DEAR DR. NERDLOVE: I’m a 42 year old woman who has had one long term relationship in my life, that lasted about 10 years but ended over 10 years ago. Other than that it has been a series of dates here and there, but generally the guys just ghost or tell me that they aren’t feeling a spark. And this has been the case my entire life. I didn’t date in High School because nobody would ask me out even though, in the years since, a lot of my former friends from that time told me they had crushes on me, but they were intimidated. My one boyfriend broke up with me because he felt like I didn’t really need him, and that I would be better off without him. (I guess he was sort of right, after the relationship ended I quit the job I hated, but kept because it worked with his schedule, and went to law school and became an attorney).

I want very much to be in a long term monogamous relationship, hopefully marriage. I am on dating apps. I try to always look cute even if I am not conventionally attractive anymore (but I was very hot as a teenager and I still couldn’t get dates, so it can’t just be my looks). I am in therapy to work on the grieving process I feel about not being married by now (and the fact I probably won’t be able to have biological children) and he has had me ask my friends and family about why they think I’m having issues in this area. The thing that keeps coming up is that I have a big personality, have carved out this full life for myself, and that I am always doing lots of stuff to stay busy, and that guys are scared by that because they don’t see where they would fit in my life.

Is that something guys need? It doesn’t make sense to me because if I meet a guy who seems to have a “girlfriend shaped hole” in their life it freaks me out. I don’t want someone to be auditioning me for a part they already have written to see if I fit, I want someone to get to know me and build something with me. Is that unusual? Do guys need to feel needed, and if so how can I build that life so that I need someone who may, or may not, ever exist?

Running Solo Build

DEAR RUNNING SOLO BUILD: Congratulations RSB, you asked a question without realizing that this was an ‘insert quarter, receive essay’ topic for me.

So there’re two things going on, RSB and they all come down to one thing: society has really f--ked men up.

The first is the classic issue of The Intimidating Woman — someone who is just too “intimidating” for guys to ever feel comfortable getting into a relationship with. This is an issue a lot of women face, especially growing up; they’re ambitious, they’re focused and driven, they’ve got passions, goals and a future… but no dates. Meanwhile, guys are out there saying that they want someone who’s focused, ambitious and driven… but they’re not dating the women who embody those very qualities. And if you were to ask them why, they’d tell you: those women are a little too intimidating for them. Instead, they end up dating women who seem to be the opposite of what they say they want — women who’re less driven, less ambitious and often less successful in areas that those men feel are more “their” province, particularly in terms of careers or financial status.

The second issue actually ties into the first: guys who feel like they need to be needed by their partners in order to have a relationship. If a woman has her life together… well, then why would she possibly need him? So the woman who may not Have It All, but at least Has Quite A Lot — women who’re successful, who have big or forceful personalities or who live a fulfilling life often find that men… just don’t feel comfortable approaching or dating her.

So I want to be clear here: this isn’t a you problem. This is a systematic issue with society as a whole and the way that men have been damaged by the way we’ve been socialized. This has little to do with your accomplishments and everything to do with the whammy that toxic, confining and restrictive ideas of masculinity have put on men’s heads.

One of the issues I’ve brought up a lot around here is how emotionally and socially isolated men tend to be. Men have fairly few close emotionally intimate relationships — far fewer than women do, and very few with other men. This is in no small part because we’ve been socialized to see emotional intimacy as being the same as, or a precursor to, sexual intimacy. This didn’t used to be the case. Throughout history, men had very close, emotionally intimate and significant relationships with other men. If you were to look at old photos of men and their friends, you’d be shocked by the amount of closeness and physical contact between them. You’d be forgiven, in this day and age, for thinking that these were lovers, not good friends. But the truth is that, until recently, men were freer to have that level of casual physical and emotional intimacy with other guys. We were more comfortable with casual touch and physical affection with one another and treating our friendships as significant and meaningful.

And that all changed as social narratives surrounding masculinity started to curdle. Homophobia, the fear of being perceived as “gay” and idea of masculinity as social dominance came to the forefront and started to change male friendships and leaving men more isolated and alone. And to be clear: this is learned behavior. You can see this today in the friendships that boys have in childhood; they’re much freer to express themselves, more affectionate and more connected to their friends. This starts changing by the time we turn 10; social narratives about what is or isn’t acceptable “guy behavior” start getting enforced and boys start taking those lessons onboard. By the time they’re 13, those friendships have altered drastically, if they survived the transition at all. Boys become more closed off, less warm and expressive and far more concerned with not being seen as weird, weak or “faggy”, and those lessons follow us and are reinforced for the entirety of our lives.

