Very often, a woman is not strong, waiting for a man to protect and help, but does not want to recognize themselves weaker. And this is contrary to the very principle of protection and assistance. You can't look down on someone whose help you're accepting. Either you admit your weakness (not in everything, but in what you ask for help), or you don't get help.
Very often it is necessary to hear from women that men expect from them weakness.
Many women come to psychologists with a request to teach them to be weak, and then, they say, personal life does not add up. Devaluing women's experience, in this case, is dangerous: women have observations of more successful women in personal terms: they almost always look weak and this seems to attract men. And for a surveillance have such "strong women" there is: when they like men when not very. And hence conclusion: men like the weak. Men love the weak...
Explanations for this are different, but most often one: strong women men are afraid, because only against the background of a weak woman a man can look strong and like himself. If a woman is strong herself, a man quickly loses interest in her, because she does not give him food to feed narcissism, in the sense of self-admiration. And without the narcissism of their masculinity, male sexual relationship is not very interesting, it's for such a relationship — the main fuel.
There is a similar opinion: they say, a woman and most sexual relations are interesting only when she can admire the superiority of men, and otherwise she loses the erotic feeling. Say, all-female fetishes are built on "to be given" to the man, and it is directly connected with his domination which equality completely destroys, so deprives sex of its essence.
Not all women agree with this, however, even those who disagree sometimes admit that there is something in this idea, although it looks repulsive. It is unpleasant to see hierarchy where, on the contrary, it is important to open up as much as possible and trust the other person as your second self.
Many women have the feeling that sex is closely related to violence, while love is something hostile to violence, its antipode. But why, then, are there so many symbols of veiled violence in the sexual realm? And not only in BDSM but also in simple pornography and even in the easiest eroticism: here and there the words hinting at Frank cannibalism where the woman is represented by appetizing food, the images connected with her conquest and "sweet captivity".
Against this background, admonitions that men love strong women, somehow not very convincing. Intuition, based on an unconscious analysis of cultural baggage, tells women that men still love the weak, and hence it turns out that a woman needs to choose: either to be strong and successful in society, providing independent support or to have love and a successful personal life.
Men in this paradigm are obtained in a much more advantageous position: they can develop and support, increase independence, and for the same receive female attention and female love. To choose is not only unnecessary but also encourages one another. Do you want women to love? Become more successful in society. At that time, for women the situation is different: you can choose between success or love. That's not very fair, is it?
It is no wonder that from the analysis of such reality many women come to the unpleasant conclusion that men are enemies. Isn't the enemy the one who benefits from your weakness?
There are other women, though. They believe that they are looking for female weakness only weak men who want to look strong easily so, doing nothing, and relying only on the consent of women to play along with them. Instead of choosing a strong woman and become her stronger, naturally striking her imagination, they go and whine, reproaching women for unladylike, and looking for one next to which any wimp will look like a strongman.
Both findings are, frankly, inconsistent with reality. If men enjoyed the weakness of women, they would not look dreamily at the stars (and did not like the great ballerinas, for example), did not lose interest in their dependent wives-Housewives, did not leave sick wives, and, in general, in the personal life of most women would reign grace, because let's be honest: most women are still quite weak: resources are not enough, money is less than men, hands are weak, brains are not so very powerful, and their spirit can not be called powerful. Unless at heroines of female series which passed all circles of hell and left winners, having received in plus to all prizes also the man loving and favorite, — a crown to everything. I. e. even in serials is by no means weak women receive love men, and in life and at all it is unclear by what principle receive, but those who not receive, say, that this — from-for forces.
How to understand this confusing topic?
Imagine that you need to save someone. Let it be a friend, a relative or, God forbid, a child. If you have ever tried to save someone, you know that the effect of this case is only in one case, when the rescuer recognizes you as a rescuer and obeys you. If he looks at you like a goat at a new gate and sends you to the forest, to save him is impossible. Can be stunned heavy the subject of, of course, and save, but fight with his resistance it is difficult.
Therefore, most rescuers are well aware of the main condition of salvation-the victim must pass the leadership to you, voluntarily or because of their complete helplessness. If the victim of your government does not recognize, to rescue it is impossible. You can try to manipulate for the sake of its salvation, but it is almost the same as to stun with a heavy object, that is, violence, just not over the will, but in its circumvention.
That is, the very role of a brave knight and a noble defender suggests that she who is protected and saved is weaker than the one who saves her. In General, it is reasonable. If it is stronger, it means to save her no need, she will save anyone. Don't you? In this case, it is better to save the one who needs. And if no one needs it, thank God.
What happens when one person is not weaker than another but wants to be saved and protected? It turns out a fairy tale about a cunning Fox and a stupid Wolf. Remember how Fox was afraid that the Wolf will demand from it compensation for eaten by fish and its severed tail, so I got a test head and pretended to be a victim? And when the Wolf dragged her to herself, she slowly sang "broken unbeaten luck". Roughly so looks in popular consciousness a bitch, which much stronger, than a man, but wants to ride height. It is to such that Rozhdestvensky turns his speech, though he makes a chivalrous gesture, pretending that it is solely his desire to look strong, and she is so well.
In fact, it is well known that women often demand custody of men and expect protection. But it's impossible to protect someone stronger than you. Not only is it not necessary, but it is impossible, even if you want to. It is impossible to defend the fact that the weaker, and considers himself much stronger and looks down, and that this is exactly the main clue of the paradox, which is described above.
To be continued... https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5d8dbd85e4f39f00b039c094/female-weakness-part-2-5d94db7f98fe7900b14fd09a