Why we love them
I could never understand why successful, independent, beautiful and intelligent young women could get attracted to men who're the complete opposite of them.
Your average corporate queen, the one who takes home a five-figure salary and drive her own Honda Accord, living and sleeping in a house of her own, would be willing to take in the average fresh-out-of-school kid who's barely out of his mother's apron-strings.
Its like the demi moore-ashton kutcher fiasco. Not that Ashton Kutcher is less successful than Demi Moore, but I've always believed that Moore was better off single, than mothering her partner.
There's two types of women, in general. The one who wants to be pampered, fussed over like a kid. The type who likes to be spoiled by her man.
And there's the other type. The type who's the mothering kind, who likes to pamper and fuss over her belongings… who likes to spoil her man.
I know I'm the first. I don't understand why anyone would want to be the second type. I'd rather be single than have a man live off me. Because I'm equally capable, I want nothing less.
December 15th, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Perhaps she likes to retain a sense of power, knowing that he knows he won’t get similar treatments from the women he fuss over instead.
He might like her because she reminds him of his mum, for all we care.
December 15th, 2006 at 4:33 pm
Thanks, but I would rather be neither. With one you end up being a spoiled brattish shrew who thinks they can do no wrong (not referring to anyone in particular *ahem*) and with BOTH you end up with a ball-less man.
Equality, mutual respect and appreciation. You should try it sometime.
December 15th, 2006 at 4:40 pm
I’d rather have an equal…oklah maybe 80% equal, 20% spoil me silly. Still got a bit of balance what :p
December 15th, 2006 at 4:43 pm
Because some women just love being in control ALL the time. What better way than having someone have to depend on and worship you because you are successful, independent, beautiful and intelligent? lol… I’d rather be spoilt silly
yah lah that’s what I want too. unfortunately no lah, the world is cruel so i’ll have to be content with being a half-and-half. but i wanna be spoilt silly, totally. better still if i don’t have to work at all!
December 15th, 2006 at 5:17 pm
Hi, just happen to read your blog. Very interesting. Can i have your email?
my e-mail is on the blog. look for it lah.
December 15th, 2006 at 8:20 pm
Maybe you forget that there are women out there that would love to dominate over their men just as there are men out there that don’t mind being dominated over by their women. It’s just the role reversal that’s broken this traditional mindset that women have to be pampered by their man.
A lot of women I know especially in foreign countries have proven to be more dominant over the men and its difficult sometimes because men with traditional mindset find this troubling.
Personally I don’t mind the dominant female. I have been living with one for a while now and it’s a comfortable balance between who’s more successful and who has the right to pamper the other. It’s just a different mindset we were raised in and while I guess you may not understand, there are others who do.
December 15th, 2006 at 8:58 pm
that’s how love works.
you can’t always plan for who you fall for.
and, what if (touch wood) the independent man you fall for should have some mishap befall him and leave him disabled? i doubt many, even the ultraindependent women who want independent men, would leave their partners but rather, be more than willing to assume the breadwinner/caretaker role. that’s how love works.
always believed that while you can choose your actions, you can’t choose your feelings.
December 15th, 2006 at 9:28 pm
its strange how we easily assume that women like that want to be domineering even in relationships. i think it could be another reason too - that the age of a woman who falls for a younger man could speak for it… that good men her age are all taken, and she just wants someone to love her. settling, almost, for a younger man - or whatever comes her way. economics also just happen to be that way because he’s younger. & who says a younger man can’t pamper an older woman? =P
besides, i don’t think ashton kutcher needs demi’s money anyway.
December 15th, 2006 at 10:14 pm
An Average corporate queen earns five figure salary? LOL.
“equally capable, I want nothing less” yet “wants to be pampered, fussed over like a kid”, but dislike women who fuss over others. Wah, one heck of a contradiction!
December 15th, 2006 at 10:49 pm
Always choose the one who loves you more than you love them..
December 16th, 2006 at 10:39 am
Always choose the one who loves you more than you love them..
December 17th, 2006 at 8:01 pm
Thats because successful woman want to have a partner that listen to her and obey…no question ask…
December 18th, 2006 at 10:37 am
“The one who wants to be pampered, fussed over like a kid.”
… here’s my take on the situation.
Some corporate queens… have come to be because they know when the see a good deal. They make good business decisions. Some young stallions require some guidance and feeding as they are fresh from mother’s apron-strings… BUT… they are in it for the longer term. They are betting on a horse with lots of potential.
