Do Women Prefer Bad Boys?

November 5, 2003

I'm pulling this piece of Jonathank's response in the Familyman comments out of context because it provides a good jumping off point for something I've wanted to discuss for a while.

The phenomenon of "women going for jerks" is a real one, but there is a very, very important thing missing from the usual understanding of it. It is, I believe, a product of women's enculturated fantasies that jerks really AREN'T jerks down deep in their most hidden souls. The usual La-La Land construct is that jerks are really powerful, confident, and misunderstood men that the Very Special Women Who Truly Love Them can bring into the Light, so that someday the erstwhile jerk will finally appreciate the Unconditional Love that has been lavished upon him so stupidly unstintingly. At which point, of course, he will fall into stunned, eternal adoration of the Very Special Woman who Stood By Him while he was going around being a powerful, confident, misunderstood jerk, world without end, Amen.

Yeah, it's nuts. But you do have to understand some of the vital elements of this scene to understand female sexuality. What turns women on? Novelty and beauty, of course: the new and different, the gorgeous hunk, the intelligent or humorous personality, an air of mystery. Touch, warmth, attention, sensual surroundings, laughter. But above all, most women will say that a man's inherent personal confidence, in and of itself, is a big turn on.

The sexual appeal of masculine confidence is why a bald assertion of power, pure ashcan walkover stuff, can work, especially in the beginning of a relationship (it's the secret to how a lot of men get a lot of one night stands). And it is also a fact that many women can't tell the difference between put-on machismo, the violent, belligerent swagger that is often a mask for a LACK of confidence, and real manhood.

Many women believe the classic romantic construct too faithfully, and it is such an insidious mythology that it can incorporate any manner of disgusting behavior depending on a woman's need to believe it. A woman will go for years believing that her lover's Redemption is just around the corner, letting him wipe his boots on her. She feels alternately thrilled by his Power and tortured by the length of time it's taking for him to start giving her the Love she's "owed" for all the dirt on her back. If she leaves him now, she's admitting he wasn't worth it. She can't do that, can she? Surely he's going to come around any day now.

So...do some women "want" to be degraded? Yes. Do some women "want" to be ordered around? Yes. Do some women "want" to be Daddied like infants? Yes.

Does that mean that any mature, centered, MANLY man should indulge these women's fantasies and encourage these neuroses?

I leave the answer as an exercise for the reader.

COMMENTS ON THIS POST:

interesting theories here, but i think you're way off. *some* women--ie, the very glam, the very self centered, the very sex-in-the-city type of gals--want to be "daddied like infants." they like jerks, yadda yadda. but i find this whole theory about women dating jerks (yours, and the rest of the world's) to be completely false. i think a lot of nice men have made this up to make themselves feel better about the fact that they don't have dates, that the women they know are in relationships with shitty men, and not with them. let me tell you something: as a woman, i'd go for the nice guy any day of the week. i always think i'm going for the nice guy, and then he ends up being an asshole. i don't think that there are more male assholes than female ones, just that there are a lot of people who are assholes. and if you know any nice guys who aren't freaks, well, please, bring them on. alyssa ettinger [apple] 11/5/03; 7:09:34 AM

Oh I think MANY MANY women like nice men. Me for instance. I'm married to one. Most of the women I know are married to nice men, too. Thank heavens. But the phenomenon of SOME women going for "bad boys" is also real. That's what I was addressing, because Jonathan brought it up, and because it is a subject that is on a lot of men's minds when they think about "what works with women." There's a LOT of misunderstanding out there on the subject. Julia Grey [apple] 11/5/03; 7:26:00 AM

