Good Man vs Bad Boy in Long Term Relationships

11086 Views 346 Replies 53 Participants Last post by BigDaddyNY, 16 d ago

1994

Discussion Starter · 3 mo ago

Question: How do you feel about your wife describing you as a "Good Man" in a LTR? Does it seem a little condescending to you, or is that the goal?

Background: We've been married nearly 30 years with three children, one of whom will soon be married. We're approaching an empty nest soon when the youngest goes off to college. This happens to coincide with me retiring from the military. I wanted to do what I could to facilitate this major transition for us, hence me discovering this site and others like it.

My wife and I are very close, as most military couples who endure long absences often under dangerous conditions often are. I have loved her since our first date (it took her a bit longer) and she loves me. I have no question about that.

Here's my topic. When describing me to others, my wife will typically play up my stability and reliability. Yes, I fix things around the house that are broken, mow the lawn with an almost OCD fervor, attend Church, spend time with my kids doing things we enjoy, check their homework mercilessly and insist they keep their rooms clean. I buy her flowers on all the major holidays and sometimes just because I felt like it. I have never paid a late fee on a bill. I love my puns, and my social media posts vacillate between pictures of my kids and sharing memes that I (and probably only I) find funny. I actually read (mostly) the annual prospectus on my IRA funds. In short, I'm a suburban Dad.

However, I've been successful in an inherently dangerous career, am a former moderately competent fight sport athlete, can lift way more weight than most men my age-and many younger men-at real gyms (I've never had a Planet Fitness membership, thank you). I've run multiple marathons with respectable times, worked my way through college as a bouncer, drove a motorcycle (not for a long time now, though...life insurance is way too expensive at my age) and have more than one tattoo. When I'm pissed, I've been told I can be quite intimidating. Plus, in all due modesty, I really rock a shaved head. In short, under the right circumstances, I'm kind of a badass

So, here's my first-world-problem question: would you rather the person with whom you regularly have sex think of you as a "Good Man" or "Bad Boy?" When she wants to show appreciation, if you must choose, should it be in the form of making your favorite meal or greeting you at the door in nothing but lingerie? When she imagines you, should it be Monkey Wrench or Monkey Sex?

See less See more

Reactions: 2

301 - 320 of 347 Posts

DownByTheRiver

· #301 · 3 mo ago

DownButNotOut said:
This is what I don't understand. Why is asymmetric attraction considered hypocritical?

Men and women don't have the same attraction triggers. Different standards, not double standards.

Is it hypocritical to desire feminine behavior in a partner when you don't exhibit feminine behavior yourself?
Is it hypocritical to want a man who makes $100k/year when you don't earn that much yourself?
It's the same with sexual history. Men and women value it differently when looking for a partner.

A couple of your comments on this thread make me think that you regard all women as gold diggers and without people buying that premise of that cookie cutter idea of women, your theories don't hold together. The gold diggers who prioritize marrying for money are few and far between in my world in my 70 years. And they aren't limited to women.

And to me the flip side of that is that the man who wants to buy a woman has separate but equal issues as the woman who wants to sell herself to a man.

Divinely Favored

· #302 · 3 mo ago

Ragnar Ragnasson said:
So, 5 partners and you after that call them damaged? Not really a thing.

Studies show that after 5, 80% of wives are less satisfied with their marriage. Since women file divorce 8 out of 10 times, after 5 notches, she is 80 % more likely to divorce you and take half your crap and time with your child. To many of us, the "fun only girls" are not worth the risk.

Reactions: 1

Divinely Favored

· #303 · 3 mo ago

Griswold said:
Shiny object Ragnar?

No... SQUIRREL 🐿!!!!

Reactions: 2

Divinely Favored

· #304 · 3 mo ago

Rus47 said:
I don’t understand. 304? Wrong location?

A grandson will be 25 soon. He has dated different girls every 3-4 months since he was junior in HS. About when we think “she is a nice girl” he has dropped her n dating someone else. So 4 a year x 8 years is 32.

He has said numerous times he has no interest in marriage.

Girl with 25-30 bodies?! Hell to the no!!

If that is the kind of girls one is finding, they are looking in "wrong location"

My early 20s I was going to the clubs, I wanted a LTR from the jump. But I was definitely in wrong location to look for LTR material.

Met wife at work and saw her at lake seeing her parents camping. She loathed clubs. Her STBXWH had a band(with groupies). After the women I had come in contact with, I was very fortunate to find a 28 yo hottie with a count of 3. 1 of which was the POS serial cheater HS BF she married at 17 and was in divorce process with.

