He asked what he can offer you and you answered with teaching him how to be a man, essentially. You told him about the new age of masculinity or wtv you called it.
In the reverse, what do you offer him? Women (not just you) can wax poetic about what they want and exactly what a man should contort himself into to provide it but not so much about what men want and how y’all provide that. 🤔
I want to make sure I understand your perspective. My partner's question focused on what men can offer women, particularly when they're quite independent and can already provide so much for themselves (I didn't go into what women should provide for men in this one, but you make a nice point, if I'm understanding correctly.)
When it comes to my partnership, we check in with one another on a regular basis to make sure that I'm also providing the things he desires in a partnership. I'm not suggesting that there's only one side that needs to provide for the other. On the contrary, partnerships only work if both individuals are supportive. I provide elements such as creative support with his business, taking care of our home, and planning out of the ordinary nights. He appreciates my sensuality, my nurturing nature, and when I step back and let him build and create the more "traditionally masculine" things around the house.
Our ability to communicate our desires and needs is something important, but we all want emotional safety, emotional understanding and the willingness to explore feelings.
I think you understood the gist of my point and I’ll clarify below further. I didn’t mean to come off as questioning your relationship and I’m happy to hear that you have a good dynamic around this. I guess I was also expressing frustration as this side of the coin is much more prevalent; for which men are partially to blame as we don’t much write poetically about our expectations online.
But what I was getting at more precisely is that it seems to me that when women define what they want from their partner it’s always something that requires him to change everything about him. Ok not EVERYTHING, but major core things like his style of masculinity even, how to communicate, how to show love, his personality, how to be her everything designer partner basically. (Often times once he does that she also realizes that he’s not who she fell in love with, but that’s another issue). And I don’t think women appreciate that, and don’t realise how it would be if men did the same in reverse. And I don’t think it comes from a malicious place, just not empathising with the other side I guess. I can’t imagine expecting or even asking my wife to contort herself in the opposite or equivalent of ways you described here for what men should do, or telling her what new type of feminine-ness I want her to portray for my benefit, and so on. Maybe I just lack imagination but anyway this is what I was driving at.
I really appreciate the clarification and completely understand where you’re coming from. I agree that it’s unfair to expect someone to fundamentally change who they are in order to fit a partner’s desires, and that applies to both men and women. That’s not what I’m advocating for—especially in my own relationship.
For me, it’s not about asking a man to redefine his masculinity or personality; it’s about emotional awareness within the framework of who he already is. I don’t expect my partner to be my therapist or to process emotions the way I do, but I do value emotional availability—not as a forced change, but as a natural part of a supportive partnership. Just like I bring my own strengths to the relationship, I appreciate when he can meet me where I am in moments when I need it most.
I completely see how the conversation around men’s roles in relationships can sometimes feel like an expectation to overhaul their entire way of being. At the end of the day, I think both men and women need to honor who they are while still growing together in ways that feel natural and aligned.
I want to gently challenge these lines: “I can do everything myself. I don’t need a man. I want a man. A good man.”
I used to say the same. But something in me no longer resonates with that posture.
Because while many women can do everything themselves — and often have to — it doesn’t mean we were meant to.
I believe women were meant to have a man in their life.
Not in a disempowered way. Not in a clingy, dependent way. But in the most human and honest way.
We need masculine presence.
We need co-regulation — which, by definition, we can’t do alone.
We need the grounding, the witnessing, the protection, the devotion of a good man.
We need someone to build with, dream with, soften into.
So my invitation is to inquire whether the “I don’t need, I just want” framing isn't masking a fear of disappointment or dependence.
Needing isn’t a weakness. Our current societal paradigm makes us think so. But when we look at our very human nature, dependence and need are relational truths. It’s biology. It’s the natural dance of feminine and masculine.
My take is: we weren’t made to do life alone.
It’s OK to say I need a man — because in the depth of what makes us woman, we do.
(And the same is true for men — they need us too.)