(Yes, even in 2021, we have boys growing up afraid of being seen as queer and we still have queerness weaponized as an insult.)

Now, the reason why I bring all of this up is because of the knock-on effects that this changes brings.

One of the biggest is the fear of weakness or being perceived as weak or less dominant. Because aggression and dominance are emphasized as masculine virtues, not being dominant or in charge is seen as a failure as man. This weakness means you’re going to be forced down the social ladder by other men; after all, dominating others is one of the fastest and easiest ways for men to establish their manly bonafides. And so we equate not being dominant or in charge as a form of failure to be a “Real Man”. That, in turn, means that we’re weak, vulnerable even… and thus more likely to be dominated by others.

This leads to one of the reasons why you run into guys who say one thing — “I want to date a driven, ambitious, successful woman” — and do another. It’s not that they don’t want to date someone who’s driven and ambitious, it’s that silent, unspoken addendum: “…who’s not as driven or ambitious or successful as I am.” It’s one thing to date somebody who has her s--t together and is going places. It’s another entirely to date someone who might outclass or out earn you. And as silly as that may seem in the modern age, the fact of the matter is that a lot of men who earn less than their spouses have higher levels of anxiety, insomnia, depression and erectile dysfunction. Not being the primary breadwinner is literally emasculating to them.

Another effect of this change that men face is the emotional isolation it brings. Because emotional intimacy is seen as either a prelude to or synonymous with sexual intimacy, emotional intimacy is thus forbidden except with people you might conceivably f--k. So — leaving aside how this conflation of friendship and sexual intimacy perpetuates the whole Friend Zone myth — part of what happens is that men’s friendships with other men are incredibly limited in scope and connection. Meanwhile, their only acceptable outlet for emotional intimacy and vulnerability is with women.

Now, here’s where the “need to be needed” part comes in: that emotional isolation also cuts us off from forms of validation and self-expression. Consider the typical friendship between women. It’s said that male friendships are side-by-side while female friendships are face-to-face. What this means is that male friendships tend to be activity-based; our friendships are focused around doing things together, where any sort of bonding is secondary to the activity. Female friendships, on the other hand, tend to be about bonding, intimacy, validation and sharing; women get together with their friends to see their friends. And a significant part of those friendships involve validation, vulnerability and support. This is something women in general and young girls in particular develop early on, and it creates a very different dynamic between how women are socialized to see themselves and how men are.

If you were to look at girls’ Instagrams and other social media, you would see how often their friends hype them up; they have their squad telling them how great they look, how cool they are, and so on. Boys, especially straight boys, don’t have that sort of social support from their friends. And that takes its toll in a lot of ways. And one of the most profound — and relevant to your question — is that it leaves men thinking that they’re not desired or desirable. And this is a problem on many levels; after all, not only do men and boys crave intimacy and validation as well as emotional connection, but one of the toxic ideals about manhood is that a man’s status is, in part, measured by how much sex he has.

But if men aren’t desirable… then what are we supposed to do to raise our status? Well, it comes down to the issue you’re facing: because men don’t feel wanted, they feel like they need to be needed instead. If they’re needed, then at least there is a value-for-value proposition; they provide value in the form of “being a provider”, particularly financially, and are rewarded with sex… which then raises their value and status.

However, there’re a number of drawbacks to this. Well, drawbacks beyond “wow, that’s a really toxic and s--tty thing to believe about yourself,” anyway.

To start with, the idea that our value is predicated in part on our ability to provide creates a sort of arms race, where those who can provide more are thus more valuable. So we instill the belief that our value — and commiserate ability to acquire “valuable” women — is in part predicated on our financial and material success. So someone who has more — more money, more success, more stuff — is thus a more desirable partner. This creates a cult-of-success mentality where you need to have a consistent and rising amount of financial success in order to be sufficient to date and to ward off your supposed competition.

