Thread: Girls & Guys

Originally Posted by Chimpertainment

Not every culture in history was like ours. Not every culture in history had men chasing tail.

Evidence plz

Originally Posted by Chimpertainment

The chase would be irrelevant if we didn't base our judgements entirely on looks. We are not in the jungle anymore. Evolutionary factors are more than physiological traits. Get over it...

difficult to not judge someone based entirely on looks when you've never seen them before.

So, I have to say that I over-reacted in the tone of my posts. It doesnt make for a good representation of my thoughts. Now that we know that lemme say a couple reasonable things...

Many cultures have entirely different forms of courting. When you see that word, I mean seeking partnership of any kind, even if it only lasts 5 minutes. In the modern world, there has been a general meshing of international cultures into a different kind of culture. Then there are people within each country that make up sub cultures. Each of these groups have varies ways of going about getting together.
Most cultures in our world consider males as superior and all behaviors follow that basic assumption. There is plenty of evidence of Patriarchy and it effects every level of cultures within its powers. The same goes for a Matriarchy of which Bonobo Apes are a good example. Chimpanzees are a good example of Patriarchy. They also form militarized squads and cannabalize their own kind. While Bonobos having the benefit of being isolated from other great Apes have formed a peaceful group culture. A lot of it has to do with resources but it is also about who makes the decisions about resources.

As far as the chase. Our society deems outer, external analysis to determine sexual viability. That is an evolutionary advantage. Societies that are either Patriarchal or Matriarchal lead to two different perspectives. The male oriented perspective leads to an external bias while the female perspective leads to an internal bias. Most writers like to use the words masculine and feminine because you can find these qualities in either sex.
What I am saying is that a certain perspective is necessary to have certain rituals of courtship. Ours happens to be domination of the feminine qualities. Whether you are a weak man for crying, or a butch woman for having short hair. They are biases that are based on an unbalanced perspective.
A balanced perspective is one of partnership. Wherein both masculine and feminine voices are heard. Look at the gender inequality of government, and ever level of culture. Its pretty easy to see.

This issue presses on my mind a lot and I do agree. But it's more complicated and I have many thoughts on it, more than I can get around to.

It is getting better already. It seems that every year, society becomes a little less sexist. Women are considered more and more equal to men. And I'm glad for that.

The fact that women are viewed as inferior, perhaps only on a subconscious level, makes it difficult though. Something I've realized is that people are a lot more sexist than they think, even women themselves. Sexism is usually thought of as assigning the 'good' tasks to men and the 'bad' ones to women, claiming that women aren't able to do those 'good' tasks because they lack some positive quality. But what a lot of people don't realize is that they're actually defining the 'better' tasks by those that men tend to do for whatever reason, whether because they're naturally good at it, happen to enjoy it, or it's just expected of them culturally. For example, knitting, cleaning, cooking, and being a nurse are typically considered women's tasks. These are also considered to be inferior tasks. Why? Because women tend to do them, perhaps even for evolutionary reasons. If you think about the tasks themselves, there is nothing wrong with them. It's not like women are only good at shoveling shit or something; there is nothing wrong with these tasks. What is the reason that cooking is considered lowly in modern society yet barbecuing is considered something to be proud of? It's because men, for whatever reason, tend to barbecue more often than women. The point I'm getting at is, it's not that women are expected to do the terrible tasks and that needs to change, which is what most people think. It's that people judge the tasks that women do to be terrible, because they're already sexist and think that anything women do almost solely must be inferior.

Even I fall for this a lot, even after realizing the real problem, I cannot help but think of these womanly tasks as inferior. Perhaps it is even natural to do so. I really don't know. I hate sports, but I feel as though I'm inferior for hating them, because the liking of sports is a manly thing and to prove that I'm not inferior like most women are I need to like sports. When someone asks me about sports and I tell them I don't like them, I feel inferior. This type of thing bothers me a lot. When someone makes a joke about women, I automatically desire to prove to that person that I'm not like that, that I don't fit that stereotype and am different somehow from those other women. The whole thing is just frustrating, and I wish sexism didn't exist at all.

That took a while to write. I have a lot more to say on this but maybe later or another day, because I've just spent the last 2.5 hours on DV.

I'd back you up...but you still never told me what wine you drink.

Yes I did, the very same day. Yellowtail red wine usually, not because it's that great but it's good for how cheap it is. And I was heartbroken that you never replied back.

