Explosive New Study: Women Want “Benevolent Sexism” in Men

I am so sick of studies on “what women want” or “what men want”.

The premise of such a study is that men and women want fundamentally different things. How true is that? What scientific basis is there for taking this for granted, and then developing all future research on an unchecked, unchallenged point?

Nevertheless, read the following:

A new study conducted by scientists in the U.K. shows some pretty saucy findings on the topic of women’s attraction to men.

According to the study, women are more attracted to men who demonstrate “benevolent sexism” in relationships than those who do not.

The Daily Mail reported the following:

Benevolent means well-meaning or kind, and experts define the sexism as men who, for example, think women are more delicate or should be cherished or looked after by a man.

This is different to hostile sexism in which women are degraded, such as saying a woman’s place is in the kitchen…

…The researchers’ tests found women are more attracted to men who have benevolent sexist attitudes or actions than they are to men who treat them as equals or don’t give them special treatment.

This really blows a hole in the whole equality-in-dating movement doesn’t it?

It sounds like the study’s findings basically say: Women want men who are strong, but who are also sensitive.

How is this news? And why will it be explosive?

Because it flies in the face of feminist claims that women don’t need a man at all.

What’s the meaning of the term “need”? Do you need a romantic connection to survive? The same way you need food and water? No, you don’t. Plenty of widowed, divorced or otherwise single people survive just fine. And some of the unhappiest, loneliest people I have encountered are married.

But make no mistake: romantic connection does make a difference. Having a stable, long-term partner enables you to feel visible in a way that you are not to anyone else. It makes you feel loved, special and — in a sense — taken care of. What’s so bad about that — for women or men?

Going back to Freud, psychology has noted the importance of abandonment as a theme in human life, from childhood into adulthood. It’s important to remember that both girls and boys — men and women — loathe abandonment like the plague. It’s a universal phenomenon, and it’s not gender-specific.

Reciprocity is a characteristic of any healthy relationship. Reciprocity does not mean equal in every respect. It’s fine for a man to be stronger at some things, and for a woman to be better at others. Men and women are individuals, and talents, stengths and weaknesses are all individual traits.

It’s likewise fine if those qualities are conventional or unconventional. A man can be the breadwinner, or the woman might make more money than the man. In more cases a man will probably know how to diagnose a problem with the car, but if the woman is better, who cares? As long as the differences are not objectively self-defeating or self-destructive, and serve the rational needs of each partner involved in the relationship, what does it matter?

None of it has anything to do with politics, feminism, or any of that crap.

Unfortunately, politics poisons everything it touches. That’s why a study suggesting that women want men who are “benevolent sexists” will lead to expressions of outrage from the perpetually offended and enraged.

So what else is new?

The rest of us should live our lives, make objective and rational observations and forget what the outraged think. Especially in our personal love lives.

Follow Dr. Hurd on Facebook. Search under “Michael Hurd” (Rehoboth Beach DE). Get up-to-the-minute postings, recommended articles and links, and engage in back-and-forth discussion with Dr. Hurd on topics of interest. Also follow Dr. Hurd on Twitter at @MichaelJHurd1, and see “Michael Hurd” on MeWe.