So Mini… you are right to say… women want to be pampered. These corporate queens are merely investing in their young stallion before he peaks… in career, confidence, personality… and as a alpha-male corporate king!
December 18th, 2006 at 2:06 pm
Hey, I’m a lawyer and even I wouldn’t mind a sugar mommy. It would be nice to work short hours.
December 18th, 2006 at 4:43 pm
Can
t find ur email..
December 18th, 2006 at 5:22 pm
Hm…I’m a bit confused with your thoughts on this…
You find it OK for a woman to be pampered, fussed over like a kid and spoiled by her man.
But you find it uncomfortable with a man being in the same situation - just that the role has been reversed.
Personally, that just doesn’t sound right.
“I’d rather be single than have a man live off me. Because I’m equally capable, I want nothing less.”
Not trying to twist your words, but based on what you have written, I ask, why would a capable, intelligent and handsome man wants a woman living off him - he would be better off single, no?
Correct me if I’m wrong. But the impression I’m getting is that you are feeling uncomfortable with the role-reversal because you feel that women should be the one to be pampered, fussed over and spoiled and that men should normally (if not always) be the one providing it.
Being pampered and fussed over are not rights…merely privileges…Does sex matter? Does age?
Btw, I think the Demi Moore - Ashton Kutcher example is not so suitable. Both are successful and yet despite the age difference, both found something from each other. Kutcher, being young and active, could be what Moore needs in her life. I just can’t see someone older than her keeping up with her active lifestyle. And Kutcher might be looking for that mature (maybe motherly like) woman - with the experience and all that comes with it.
December 18th, 2006 at 6:56 pm
Rez, i think you think too much into what Minishorts has written
How about i rephrase the question that you posed to Minishort: Do you feel comfortable that your women are the one who provide for your family instead of you? You as the man of the family, waiting at home, for your wife to bring back money for the family?
It is about role and responsibility here
December 18th, 2006 at 11:18 pm
I guess successful women spend so much of their mental energy trying to earn money and power, that they have nothing left to compromise with equally successful men. So instead of compromising, they rather have someone “weaker”.
December 21st, 2006 at 9:26 am
I think it is the power thing, society has evolved to the point that women can be powerful in the boardroom, they are allowed to be “take charge, no bullshit” types…is it surprising that they then want this to translate to the bedroom?
I think the good thing is that there are two types of women…because there are two types of men as well, and those odds just increase the chances of meeting someone right for you.
December 21st, 2006 at 12:10 pm
if i was the rich corporate queen, i dun even take my own phone call any more, so how can lower level guys gonna kau me since he cannot even get in touch wif me? the only way a guy can kau me if i was rich corporate queen will be if he was same level as me or higher coz its the only possible way to socialise wif me am i rite?
and if my subordinate wanna kau me, he is gonna think twice whether his kauing gonna insult me also as his boss, am i rite? if he make wrong move, he might get sacked also…lolz
December 21st, 2006 at 3:40 pm
Jo,
“Do you feel comfortable that your women are the one who provide for your family instead of you? You as the man of the family, waiting at home, for your wife to bring back money for the family?”
Hm…perhaps I didn’t write well enough to get my points across. Will do better next time.
Anyway, assuming that the questions are for me, my answer would be a Yes. With the same situation that a woman waits for her man at home and not working, I see nothing wrong with a man doing the same, unless ego comes into the equation.
Personally, I would like to work, unless I become a house-husband or something. But it’s a personal choice, not some sort of gender responsibility.
Something wrong with the roles-reversed? Would it make me somewhat a “lesser man”? That was why I asked: Does gender (sex) matter? And it wasn’t some rhetorical question either.
December 21st, 2006 at 6:23 pm
definitely you guys analyze too much lah. i just blog in the spur of the moment and you guys start to think and scrutinize between the words? too free izzit?
heh.
December 21st, 2006 at 7:08 pm
Yeah so free can drive Honda Accord. The old model is semi-auto, really syok to drive if got nothing to do.
December 22nd, 2006 at 8:06 pm
i just want a companion. maybe not exactly an equal - i would still want to be kinda looked after - but someone to walk WITH me. i don’t like the idea of being pampered and there is no way i want a man whom i have to mother, but i would like a friend.
January 6th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
people … all ur theories are wrong. they just happened to FALL in LOVE! have u heard of that? sheesh…