When a woman has a good man in her life — a grounded one, whose presence helps her become even more of who she is — it’s an expression of the divine.
PS. Of course, this is a generalization, and some women and some men are lone wolves. But honestly, I've met many of these, and many of them admitted, in a vulnerable moment, craving a companion.
Beautifully said, Issa. And thank you for sharing with such depth and sincerity—I truly appreciate it.
I think at the core, we’re in alignment. Perhaps my wording didn’t fully capture my heart on this. When I said "I don’t need a man, I want one," I meant “need” in the most literal sense—like how a newborn needs a mother to survive. Not as in, I can or should do this alone, but rather, I have built security within myself first.
That said, your words give me something to sit with. Maybe there is more for me to soften into, more layers to unlearn. I grew up hearing from my mother and grandmother that I needed to be entirely self-sufficient—that I had to create my own security, because no one else would. And while that strength has served me, I also recognize that true connection thrives in interdependence, not just independence.
So yes, I agree—our nervous systems do soften in the presence of grounded masculinity. We do crave that co-regulation, that witnessing, that sacred partnership. And maybe for me, part of my own evolution is allowing myself to need in a way that doesn’t feel like losing myself, but rather, coming home to a deeper truth.
Truly, thank you for this. It’s a beautiful reflection. x
Thank you for receiving me so openly. What beautiful feminine energy I sense.
This landed deeply on me: "allowing myself to need in a way that doesn’t feel like losing myself, but rather, coming home to a deeper truth." You articulated what my intuition has been whispering to me, the quintessence, in this sentence. Thank you for this gift.
Lovely piece— Although I want present a challenge if I may…I’m currently interviewing only MEN for a project / book I’m working on about masculinity in the Moderna era. And I think what women think they want vs what they actually want are two different things. The reasons women want “emotional intelligence” or “emotional support” is because they’re still working through having been emotionally unmet in childhood— which is now being conflated with being seen. Women have now outpaced men in most urban markets, we’ve gotten the equal opportunity we’ve demanded for the last 50 years. As a result men have lost their purpose. Women think they want emotional intelligence someone who can “pacewith their hormones” — a partner to process with, but this is actually a mother/ father wound. What we really want is a stable force that we can rely on no matter what (this is what physiologically regulates our nervous system’s). Within this stability, feeling UNDERSTOOD (seen) is what women really want, which is utterly masculine. The connection crisis we have is not a zero sum game. I’m advocating hard for our men right now, the biggest void is that no one has taught them how to be men, and I do not believe it’s the women’s job to do that…
Thank you for taking the time to share this info (and for reading the post) Talie! It’s clear you’ve been sitting with these questions deeply, and I admire that you’re creating space to uplift and support men in this way, especially through the lens of your project. It’s such important work.
I absolutely agree that emotional support and intelligence are often tied to unmet childhood needs, and I think that’s true for all of us, across genders. We carry forward what wasn’t tended to, and relationships naturally become mirrors where those longings resurface.
I also believe that a strong, steady presence—what you described as “utterly masculine”—is deeply regulating and nourishing, especially when it’s paired with attunement. This notion of feeling understood is a great way of getting to the core desire (and to be honest, has been a through line in my relationships. Whenever I felt understood, there was a different level of connection with my partner.) Would you agree that being able to tune into women to understand them, however, requires some form of emotional maturity and being able to hold space, however?
I'm curious about your work! My partner just read a few books on this subject, including For the Love of Men. I'm curious what the men you're interviewing are saying, too!
1) Not about your husband, but men in general - We must step back and understand that our relationship and even life markers are not the same as those of women, for the most part. Our first inclination is from the perspective of the provider/protector, but we fail to realize that the "intimate, emotional and mental" wants and desires that women cannot provide or fulfil themselves are their first inclinations - especially if she has all the practical bases covered.
2) It was great you recognized what he was asking and why - and didn't take it as a sign of weakness, jealousy or him feeling threatened. As you said, he was genuinely wanting to know, how he could enrich your life and you, and I'm sure took the opportunity to widen his view, of what he brings to the table - those things not always being apparent to us men.