Ragnar Ragnasson

· #305 · 3 mo ago

Divinely Favored said:
Studies show that after 5, 80% of wives are less satisfied with their marriage. Since women file divorce 8 out of 10 times, after 5 notches, she is 80 % more likely to divorce you and take half your crap and time with your child. To many of us, the "fun only girls" are not worth the risk.

That could be true. Or flawed studies. I don't know that personally is true or is not true so I'm just rolling with well, different strokes ...

I've also observed depending on why and who does (any) study, human foibles being what they are and why the study was done, many studies reflect fair .....and some are tilted by different known and unknown factors ...

I say that to say this.... any study involving sex traits of humans..... it's almost impossible to say everyone was truthful in any responses.

I think both sides have equally valid points.
I lean towards the point that any person male or female has countering issues, later in life the FOMO and wonder what it would be like to have sex with (not my spouse). Not a sure thing, but as equal or more of a concern even. Just my opinion.

1994

Discussion Starter · #306 · 3 mo ago

Divinely Favored said:
Studies show that after 5, 80% of wives are less satisfied with their marriage. Since women file divorce 8 out of 10 times, after 5 notches, she is 80 % more likely to divorce you and take half your crap and time with your child. To many of us, the "fun only girls" are not worth the risk.

How would you define "partner"? Do you mean long-term partners, say 3 months or more? For the physical part, without being too graphic, is it full-on penetration, or does a heavy makeout session count?

DownButNotOut

· #307 · 3 mo ago

DownByTheRiver said:
A couple of your comments on this thread make me think that you regard all women as gold diggers and without people buying that premise of that cookie cutter idea of women, your theories don't hold together. The gold diggers who prioritize marrying for money are few and far between in my world in my 70 years. And they aren't limited to women.

And to me the flip side of that is that the man who wants to buy a woman has separate but equal issues as the woman who wants to sell herself to a man.

What a warped world view.

Nowhere in this thread did I ever even imply that all women are gold diggers. In fact, my only comment in this thread that even refers to money is: "Is it hypocritical to want a man who makes $100k/year when you don't earn that much yourself?"

From that you infer that all women are gold diggers?

I would encourage young women to vet their potential partners on two questions before even considering sleeping with him: "Would he be a good husband?" and "Would he be a good father?". Integral to both is his ability to provide for his family. A woman will often spend years out of the workforce during early childhood years. She needs the assurance that her husband will be a steady reliable provider during those years while she is home nurturing their infants and toddlers. That isn't gold digging. That is understanding familial roles and responsibilities.

Gold digging is a finesse. Gold digging is extracting a man's resources under false pretenses.

See less See more

Reactions: 4

Ragnar Ragnasson

· #308 · 3 mo ago

Rus47 said:
I don’t understand. 304? Wrong location?

A grandson will be 25 soon. He has dated different girls every 3-4 months since he was junior in HS. About when we think “she is a nice girl” he has dropped her n dating someone else. So 4 a year x 8 years is 32.

He has said numerous times he has no interest in marriage.

And this is a prime, happy, good example. One expects this normal grandson to date. Surely is fine, and normal, sounds like a good young man.

Yet time moves on. Numbers increase, so what. And certainly no one has a valid reason to judge the girls negatively. Because most guys sleep with....you guessed it. ....women!

Reactions: 1

Ragnar Ragnasson

· #309 · 3 mo ago

DownButNotOut said:
What a warped world view.

Nowhere in this thread did I ever even imply that all women are gold diggers. In fact, my only comment in this thread that even refers to money is: "Is it hypocritical to want a man who makes $100k/year when you don't earn that much yourself?"

From that you infer that all women are gold diggers?

I would encourage young women to vet their potential partners on two questions before even considering sleeping with him: "Would he be a good husband?" and "Would he be a good father?". Integral to both is his ability to provide for his family. A woman will often spend years out of the workforce during early childhood years. She needs the assurance that her husband will be a steady reliable provider during those years while she is home nurturing their infants and toddlers. That isn't gold digging. That is understanding familial roles and responsibilities.

Gold digging is a finesse. Gold digging is extracting a man's resources under false pretenses.

Did you mean to quote yourself?

Rus47

· #310 · 3 mo ago

DownButNotOut said:
A woman will often spend years out of the workforce during early childhood years.

I will only say that while that may have been the norm decades ago, at least among our younger female relatives and acquaintances it is no longer the norm. ALL of them went back to work when leave was up. Some are single mothers, most are married. NONE of them are SAHM and many make more money than their husbands do.

Families these days depend on two incomes fir the lifestyles they live.

Ragnar Ragnasson

· #311 · 3 mo ago

Divinely Favored said:
No... SQUIRREL 🐿!!!!

Hey, it could have been. The squirrels in my back yard sometimes lay out on overhead line splice cases and nap, they're so well treated here.

But this time I had a moment of well, maybe a quickie with the W before work ......

