Do men ever actually crave romance?

[mark_j]

There was a time, in my youth, when one could say that I attempted the whole romance thing. Of course I don't know if this fits into the definition of "romance" but I thought it was apropos at the time.

Long story short, I was dating a woman with whom I was having a fairly serious relationship in my early 20's. Other than some minor dating (which mostly consisted of going to a few parties in late HS and early Uni) I didn't really have a clue as to what I was doing. Needless to say, I would have been considered a late bloomer. So I did what I knew.

Things like:

Dropping off a single rose at her work.

Inviting her over for dinner and attempting to cook things other than the standard easy fare and to show that I had SOME domestic qualities like setting a proper table.

Writing short notes and (and as I considered it) cheesy poetry.

Long missive letters when I was in the military and stationed out of state or out of the country full of mushy stuff.

Small gifts of inexpensive jewelry. (She wasn't much into that sort of thing being a "horsey girl")

When I was in my serious musician phase I wrote a couple of songs in her honor.

Things like that. Remember this was all pre-internet. So I suppose it must have worked because I was with her for several years and as it turned out she kept a lot of that stuff in her keepsake box (which I found out about a couple of decades later). Some of the things I did then would probably be considered cliche but it was what I knew.

I enjoyed the whole thing at the time, so yeah I would say that men are capable of it.

 

[Nezhul]

Oh dear oh dear. You are absolutely the last person to be chiding anybody else for ipse dixit

Ad hominem
Whoever I am does not make YOUR claim less a fallacy.

Just about every interaction I've had with you has involved you making unsubstantiated claims

This is another fallacy - namely, argument from fallacy.
Any previous fallacies committed (even if there were any) do not falsify current premise.
Also, the fact that I did not provide "proof" that was up to your liking doesn't mean my claim were unsubstantiated. I didn't realize it before, but you love to use the "shifting goalposts" fallacy, where no matter what retort to you accusations I made or what link given - it was never enough and something more always demanded.

unsubstantiated claims - like "men are less emotional than women", for instance.

This is appeal to stone fallacy.
I gave it a proper justification.
You said it's wrong based on appeal to emotion.
Now you're just saying it's wrong just because. As if it's some kind of universal truth that genders are equal emotionally. This may also be a moralistic fallacy - you asserting that something is true because it should be like that.

Nonsense. Nature doesn't "design" anything. It's not a thinking process.

again ipse dixit and Persuasive definition.

Evolution adapts to circumstances, and while the general direction of that adaptation tends to move towards advantage, there's no guarantee of that in individual traits.

Just because something CAN happen the other way - doesn't mean that it does on average.
Evolution is a mechanism that works by repetition - Gene transfer is a stupid process if you take a small number of cases. But billions of times the population is tested, and while sometimes people with unoptimal qualities get to breed - most of the times, people with optimal qualities have the upper hand and breed MORE, gradually increasing the weight of their traits and its presence in the populice.
In millions of generations this leads to a formation of common traits in the majority of the population.

It would also be useful for me to be able to see in the dark like a cat and to synthesise Vitamin C, but evolution hasn't given me those things, because it's an erratic kind of process.

This is false analogy fallacy.
It didn't happen Not because it's erratic. It is erratic only on the small scale, but evolution has a vector that is not erratic at all (although it can change if the environment changes)

We didn't evolve Night Vision Because the behavior of our ancestors didn't fit with needing night vision.
Sure, it is useful sometimes. But most of the time humans sleep at night, not hunt. Why? Because we do not need to hunt at night. The prey and resources that we're after is just as available during the day as it is at night. We do not need to hunt small rodents that hide underground during the day - it's inefficient to do so. We hunt the prey and gather resources that are equally available all the time.
On the other hand, there are no natural predators that are less active at night for us. Nothing compells us to go out at night because it's safer. In fact, it is more dangerous. That's why at night we are staying in our caves or near the fire.

We don't gain any advantage as a species by being active at night. In fact we sleep through most of it, because our brain needs sleeping anyway, and it's the best time to do so. Nothing useful to do anyway. So we don't need night vision.
That's why night vision doesn't give humans who begin to develop it enough advantage to promote their genes with overwhelmingly larger success. If it did - we'd have evolved it.

In fact, we evolved better DAY vision instead. Better color perception, better movement recognition. There's only so much space on your retina, and if you start putting in infrared-perceptive cells on it, or low-light perceptive areas - you will be removing something else. Color, for example.
For us, those things are more important than night vision.