It also creates an antagonistic relationship between men and… well, literally everyone else. Other men are seen as our competition and believed to be likely to pounce if there’s even a hint of weakness. Meanwhile, if a man’s value is in what he can provide, then his value is inherently unstable, especially in the current economy where job security is the career equivalent of The Loch Ness Monster. Worse, under this system of belief, there’s (theoretically) no reason why women shouldn’t always be on the lookout for a higher-value man. If women, in this scenario, are attracted to a man’s ability to provide, then they’re motivated to trade up whenever possible. And worse, because women “control” men’s ability to raise their value by controlling the access to sex, it creates an antagonistic relationship between men and women. Men are incentivized to get sex at any cost, while women are incentivized to withhold sex until they get the highest value they possibly can… creating a situation where someone is going to lose.

And just to make matters worse, this idea of “man-as-provider” was predicated on a time when women simply didn’t have the same financial opportunities or security that men did. Most women had to look to men, not for love or connection or companionship but for survival, because the alternative was starvation or worse. But in this day and age, as society continues to narrow the economic gap between men and women, and women have unprecedented financial security and freedom, women aren’t reliant on men for survival any more. The economic “need” is functionally rendered moot. Worse still, as women become more empowered to handle their own affairs, capable of doing “men’s work” in their lives and otherwise being able to survive and thrive just fine on their own… the areas where men are “needed” grows smaller and smaller.

So if you’re a guy who doesn’t believe that he has worth outside of what he can do for someone else on a material level… well, you find yourself to be a rapidly depreciating asset. This gets made worse by things, like, say, not wanting a woman who’s “needy”  them because they want to be able to live their life as though they were still single. Managing someone’s emotional needs is difficult when you barely have a grasp on your own emotions and needs, so they want a woman who doesn’t “need” them”.

(A lot of the men who don’t want “needy” or “clingy” women also are hoping to be able to keep f--king around until they find one they’d rather have, but that’s a different issue entirely.)

This creates a situation where men get stuck; they supposedly want a particular type of woman, but as with many areas in life, there’s the vast difference between “wanting something” and “dealing with the reality of having it,” that is — as so many things in this modern age are — best expressed in meme format.

Man: “Man, the last thing I want is some clingy girl. I want to date a woman who doesn’t need me.”

Woman: “OK…”

goes off and lives her life.

Man: “Wait, not like that…”

So you end up with these competing desires. There’s the desire to be wanted, which they think they aren’t, and instead gets sublimated to the desire to be needed. However, they want to be needed in a very specific way. At the same time, they want a woman who matches certain criteria, but can’t be honest enough with themselves to admit that either they don’t actually want that, or they want it in a way that leaves them feeling superior and in control. So either they can be ‘needed’ or they can be needed. But as more and more women don’t need men — not in the limited way those men tend to think — and the delineations between “men’s stuff” and “women’s stuff” gets erased, men find themselves in increasingly untenable positions.

And thus we come back to your dilemma, RSB: you want to date, but you also live life out loud and don’t “need” a man. Thus you end up with guys who find you “intimidating”. So what do you do about it?

Well… ultimately you have two options. The first is that you live your life and look for a guy who can actually meet you where you are. This may be someone who’s a little softer and less caught up in traditional, restrictive forms of masculinity, or it could be someone who’s confident enough in himself that he doesn’t need to be “needed” by someone to feel desirable or worthy of love. However, this means accepting being single for a while, likely longer than you might prefer. Sometimes the issue with waiting for guys to catch up to you means that you’re going to be waiting for quite some time. While there’re more and more men who are becoming comfortable with shucking the restrictions of coercive forms of masculinity, socialization is a motherf--ker and it can be difficult to uproot all of it. So you may well meet dudes who seem like they’re able to meet you at your level — or who are cool with being the support class to your front line character — but who end up having issues with it, a la your last boyfriend.

The other option is you can choose to change, to make adjustments so that some guy would feel like there’s “room” for him in your life. But, to be blunt: a lot of times, this means making yourself smaller for the comfort of others… sanding off bits of you so that other people aren’t as scared or feel less intimidated by you. The trade off for having a relationship means that you had to reduce and limit yourself so other people wouldn’t be as afraid or intimidated by you… and that can chafe. A lot. And it sounds to me that, despite not having romance in your life, you have a pretty good and satisfying life.

