The Art Of Being A Man

[proseandpassion]

How about be yourself and forget this noise.

 

Can I get a "how to be a woman" list, please? I am sure it includes some meme about making sandwiches and being passive and a beauty object to all eyeballs who happen to glance my way.

 

It's well written and I am sure was done with good intentions, but masculinity and femininity are conditioned states of being that really mean nothing.

[MrCastle]

 

It's well written and I am sure was done with good intentions, but masculinity and femininity are conditioned states of being that really mean nothing.

 

Disagree. Women want masculine men. Men want feminine women. We're wired differently and look for different traits in each other to compliment us.

[Pierre]

How about be yourself and forget this noise.

 

Can I get a "how to be a woman" list, please? I am sure it includes some meme about making sandwiches and being passive and a beauty object to all eyeballs who happen to glance my way.

 

It's well written and I am sure was done with good intentions, but masculinity and femininity are conditioned states of being that really mean nothing.

 

Advocates of gay lesbian parents adoption state that a man can provide motherly function and that a female can provide the manly component of fatherhood.

[MrCastle]

Mr. Castle, there is something missing from your piece for me. While some of it is good and I like the fact that you are trying to reach out to the idea of masculinity, a lot of it seems rather selfishly based.

 

Such as your take on being dominant. I think being a man means being able to have the strength to vocalize when you don’t know something. But having the resolve and determination to figure it out. Especially if you have to work with another person to do it. Saying “I don’t know”, isn’t a weakness. It’s only a weakness when that person doesn’t want to do anything about it. But a man not having all the answers and admitting that is far more attractive then one that pretends he knows everything because he thinks he needs to create this unrealistic shield.[/Quote]

 

Fair enough. This reminds me of that old comedy bit about men not asking for directions and whatnot. I can see where you're coming from though.

 

You touch on the element of sexuality. I am not sure that a man being vocal about his sexual “needs” is what makes a man a man. I agree a man is sexual and should be proud of who he is. But your comments make it sound more like men are sociopaths looking to dominate through sheer force of their sexual needs first, then his mastery of sex by “playing” a woman like a symphony. I don’t think this sounds healthy at all. Is that man more worried about his own ego or her pleasure? Which is it?

 

I think a man is someone that owns his sexuality. That recognizes the responsibility he holds to his own sexuality. He is someone that isn’t just looking to play women like a symphony to prove his mastery to himself or to her and feel good about himself through how many orgasm his partner has, but he is looking to create something special between him and a woman. He isn’t just centered around the physical pleasure but the deeper things that come from sex too. [/Quote]

 

I'm sorry you took that part of the post as being selfish, but it's not. I'm more a giver than receiver when it comes to the bedroom. I want to please a woman like she's never been pleased before; is it in part to make myself feel good? Sure. But I don't see what the problem is with that, she's getting pleased, and I get pleasure in knowing I was the one to please her.

 

Some of your “Be a Mystery/Challenge” is good and some of it isn’t.

 

The good stuff:A man is hard to pin down. He’s not sitting at home, flipping out because you didn’t answer his text message. He’s out doing stuff. Having fun, celebrating life, experiencing different things.

 

The bad stuff:

 

He will not follow you around like a lap dog, throwing one compliment after another at you. He’s not going to like all your Facebook pictures and leave silly comments to try and get your attention. A man can take you or leave you. If you prove to be a high quality lady, he’ll be more than happy to show you a good time. But a man will not be your little ego booster. He respects himself too much for that.

 

While I agree a man shouldn’t follow a woman around, your approach is so harsh. It’s kind of like “in your face ladies, you have to prove YOURSELF to him while he’s doing his own thing.”

 

Also, what do you mean by “good time”. While women like fun, most ladies aren’t overly impressed with simply a “good time”. And what is wrong with giving a woman a sincere compliment? I don’t think he should be giving them ALL the time. But if he likes something, why shouldn’t he say it?[/Quote]

 

I'm not all that interested in discussing my stance on this. If you're overly nice you will get eaten alive, that's all I'm saying. What I mean by a "good time" is going on nice dates and sharing a chemistry.