Similarly - we don't need to evolve complex and energy-inefficient means to produce Vitamin C on our own - if we are already getting enough of it with our food. If any person produced it - he would likely never notice any difference and would gain no mating advantage over others - the mutation would get lost in the randomness of the gene pool, because it's not an advantage.

And even if your analogy WAS correct. So what? What would it prove?
Just because there's an exception to evolving something necessary - the premise that emotions have evolved to be different between genders is not falsified.
One independent event can not falsify the other.

You haven't provided a shred of evidence for your claim

Moving the goalposts fallacy.
I don't have to provide any "Evidence" for a chance to participate in a discussion. In fact, you have provided neither as well. Simple arguments are enough.
Logic is just as valid of an argument as data.
If I link you some articles or some study - you'd simply move the goalposts again and say that you need a better one. Or make a rule that excludes the one I would link. So why bother?

I come back to this forum after years of abscense, and I find you just as ostentatious, argumentative and confrontational as before. You didn't grow one bit. This is your small pond and you stayed exactly the same as I left you - barking out at every one of my posts because you expect I'd argue back.
Not interested anymore. I moved on from that petty scuffle.

I'm not gonna bother with you any more. By all means, keep trying to look like a smart-ass while your entire post is riddled with logical faults and diversions. All you do is attack my arguments without giving any of your own. And you aren't even doing a good job. Your entire post is a collection of fallacies, sometimes even fallacies BORN from fallacies.

I've said my piece in this thread. Your opinion may be whatever - you did not manage to convince ME in anything other than your obsession with being "a good guy" in the eyes of everybody by arguing against ideas you find uncomfortable. You look desperate to defent the right thing - that everyone are equal. Because it should be right - it feels good if it was true. Gender equality, right? That's the only reason you need to keep arguing. Make everyone feel good about themselves. To demonize my post just so that yours could looks smarter and "gooder".

I'm not interested in similarly calling out your BS in your next post. Everyone can read it, read this post here that I just made, and decide for themselves if your arguments were ANY good at all.

 

[JAYBE30]

Not sex, not "the chase"/pursuit, but actual romance. Like holding hands, a makeout session with a long term significant other, buying flowers just because, etc.

As a woman, I love making his favorite food for dinner just because, or putting on lingerie before he gets home to spice up the mood. I get a thrill from a kiss on the head, the emotional closeness a pure expression of affection brings. Is this a purely female need? I am genuinely curious.

This is definitely not just a female thing, even if a lot of guys are numb to it... I enjoy these types of things A LOT. I miss it & look forward to finding someone I can enjoy it with again.

 

[jehoram]

she kept a lot of that stuff in her keepsake box (which I found out about a couple of decades later).

Interesting that you mentioned that. I still have things that my previous lovers have given me ... a ring, a poem, a greeting card that she hand-painted ... and I don't think I will ever part with them. Does that make me a romantic, or just a guy who can't throw things away?

 

[mark_j]

Interesting that you mentioned that. I still have things that my previous lovers have given me ... a ring, a poem, a greeting card that she hand-painted ... and I don't think I will ever part with them. Does that make me a romantic, or just a guy who can't throw things away?

My surprise was the extent she kept. Like damn nearly everything. In my case it was more like a couple of mementos from a HS sweetheart. Nothing that was really a big deal, just the sort of stuff one would find in a box of old family pictures (yes there are some of us who still have those even in the digital age).

 

[Erlikkhan]

Men crave sex. Romance is a path to achieve it. Although romance tends to decline as a relationship matures, when I bring flowers home to my wife I expect at least a blowjob. Jewelry gets me anything I want! Even a nice "Honey I'm home" kiss followed by a compliment often leads to the bedroom (if we make it out of the kitchen!) Otherwise I would just come home and plop down in front of the TV with a beer. That never works unless she wants something or needs to break bad news like her mother is coming for a visit.

 

[MidKnight1378]

Not sex, not "the chase"/pursuit, but actual romance. Like holding hands, a makeout session with a long term significant other, buying flowers just because, etc.

As a woman, I love making his favorite food for dinner just because, or putting on lingerie before he gets home to spice up the mood. I get a thrill from a kiss on the head, the emotional closeness a pure expression of affection brings. Is this a purely female need? I am genuinely curious.

This man does.