You can also try to carve room in your life for someone to fit. But that can be difficult, especially when you love your life, and when you want a guy who can meet you at your level and on your terms. As I’m telling guys all the time: you want someone who complements your life, not completes it, who adds something to it rather than fills a hole. Because, honestly: that hole isn’t there because someone was missing. The hole is there because there’s some part of you that’s missing.

Now in my opinion, I think you’re making a lot of the right moves. Talking to a therapist to process your entirely reasonable feelings of loss and regret is a good start. So too is living a full life. One of the unfortunate truths of this world is that love and companionship don’t always happen on our preferred schedule, and sometimes the love of your life needs to be the love of your life. Having a life full of friends, family and meaning is important. And while yes, love is important too… sometimes giving up that life for love means finding a love that doesn’t fit, or a love that doesn’t match who you are.

Does that make the loneliness any less or the sense of loss for what children you may have had any easier? Not always. But there are ways of dealing with both. What there isn’t, however, is a way of dealing with the special kind of loneliness that comes from being with someone who isn’t right for you. Being lonely because you’re with the wrong person is like having a void that can never be fully filled or closed; you can ignore it or distract yourself from it, but the feeling is always there just at the edge of your perception.

I’m not gonna lie: looking for someone who can actually match you or complement your life can be frustrating. You may be looking for a while. But as the saying goes: nobody ever said that it would be easy… just that in the end, it will be worth it.

Good luck.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com

DEAR DR. NERDLOVE: I love your work! I’m a female and your work gives me hope in so many ways. You remind me that men, woman and all humans identifying inside of or outside of the binary system all have the same issues, as well as desires, dreams, and goals. But we are conditioned differently to become a social construction of gender instead of just human.

Anyway, I wanted to reach out to you mostly to vent, but also maybe you can help. My family is very conservative and I considered posting a little rant of my FB page, but realized that would probably cause the men in my family to call me a crazy female or ask if I’m ‘riding the broom’ or whatever.

So I asked myself who would be interested in explaining to men why this situation is wrong and where would men actually listen to the rationale? Lightbulb! Dr. NerdLove and his people! Yay!

Ok so here’s the story: I joined Codependents Anonymous about 8 months ago. I have a history of various kind of abuse from both men and women and I finally had a therapist call out my issues as codependent and push me into meetings. Through the program I am realizing how much abuse I haven’t even seen, because I didn’t even know it was abuse.

I decided to join a mixed group (open to all genders) which made me very uneasy at first, because most of my abuse has been from men. As it tuned out the group has been really cathartic. It turns out men can be codependent too! (Which I knew from reading your blog, but hit me differently in Coda) I felt safe there for the first 6 months. But now there’s a man in the group (who’s actually one of the original founders of the meeting I attend) and he’s making me feel really uncomfortable.

A few months ago he was talking to me after the meeting and he asked if I was married and I said no. So he told me, “you should just get married.” And I was shocked. I asked, “Where is that even coming from?” He said, “well if you were married you’d deal with your husbands problems and you’d have your own family and you wouldn’t have time to worry about other people anymore.” And I was shocked again, because 1. He assumes I’m going to marry a man 2. Shifting coda issue from friends to family isn’t actually solving the whole codependency issue. It’s literally just transferring it to other relationships. So I just sat there with my mouth hanging open. The other leader of the group started laughing and I gave him a sharp look, so he stopped laughing and told the guy to knock it off because he was not being helpful.

Fast forward to today, the same guy who told me that I should “just get married and it would solve all my problems” said some more toxically masculine nonsense.

So I shared tonight that I am in a DBT ( Dialectical Behavior Therapy) group and I had learned about core emotions including sadness. There was a list of maybe 8 reasons to feel sad, and when I read them I had 7 of them. Being codependent I was like,” oh wait. what? oh ok so I am sad. Interesting!” Because I have trouble even identifying my emotion, just finding the correct emotion felt like a positive step.

After I read the reasons to be sad I learned it’s ok for me to be sad. I was surprising to me that it’s ok for me to have this emotion that’s not just making other people happy.