 

 

You moved on to Be/Classy/Have Style: I liked what you had to say about “swag”. “Swag is for children. Class is for men.” But then you talked about what a man wears. I could care less about what a man wears. I want to hear about “classy” in the sense of who he is and how he conducts himself.

While a nice suit, is nice. What’s the goal here? To just get women to “fawn” all over him? That doesn’t sound classy.[/Quote]

 

Again, you're looking too much into this. When you dress nice, you feel good, and women also enjoy it. Simple as that. It's not about alterior motives or hidden agendas. Dress nice, feel good. Simple stuff.

 

Next you addressed: Be Passionate/Be Interesting. You talked about how a man has goals and dreams outside of getting laid. Then you said that he makes himself interesting so women will come to him. Which is it? Do men have goals and dreams outside of getting laid or do men have goals and dreams only to get women? You see the confusion here yes?[/Quote]

 

Be interesting, have passions in your life, and women will naturally gravitate to you. You don't do it for that reason, but it is an added benefit.

 

Be Funny/Charming was your next part. While I agree that a witty/funny guy is interesting to both men an women, your whole article sounds like men “winning” and “getting what they want”, which apparently is sex and female interest.[/Quote]

 

Then you've either misinterpreted what I wrote, or I wasn't clear enough in my OP. Or both.

 

I absoluetely LOVED your last part though. Have A Code.

 

Thanks.

[lino]

Is there an 'art of being a woman' too? Or is simply breathing and living enough.. The page - long description applies to blokes only I guess.

 

 

As opposed to what... the art of being nothing in particular???

 

I was wondering that myself.

[MrCastle]

Is there an 'art of being a woman' too? Or is simply breathing and living enough..

 

I know nothing about being a woman so this is probably the wrong thread for that.

[MrCastle]

As opposed to what... the art of being nothing in particular???

 

No, as stated before I don't think all you need to do to become a man is age from boyhood years. There are traits that I find fit the mold of a "man" and traits which I find not so manly.

 

I think there is an artform in being both sexes. I don't think once a guy loses his virginity he's a "man", and I don't think a girl in her 20's is a "woman" just because she is no longer a teenaged girl. There are mature adults who possess masculine (for men) traits and feminine (for women) traits that make you a man or a woman in my opinion.

 

I don't look at a girl my age (24) and say well yeah, she's in her 20's, so she's a woman. No. She very well could still be in high school mode, playing games with men and overall being immature. I wouldn't consider a woman. Etc etc

[proseandpassion]

I've noticed this too. You can find lists on how to be a man for a dime a dozen, yet seldom find any lists on how to be a feminine woman past how to do your makeup.

 

Fact is , both genders have fallen from grace and hard, the disappointment women feel in fearful, low self-esteem, asexual, immature and incompetent men is the same disappointment I've felt in modern women (for different reasons). But don't say it too loud, pointing out the latter gets branded "misogyny" .

 

I think you missed the point of my earlier post entirely. I am not saying these traits of Western masculinity are false. I am just saying they are entirely constructed and engrained in our social development, and they are not "natural" per se. We would never know without some sort of controlled environment. It's just pointless to try and nail down. Gender is a nebulous and multi-faceted subject. I'd actually be interested in reading your guide to femininity, misogyny and all.

[USMCHokie]

Be a Mystery/Challenge: A man is hard to pin down. He’s not sitting at home, flipping out because you didn’t answer his text message. He’s out doing stuff. Having fun, celebrating life, experiencing different things. He will not follow you around like a lap dog, throwing one compliment after another at you. He’s not going to like all your Facebook pictures and leave silly comments to try and get your attention. A man can take you or leave you. If you prove to be a high quality lady, he’ll be more than happy to show you a good time. But a man will not be your little ego booster. He respects himself too much for that.

 

I absolutely HATE HATE HATE the whole "challenge/mystery" terminology... The basic idea is that a man should have a life outside of the relationship so that he has something to bring into the relationship. An extremely valid point. I just hate the terms "mystery" and "challenge" as propagated by the PUA industry. Are you trying to hide your life from women...or perhaps make their life more difficult?