For men who find themselves with an accomplished, strong and capable woman - who has chosen to be with you, as you have her - what you bring to her self-reliant and self-sufficient world is YOU.
Thank you so much for sharing this beautiful reflection. I love how you framed the shift: from the instinct to protect and provide to understanding how emotional presence and curiosity can also be profound offerings. That distinction feels really important, especially in this moment when so many women are showing up with full lives, careers, and self-sufficiency—and yet, still deeply desiring partnership, intimacy, and grounding presence.
I think what you said here: “what you bring to her self-reliant and self-sufficient world is YOU”. This is one of the most powerful truths in relationship. At the end of the day, what we’re all really longing for is someone to see us, to stay curious, and to keep choosing us in both the big and the quiet ways.
Your insight reminds me of how important it is to keep widening our view of love, not as something we give only when we think we're "needed" in practical terms, but as something we offer because we’re human and connected. Thank you again for sharing x
Thank you for reading! I truly appreciate your feedback. I’ve noticed that many women today take a negative stance toward men, but I feel this only deepens the challenges we all face. Instead of division, we need openness. When we acknowledge our differences while choosing to collaborate and understand one another, we create the foundation for stronger, more fulfilling relationships.
Thank you for reading the post. Different perspectives are super important, I'd love to know how you define "modern" woman? And why men don't want them?
A Modern woman has been raised, usually by a single mother, to believe she is perfect as she is, and that she deserves a high value man because she has a job, pays rent and has a car.
Meanwhile, she has no desire to have children, no domestic skills, believes men and women are equal, and cannot emotionally regulate.
She's been taught that men are just bearded, incomplete women, and that men exist to pay for her life.
I appreciate this perspective and agree that many women align with this mindset.
For context, I consider myself a ‘modern woman’—I have a stable career, can support my lifestyle, and also have a strong desire to have children. I cook most of our meals (which my partner loves), take care of design-related aspects, and create a warm, welcoming home.
That said, I don’t believe men and women are equal in the sense of being the same—I believe we are inherently different, each bringing unique strengths to a relationship.
For me, the "modern" or "evolved" aspect I seek is emotional availability and maturity in a partner. Not to regulate my emotions, but to support me through them. Women experience emotional shifts, especially at certain times of the month, and having a partner who understands and responds with sensitivity is important. I grew up with a father who wasn’t emotionally available, and I recognize the lasting impact that had on me.
This ties into something you mentioned—women raised by single mothers. Do you think that if more men were actively present in their children’s lives, we would see more women who align with your definition of an 'ideal woman'? I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Sounds like you had a good father, in that he was present. This is paramount. I’m sure you’re aware of the statistics involving any child raised by a single mother. Basically any possible negative outcome becomes far more likely.
It also sounds like you’ve embraced your classic femininity while making your way in the modern world. Kudos for that. It’s the lack of the former, not the latter, that is weakening the US.
Yes, unique strengths. When a woman has been wooed by feminism to believe she needs to be doing traditionally masculine things (career, money, etc.) only, that’s where the problem arises. A good man doesn’t care about your career. He has his enough money for the both of you plus a family. Additionally, the time you’d put into a career takes you away from that family.
Overwhelmingly, single mothers choose that lifestyle. Among college educated couples (supposedly our best and brightest) divorces are initiated by women 93% of the time. Additionally, over 40% of babies in the US are born out of wedlock. Add to that the legal incentivizing done by the family court system, and you get our 44% fatherlessness rate. The ‘dead beat Dad’ is statistically very rare.
I can’t help any of that, sadly. Instead, I write books and record podcasts to help men be better at being men. As so many had no fathers at home to learn from, most men never learned how. This is the best I can do.
Without a doubt, if you put fathers back in homes you not only improve young men, you also produce solid young ladies. This is the answer.
I really appreciate you taking the time to read and share your perspective, it's such an interesting one.