I called a friend (because they suggested it as a coping mechanism in DBT ) and I said, “hey I am sad and this _ is why” and she validated that it was ok for me to be sad and that I had a right to be sad! I was so happy/ relieved to find out it was acceptable for me to be sad. It felt great actually — I get to have emotions just like other people! Wooo! It felt great to share the odd win with the group. Haha. Allowing myself to be sad about sad things is not something I’ve been able to do. It felt crazy to let myself be sad, but I’m learning it’s not crazy, it’s human.

Anyway coda has a rule that you can’t comment on other people’s shares during share time, but after people chat and sometimes say, “your share was really helpful” or “I related to that so much, thank you for your share.” Which doesn’t bother me at all. But the same guy who told me that getting married would solve all of my problems chimed in to say, “I don’t want you to be sad” I was thinking uh oh… oh no. Here we go… but I smiled and said, “oh ok, thanks.” So the other (male) lead jumps in and says, “hey man, she just found out it is ok for her to be sad.” The sexist guy says, “well I just don’t want her to be sad. It’s not good to be sad all of the time. If she’s sad she’ll get depression and I don’t want that for her.” So then a female in the group jumps in and says, “hey that’s not what she said…” and defends me in allowing me to feel my own emotions.

The sexist guy then says, “well you have such a pretty face, it’s a shame for you to be sad. You’re too pretty to be sad.” And I nearly lost my mind, but as society has condition me to do I smiled like my life depended on it. He continued, “I just want to give you a Dutch hug and make you feel better.” The other male lead made some kind of joke that I couldn’t hear over of the very colorful stream of profanity’s my brain was coming up with. I was fighting to keep it all contained behind my *pretty* smile. I replied, “yeah you’re right. I’ll just rub some dirt in in.” Everyone laughed and the situation was diffused. But I was furious. I looked happy, but I was fighting not to lose it.

Because a man finds me attractive I only get to be happy or turned on. My being anything outside of these emotion threatens their fragile toxic masculinity. I am a real person, not a doll sent her to beautify your life or make you feel good about yourself. How can one human dictate the emotional range of another and not understand that it is abuse?

I don’t want to cause a problem in the group, but I also can’t allow myself to be treated as less than a person. I am smart and funny and competent — I struggle every day to remind myself I am worthy. When s--t like this happens I feel I’m back to being the helpless girl who has to keep the men around happy so she can be safe.

I just want to feel safe in body. And because I am a woman I don’t get that right. Because I am a young attractive woman I don’t get to feel safe or angry or sad. I must be happy to stay safe. And I can’t stand it anymore.

I couldn’t stand up for myself today or a month ago. But I want to stand up for myself in the future. I realize this guy is a moron and he is probably incapable of understanding why he has offended me.

I actually understand the he meant well. He probably believes he did me a solid. He probably believes he made me feel attractive. He probably believes made me feel like I deserve to be happy. But he didn’t actually accomplish any of that.

I know what he wanted to say was, “you are young and beautiful and you deserve to be happy and find someone to love you. I wish I had the power to bring you joy and peace.” I know that’s what he meant.

But what he said was, “you’re too pretty to be sad.” He took away my value as a human — unless I am happy — I shouldn’t even exist. If I’m not being happy / acting happy I’m just making him insecure and bringing down the mood. I should just be happy. I mean I’m a girl why should I be sad, when there are men like him running the world. It’s a simple job for a young pretty girl

1. Smile

2. get married

3. radiate happiness

I know it’s not about me. He probably just doesn’t know any better. He probably meant well. He will probably never learn. I could spend years trying to gently explain this to the guy and it’s probably that nothing would change. It’s frustrating. I wish I lived in a world where this didn’t keep happening. Can you help me explain to the men (who care to learn) why semantics matters? Why women need to be allowed to be sad, even if they are pretty?

Sincerely,

Survivor and Recovering Codependent Human Female

DEAR SURVIVOR AND RECOVERING CODEPENDENT HUMAN FEMALE: Honestly, SRCHF, I don’t think you need me to explain things differently; you laid it out rather well here!

Other than saying the same thing as you, just as a man (which, sadly, does make some folks listen), I would add this: one of the problems with the way this guy framed and phrased things isn’t just the semantics or underlying sexism. It’s the message he’s sending — likely without realizing it. Much like when men tell women to “smile”, the message he’s sending when he says “you’re too pretty to be sad” is that his desire carries more weight than yours does. Despite what you have shared during your session, he has decided that your feelings are less deserved and less valid.