But another cup of coffee won out. Too cold this morning. 🙂

DownButNotOut

· #312 · 3 mo ago

Ragnar Ragnasson said:
Did you mean to quote yourself?

Common confusion. DBTR and DBNO.

Reactions: 2

DownButNotOut

· #313 · 3 mo ago

Rus47 said:
I will only say that while that may have been the norm decades ago, at least among our younger female relatives and acquaintances it is no longer the norm. ALL of them went back to work when leave was up. Some are single mothers, most are married. NONE of them are SAHM and many make more money than their husbands do.

Families these days depend on two incomes fir the lifestyles they live.

For the first child, possibly. That is if you are ok with warehousing your infant with strangers 9 hours/day, dealing with weather closings, pumping breastmilk, etc.

But that circles back around to the fact that my advice is for the young man on a high powered career track. The type of career that affords the possibility of a single income lifestyle.

Out of curiosity, how many of those young women would love to spend more time with their babies if it were an option for them? I mean if they were being honest with themselves?

Reactions: 1

ConanHub

· #314 · 3 mo ago

Griswold said:
Shiny object Ragnar?

Frankly, i did not consider (consciously) for one moment whether my wife was good wife material or a good mother material. I lit up a like a firecracker when I met her and that was that. It took 6+ years for the darned thing to actually "go off," but I was perfectly willing to jump in without thought of her wifely qualities.

On the virgin front, I was one for way longer than I wanted, and i know I tried not to be one. Just had no takers. I was not going to hold it against young women who succeeded where I failed (though let's face it that's a low bar. As Oldshirt implied earlier...Mother Theresa could have had 5 dates a week if she really wanted). But sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. If as a guy you are seeking a virgin, you'd better be one. Otherwise it's flaming hypocrisy.

I was the opposite. I wanted the "one" from the start, was disillusioned that love was real, passed on most women trying to shoot their shot, didn't really care about losing my virginity (way too young BTW) and didn't really give anyone a chance until running across my Mrs.

I use to think similarly about men , who had a promiscuous history, wanting a woman with a less promiscuous history.

I've been persuaded, by both men and women, that not having a particular attribute you desire in a mate isn't unrealistic or necessarily hypocritical.

A man with a high body count just has to have the attributes a woman with a lower body count desires.

Another example is fitness levels.

I could be considered pretty fit physically. A woman that wanted me as her partner might think she had to be near my fitness level but it isn't so for this barbarian.

I have a wide range of attraction and a bigger lady or a bit of a skinny one has a shot with me.

See less See more

Griswold

· #315 · 3 mo ago

DownbutNotOut - we share some similar views. i agree with you that there are distinct "on average" gender differences in how we approach mating. I think there is plenty of data to support that (and DownbytheRiver - to be clear - because these differences appear "in the big," it's wrong to assume that every guy or gal will display a particular trait just because that trait shows up "on average.")

Seems to me though that your asymmetrical approach to virginity assumes that it's a gender difference that lower sexual experience matters to men (on average). i.e. that men prefer virgins. If' I read the studies by Buss et al correctly (and maybe I did not!), that's not something men really care much about. No evidence. Now...infidelity? Whew the evidence is just overwhelming that men care fanatically about if their mate has has sex with another rman. In most countries, in most cultures. That is huge. Virginity? Not so much.

I do think it is not irrational for a guy to be concerned with a woman with a really high body count - based on the the clear linkage to higher risk of infidelity. But as LisaD. pointed out, that's still a generalization. It may not apply to your particular potential gal. But you'd have some basis for that asymmetrical view. If your count were high too, I'd still have a vague feeling of hypocrisy, but less.

See less See more

Divinely Favored

· #316 · 3 mo ago

1994 said:
How would you define "partner"? Do you mean long-term partners, say 3 months or more? For the physical part, without being too graphic, is it full-on penetration, or does a heavy makeout session count?

I think their criteria was sex, whether oral or PIV.

Reactions: 1

1994

Discussion Starter · #317 · 3 mo ago

Divinely Favored said:
I think their criteria was sex, whether oral or PIV.

What about what constitutes a "partner"? Does a one-time hookup count?

BigDaddyNY

· #318 · 3 mo ago

1994 said:
What about what constitutes a "partner"? Does a one-time hookup count?

In those studies it is straight "body count". Just how many different people have you have sex with.

Reactions: 1

1994

Discussion Starter · #319 · 3 mo ago

Thanks, all. Just wanted to make sure we were all understanding the terminology the same way.

Divinely Favored

· #320 · 3 mo ago

1994 said:
What about what constitutes a "partner"? Does a one-time hookup count?

Yes that is a sex partner.

Reactions: 1

301 - 320 of 347 Posts