I want to make sure I’m understanding correctly. Are you saying that you would rather learn Russian to be with a woman you perceive as more feminine than focus on developing emotional awareness? Would you be more willing to tap into your emotions if modern women were more feminine?
I’m also curious—what specific qualities or behaviors do you feel make modern women less feminine?
As I read more Substack posts—from "Men need to be emotionally open, slow, and caring rather than fast and lustful" to "Men need to embody the Eastern European brand of machismo, fierce yet contained", I’m starting to think there is no single overarching philosophy of the ideal man. Some of these ideas even seem irreconcilable and contradictory. I suppose at this point, it’s all about the kind of audience or partner you want to attract and build a life with. One has to make their own bed and lie in it.
Great points - the more that I've read people's comments and interacted with conversations on what they're looking for in partnership (and form the opposite sex), there really isn’t a single, universal blueprint for the "ideal" man (just as there isn't a single blueprint for a "modern woman.") I wrote this piece from my personal perspective (and from the conversations I've had with women in similar life stages and life circumstances as me).
At the end of the day, it really is about alignment. For me, I had dated overly masculine men who weren't in touch with their emotions, and though that was fine at a certain trajectory of life, the more I learned about myself and evolved emotionally, the more I became ready for a man who was emotionally mature and able to hold space for all sides of me.
I agree with you, however, that every person and every dynamic thrives on a different balance of traits, and what works for one couple might not work for another. Curious what works best for you, or what dynamic you're in search of?
I love this question, John. I believe parents can nurture both strength and softness. To raise a son who knows how to hold his own in the world, who can take up space and be playful and bold, but who’s also not afraid of his emotions, connection, or tenderness.
Part of that, too, is letting a boy be a boy. Letting him roughhouse, climb trees, play sports, push boundaries, and explore what his version of healthy masculinity looks like — without shaming him for the parts of himself that are energetic, competitive, or driven. It’s not about softening boys into something else, it’s about expanding the definition of what it means to be a man.
I think it starts young, teaching boys that their feelings are valid, modeling emotional maturity in the house, encouraging empathy, showing them that vulnerability isn’t weakness, and that kindness is as important as courage. It’s about raising a whole human.
Ultimately, we all play a part in shaping the world we want to live in, and parents have such a beautiful opportunity to raise sons who are not only good men, but good people.
Let me know your thoughts, and if any of this resonates x
I think there's a major hurdle for men here in that this is a great way to be, but flies in the face of what many (most?) men will feel makes them masculine, and will often not help in actually attracting someone in the early stages. We have to simultaneously be traditionally masculine and fully in touch with our emotions at the same time. It's a bit of a double bind and not many can really do that. Too masculine? Oh, he won't be in touch with his emotions. Too in touch with his emotions? Oh, he's just not masculine enough for me to be attracted.
Put it this way, if it was simple for men to just be like this, fit what you're talking about here, and get into a loving relationship we wouldn't be having this discussion. Singlehood wouldn't be rising and everyone would be much happier. But it isn't something most men can just switch into and succeed at.
Part of this might be age. I suspect older women are more open to men that are more emotionally mature and are more willing to look the other way when they aren't as traditionally masculine. So men probably learn at a younger age that no, you have to be very masculine and hide your emotions, then they get older, find the game has changed, and have now developed habits and an identity that doesn't match the new game and can't be easily reversed.
You bring up such important points, Noah. I imagine that the balance between emotional depth and traditional masculinity can feel like a double bind for men, especially in the early stages of dating. And you're right, many women are initially drawn to confidence, decisiveness, and strength ("traditional masculine qualities"). At the same time, from my perspective, a lack of emotional depth can create problems in long-term relationships.
You’re completely right on the age and experience element. I can speak from my own experience and societal conditioning that when I was younger, I was drawn more to the "traditional masculine" ideal, but as I've grown and matured, emotional intelligence has become far more valued. I also don't think I would have been ready for an emotionally evolved and present partner back in the day.
