Manliness VS Sentimental in Men?

[the_bearpelt]

Okay, so I know that, within the last decade or two, being "sentimental" or "in touch with his emotions" has become very popular amongst the women today. Ladies just seem to want guys who are more open with their feelings.
As a fellow female, I've found this to be less than desirable because it's hard to find an emotional/sentimental guy who's still MANLY.
For me, I don't WANT to be the one in the relationship to have to wear the pants. HE has to. I want to be with a guy who will make me feel PROTECTED. (I'm not saying, of course, that he has to be a control freak/chauvanist/etc. You guys know what I mean, right? Do I need to outline this?)

For the ladies reading this, what do you think? If you had to choose, manliness or emotional/sentimental? Do you find it hard to find both in a man?

And for the men reading this, what's your take on it? Think I'm right or what?

 

[spartan231490]

I think that a good man is a bit of both. he should be sentimental with you in private, but he shouldn't be so sentimental that he can't give u the feeling of being protected and desireable. Sound about right ladies?

 

[Eldarion]

A guy can be in touch with his emotions and not be a wimp you know. Emotional maturity doesn't make you weak, it makes it easier to relate to.

I think that the macho dunderheads are the weak ones to be honest. Being afraid of your own heart is stupid.

 

[Julianking93]

Is it really? Because I'm extremely emotional and I've only ever had one girlfriend and she was a fucking ****.

Anywho, I think it's easy for guys to be sensitive yet manly and protective. Just because a guy is sensitive doesn't mean he's a pussy. It's more of an equality thing.

I've always looked at stereotypically manly men as egotistical pigs who treat women like shit. I like the way I am as a sensy. Someone may call me a fag because of it, but I know that I can be just as manly and protective as anyone else when need be yet loving and sensitive when the time calls for it.

So, no, I disagree with your statement.

 

[Emperor Platypus]

Yea I'm what you'd call a (and I quote) "A pussy". Which isn't atractive either from what I gather.
But you know what? I'll change my way's. I'll go out join a sportsclub and become more manly. (input manly flex here).

 

[Dapper Ninja]

I've seen both extremes on the scale, and I think that they're both incredibly annoying and hard to put up with, sooo I guess some point in the middle would be best. Or a bit of both. Or just someone unique enough not to be categorized as either. Or something.

But I'm an asexual male, so I don't exactly have the best first-hand experience with this sort of thing.

 

[ca_jas]

I get the feeling that as women have attained more freedom throughout history and now have more multi-layered personalities/roles (i.e. more than just a mother and housekeeper) they expect men to have as much diversity in their personality as well. Unfortunately I don't think men are as capable of switching mindsets. In other words, a man is either in touch with emotions or not. Being in touch with emotions is being able to be vulnerable which is the opposite of manliness. You have to choose!

 

[spartan231490]

I get the feeling that as women have attained more freedom throughout history and now have more multi-layered personalities/roles (i.e. more than just a mother and housekeeper) they expect men to have as much diversity in their personality as well. Unfortunately I don't think men are as capable of switching mindsets. In other words, a man is either in touch with emotions or not. Being in touch with emotions is being able to be vulnerable which is the opposite of manliness. You have to choose!

They're not opposites. You can be able to be vulnerable, while also being able to hide those vulnerabilities. the trick is knowing who to be vulnerable with, and who to be strong with.

 

[Dango]

Well let's see, in reality I actually am a very, very emotional, sentimental male as well as a very caring one, although I don't really show it cause that's the kinda thing you're constantly called a "******" for, so most people know me as the emotionless skinny kid. And, no I'm not exactly manly, I sure as hell won't start a fight or even fight back if the fight is pointless, but god dammit if I have something to protect I'll fight to the death.

So basically what I'm trying to say is, most guys are a good mix of manly and sentimental, we're just afraid to show it.

 

[Mimssy]

I like a man who can tell me really what he's thinking but will yell at the TV with me while watching football. I want a guy who can express how he feels but still wants me to feel secure physically. It's all about balance. I do like a guy who is emotional though.

 

[ca_jas]

For a girl what does it mean to feel secure then?

 

[Lavi]

Manliness does not exist...

Because last time I checked, if they have a penis, they're a man. Every other quality attributed to the gender is completely arbitrary.

 

[Hazy]

It's good to find a balance. I don't necessarily feel that being expressive with your emotions should automatically deem you "less manly," nor vice-versa, as the "expressive guy" and "confident guy" aren't mutually exclusive.

Being in touch with emotions is being able to be vulnerable which is the opposite of manliness. You have to choose!

I disagree, and for the same reason that I've mentioned above: I don't feel that they are mutually exclusive attributes. I'm a caring, compassionate person, and I don't have any issues with expressing my emotions - though, I'm also not someone who lacks confidence. I believe in myself, and in that regard, I would say I'm at peace with my "inner man."

Strike a happy-medium.

 

[ohgodalex]

Why the fuck do the two have to be mutually exclusive?

 

[Eponet]

I want someone who is, solid I guess.

Someone brave, and willing to stand up for their beliefs. Someone who can manage on their own, and holds the same expectation of us both instead of either dominating or surendering to me. Someone self sufficient who will learn from their mistakes, and be understanding of mine on the condition that I do the same. I want someone who will tell me of their problems, and be willing to accept help; as I would do the same for them.

I want someone honest, and unwavering. The two aren't exculsive.

I guess that's unrealistic though.

 

[angus steak]

I like nibbles' response. How can you use a word like manly when the perception of manliness differs from person to person.

 

[Ultrajoe]

I only ever sleep with manly men like myself.

Sensitive types are gay.

 

[Monkfish Acc.]

A thing a lot of people tend to mix up is sensitivity and wimpiness.
Dudes can be manly and sentimental. The problem is that most people assume to be sensitive, you have to be a whiny little *****.
Let me outline the difference.

Bursting out crying at that scene in Bambi as a grown man, despite having seen it a hundred god damned times, is being a wimp

Crying without shame because a good friend died is being sensitive.

See? Difference.
You don't have to be a pussy to be in touch with your emotions. All you have to do is acknowledge them. Literally, be in touch with them.
It's not really all that hard to understand.

That said, I am a horribly emotionally unhealthy person and would sooner cut off my own balls and eat them than acknowledge that I feel things.
Which I don't.
Obviously.

EDIT:

I only ever sleep with manly men like myself.

Sensitive types are gay.

Wait, fuck, forget everything I said.
Forget everything anyone said.
The thread is over. This guy has fucking got it.
Everyone sleep with Ultrajoe. Hop to it.

 

[MONSTERheart]

Look at your man. Now look at me. Now look at your man. Now back to me.

Sadly, he isn't me. But if he started to act more masculine and less like a pansy, at least he could smell like me.