Maam, you missed the point of what "career women" means, in this context. It is contained in quotes and intended to be metaphorical. The point was not to draw attention to the quantity of women in careers, but to draw attention to the notion of a "career woman", with specific attributes, to be defined later in the following paragraphs.

You did however, get the point about fading looks. The point here is that a "career women" should not try to compete at home. Especially, considering their looks are fading, and... you guessed it, the chances of a man "trading up" is increasing.

In the next paragraph, unfortunately, you did miss the point on "the fundemental truth". Most men AND women, will agree in this post and outside of this post that men don't want a woman to compete with them at home. Who wants that? Man or Woman? It's unattractive, especially coming from a woman.

You may not know any man who will admit to not wanting a woman to compete with him, in a relationship, with your feministic gun pointed at him, but deep inside all men know they don't want a woman to come home and compete with them at home. They want a wife or girlfriend, not a boss.

You last sentence was the most telling.

"But, then again, what can I know? I'm a 'career woman' who's way past the age for 'faded looks'. I hate war & like John Mayer. Wait a minute, now I know why I can't get a date! Thanks for the enlightenment."

You'd like to think you're being facitious, but you know deep down it's true.

An accurate tally will indicate that more people agree than disagree.

I like the biblical refrence.

I think you may be seeing where I'm coming from. Men totally respect your career, your hard work, independence, and love your girly girl side. We just don't want you to come home and try to "one up" us. We don't want to compete with you at home. A relatioinship is not about showing up the guy your with, it's about a partnership. And in that partnership, no one is a doormat.

It takes a lot of understanding to realize that men can completely respect a woman's position and success, but they don't want her to come home and throw it in their face.

Unfortuntely, but not surprizing, you missed a key point of the arguement. The point is that men respect women who have careers and are successful. However, in a relationship, a man does not want a woman to come home and compete with him, in the relationship.

If a woman wants to come home and compete with a man (i.e. tell him that she doesn't need him, or how well she's doing, or in general compete), it seems her only point in dating a man is to dominate him. Men do not find that attractive, quite the opposite.

Probably only those with a constructive point to make... :)

I updated my previous post to include more details. Initally, I had proposed that wearing a suit is somewhat manly. Other manly traits could be: having all male friends, playing poker with the guys, swearing like a sailor, etc.

It's unfortuate that most people weigh in without understanding the point of the discussion, or the premise of the arguement.

Most men and women, if you read all of this post, agree with the premise.

There will always be disagreements in any discussion.

Nothing about this discussion suggests that women should not pursue careers. The only related arguement is that career minded women, who competes fiercely against men in the office, should not try to compete with a man at home.

The point was completely missed here, as it was you who brought up muscles.

My comment was about gender traits and the differences between men and women physically. However, it was not a value judgement. Had the post been read in more thouroughly and taken in context, it would be appearant that this was not a value judgement - just an observation and a response to a comment that men and women were equal.

You were also off topic in thinking that these posts have anything to do with women spending time trying to be attractive to men. The point here was that it is unattractive for a woman to be manly.

Based on the above, it seems that if there is a reading comprension issue here, it must be on your part. In all cases, you ignored the basic premise of this discussion and turned it to your personal topic of choice: men vs. women. Sorry to hear you feel it's such a battle.

One thing that you are consistent in, however, and unfortunatly, is abuse. It's readily appearant that without anything sustantive to say, your only retort is to be abusive to either the topic or the writer.

Best to you, Maam

But... would you want to date one of those 1200lb projectile ladies?? Come on...


I'm talking about here is a woman that is a walking playbook. Usually wears a baseball cap, jeans, etc. There's nothing feminine about this type of girl, and maybe you might want to have sex with her, but that's it. A girl more into sports than you are is not someone you want around the house.

Imagine the time she invites all of her guy pals over to watch the superbowl, while you <insert hobby here>. All that high fiveing and sports talk.... I can't see you hanging with that

Deana,

I think you got most of it, but might have missed some of the point...

Men will definately admire and respect how hard you work, and will love to see your feminine side.

The only thing we don't find attractive - and I think you were getting to this - is if you come home a try to compete with us at home, by telling us how much more successful you are, or how much more money you make, etc. Men like to feel in charge at home, like we are the provider, even if we're not. It's something we are hard wired to feel, biologically.

The point is, if more career minded women understood this, they could try not compete with us and home, and have a more sucessful relationship.