I think the challenge isn’t about choosing emotional depth and traditional masculinity, but perhaps about their integration. Masculinity doesn't have to be about suppressing emotions, but a mastery over them. An ability to be strong and steady while also being emotionally attuned. For me, a man who can hold his ground but also hold space for his partner’s emotions is rare and deeply attractive.
It's a really interesting conversation that warrants more exploration and conversation :)
I think what's missing from this is what you still want on the masculine side of the ledger. There are a lot of men ("nice guys", of which I count myself as one), who are in touch with their emotions, a shoulder to cry on for female platonic friends, etc, but don't generate romantic interest. And the drivers of attractiveness we thought would be true when we grew up in the 90s -- successful career, wealth, a comfortable lifestyle -- suddenly aren't the drivers of attraction in an app based world.
Would be worth hearing your thoughts on what to keep doing on the traditional side of the ledger to keep driving initial and enduring attraction. I suspect that these are the things modern feminism refuses to state in public if it shows a desire to be anything other than self-sufficient.
Thank you for these questions; these are really good points for me to consider. I feel that I'll need to do a deeper dive into it, but perhaps my initial answer will be useful in the meantime.
I do believe that attraction still comes down to polarity to some degree. Feminine energy is drawn to masculine energy, not just in terms of roles but in presence. Women want men who are grounded in themselves, who lead their lives with confidence, direction, and a sense of purpose.
What men can keep doing on the traditional side is to continue to embody the kind of strength that provides emotional stability. They can still cultivate ambition, especially as it relates to personal growth and vision for their lives. They can be deeply passionate about something. They can be decisive. (Nothing kills attraction faster than passivity.)
The challenge with the "nice guy" dynamic isn’t kindness, because kindness is an asset. But I think that the way that attraction works is important - the playing, teasing, connecting. That's an element in initial attraction and connection that's definitely important that I haven't gone into exploring in-depth.
My head is spinning with more ideas about this, so will give it some more thought!
I’m glad this wasn’t another “men suck” post which the internet is overly saturated with these days. I think it’s a good starting point for the conversation of how both men and women can show up for each other.
Super top level, be the healthiest version of you so you can show up for and create a healthy and safe space for your partner. This goes both ways.
What I think needs further understanding and conversation is how men can really feel like men in their roles. The meaning of this will differ by individual. But we live in a world that overly generalizes and classifies too many masculine traits as toxic. While there’s obviously a line, I do think the pendulum has swung too far and over corrected.
In general, there are differences in male and female communication. The experience of men and women is also very different. I believe the key to healthy relationships (romantic and otherwise) between the sexes is an understanding and appreciation for those differences while simultaneously not allowing them to be excuses for bad or unhealthy behavior.
Side note, I am curious how you see yourself or other women showing up in relationships to allow your significant others to be in their healthy masculine and feel like needed, purpose driven men.
Really appreciate your thoughtful feedback, Aristidis. I completely agree that showing up as emotionally mature and healthy individuals is the foundation of any meaningful relationship.
The question of how men can truly feel like men in their roles is an important one, and it’s something I’ve been discussing more with my partner as well. He’s mentioned how many men today feel like they’re walking on eggshells—good guys who are caught in a shifting landscape where even well-intended actions can be misinterpreted or called out. It’s a complex issue that deserves more nuanced discussion.
Your last question is a great one, and it’s something I'm planning to explore further in a future piece. In the meantime, I'd love to hear your perspective—what male traits do you think should be more appreciated by women? And how do you personally feel a partner can best support and create space for you to feel masculine and purpose-driven?
I don't have a singular answer as I am still exploring what it means to be a man, a healthy one, in today's society.
Let's break it down by generalize male traits:
- Problem-solving: this is a strength, immensely valuable in its practical application. They key is for men to know when they are being asked for this and when they are being asked to lend a sympathetic ear. For women, there should be an understanding that, at some point, action needs to be taken and if a problem is recurring, sympathy can only extend for so long if no action is being taken.