He doesn’t want that for you? Well, it’s good to want things. Except, the way he’s phrased things is that he has decided that his wishes supersede your lived experience. His desire for you to not be sad — because it apparently displeases his boner — somehow outranks your right to feel the way you feel. Because he has deemed you to be “too pretty”, this means that your continuing to be sad is an affront to his wishes. While he may not realize that’s what he’s saying, the effect is that he’s telling you that he has determined that you aren’t the person best positioned to decide how you should feel. He is. And, as the kids said five minutes ago: that ain’t it, chief.

There’s also the unintentional judgement on your appearance and the other women in your group. Would it be ok for you to be sad if you were less attractive? Are people who are less conventionally attractive less deserving of happiness? Should your physical features mean that you’re only “allowed” to experience certain emotions and that the full range of the human experience are only for people who rank between, what, a 4 and a 7? Is it ok for you to have expressions or emotions other than happiness if it doesn’t make his penis smile?

But really, the most important part, more than anything else, is right here where you hit the nail precisely on the head:

“When s--t like this happens I feel I’m back to being the helpless girl who has to keep the men around happy so she can be safe.

I just want to feel safe in body. And because I am a woman I don’t get that right. Because I am a young attractive woman I don’t get to feel safe or angry or sad. I must be happy to stay safe. And I can’t stand it anymore.”

That is what he — and folks like him — needs to hear. You phrased this perfectly. And you’re becoming stronger and more self-assured every day. You’ve got the tools, you’ve got the words and you’ve got the strength to handle all of this, SRCHF. You’re building yourself up to be precisely the person you needed one month ago, today and tomorrow. You’re becoming your own hero and you should be immensely proud of all the progress you’ve made, because it’s pretty goddamn bad-ass of you.

You’ve got this.

All will be well.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com

DEAR DR. NERDLOVE: I was inspired to write this based on your recent article about the kinds of men women like, and how you’ve talked about archetypes in previous columns. Do you have any advice for or places to look for men who don’t really identify under the banner of masculinity in general? I know you’ve pushed the idea of there’re being tons and tons of different personal models of masculinity, but what about the people who fall out of even that?

While adopting feminine aesthetics has gotten more acceptance over the past few years, I don’t know if I’ve seen the same encouragement for guys who are – socially – feminine or androgynous. (Most aesthetically feminine guys I know are still fairly masculine personality-wise.) It’s usually either met with insults or an assumption that our lack of masculinity corresponds with some lack of confidence. I feel you can see this in a lot of media, in which a less masculine character might end their character arc with a boost in confidence and act more aggressive. What’s more, I do get the impression that your blog does tend to assume some degree of social masculinity. Not knocking you, but I do wonder if that changes the needed advice.

For background’s sake, despite identifying as a guy and having an outwardly masculine body, my personality and usual social role is regarded by myself and others as pretty feminine. My good friends often tell me I’m pretty feminine and “think like a woman” in a non-derogatory way and compare me a lot to the female characters in the shows we watch. (Think Nia from Gurren Lagann, Kumiko from Hibike Euphonium, Aerith from FF7, and in a rare male instance Kamui Uehara from the recent No More Heroes 3 and TSA) I’m well known in town for being ‘sweet’, people say I bring a calming atmosphere to the room, and my friends value me for being the guy that’ll always listen to their problems. These are all parts of me I like about myself and it feels pretty often that the dating advice people give ask me to abandon these aspects.

The whole “safe-dangerous” dichotomy is one that I feel gross about in particular, partially as someone who’s experienced sexual assault in the past. I really hate advice that says to make yourself “a little dangerous” as well as the contrasting notion that it’s my job in a relationship to “protect” the woman. Don’t get me wrong, I’d like to be able to say that in a crisis I’d do my best to help others and put them before myself, but something about me being seen in the image of a masculine “protector” makes my skin crawl. It feels like one of those areas where more progressive space will still trend towards gender essentialism.

(It’s probably good to mention I grew up and am getting my degree in a mid-sized town in a very red, very southern state. This probably has influenced the model of masculinity I’ve internalized. I have no plans at all to stay once I graduate.)