 

All this promotes is artificial bullsh*t that people without their own life outside of dating will do to make women think they have a life... So instead of actually going out with friends or doing something life-enriching on your own during the week or weekend, you make up some bullsh*t nonsense to feed to the girl while you sit at home and watch porn...? Or you purposely don't call for a week while you sit at home and watch porn...? Seriously...? WTF...

[MrCastle]

I absolutely HATE HATE HATE the whole "challenge/mystery" terminology... The basic idea is that a man should have a life outside of the relationship so that he has something to bring into the relationship. An extremely valid point. I just hate the terms "mystery" and "challenge" as propagated by the PUA industry. Are you trying to hide your life from women...or perhaps make their life more difficult?

 

All this promotes is artificial bullsh*t that people without their own life outside of dating will do to make women think they have a life... So instead of actually going out with friends or doing something life-enriching on your own during the week or weekend, you make up some bullsh*t nonsense to feed to the girl while you sit at home and watch porn...? Or you purposely don't call for a week while you sit at home and watch porn...? Seriously...? WTF...

 

You don't have to fake it. Just don't always be so available for people. That shouldn't be a big deal if you actually have stuff going on in your life, but tell you what, the next target you find, when she asks what you're up to, say "nothing much", when she texts you, always respond within 10 minutes of her texts, and then let me know how that works out for you

[USMCHokie]

You don't have to fake it. Just don't always be so available for people. That shouldn't be a big deal if you actually have stuff going on in your life, but tell you what, the next target you find, when she asks what you're up to, say "nothing much", when she texts you, always respond within 10 minutes of her texts, and then let me know how that works out for you

 

It's working out fine at the moment, actually.

 

I strongly believe that if she is "turned off" by your "availability," then chances are strong that she's not that into you to begin with. My recommendation wouldn't be to be more of a challenge/mystery, but improve yourself to be a more of a viable candidate for dating.

[MrCastle]

Hokie, another thing:

 

I do what's (within my personal code of ethics) necessary to survive in the dating world.

 

Could you, conceivably, find a woman who accepts you for who you are? Totally unhinged, and vulnerable, accepting of your flaws and shortcomings? Yes. I mean a fairytale ending is never promised, certainly, but in theory, you could continue holding out for that special someone, and they may come.

 

But in short term dating? I'm sorry. There are social games both genders play, either knowingly or unknowingly. If you want to have short term success and date around, you have to recognize these games, and how to handle them.

 

You have to make a decision. Are you going to play by your own rules, be your own person, and hope to find a girl who is into that? Or are you going to follow mainstream society dating techniques in order to increase your dating success. You can't do both.

 

I don't think we can argue the fact that being less available makes you more desirable in most people's eyes. It is what it is. I'm not suggesting you fabricate your entire life and become someone you're not. I'm saying that you should be able to know when to maintain contact, and when to realize you're overdoing it and smothering the other person. That's it.

 

I'm very much into the rules and not the exception to the rules. There's a reason why they're called exceptions. They rarely happen. I'm looking to maximize my dating success, at least for now, since I'm not looking to settle down. I have to play by the rules in order to improve my success.

Edited August 10, 2012 by MrCastle

[USMCHokie]

I do what's (within my personal code of ethics) necessary to survive in the dating world.

 

I totally understand and respect your views on dating as well as respect the way you go about presenting those views here on LS. My views simply come from an apathetic perspective built from years of "failure." I've always felt that I shouldn't go out of my way for a girl who wasn't going to go out of her way (especially for someone like me), and I was content with whatever result would occur, even if that meant not dating.

[MrCastle]

I totally understand and respect your views on dating as well as respect the way you go about presenting those views here on LS. My views simply come from an apathetic perspective built from years of "failure." I've always felt that I shouldn't go out of my way for a girl who wasn't going to go out of her way (especially for someone like me), and I was content with whatever result would occur, even if that meant not dating.

 

Well I haven't reached that point of apathy yet, so my views are different.

 

Also, to give you a better idea of what I'm speaking about specifically...