- Protectiveness: The desire to protect and provide security is a strong desire in many men and can be built into their identity or purpose. While physical protectiveness is more obvious, men can also learn how to be more in touch with their emotions so that they are better equipped to provide emotional security. Women need to find the balance between relying on men's protectiveness too much (this could indicate lack of personal development) or not nearly enough (over development of independence, walling them off from true vulnerable connection).
- Emotional Vulnerability: Or lack thereof given societal norms and pressures over centuries/millennia. In order to be of service, men need to take care of themselves first. This includes building the courage and comfort of allowing themselves to be emotionally vulnerable. Women need to create space for this. So many say they want an emotionally intelligent man to hold space for them, but how many are willing or equipped to do the same for men? How are they when confronted with a visibly upset man? Can they handle the tears? The anger? Or will they mock, belittle, or shame the man? I've seen and experienced too often how horrible women can be when a man shares his true emotions and thoughts. We think men emotionless, but they are very much emotional creatures. The feelings are merely stuffed deep within without healthy release.
- Drive and Ambition: This isn't unique to men, but it typically classified as a masculine trait. These are two powerful forces that move society forward. It is up to men to control and direct these forces towards something fulfilling and beneficial to themselves, their loved ones, and beyond. This is another area women can create space for and help nurture through compassion and understanding.
Their needs to be mutual respect between men and women. A mutual desire to understand each other's unique and individual perspectives, hopes, dreams, and fears. Typically, what women want from a man isn't too far from what men are looking for from women.
Just like women want men to understand their struggle over centuries, so too do they need to understand those that men experienced. Men have also suffered under the "patriarchy", though it looks different from the issues women have historically faced.
Women today are more educated, wealthier, more independent, and (this varies drastically by individual) more emotionally self aware and intelligent than men.
This isn't the fault of individual men unless they don't even try. It hasn't been part of the social and cultural language. This is new and men are trying to find a way to catch up and find their place in a world that criticizes them for nearly everything that feels natural to them or what they've been taught.
If we create more safe spaces for men, encouraging, compassionate, and loving spaces online and in real life, we will allow them to share their stories, explore their feeling and thoughts, learn and grow.
This isn't a zero sum game or "us vs them". While men need to find it in themselves to do the work, women also play an incredibly important role in shaping the very men they seek.
I could continue on this topic for a while, going down various tangents, but hope this helps the conversation for the time being!
I read your stack with interest. I’m an independent man who asks the same questions when I date. I’ve been criticized for my “cruelty” but I disagree with such perceptions. When you are an independent person for so long, you ask yourself what your partner brings to the table. You need someone who complements, supports and enhances you. Not drags you 10 feet under to a lesser person than you are.
Thank you, Sachin, I really appreciate that. I completely agree with your sentiments. We need expansive relationships that help us grow, change and evolve into our best versions. And add positively to our lives!
This is such a good question, Drew, and honestly, something I think a lot of emotionally available men are trying to figure out right now. In early interactions, you don’t want to lead with, “Hi, I’m emotionally mature!” because that’s a bit of a nonstarter. But what can come across early is presence, attunement, and self-awareness.
That might look like asking thoughtful questions, listening without jumping to fix, or reflecting back something the other person said in a meaningful way. It might mean sharing just enough vulnerability to signal depth without oversharing. You don’t have to be performative about your inner world, but giving little glimpses that show you’re grounded and open can go a long way. And honestly, the right person will pick up on that. (I’ll probably write more about this—it’s a great topic.)
To me, holding space means creating a safe, nonjudgmental environment where someone can fully express their emotions. It’s about listening without trying to fix, offering presence rather than solutions, and allowing them to feel what they need to feel—without dismissal or interruption. It’s choosing curiosity over judgment. Holding space is supportive.
Does that clarify? And if so, does it resonate? Curious to hear your thoughts.
This 'holding space' thing sounds like therapy-speak, which is likely to be off-putting to most men.
The desire to have men listen without offering solutions suggests that you think that the feminine communication style is superior to their more natural masculine style. Do you really want your husband to talk or act like a woman?