When I last replied to this thread I - for some reason - thought the whole second page was a different thread and the first post on the second page was the OP.

There seems to be an essential misunderstanding here. Some people are pissed because other people are admitting that the reason for patriarchy, men chasing women, etc. is evolution, because it's expected, etc. These people are whining about that type of response because for some reason they think it's implied that it's okay. But that is not at all what we're saying. We're only pointing out the causes of it happening now, and are saying nothing about it being a good thing. I don't think there's been a single post on this thread asserting that this is the way it should be, yet those invisible posts are what some people are responding to.

Don't give into fallacies. Just because something is natural or expected by society so doesn't make it good.

And don't deny a fact just because you don't like it. Males are dominant in most species. Yeah, there have been some matriarchal human cultures, but not many. But that doesn't mean we can't overcome it.

Originally Posted by Dianeva

Yes I did, the very same day. Yellowtail red wine usually, not because it's that great but it's good for how cheap it is. And I was heartbroken that you never replied back.

I'm pretty sure I was absolutely stone wasted when I wrote that....lets see. 4am post that I don't remember whatsoever. Yup.

Originally Posted by Dianeva

Don't give into fallacies. Just because something is natural or expected by society so doesn't make it good.

And don't deny a fact just because you don't like it. Males are dominant in most species. Yeah, there have been some matriarchal human cultures, but not many. But that doesn't mean we can't overcome it.

It is how it is because that's the way it is. Guys finding women who are ovulating more attractive...pheromones all that jazz. No matter how many time I go out and "chase after women" (quoting myself) the only ones who are going to say yes are those who are attracted to me in the first place. You know...I probably wouldn't mind a situation where random girls came up to me...bought me free drinks all night...paid for dates and wanted sex. Hell I bet in Bizzaro world Norua is complaining about that on the rant rave complain board right now.

The thing I'm getting at is people can blame it on a culture or tradition media or whatever, but everyone always can make a conscious decision to do whatever the hell they want to. I've sat there and waited for girls to come up to me before, and usually they end up talking to be because they had the misconception that I'm the typical black guy who listens to rap music smokes/sells weed and is good in bed. They're surprised when they find out I listen to toytronica, knows more rock songs than they do, goes to college, and leaves before finding out I'm great in bed.


PS Norua: If you've found out multidimensional travel, lets trade places for Christmas break. I'm sure you just want to be alone for the holidays.

All I have to say is that I'm glad there's a guy like Chimp who's just as pissed off at all this as I am. It seems like people aren't skeptical enough of what they've been taught is true by society (well this is clearly evident by religion, but I digress). What I really get tired of is everybody just shrugging with complacency and slapping an overly simplistic "evolutionary psychology" label on everything from courting to why women should stay in the kitchen and pump out babies. I'm glad I didn't have to be the first one here to mention anything about culture, instead of just "nature". If it was all nature, we wouldn't need to try so hard to force all boys and girls into a very extreme, black and white and sometimes ridiculously arbitrary (hair length, dress code, makeup, earrings etc) gender binary of "men" and "women". That's patriarchy, not reality.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

All I have to say is that I'm glad there's a guy like Chimp who's just as pissed off at all this as I am. It seems like people aren't skeptical enough of what they've been taught is true by society (well this is clearly evident by religion, but I digress). What I really get tired of is everybody just shrugging with complacency and slapping an overly simplistic "evolutionary psychology" label on everything from courting to why women should stay in the kitchen and pump out babies. I'm glad I didn't have to be the first one here to mention anything about culture, instead of just "nature". If it was all nature, we wouldn't need to try so hard to force all boys and girls into a very extreme, black and white and sometimes ridiculously arbitrary (hair length, dress code, makeup, earrings etc) gender binary of "men" and "women". That's patriarchy, not reality.

So you're saying you don't enjoy someone opening the door for you...paying for the date...asking you out. Then if you do happen to "pump out a baby" you can get them for money no matter what for 18 years of their lives (yes...even with dual custody you can still make him pay). I never said that this is how it works because it's supposed to work that way, but I do know it works that way because it has been. I don't want to turn this into a religious thing, but what I do believe is this. I can teach my child whatever I believe in, and whenever they get old enough to formulate their own opinions they can. Even though I believe in God, I'm not going to be that person who looks down on their child because of what they believe in, how they decide to dress or whatever. God gave every person a free will to choose their own path.....so what gives me the right to take that away from them? Now I will say "wow...wtf did you just do?" Because I'm an honest person.