Now onto the actual ‘dating’ aspect. Despite getting myself to a point where I feel okay with asking girls out, I have yet to go on an actual date — much less form a romantic relationship. For some reason or another the answer is always a ‘no.’ Most of my friends, male and female, think I’d be a great boyfriend to whoever’d be into me and I’ve even had lady-friends offer to try and set me up on a date — all of which the attempts never succeed. While I’m grateful for the female friends I’ve had, I don’t really know what it feels like to be desired in a physical or romantic sense. (I know the point you’ve made about sex positivity leading to more/better sex but despite being that for most of my life it’s made no difference. Seeing that point kinda weirded me out after being sex-positive and approving of more forward women with no expectation of recompense for years.)

People will always say that I’ll know it when it happens, but that’s unfortunately rung hollow in my experience. I’ve had instances where I and my friends totally thought that someone was signaling interest towards me (initiating and heavily escalating physical contact, saying things as brazen as “I bet you’re a sub”, saying we should go out for coffee sometime, etc,) but when I make the move to ask them on a date it turns out they didn’t see me in that fashion at all. Every time I feel like I’m getting close, it’s as if the sun decides that it’s time for my wings to catch fire. And I’m not going to lie, it’s demoralizing. Confusing, even, when tons of girls around me’s first way to describe their boyfriend or crush is “a lot like you.”

I just don’t know what’s missing at this stage. Even worse, neither do my friends. My failed attempt usually end with the old sentiment of “you did everything right, the interest just wasn’t there.” But how long can I reasonably be expected to run on that?

I know you’ve mentioned that it’s good to be someone who is happy with who they are and to feel like you’re datable. I was doing pretty well for myself before the pandemic and have been trying to work on the physical and mental issues that predictably come with spending a year in isolation (might take a while to get that senior-sixty off, though.) I feel like I have somewhat interesting hobbies; I play guitar, I’m handy with a camera, I like to cook, and I’m constantly getting compliments from friends, peers, and professors on my personal writings. I’m well-liked within my town, and I’ve been working for years towards the path I want to take in life. I’m really wondering at this point where my blind spot could be, or if it’s just a simple matter of needing to continue with my weight loss, try therapy again despite my dissatisfaction with the last go around, and wait for someone who’ll finally either initiate or reciprocate my interest. Maybe my head will break the brick wall someday.

Best Regards,

Malewife Matriarch, Femboy Fatale

DEAR MALEWIFE MATRIARCH, FEMBOY FATALE: I’m not gonna lie, MMFF; I had to read through your letter a couple of times to get the gist of exactly what you were having issues with. But I think part of the problem you’re dealing with is that you’re working from some odd, idiosyncratic or otherwise just plain wrong interpretations of… well, lots of stuff, honestly.

Case in point: the idea about sex-positivity leading to more sex. I think part of the disconnect you’re having here is that you’re taking this on the personal level — that being a more sex positive person will lead to you having more opportunities to get laid. While this can be true — God knows people are more likely to sleep with someone who’s more accepting and less judgemental about other people’s sexuality, preferences, orientation or history than folks who aren’t — what you’re referring to is the effect on the social level. As I’ve said many times before: part of the reason why women have less sex than they would necessarily prefer is because society judges them for having it at all and especially in ways that aren’t socially “approved of”. One of the most common reasons why women are less open to, say, casual sex with men, than they might be otherwise is because most of the time it’s too dangerous for them, the sex is rarely worth the level of risk, and men tend to judge them for having sex with them. A more sexually positive society means that people over all feel freer and more empowered to have the kind of sex that they would want to have — whether that’s tons of wild and crazy adventures, a monogamous and committed partner or no sex at all.

But another issue is that you talk about being non-masculine in reference to your gender performance, rather than aesthetics or identity. From what I’m gathering from your letter, you’re talking about being less aggressive and macho and more nurturing, empathetic, calming and sweet, and possibly a little less assertive and proactive than others. I think the problem you’re having is that you’re assuming that this means you’re not “manly” and that these are exclusively female traits. And while yes, those are traits that are coded as female by society… that doesn’t mean that you’re any less of a man for having or embodying those traits and values. It just means that you, as a man, are more nurturing, empathetic, calming and so on.

