posted September 21, 2012 07:56 PM            

when you see a bunch of friends gathered around, there is that one guy that commands everyone's attention. he's funny, witty, charming and generous. his friendly demeanor and huge smile is infectious. he's arrogant and a little stubborn, but at the end of the day he's just a big sweetheart. is that perfectly leo enough? lol

posted September 21, 2012 08:09 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aquacheeka:
My ex told me that I wasn't "submissive" enough for his liking. He's got Venus in Capricorn .

---

posted September 22, 2012 09:30 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aquacheeka:
My ex told me that I wasn't "submissive" enough for his liking. He's got Venus in Capricorn .

---

Let me explain myself. I had a really hard childhood and I built myself up in my 20s. My view of the world was formed then, that the world is looking to just take jollies on my rear end. So, I developed a warrior mentality that I needed a strong partner if I were to try to conquer the world. A weak partner wouldn't be useful to me. In modern day context, an intelligent, capable decisive woman would best help me meet life challenges. That is why I don't want a woman looking to me for orders or decision making. Tasks, responsibilities and decisions should be shared. Also, I have a strong leaders' Type A personality at work that can get overbearing. I would crush a submissive woman and drive her to tears.

posted September 22, 2012 10:37 AM            

Aqua/Scorp/Leo (in that order)

- an over-emotional, caring and whining-a-lot partner
- an underlying but noticable agressiveness (mostly obtained by harsh circumst./ I've found that without it there simply isn't any viability)
- independence
- faithfull/fixed as hell (so All-Or-Nothing)

posted September 22, 2012 10:58 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by pancakes22:
I dont have any taurus in my chart. Submissive, non-emasculating women is what God intended for us to have.

---

posted September 22, 2012 11:16 AM            

I guess I like guys who are charming yet cardinal.

posted September 22, 2012 11:23 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aquacheeka:

A real man *can't* be emasculated by a woman, let alone find a woman threatening to his masculinity.

---

posted September 22, 2012 11:26 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by pancakes22:
I dont have any taurus in my chart. Submissive, non-emasculating women is what God intended for us to have.

---

I'm sorry, but you're in no position to claim what God have intended.

posted September 22, 2012 05:02 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by pancakes22:
I dont have any taurus in my chart. Submissive, non-emasculating women is what God intended for us to have.

---

not sure what God intended, but there is truth to this - men want to be men and the more feminine and 'submissive' a woman is... the better the relationship seems to go, the longer it lasts, and the more your bf will dote on you, at least imo.

posted September 22, 2012 05:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by starmoon:
not sure what God intended, but there is truth to this - men want to be men and the more feminine and 'submissive' a woman is... the better the relationship seems to go, the longer it lasts, and the more your bf will dote on you, at least imo.

---

posted September 22, 2012 05:41 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by sand:
venus in taurus

i've always wanted to date a singer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yr8xDSPjII8

damn now that's a scorpio!

---

omg i use to love listening to that 3 years ago. im female and even i think shes dreamy.

posted September 22, 2012 06:09 PM            

Have been re-evaluating things a lot lately. My dream is something like Thurston Moore circa '87. Dishevelled, talented, fiery. Or well Ron Weasley at a pinch might do too.

posted September 22, 2012 07:23 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alabaster437:
Mars in Leo in the fourth house

I like confident guys who can take charge. Insecurity and feebleness are turn offs. BUT they also have to be sensitive, sweet, and a bit protective. It's a tall order, lol.

---

posted September 22, 2012 07:33 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hanneli:
mars in leo.

when you see a bunch of friends gathered around, there is that one guy that commands everyone's attention. he's funny, witty, charming and generous. his friendly demeanor and huge smile is infectious. he's arrogant and a little stubborn, but at the end of the day he's just a big sweetheart. is that perfectly leo enough? lol

it's funny though... ideally that is what i find attractive but i always end up with men that have dominant air placements.

---

posted September 22, 2012 07:55 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by freebrainstorms:
i'm sorry but i have a LOT of problems with this sentence/theory: "men want to be men and the more feminine and 'submissive' a woman is... the better the relationship seems to go, the longer it lasts, and the more your bf will dote on you, at least imo."

ugh where to begin: "feminine" being connected with submissiveness, the implication that being a man has something to do with being dominant over a woman, the idea that women should be submissive in a relationship if she wants it to work....*sigh* i'm not trying to pick a fight, i just couldn't let it go without something being said about it. i know Kathleen Hanna, Joan Jett, and Amanda Palmer would back me up, so i'm good if nobody else does.

---

without meaning to pick a fight either - i don't think it is so much about being dom/sub, it's just..... well, it's obvious that gender roles have been created by the society over the centuries and don't have much to do with the real state of affairs, BUT all I can say I have been with boys who really expected me to exchange gender roles all the time. it's really rubbish being the one who has to say "lets go", to seduce, to do EVERY BLOODY THING that should have been done to me! And not because they didn't fancy me, they did alright, just enjoyed being the girl who gives herself to her lover. WHAT ABOUT MEEE? I also want to be led away, seduced, thrown on the sofa.....

posted September 22, 2012 07:59 PM            

I think the truth is that different guys just have different taste... And lets just hope all we wind up with the type of guy that can appreciate our personality type.

I myself am more submissive then dominant... I tend to be quiet, sweet, and nice to people most of the time... I can be aggressive if I have to, to stand up for myself, but I prefer not to involve myself in antagonistic situations. If a guy was expecting a super aggressive, go-getter type he'd be disappointed with me.

posted September 22, 2012 08:59 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lotis White:
There's a lot of talk here about dominant vs submissive women.

I think the truth is that different guys just have different taste... And lets just hope all we wind up with the type of guy that can appreciate our personality type.

I myself am more submissive then dominant... I tend to be quiet, sweet, and nice to people most of the time... I can be aggressive if I have to, to stand up for myself, but I prefer not to involve myself in antagonistic situations. If a guy was expecting a super aggressive, go-getter type he'd be disappointed with me.

When it comes to the dominant/submissive thing it's quite common for there to be an 'opposites attract' sort of thing... Like in my case, as a more submissive personality type in general, I prefer a dominant male (but he must be respectful towards me, and treat well too)...

---

I agree with this post, particular the part I bolded. Different people have different tastes.

While pandacakes comment was kinda condescending and I agree it is not his position to say what "God intended", if he prefers submissive or what he sees as "feminine", and YTA prefers a more aggressive, educated self-assured type woman, hey, that's just what it is. I see nothin wrong with either.

I myself do not fit the loud-mouth, feminist ball-busting wonder-woman type. But I am not a shy, timid little flower waiting to be picked, to cater to her man's every single need and be perfectly pliant.
If anything, I have qualities from each, can be sweet and seemingly easygoing if needed, can be a b!tch or even cold other times.

Oppositely, I'm not attracted to men who are overbearing or controlling in any kind of way. Nor do I like men who rely on the woman to make all the decisions in the relationship and have her initiate 100% of the time for everything. I'm not a Stepford wife, nor am I "Christina Grey".

posted September 23, 2012 12:45 AM            

There is no one 'type', but someone whose: Highly intelligent, musically inclined, a creative problem solver, introverted, sensitive, dryly humourous, vegetarian, inwardly self confident, deeply passionate about his work/craft above all

Pretty much inadvertently described my boyfriend. Except for the dry humour bit. He's more of a goofball.

posted September 23, 2012 01:11 AM            

I am attracted to firery types who love to read yet are down for an outdoor adventure, consider themselves feminists and who can pull out their guitar and woo me with their musical abilities and creativity and who can cut to the chase and tell me they love me.