Now back to the "nature" crap. When's the last time you asked someone out? When's the last time you paid for everything? How did it go? If you're still single after all that jazz....hit me up....I'm looking for someone who would be willing to do all of that. I know how to cook and clean. Oh wait....I'm asking you out...sorry for being so aggressive....I'll just sit back and complain about being single until i get off my ass and do something about it.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

All I have to say is that I'm glad there's a guy like Chimp who's just as pissed off at all this as I am. It seems like people aren't skeptical enough of what they've been taught is true by society (well this is clearly evident by religion, but I digress). What I really get tired of is everybody just shrugging with complacency and slapping an overly simplistic "evolutionary psychology" label on everything from courting to why women should stay in the kitchen and pump out babies. I'm glad I didn't have to be the first one here to mention anything about culture, instead of just "nature". If it was all nature, we wouldn't need to try so hard to force all boys and girls into a very extreme, black and white and sometimes ridiculously arbitrary (hair length, dress code, makeup, earrings etc) gender binary of "men" and "women". That's patriarchy, not reality.

I agree it's cultural and not evolutionary per se, but patriarchy? Are you fucking kidding me? Think of all the things you just mentioned. Dress code, hair length, makeup, jewelery. Who's got the leeway in that regard? Women. I'm not saying patriarchy isn't part of society but women can do anything men can do today. And men aren't allowed to do most anything formerly allotted for women.

Women like to get chased, and that's not patriarchy. That's nature. Women have the choice now, if it turned them on to go after guys they would. They do. They go after guys a lot. Just not in the same way, because they want to leave openings for the guy to show some masculine characteristics. Men are mostly turned on by the way the woman looks, but women are turned on by the way the man behaves, so they're obviously not going to be as forward as men are, the sex just isn't as good that way. And that's straight hormones. Culture doesn't have shit to do with that.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

If it was all nature, we wouldn't need to try so hard to force all boys and girls into a very extreme, black and white and sometimes ridiculously arbitrary (hair length, dress code, makeup, earrings etc) gender binary of "men" and "women". That's patriarchy, not reality.

Originally Posted by Original Poster

I agree it's cultural and not evolutionary per se, but patriarchy? Are you fucking kidding me? Think of all the things you just mentioned. Dress code, hair length, makeup, jewelery. Who's got the leeway in that regard? Women.

I agree that itself isn't patriarchy. I believe the patriarchy part is that men are considered superior in the first place, for whatever reason. Think of the insult in calling someone a 'pussy' and other names that reference females and imply that they are weak-willed. The reason men decline to wear dresses isn't because they aren't allowed to due to sexism against men. It isn't socially acceptable because wearing dresses is considered girly, which is synonymous with weak, stupid, being a bad decision maker, submissiveness and countless other negative things associated with women. So looking at it like this I agree with Deery.

And then there are things like cooking and cleaning which aren't negative at all, but people view them to be because women often do them and so those things are associated with weakness, etc. My problem is that this isn't being recognized as the problem. Instead, people just believe that things like cooking and being emotional and liking ponies are degrading on their own, and women are urged not to partake in them. But I think this just ends up making people even more sexist. Instead of telling women that they're equal to men, it's like they're being told that they're inferior to men and so they need to try to become more like men.

I just want to make a few rambling points about the nature/nurture distinction, in particular the notion that patriarchy is the product of culture and not our biology. This is of course a very tricky question to answer (like many other contentious issues in the social sciences, many hypothesis are not testable) and an even more tricky question is that if patriarchy is biologically reinforced does that justify it? The latter is more of a philosophical question than a testable scientific one because science is in the business of explaining "is' " not justifying "oughts".

Anywho, humans being a subset of mammals and primates have a tendency to be social organisms and like mammals and especially primates we also have a tendency to organize ourselves in very particular social patterns. Now since the 70's there has been quite a bit of research conducted on phylogenetic analysis of primate social structures (in particular Old World Monkeys) and has yielding some fairly interesting results since then. What was found was that patterns in social organization have been conserved throughout many lineages despite variations in the primates ecology. While Great Apes have subtly different social organization patterns they are still conserved throughout many lineages despite ecology. The question is what implications does this have on human social organization?