 

[fitzroyology]

Not sex, not "the chase"/pursuit, but actual romance. Like holding hands, a makeout session with a long term significant other, buying flowers just because, etc.

As a woman, I love making his favorite food for dinner just because, or putting on lingerie before he gets home to spice up the mood. I get a thrill from a kiss on the head, the emotional closeness a pure expression of affection brings. Is this a purely female need? I am genuinely curious.

This this thread has proved that many men, including myself do enjoy that close romantic bond.

For me, walking down the street, holding hands is nearly as good as it gets.

Will be me being presumptive, but I would guess the stereotypical Alpha male may not be seeking this kind of relationship and feeling.

 

[skitzoid]

I wish I had what I had when we first married. I'm 69 and she is 59, married 20 years. We DID have conversations that lasted 2 hours on the back deck. Drinking coffee / tea and just discussing the problems with the world. ( as if we could solve them ) Walking hand in hand, a little peck on the cheek for no reason, flowers anytime at all. ect. All that kind of romance was cool and will always be remembered. Now,,, I don't know where it went but I can't find it, in either one of us. I do miss it. These conversations and romantic notions did not have to lead to sex, it just gave you a good feeling inside. And, hopefully, her also.

 

[NickCarraway12]

Yes. I do.

I just want her to stop ignoring me. I've done everything I know to do. It's always a bad time or she's in bad mood. She's married to her job and then reads or grades papers when she gets home.

I want to take her on a long walk in the country and talk....but our conversations are so shallow, though I try to deepen them, she doesn't seem interested.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I remember nights long, long, long ago. Me in a suit, her in a new outfit I bought for her... long black skirt that buttoned up the fount. I had her leave the buttons undone to just above her knees. A black camisole with no bra with a black transparent blouse over it. Black stockings, not pantyhose, with a garter belt to hold them in place. Her hair done just perfectly. Face, oh god, what a beautiful face.

Out to dinner to a very nice restaurant. Then to our favorite club for close dancing. Just holding each other on the dance floor. Holding each other close. Talking about the kids, I know not all the romantic, talking about work and all those other things that are part of life. Hours of dancing and talking. Neither one of us drank all that much.

Then home.

I miss those nights like that. No expectations, just being togeher. Just talking. Just holding on to each other and tell each other how much we loved them.

That was 40 years ago. Every once in awhile we still go out and eat and then dance. But those nights are fewer and farther between now that we old and set in our ways.

 

[hundejahre]

Yesish... certainly did with new relationships, something I haven’t had in 20 years. And I’d say between my wife and me, I’m definitely the more romantic. She likes to be romanced, but she’s very practical minded and has a hard time coming up with anything romantic.

 

[Tasty_GA_Honey]

To the original poster, I highly recommend the book “The Five Love Languages.”

Understanding that my love language is “words of affirmation” and understanding my partner’s love language is “quality time”, helped us communicate better in each other’s own language.

 

[EdEc]

I make breakfast for her every morning that she can sleep in. The days of the week vary since the coronavirus. I take a TV table into the bedroom at around 8:30 and slide it so the eating surface is over the mattress and then I go to the kitchen to make a hot meal and either a pot of coffee for both of us or boil hot water for some instant Starbucks for her and tea for me. She lays in bed and eats while I sit on a barstool at the TV table. After we finish eating, I slide the tray with empty plates and cups out of the way and move the TV table away from the bed and join her so we can talk for a while untll she falls asleep. I awaken her at noon so she can leave.

 

[RunningJib]

Of course we do

Enjoying weekend coffee w/ spouse / SO is one of my favorite moments. Sharing music, a passage from a book or news/. A sunrise or sunset.

And I look forward to a long make-out session.

 

[Misshotndeep]

Just gonna sigh here. You guys are all awesome!

 

[nicklucas]

Like everything else, it depends...

My super megatheory about this is as unscientifically valid is one can get, but it's anecdotally solid.

Several posters have scribed a clear delineation between male-sexual and female-romantic natures/impulses/needs/whatever. I don't -- at least, not to the degree that some would. I do believe, howover, there is a difference in how men and women in general approach sex and romance

Caveat: As with all universal truths, there are exceptions. Your mileage may vary. Void where prohibited. Employees of Literotica and their dependents...yada, yada...