Men, of course, need to respect, take care of, and treat the woman they are with right, and understand that women also have needs that men may not feel comfortable supporting, like buying flowers or remembering birthday's etc. We can't expect women to understand our need to not compete at home, without understanding their needs.

Kid. Of course not. The point is that men, in general, do not find a woman attractive if she watches Sports Center every night, knows the entire Dallas Cowboy roster back and forth, knows the entire NBA playbook, etc. There's nothing wrong with enjoying an occasional game together, but men just don't find it attractive for a woman to be non-feminine 24/7. If that's the case, we may a well be dating Ellen Degeneress.

This is completely off topic.

There was never any claim made that success or competetion were manly qualities.

It's strange to agree with a point, by re-stating it, and then call it weak. Appearently, you agree that men are more physically strong than women. OK... but you missed the point. Everything else you said is off topic.

However, you've once again missed the point. This post is not about men vs. women, who's stronger, whos' weaker, etc.

This post has a narrow focus, which I will repeat again for everyone who still hasn't heard it:

1.) Men do not find career minded women, who bring their competetion with men, home with them, and attempt to complete at home, attractive.
2.) Men do not find women who are excessively into manly things attractive.

Please try adding something to conversation that is on topic, instead a personal men vs. women rant.

Appologies, if the last post was too long to be fully read, in the available time. Had it been read, the answers sought would have been found.

Going back and looking at the thread will yield a great deal of support for this premise by both men and women equally. This is hardly the thoughts of one person, most will agree that men do think this way, and to acheive suceess in a relationship, a career minded women should not try to compete with a man at home.

Personal attacks and abuse seem to be only counter arguement available.

You're making some good points, but you missed the mark a little.

There's nothing wrong with a woman working hard, and it certainly makes you a strong person for doing so. No one would deny you the respect you deserve for working hard.

The point of the arguement is that if you had a job where you were in competetion with men all day, company politics, the stock exchange, anything... a man is not going to find it attractive if you come home and compete with him. (i.e. tell him how much better your job is than his, compare your work to his, talk about how much more money you are making than him) Men don't find that attractive.

Men, also, in general, don't find a girl that is into sports more than most men, attractive. There's nothing wrong with watching the occasional big games together. However, sometimes women get into sports, to obtain entry into the world of men, and really know too much about sports to be feminine. It's unattractive, in excess.

Being personal and abusive doesn't disprove this premise. It only shows that some people do not have a counter arguement to make, and can only express a difference of opinion with hate.

If this post is perceived negatively, there's no need post here.

The small portion of this emotional come back that unfortunately misses the mark is related to a man's ability to "take the heat".

This post is NOT about taking the heat or about men and women competing in the work place.

This post is about career minded women not bringing their competetion with men home. Men do not find it atractive for a woman to compete with them at home. Nor, do men find it attractive for a woman to show off her manly qualities.

There's a whole section in this post related to notion of how this post is not about turning back the clock (i.e. attempting to put women back in the same mold as they were in the USA, in the 50's). You might refer to that before making the same arguement again.

If gender traits are irrelevant, then why are men: consistently beating women at most sports, assigned to the most dangerous combat missions, and work laborer jobs in larger percentages? We are different. Biologically. Both physically and psycologically.

The point of this discussion is NOT to ask women to leave their behaviors at the door. They should feel free to act like a man, drink like man, watch sports like a man, belch like a man, etc. And, they should also feel free to dominate a man at home, tell him about how they can provide for themselves, or how much more successful they are than him, in other words, compete with him. However, if women choose to engage in this behavior realize that men do no find this attractive, and it will utimately lead to conflict.

The point is: Men do not want to compete with a woman at home. It's not attractive. A man can respect a woman, talk to her about her day, etc, but if she choses to compete with him, it will only lead to conflict.

Men admire the advances women have made both professionally, financially, and socially, but they do not want to be reminded that a woman makes more money than them, or has a better position that them, when they are in a relationship.

Men are hard wired by nature, as providers and do not like to compete, in a relationship, with a women.

This notion applies to any nation where the provider gender role has been blurred by attempts to equalize rights between men and womrn.

It would be helpful to hear more constructive critism of this arguement - other than to call it names.

It would be nice to hear any counter thoughts you may have.

Many women think of this post as a challenge, and that's where they miss the point. This post is not a challenge to say that men are better than women. The point of this post is to argue that women who take their desire to compete against a man at work, home with them, invariably leads to conflict. Men do not find it desirable to compete with a woman at home.