Now we have a closer phylogenetic relationship to apes than old world monkeys but their social structures are still valid models of early human social organization and we can observe that due to the sexual dimorphism in early hominins, they were polygynous much like many other old world monkeys. With all this being said, primate social structures persist throughout many successive generations despite variations in ecology implying that their is a biological imperative at work here not the clothes of culture.

So does this justify patriarchy? Absolutely not. For example humans have a biological tendency to be xenophobic and we can arrive at a pretty good post-hoc explanation on the selective advantages being wary of strangers and members of outgroups could bring to an organism. This is a contentious issue in its own right (I almost didnt bring it up for that reason but I thought it would make a great analogy) but in a sense yes, xenophobia is culturally reinforced but it also has biological origins and selective advantages yet this does not justify xenophobia. As Dianeva said "But that doesn't mean we can't overcome it." which is very true; we are not biologically determined to be suspicious, racists assholes and when our ecology changed, this type of attitude towards outgroups has become obsolete and we as a global society have made some considerable progress in achieving social justice for all races and sexes. Now that last sentence might raise a few objections but we have to realize that our current society is more egalitarian than any other previous society, yes social injustice is still prevalent (I'm not denying that) but we have taken some considerable steps toward progress that I think we can all reach a consensus (but this is also another issue entirely).

Now early hominins for the most part organized themselves in polygamous family groups but modern humans dont organize ourselves that way anymore (well except for mormons) so the social roles allotted to women in those particular social contexts are now obsolete. Now humans are not biologically determined but we are not blank slates either, social roles might have been reinforced by our biology and culture throughout the hominin lineage but that does not mean that we cannot carve out a new path that allows for the flourishing of both sexes.

I agree with Chimp that not a lot of the evolutionary based arguments are questionable. We can't blame human behavior on instincts that were suitable for tens of thousands of years ago. Look at condoms. They fly in the face in everything evolution drives us to do. They serve only to stop the propagation of our genes yet most people slip one on most of the time. I disagree that society is patriarchal right now though. The power imbalance has been fixed, but the values/culture reminiscent of the male-dominated times still permeates our society.

Originally Posted by Auron

Now back to the "nature" crap. When's the last time you asked someone out? When's the last time you paid for everything? How did it go? If you're still single after all that jazz....hit me up....I'm looking for someone who would be willing to do all of that. I know how to cook and clean. Oh wait....I'm asking you out...sorry for being so aggressive....I'll just sit back and complain about being single until i get off my ass and do something about it.

Okay, clearly you are a very bitter, biased guy (no minority for sure) who thinks that I or any woman don't already do those things. Yes, I have paid for food on dates, even FOUGHT to pay on dates sometimes, when the guy admitted he hoped to step in and pay for me next time. 90% of the time I ever attempted dating, I asked the guys out, and once in a while some would ask me out. And yes, I'm single now. Your guilt-placing, misogynistic assumptions run rampant through almost everything you say, expecting me to get intimidated, back down and admit that women should just put up and shut up. And no, I'm not thankful for any "special rights" given to women, as if they're that great or that they somehow make up for general suppression or oppression. I also would like men to not be constricted to idiotic male roles and be able to do whatever they want as well.

PS, I've started reading a book called Sex and Gender: The Human Experience out of my interest in this subject, and happened upon some interesting quotes that reminded me of this thread.

The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie - deliberate, contrived and dishonest - but the myth - persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.

~John F. Kennedy

Also, this one I particularly agree with.

Until psychologists begin respecting evidence and until they begin looking at the social contexts within which people move, psychology will have nothing to say of substance to offer in this task of discovery. I do not know what immutable differences exist between men and women apart from differences in their genitals; perhaps there are some other unchangeable differences; probably there are a number of irrelevant differences. But it is clear that until social expectations for men and women are equal, until we provide equal respect for both men and women, our answers to this question will simply reflect our prejudices.

~Naomi Weisstein

Originally Posted by VictoReverie

I agree with Chimp that not a lot of the evolutionary based arguments are questionable. We can't blame human behavior on instincts that were suitable for tens of thousands of years ago. Look at condoms. They fly in the face in everything evolution drives us to do. They serve only to stop the propagation of our genes yet most people slip one on most of the time. I disagree that society is patriarchal right now though. The power imbalance has been fixed, but the values/culture reminiscent of the male-dominated times still permeates our society.

