hurt, exhausted, irritated, whatever, but I think he would be more likely to think of the experience more in terms of "that didn't work out" rather than "I'm so hurt and irritated by her behavior." Whereas on a date with a man who does all the talking, orders for her without checking with her, talks pensively about his ex-girlfriend, whatever, a woman, I think, would more likely think in terms of "I feel bullied and second-rate with that guy" -- she would tend to sit with her feelings more than a man would -- before she said, "Next!"

I don't think either gender actually feels more happy or sad or enthusiastic or morose; women just generally are more comfortable expressing and being with feeling swings. I think that's because of socialization, not because it's an innate gender difference, and I know some here disagree. And I also think that the last couple of generations of men are being more and more free to be with and to express emotions, which I think is wonderful.

And like you, I'm just noticing a general tendency, not a universal law or what either gender *should* be or do.

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by Angela

I don't think women have the monopoly on wanting to feel good. Men are interested in feeling good too, of course! I think women tend to be more comfortable referring to feelings as "feelings," ("How does this feel?") and men tend generally to refer to it in more utilitarian verbiage (How does this work?") -- because of the whole boys-don't-cry socialization thing. But it's all the same stuff.

Yes, thank you. That is one other possible reasons for emotions and feelings being more equated with women than men: maby women feel more comfortable and natural talking about feelings as feelings. I find I am more comfortable with saying "what do you think about this?" rather than "how do you feel about this?" I guess asking how someone feels feels more intimate and, ehm, "touchy-feely" to me. It is just not something that I feel comfortable with and that is an emotional preference, fully. Just as having an interesting conversation with someone on what they think on a subject, rather than how the subject makes them feel, is something that can be more emotionally rewarding to me.

And of course, guys talk about emotionally charged stuff aaaaalll the time. In a positive sense: how awesome something is, and how hot a girl is. On the negative side: how this guy pissed you off, how mad you are about X. And that is just using a stereotyped "dude/guy" scenario, there can be many more subjects where men talk about emotionally charged topics freely and naturally.

I don't know how much that has to do with socialization, though. Maybe it is just preferences. But you are right though, boys don't cry - they get flippin' mad and punch each other in the face! The fact is that I see a lot more guys getting really mad than girls, and more girls weeping/crying than boys. Of course, women get mad plenty too, but it just seems that guys have a more bad temper. It could have something to do with the fact that guys are more physically imposing than women and often more domineering, so maybe they just express it differently. But the fact is that guys get "emotional" a lot, and that often manifests itself in anger or something related to it. I get angry/frustrated a lot, but I rarely get any emotion that calls forth the watergates. Sadness/powerlessness, those emotions that I connect with crying, they are just farther down on my emtional hierarchy than emotions such as anger. Anger and such just feels better to me than those feelings.

It is a long time since I heartily cried. The last time I can remember on the fly is 1,5 years ago. It was the finale episode of Six Feet Under and the ending was just brilliant, or so I felt when I saw it. I cried for more than five minutes, and it was a kind of melancholic good-feeling vibe over it. Weird.

So, although getting pissed and all that is a clear sign of emotion, it seems that society equates crying more with emotions. And because guys don't cry much, it gets speculated on if they maybe are repressing their emotions. Another alternative to this reality is that they just don't feel the need or desire to cry much.

[Angela]

Well, just like boys are taught that it's not okay to cry, girls are often taught that it's not okay to be outrightly angry. Men don't get more angry or have worse tempers than women, I'm pretty sure, but like women are more comfortable publicly getting teary, men are just more comfortable blustering out their anger because we've been socialized to believe it's unladylike or bitchy or destructive -- in any case, BAD. Women feel anger just as much as men, but you might not recognize it as readily because it might not show up the same way it does in the men around you. It's there, though.

As I see men being taught to be more comfortable with the authenticity of their feelings, including the weepy ones, I am also glad to see that girls are more and more accepting of their mad ones so that they can be expressed appropriately and constructively, instead of being buried and erosive.

[Elrond]

^ Hmm, I didn't know that girls are taught that. It adds another dimension to the subject.

[Brutha]

And of course, guys talk about emotionally charged stuff aaaaalll the time. In a positive sense: how awesome something is, and how hot a girl is.

Talking about the properties of some object is something different than talking about how that object affects you.

Talking about emotions changes those emotions.

I also don't think that happieness is my prime motivation. It's nice to have and being more happy usually increase your effectiveness but it isn't my end goal.

[Elrond]

Originally Posted by Brutha

Talking about the properties of some object is something different than talking about how that object affects you.

Talking about how awesome, amazing, cool an object or non-object is closely related to describing how it affects you. If I say that I think that Iron Maiden is amazing, then I am talking directly about how it affects me. If I get defensive over it and start to argue with someone who hates Iron Maiden (go take a look at youtube comments), then it is usually because of some need I have to beleive that their music is in some way superior/special. Even if it would be because of some conviction that I really believed that their music is superior, my motivation for trying to prove that they are great would always be because I wanted some pleasurable feeling down the line because of that action. It could even be that I just enjoyed the process of trying to prove the objectivity of it.

Even if you don't go in to great detail: "listening to that music makes me feel a warm and fuzzy sensation in my tummy..." you are still talking about how it affects you.

Originally Posted by Brutha

I also don't think that happieness is my prime motivation. It's nice to have and being more happy usually increase your effectiveness but it isn't my end goal.

Than what is your prime motivator? It may not be your prime motivator in the sense that you use it as some carrot on a stick if that's what you mean, but I think that it is anyones goal - the ultimate, underlying goal. "Happiness" the way I'm talking about it is defined in the OP as:

"... being an umbrella-term for all desireable feelings and emotions."

If you want to be more effective in something it could be because:

1. You want more time to do something else than that.
2. You need to be effective to accomplish everything that is on your timetable.
3. Many more reasons. I don't have the sufficient creativity right now.

Whatever your reason is, I would dare say that the fundamental underlying thing that you want is some kind of pleasure - it doesn't take much introspection regarding to your actions and motivations to be able to figure that one out. It seems abit redundant to state this, because it seems so obvious to me. Maybe it is obvious to everyone else, maybe it's that people lay into statements meanings different than mine.