I'm one of those nice guys, and the earlier comments below about traditional gender role reversal ring true to me. My wife is a feminist, and I think this is part of the reason why we have a sexless (twice in 2003) marriage. She seems to equate sex with violation of her body, so, if she is going to have sex, it must always be on her terms, at her speed, in her preferred position, etc. As a "nice guy" I sometimes think (in my darkest hours) that, perhaps, she wants this "violation belief" to be borne out, and that she wants me to "take her" so that I can prove that men are scum, rapists, etc. When I have these thoughts about "taking her" (okay, fantasies), they are not particularly violent, just very forceful, and I imagine her succumbing to the passion and us having the best sex we ever had. Then reality hits, and I realize that a) she'd probably just kick my ass; b) maybe divorce me; and c) I am a NICE GUY and would never do this and would probably not be able to perform under such pressure. I wonder how much of this is related to that scene we've all seen in countless movies where the jerk-man kisses the woman, who resists at first, then melts into him because of the passion that overtakes her. Thanks a hell of a lot, Hollywood. I'm a nice guy, and will probably die a nice guy, who lived in a sexless marriage. How many of the rest of you guys out there are the nice ones? I'm guessing the majority of the male readers of your blog, Julia. Harry [apple] 11/5/03; 7:41:21 AM

(warning; shameless plug coming up) I wonder how this fits in to this discussion. Harald [apple] 11/5/03; 7:51:20 AM

Harry; how does the "it must always be on her terms" equate with the sexlessness? Does she enjoy it then? Then why not more often? Harald [apple] 11/5/03; 7:53:33 AM

From what I've seen, the single biggest predictor for picking jerks is growing up with jerks for role models. In later life, this helps them confuse confident, desirable alpha traits with meanness. There's also a whole contingent of guys who describe themselves as 'nice', yet stomp through life with a big ol' unappealing chip on their shoulder, spitting poison about how all those horrible women have the gall to deny them the love they're owed by virtue of their anger-besotted 'niceness', dammit. Of course, some guys are just purely decent, with confidence rather than bitterness under the veneer. I'm pleased to say that after the excruciating unlearning of some bad patterns, I'm happily married to one. On a related topic, why is it that when a woman is with a jerky guy, it's the woman's fault for picking him, and when a guy is with a jerky woman, it's the woman's fault for being jerky? I never could figure that one out. bun [apple] 11/5/03; 9:44:56 AM

Harald: The "it must always be on her terms" aspect is that she must be the initiator, she determines which of the two positions she accepts as normal we will use (missionary or her on top), how long it lasts (usually about 3 minutes or less), speed and rhythm, and no touching or cuddling afterward. And no talking about it afterward, either. I can't say whether she enjoys it or not, as I am not permitted to ask. I know I don't particularly enjoy it. Harry [apple] 11/5/03; 9:46:55 AM

I answered your rather amusing sidebar on your site, Harald. Thanks! Julia Grey [apple] 11/5/03; 10:05:37 AM

Like I said, you choose to stay in a sexless marriage. You allow her the chooses while refusing to do anything to change the situation. Call it what you want, people, but to me, it is still all about "power". This has nothing whatsoever to do with sex. Lynn [apple] 11/5/03; 12:59:21 PM

Or, for that matter, feminism. munkymu [apple] 11/5/03; 1:53:20 PM

I agree that people seek Power when they feel they cannot get Love, and that sex often becomes a Power battlefield when anxiety and insecurity and misunderstanding make real love, partnership and genuine emotional intimacy seem like an impossible dream. That's been the basic point I've tried to make over and over in this blog. I also agree that people who stay in a crazy situation without making ANY effort to change it are probably neurotic in the M. Scott Peck sense (suffering a continual just-bearable pain in order to avoid facing a larger, scarier, possibly unbearable one). However, I don't agree that meeting Power with Power is the ideal way to break a power imbalance, since that usually only results in ugly, perhaps irretrievable escalation. Look in the Love direction instead. Or, if there is no genuine love left at all, and no possibility of reviving it, get out. Julia Grey [apple] 11/5/03; 2:22:45 PM

People in general, not just women, not just men, look for indicators of love in familiar ways, the ways they were taught as children, IMHO. You have to work to break those connections if it turns out that your family's relationships were hurtful (and recognizing this can be its own trick). But it can be done. I did it, after a failed first marriage (where my husband treated me in the familiar way my mother and father had--which was ultimately hurtful and not loving). Kris Hasson-Jones [apple] 11/5/03; 3:51:45 PM