Um, no. Not so far, although I agree with your other points. We've had no female presidents, and the vast majority of politicians in government are still male. Even in the media, whenever it's not labeled a "chick flick" or "chick TV" full of stereotypes for women (and that ONLY women can watch and relate to), we suffer from token female syndrome, or token "hot female" syndrome especially. The media not only reflects but perpetuates the old system, as it does to our perceptions of gender. And just look at what the GOP is peddling for president and vice president. "Rape is just another means of conception", eh Paul Ryan? This is who got this far in our political system, so no. There has been good progress made, but to me we still live in mainly a patriarchy. And we are not any more post-feminist than we are post-racial.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

Okay, clearly you are a very bitter, biased guy (no minority for sure) who thinks that I or any woman don't already do those things

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

Your guilt-placing, misogynistic assumptions run rampant through almost everything you say

You know what......you're absolutely right, and I apologize for the things I said. There was a time when I would bend over backwards for a woman only to get my heart broken, and after so many times I became bitter. That bitterness has clouded my judgement on women for so many years and has turned me into my own worst enemy. You've helped me understand that I need to stop letting the past ruin my future. And I thank you for that.

*Mentally marks down Auron as one of the 0.0001% or so of people who are willing to admit when they're wrong.*

I used to be bitter. But I just had to learn more about women. They are actually very easy to have sex with once you figure them out. I've also had to learn to let go. Even when everything is perfect and intimate, you still need to let her go. Especially then. That's when it's hardest because you have no reason to let her go.

Why? Two reasons:

1. Women don't want to risk rejection, and
2. Women don't want to risk losing value in the man's eyes.

Let's talk about Reason #2 first, because it's simpler.

Men value softer, more passive women more highly. This isn't a universal truth, and it isn't even true for me. But for the vast, vast, vast majority of men out there, they want soft women. Women softer than them, anyway.

Women know this. They know, at an instinctive, intuitive level, that men value women more highly that they have to approach and chase and do the work with.

This is due to investment: the more invested in a woman a man is, the more highly he's going to tend to value her. And women want men who are highly invested.

I feel like I'm saying, "We'll come back to this in a minute," a lot in this post, but -- well, we'll come back to why women want highly invested men in a minute.

Back to Reason #1. Men are afraid of rejection too, you might say -- so why don't women just approach men as much as men approach women? Why shouldn't both genders share an equal load of that fear of rejection?

Well, I'll tell you why -- it's because rejection for women is worse. Much worse.

When your role in the dating game is to be pursued -- you are the object of desire -- and then you pursue instead, and get rejected -- wow. Ouch. The object of desire being told she isn't desired.

Rejection hurts like hell for women. Much more so than it does for men. That's why you see so few women approaching.

Even if a girl is crazy about a guy, she's not likely to approach him, unless she's among that minority of women that could give a rat's ass about rejection, about keeping face, about what her friends think, and about maintaining her reputation.

Aside from that [small percentage] of confident women who either don't care about reputation management or else are so damn good at it and so overwhelmingly charismatic that they can do whatever they want and people still love them, the fear of rejection is crippling to women.

For that reason, most women will not approach unless they're absolutely certain it's a sure thing.

Read more: Understanding Women: It's Not as Hard as You Think | Girls Chase

I did a quick Google search regarding the OP's question a few days ago and came across this article, but I forgot to post it. Anyway, I think that little excerpt sums it up quite well.
-----
That sites worth a visit or two btw, there's a lot of (surprisingly) interesting stuff on there. It's one of those dating advice blogs but even if your not into that, the articles on there offer rather interesting takes and observations regarding social skills/expectations/situations.

^Seems like the likely reason. And I like that site. Usually some site that's labeled "Understnading Women" I'd expect to be filled with derogatory remarks about how they think strangely and illogically or something, for it to be explaining exactly where their senses of reason fail so that you can try to think like them or something. But it isn't like that and actually explains things and is true it seems for the most part.

nd to top it all off, most women don't even understand themselves. They can explain some of the simpler things they do, but if you start asking them why they (or other women) do the more complicated things they do, you get answers that are full of holes. They sound good on an pure emotional level, but take a moment to analyze the logic and you'll realize it doesn't hold water.