I'm a straight man (assuming there's such a thing as completely straight, but that's another theory). I have a romantic side. I enjoy hearing compliments (nonsexual, although "you curled my toes" is always nice to hear), holding hands, feeling my heart leap toward my throat when I see my love after an absence, crying at a sad movie (don't judge), etc.

(And because, like all men I've ever know, I can be insecure about your perception of my masculinity, I hastily add that I can shoot a gun, build a deck, barbecue a slab of raw meat until it's juicy but won't poison you, and fuck, jack off, and get blown, all to ejaculation, in rapid succession.) (That last bit might be a slight exaggeration.)

And I've known plenty of women who absolutely own the stereotypical "feminine" love of romantic words and gestures and sentiments. But sometimes they just want to fuck. Right here. On the table. Pants down, ass up. Right NOW.

And yes, I've known hetero couples in which the stereotypical roles are reversed. I said "caveat," remember, not that I'd "cave at" your first objection.

What I'm saying is that it's human nature to have both sides, although perhaps in different ratios. And at different times. And over different things.

That's where the problems originate. I'm sure everyone can provide their own anecdotal evidence to back up those theses.

I also believe the disparities aren't as stark as we make them. It's also human nature to remember the occasional frustrations over the times everything went well -- when one of you wanted to cuddle while the other could really use head, for example, instead of the times you both cuddled, or enjoyed a sloppy 69.

Before I go read this stunning bit of insight at the Masters and Johnson Clinic, let me add one more side corollary to my unifying theory of sex vs. romance. Again, this is anecdotally sound but empirically lacking, but here goes:

Our individual ratios of sex to romance vary throughout our lives, maybe now toward romance, then toward sex, then back again. It varies over time.

However, in many of us, as we approach middle age, our individual ratio steadily arcs toward one or or the other extreme. We might have been balanced between sex and romance when we were younger, then became either more sexual or more needful of romance. I won't say that's tied to gender, because I know of couples in which the wife became much more sexual (and kinkier) as she got older, and the husband less interest in sex (or more vanilla).

Now the kicker: It's not a universal truth, but nevertheless common, for an arcing-toward-sexual (kinkier) to marry an arcing-toward-romance (vanilla). Ask me how I know...

Please address comments and criticism to me, not to Literotica. I take full responsibility for my public irresponsibility.

 

[Orchidea73]

I agree with nicklucas.

Not sex, not "the chase"/pursuit, but actual romance. Like holding hands, a makeout session with a long term significant other, buying flowers just because, etc.

As a woman, I love making his favorite food for dinner just because, or putting on lingerie before he gets home to spice up the mood. I get a thrill from a kiss on the head, the emotional closeness a pure expression of affection brings. Is this a purely female need? I am genuinely curious.

However, my short answer would be, yes they do. If they love you.
People are inspired to do remarkable things to find and be with the one they love.

 

[AlotLikePsyche]

Yes. My sweetheart craves romance. All the stories he reads on here are in the Romance category. He loves romantic comedies. He gets an erection whenever we have deep, meaningful conversations, especially about our feelings. He prefers that we look each other in the eyes during lovemaking. He reads poetry out loud to me, rubs my belly, holds my hand, kisses my face. Those loving connections are important to him.

 

[SamScribble]

I can't prove it (any more than anyone I know has ever been able to disprove it) but I suspect that romance 'just happens'. Yes, I've done most of the things that many people consider to be 'romantic'. Flowers, poetry, candle-lit suppers, and more. And, yes, the 'shes' (there have been several of them - but I have lived a long time) seem to have been more that appreciative. But I'm not sure that too much of it was 'rehearsed'. As I say: it mainly just happened. But I'm not unhappy about that.

 

[Jada59]

My dad was very romantic. Sometimes it made me want to barf. My mom is not very romantic and his attempts to woo her with flowers and such didn't win him much. OTOH, he loved getting flowers so he wasn't hard to buy for.

 

[glittertwist]

Enjoying weekend coffee w/ spouse / SO is one of my favorite moments. Sharing music, a passage from a book or news/. A sunrise or sunset.

And I look forward to a long make-out session.

l love this.

 

[Lysander444]

Many men do crave romance. Too bad that sex is cheap and plentiful, emotional closeness is almost impossible to find.

 

[jehoram]

I think it's lovely when I see a grey-haired couple holding hands
cynic me says
Viagra and second marriages are amazing

I remember hearing a song about an old couple sitting in a park and burning their love letters so they wouldn't shock the grandchildren.

 

[Acktion]

Yes.