 

If I text a girl, and she doesn't respond back for 2 hours, and I respond back to her text within 5 minutes, to me, that's sending the wrong message. To me that's saying "I have no life, I will respond back to you quickly no matter what time of day you text me and no matter how long you make me wait for your response, I'll be here"

 

That's just my personal view. I don't want her to think that she can take all kinds of time to reply to me, and no matter what, the most she'll have to wait for me is 5-10 minutes. That is not happening. It's unacceptable in my book. Again, I'm just going by my experience, my beliefs, and what has worked/hasn't worked in the past.

[USMCHokie]

If I text a girl, and she routinely doesn't respond back for 2 hours...

 

To me, that's her saying, "I either don't have the time, interest, or common courtesy to respond in a timely manner, OR I have no redeeming qualities whatsoever and must resort to childish nonsense in order to make you want me."

 

That's just my personal view. I don't want her to think that she can take all kinds of time to reply to me, and no matter what, the most she'll have to wait for me is 5-10 minutes. That is not happening. It's unacceptable in my book. Again, I'm just going by my experience, my beliefs, and what has worked/hasn't worked in the past.

 

Exactly. She would quickly stop getting texts from me altogether.

[Emilia]

I totally understand and respect your views on dating as well as respect the way you go about presenting those views here on LS. My views simply come from an apathetic perspective built from years of "failure." I've always felt that I shouldn't go out of my way for a girl who wasn't going to go out of her way (especially for someone like me), and I was content with whatever result would occur, even if that meant not dating.

 

Is it apathetic? Not sure that's the right word. I agree with you by the way but the way I see it: 'this is who I am, I show you my life and how I live and my approach from day one, you either like it or you move on'.

 

The mystery/unavailable thing is about insecurity and for most people with slightly more life experience (beyond mid 20s for an arbitrary cut off) it's obvious. I know when I meet men who have had long term relationships because they play fewer games than those that haven't.

 

Whatever your style is, own it and you will find the person you are compatible with. Play little games and you end up wasting each other's time and become more bitter in the process.

 

Apathetic? I don't think so. Forthright? Definitely. Is that for everyone? No. Is it for me? Yes, definitely.

[USMCHokie]

Is it apathetic? Not sure that's the right word. I agree with you by the way but the way I see it: 'this is who I am, I show you my life and how I live and my approach from day one, you either like it or you move on'.

 

Well, the word apathy came to mind in terms of how much I care about whether someone leaves because I don't offer enough "games"...but I agree with you on all points.

[MrCastle]

All things considered so far, I must say it's interesting to see how individual/personal the belief of manhood really is. I thought it was a more universal concept, apparently not. Interesting views so far in this thread.

[Eternal Sunshine]

You don't have to fake it. Just don't always be so available for people. That shouldn't be a big deal if you actually have stuff going on in your life, but tell you what, the next target you find, when she asks what you're up to, say "nothing much", when she texts you, always respond within 10 minutes of her texts, and then let me know how that works out for you

 

This is a big turn on for me actually and makes me feel more connected.

 

The less connected I feel, the more I am inclined to look for other options.

[Bristolius]

Your list didn't include anything about sleeping. Sleeping isn't very manly, with the warm blankets and the soft cushions, and lying there all sprawled out with your mouth open. Real men don't want to get caught doing that.

[counterman]

I share many of the thoughts on the art of being a man from the original post and it makes me think how few men I know that meet any of those points. I'm not quite there yet and I recognise some points in my life I can work on, for example, having more going on for me in terms of hobbies and experiencing different things. I use to express opinions different to those I truly believed just to agree with girls and try to get them to like me. That was definitely not the right way to go and now I am strong with my views and my ethics that I don't budge even if people close to be disagree.

 

Reading the OP also makes me appreciate how far I've come and I'm very proud to say that I have improved immensely as a person and, more specifically, as a man. I am more dominant, more decisive and definitely showing more leadership, whereas before I use to be a 'follower'. Also, a man doesn't need to put others down to prop himself up. I say this because I witness constantly the 'boys' around me who rag on each other in front of each other and behind their backs due to their own insecurities and then call themselves 'alpha-males' because they feel a sense of superiority after putting other people down.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

Is there an 'art of being a woman' too? Or is simply breathing and living enough.. The page - long description applies to blokes only I guess.

 

 

 

 

I was wondering that myself.