Read more: http://www.girlschase.com/content/un...#ixzz29QdLLf7h

To promote myself for a bit, I don't think I'm one of those women who don't understand themselves. I'm pretty introspective and can explain exactly why I reacted a certain way to anything in detail. In fact I pretty much always do this analysis after experiencing anything I haven't before, because if I don't it doesn't feel right. Most of it makes sense, but if there's ever a part that doesn't make sense, like I realize I'm angry at someone who didn't really do anything wrong, that anger will go away and I'll try to stop myself from doing anything similar in the future. I understand that most women aren't like this, and neither are men, but I wish they were. Being upset in any way feels terrible, and I feel bad for people who simply let themselves feel bad when their anger is irrational.

Usually in those cases described the reason women think they're angry isn't the actual reason, as it says in the article. I believe that emotion is always justified. However, failing to understand its cause properly can result in misdirected anger, etc. that only makes you feel worse and hurts whoever you're angry at. For example, saying 'no' when you mean 'yes', or vice versa, I haven't read his reason yet but can personally judge what I think the reason is by examining what's going on in my mind when I do this.

For example (made up scenario), let's say I've had a terrible day and I know that my significant other knows this. I'm miserable and he wants to have sex, and I say I don't really feel like it. If he asks one more time I'll feel guilty for depriving him of sex, so saying 'no' is difficult because it would make me feel like a bitch. So I'll say something like 'I don't know' or 'if you really want to', hoping that he'll get the clue that I don't want to but am still looking out for his needs, and he'll tell me it's okay and we don't have to. My real significant other is nice and intelligent enough to understand this type of thing, and even if he didn't, due to proper communication I'd explain it and everything would be fine. But let's say the guy has no idea what's going on and is an idiot, is extremely horny and simply thinks "oh well she says 'if you want to' and I want to so let's do it!" I'd never be with someone like that, but if I were and that happened, I might get upset and even angry. But, the thing is, it wouldn't actually be anger. It would be masked sadness at the fact that we think so differently he doesn't even understand, and I might wonder why I'm even with him. Or at the possibility that he does understand but just doesn't care about me. Those are big issues which are actually important, and I think that's why most women would get mad in a situation like that which, without analysis at all, is just a huge mess. Since the women themselves often don't even understand what's going on in their heads, even they think they are mad and can't explain why. Then the man thinks the woman is just insane and a bitch, which is what she was trying to avoid in the first place, and then she gets even more upset. That's why communication in relationships is so important.

And that scenario is unrealistic for me, but is the type of thing I might have done before developing proper communication and I'm pretty sure it's the type of thing many women do. I probably wouldn't even get to the 'if you really want to' part and would just tell him I don't want to but that it isn't his fault and I'm sorry I don't feel like it or something. Sorry I ranted on a bit here, I didn't plan for this post to be long at all and most of it is an edit. That always seems to happen.

Originally Posted by Auron

You know what......you're absolutely right, and I apologize for the things I said. There was a time when I would bend over backwards for a woman only to get my heart broken, and after so many times I became bitter. That bitterness has clouded my judgement on women for so many years and has turned me into my own worst enemy. You've helped me understand that I need to stop letting the past ruin my future. And I thank you for that.

Wow. I'm flattered that I helped in some way. I thought my tone would launch another flame war, so I was confused by you liking my post. You're welcome, and thanks.

This video is my input on the subject (skip to 2:51 if you don't have the patience to watch majestic mountain lion jumping)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hNieUVFylY

^That was really cute.

I was actually the one who spent an entire month giving my current boyfriend little presents (chocolate, mostly) and coming up with ingenious ways to "bump into him" before finally asking him out on a date. Am I an alien?

I'd like to note that I am a guy (even though I feel my inner self is SERIOUSLY female, no joke) and my girlfriend (who is more akin to a male) and I had an interesting first few months. She knew I was female inside and would buy me pretty things like bracelets and rings and even got me flowers once. But society was overbearing, and when I was forced to get a job with manual-labor at a steel-manufacturing plant, I shoved my female deep inside my head. I write the notes, and I give the gifts and whatnot now. She isn't sweet anymore to me, like she used to be.

I hate society with it's expectations. =3=] I know it sounds strange and maybe this is the wrong place to put this: but I still really wish I could wear pretty dresses and have pretty hair. And since I know females better than most males do, I can say, it's just a mindset.
Females or female minds- they just want to be protected and loved and desired. They want to feel safe and secure.
There shouldn't be any heavy expectations like there IS, but there IS a deep underlying psychology to it that you can't just throw out the window.
Submission and Dominance. Dominant types do the chasing in most cases.