And therein lies the issue. Your problem isn’t that you’re too “femme” or whatever, it’s that you seem to have an issue with accepting that you’re just as much of a man as some eats-too-much-red-meat-booze-guns-and-bangin-broads macho meathead stereotype. Part of the reason why coercive and exclusionary definitions of “masculinity” can be so toxic is because they define “manhood” in incredibly narrow, limiting and damaging ways. Being someone who’s caring and nurturing doesn’t make you feminine; it makes you someone who’s caring and nurturing, just as someone who’s rough-and-tumble and aggressive isn’t masculine automatically, they’re someone who’s rough-and-tumble and aggressive.

As the saying goes: if you’re a man, then what you do is man s--t. Do you like crafts like knitting or sewing? Then congratulations, you’re a dude who likes knitting and sewing. If you like the idea of being domestic then hey, you’re a domestic kind of guy. Yeah, stuff like “Way of The House Husband” gets laughs by contrasting a former Yakuza tough-guy with the fact that he loves cleaning, cooking and taking care of the house… but the truth is that he would be no less of a man if he weren’t a former lieutenant in an organized crime family.

I think part of what you’re stuggling with here is that you’ve internalized so many of these restrictive ideas about manhood and masculinity that you feel like the fact that you’re softer and gentler marks you as weird or non-manly. It doesn’t really help that so many of your go-to references are from anime and video games. I may love a s--tload of anime but let’s be honest: most of the stuff that gets brought to the US tends to be pretty essentialist when it comes to gender roles, especially for male characters in Shonen (that is, aimed at young boys between the ages of 12 and 15) titles. One thing that would likely help would be to broaden your horizons and pay attention to more shows, movies, books and comics that feature many different ways of being a man without buying into the false dichotomy of strict masculine/feminine roles.

The most obvious example — and one I refer to frequently — is Netflix’s Queer Eye. One of the things that makes this iteration so enjoyable is that you have four people (Jonathan Van Ness is non-binary) who range from very straight-presenting to incredibly camp, but who are all warm, calming, nurturing and demonstrative. They’re all great examples of just how being a man (or non-binary) doesn’t mean being locked into one particular mode of behavior, and as such, they’re a soothing breath of fresh air. You might also appreciate more of The Great British Bake Off, where all of the contestants and judges are just… sweet and supportive of one another, even in the framework of an elimination-style competition.

If we move to fiction, then you have shows like Ted Lasso, which features Jason Sudeikis as a man who’s kind, collaborative and supportive, whose positivity and optimism carry the day in ways that a more vituperative, chair-throwing, yelling-and-screaming performance never could. And in shows like Letterkenny, you have folks like Squirrley Dan who are far from the macho stereotype as you’re likely to find and even traditionally masculine folks like Wayne have a softer side that they love to indulge in… just check out the Super Soft Birthday Party. And even folks like Riley and Jonesy, who are much more traditional in their gender performance, are shown to be far from one-dimensional jocks. They may be bro-y as hell, but they also have a much more nuanced and accepting form of masculinity than would otherwise be expected from guys who look and act like them.

(I find it amusing that we’ve actually managed to go backwards, socially, from the 80’s in a number of ways, when one of the most popular long-running sitcoms involved a man who worked as a nanny.)

I think that if you were less caught up in feeling like an oddity for being gentler and more nurturing and more accepting that this is just the kind of man you are, you’d have far fewer issues over all, including in the dating sphere. One of the things I have long found to be true is that the less in alignment you are with your authentic self, the worse you do. When you feel like you have to apologize or explain away being yourself, you sabotage your own sense of  confidence and self-worth. That makes it much harder not only to pursue relationships with folks you find attractive, but to meet and match with people who are actually right for you. It doesn’t do any good to go after a relationship with someone when your values and personalities conflict in fundamental ways after all. Someone who thinks that a guy who likes the idea of being a house husband is sus isn’t going to be a good match, no matter how attracted you two may be to one another.

The more you can bring yourself in alignment with your true self and accept this as who you are as a man, rather than treating it as being something that makes you less of a man, the happier and more confident you’ll be. That, in turn, will help you in life overall, but especially in dating and relationships. Once that is sorted, I think you’ll find that the rest starts to fall into place.

Good luck.

Please send your questions to Dr. NerdLove at his website (www.doctornerdlove.com/contact); or to his email, doc@doctornerdlove.com