 

Mr. Castle wrote something he wanted to write about. About being a man. Are you really offended because he didn't write something about being a woman? Come on.

[Disenchantedly Yours]

Fair enough. This reminds me of that old comedy bit about men not asking for directions and whatnot. I can see where you're coming from though.

 

Yeah, like that. My Dad was someone who could rarely admit when he didn’t know something. It made him very difficult to live with sometimes and it made him unbendable to my Mom. That didn’t make their relationship better. It strained it. It’s hard to be with someone that pretends they know everything and are not open to you being a part of the choices and decisions. So to me, a “real” man is someone that is strong enough to realize that the things he doesn’t know doesn’t make him a lesser man.

 

 

I'm sorry you took that part of the post as being selfish, but it's not. I'm more a giver than receiver when it comes to the bedroom. I want to please a woman like she's never been pleased before; is it in part to make myself feel good? Sure. But I don't see what the problem is with that, she's getting pleased, and I get pleasure in knowing I was the one to please her.

 

This is a little tricky and complicated. It’s great that you enjoy the pleasure a woman gets from sex with you. But I sometimes find this tricky line where the pleasure is less about her and more about his ego. So many men tie their masculinity into the end result, the orgasm. And they tie it not because she experienced real pleasure but because *HE* gave it to her. I’m not sure that’s a great thing. It’s certainly great when your partner cares about your pleasure, but sometimes guys put undo strain on their partners to orgasm that it’s not really even about her but about her feeding his ego. which is why women are prone to faking orgasms sometimes because too many men do tie it into their ego. It’s a question each individual man has to really dig in deep and ask himself. Does he enjoy it so much because he gets a high and an ego stroke from making her orgasm or does he really want to put her pleasure first? Or it could be a combination of the two. But when his ego overrides everything else, it’s not a good thing.

 

 

I'm not all that interested in discussing my stance on this. If you're overly nice you will get eaten alive, that's all I'm saying. What I mean by a "good time" is going on nice dates and sharing a chemistry.

 

Well you asked for opinions. I agree that being overly nice isn’t a good idea. For men OR women. But you don’t need to go overly harsh either. You’re missing a bit of balance. Maybe you could explain “good times” instead of leaving it up to interpretation?

 

Again, you're looking too much into this. When you dress nice, you feel good, and women also enjoy it. Simple as that. It's not about alterior motives or hidden agendas. Dress nice, feel good. Simple stuff.

 

But that is not the message I got from your writing. And there was someone else that agreed with me so maybe that’s not the message they got either. Again, you asked for opinions Mr.Castle.

 

Be interesting, have passions in your life, and women will naturally gravitate to you. You don't do it for that reason, but it is an added benefit

 

How about just saying, "Have passions in your life, and women will naturally gravitate to you." And leaving out the part about the "added benefit". The "added benefit" makes it sound like you are still trying to collect women on your arm.

 

I think you just need to soften things down a tiny bit on some parts. Some of it comes off a little harsh and “in your face, this is what a man is whether you like it or not.” But you have many good ideas and a really good premise.

[Els]

Someone with integrity who always chooses to do the right thing.

Someone who is respectful of others.

Someone who is confident in himself and enjoys being the person he is.

Someone who is kind to everyone, including animals, kids, and those he disagrees with.

Someone who takes responsibility for his own life, his own choices, and his own mistakes.

Someone who is open to personal growth and expanding horizons.

 

Yep, all this is essential to me. Most of the stuff in the OP, on the other hand, I can take or leave, personally. Reasonable levels of confidence, sexuality, etc, would be needed, of course, but they aren't what defines a man to me. The most confident, sexual, mysterious men could also really be boys underneath the macho facade, who do yellow-bellied, cowardly things such as cheat, lie, mislead, abandon in times of trouble, put himself above his family, etc. The sort of man that pteromom mentioned would not do that.

[Pierre]

All things considered so far, I must say it's interesting to see how individual/personal the belief of manhood really is. I thought it was a more universal concept, apparently not. Interesting views so far in this thread.

 

You become a man in childhood. Whatever you do as a grown man to become a MAN is an act, not the real thing.