I would say that a strong PRESENCE is what's attractive. I suspect a mix of generally nice - nice in the sense of "kind" - behavior is appreciated; when leavened by a bit of bad boy mischeivousness. But neither works if it's just wimpy niceness, or mean cowardice. Roy Kay [apple] 11/5/03; 5:17:58 PM

With the caveat that this does not represent my beliefs on the subject, http://www.greeblie.com/theyeti/arch/012894.html has an interesting foray on the subject. Courtney [apple] 11/6/03; 5:58:14 AM

Hey, that link was hella fun. Julia Grey [apple] 11/6/03; 9:30:22 AM

Julia, for some men, the fantasy is Pretty Woman, the whore who really isn't a whore. (And it's twin, the nice women who is a "whore" in the bedroom.) I've known some shall we say "oversexed" men and women - not swingers, who fit into their own category. Maybe and I mean maybe there's that heart of gold in the attraction, but there are at least two other factors at work. First, a lot of people are psychological basket cases and they seek out and find people who let them down, who cheat on them, who hurt them. The heart of gold theory implies a romance novel, but reality is more sordid, cheap and nasty. Second, a lot of people see the jerk/whore/stud/slut as the preening peacock/hot piece. In other words, like the study says, women generally don't want to be in a relationship with a jerk, but they are more likely to bed one. Thus, the endless letters to every advice columnists - I'm with a really great guy but I ended up in bed with his friend/his brother/my boss/the mailman, etc. and can't stop - and the advice - you're risking something meaningful for something immediate but with no lasting value. And here we get into pet theory time, I think some women are attracted to a rampant male because he's successful at that and there's a general human tendency to attribute success in one area to success in others. If he's good at getting women, he'll be good at getting raises. To take this one step further, how many discussions about forgiveness deal with this exact form of cheating? The woman "falls" into an affair with some guy she really doesn't have much in common with but the sex is great and now she's torn. The guy "ends up" in bed with the hot new girl in the office and can't stop banging her because she's so much sexier than the wife. So the discussions so often go: it was "meaningless" and I really care about you, I didn't think, it just happened, I didn't want to hurt you, etc. and the aftermath that trust has been broken, how do you re-establish trust, is forgiveness a requirement or an option, etc. I'm particularly intrigued by the way this kind of cheating leads to placing of blame - it is at least implied and often said that the cheating happened because the real partner was boring. I love the way people dodge truth. I have NOT had these conversations with my wife. Just want to go on record with that. jonathank [apple] 11/6/03; 2:11:24 PM

Simply out of curiosity, what is the definition of 'jerk' being used here? The wife-beater wearing, chain-smoking, greasy-haired tempermental and insanely jealous guy with the beer permanently affixed to the hand that's not currently delivering the smack to the head? Or the guy that's intelligent, confident, out-spoken to the point of being painfully blunt, who tends to come off as a complete ass to just about anyone he meets due to his complete lack of tact (ie...verbal sugar-coating)? Just my take, since that's mine in a nutshell (help help I'm in a nutshell!). Though it's certainly not the rule, sometimes confidence is mistaken for arrogance and honesty can be brutal. There's jerks and there there are jerks. I'd hate to have my particular jerk any other way. Btw, I find this site absolutely wonderful. shiv [apple] 11/7/03; 11:33:33 PM

I just posted what i have to say on http://www.greeblie.com/theyeti/arch/012894.html so rather than say it again you can get my rant there. In my mind i think im totally correct, but if i didnt then why would i say it? lol. Anyway, please read, at least its a new opinion. D Johnstone ironos@hotmail.com D Johnstone [apple] 11/11/03; 12:15:04 PM

From my experience women fantasize about the tough gut/bad boy...but they know esp after 3- it's much better with the man you can trust...with all things grerard [apple] 11/11/03; 9:11:20 PM

OTHER STORIES:
Why Does She Masturbate? | Lying and Power | Do Women Prefer Bad Boys? | Fiona's Story | How A Nice Guy Becomes A Dickhead | Ten Ways To Be A Lover | How It All Goes Wrong | Medicalizing Desire | Paul's Dilemma | Who Am I? | Should I Ask Or Just Go For It?