That’s a totally fair reaction. I know “holding space” can sound like therapy-speak, but at its core, it’s really just about being present without immediately trying to fix or redirect. And I don’t think that’s exclusively feminine, or that one communication style is better than the other.
It’s more about expanding the toolkit. There are moments when a solution-oriented approach is incredibly valuable. But there are also moments, especially in intimate relationships, when someone just wants to feel understood before being advised. It’s not about asking men to be more like women; it’s about both partners learning how to stretch a little to meet each other in the middle.
For a lot of men, this kind of presence can actually be strength; it’s not passive or weak. In fact, it takes a ton of self-awareness to listen without immediately solving. And when it’s done well, it actually builds trust, which uplifts the whole relationship.
I don’t want my partner to act like a woman. I want him to be fully himself, and also emotionally intelligent enough to recognize what the moment is asking for. That, to me, is the evolution of healthy masculinity.
He asked what he can offer you and you answered with teaching him how to be a man, essentially. You told him about the new age of masculinity or wtv you called it.
In the reverse, what do you offer him? Women (not just you) can wax poetic about what they want and exactly what a man should contort himself into to provide it but not so much about what men want and how y’all provide that. 🤔
I want to make sure I understand your perspective. My partner's question focused on what men can offer women, particularly when they're quite independent and can already provide so much for themselves (I didn't go into what women should provide for men in this one, but you make a nice point, if I'm understanding correctly.)
When it comes to my partnership, we check in with one another on a regular basis to make sure that I'm also providing the things he desires in a partnership. I'm not suggesting that there's only one side that needs to provide for the other. On the contrary, partnerships only work if both individuals are supportive. I provide elements such as creative support with his business, taking care of our home, and planning out of the ordinary nights. He appreciates my sensuality, my nurturing nature, and when I step back and let him build and create the more "traditionally masculine" things around the house.
Our ability to communicate our desires and needs is something important, but we all want emotional safety, emotional understanding and the willingness to explore feelings.
I think you understood the gist of my point and I’ll clarify below further. I didn’t mean to come off as questioning your relationship and I’m happy to hear that you have a good dynamic around this. I guess I was also expressing frustration as this side of the coin is much more prevalent; for which men are partially to blame as we don’t much write poetically about our expectations online.
But what I was getting at more precisely is that it seems to me that when women define what they want from their partner it’s always something that requires him to change everything about him. Ok not EVERYTHING, but major core things like his style of masculinity even, how to communicate, how to show love, his personality, how to be her everything designer partner basically. (Often times once he does that she also realizes that he’s not who she fell in love with, but that’s another issue). And I don’t think women appreciate that, and don’t realise how it would be if men did the same in reverse. And I don’t think it comes from a malicious place, just not empathising with the other side I guess. I can’t imagine expecting or even asking my wife to contort herself in the opposite or equivalent of ways you described here for what men should do, or telling her what new type of feminine-ness I want her to portray for my benefit, and so on. Maybe I just lack imagination but anyway this is what I was driving at.
I really appreciate the clarification and completely understand where you’re coming from. I agree that it’s unfair to expect someone to fundamentally change who they are in order to fit a partner’s desires, and that applies to both men and women. That’s not what I’m advocating for—especially in my own relationship.
For me, it’s not about asking a man to redefine his masculinity or personality; it’s about emotional awareness within the framework of who he already is. I don’t expect my partner to be my therapist or to process emotions the way I do, but I do value emotional availability—not as a forced change, but as a natural part of a supportive partnership. Just like I bring my own strengths to the relationship, I appreciate when he can meet me where I am in moments when I need it most.
I completely see how the conversation around men’s roles in relationships can sometimes feel like an expectation to overhaul their entire way of being. At the end of the day, I think both men and women need to honor who they are while still growing together in ways that feel natural and aligned.
I love the sincerity of this piece.
I want to gently challenge these lines: “I can do everything myself. I don’t need a man. I want a man. A good man.”
I used to say the same. But something in me no longer resonates with that posture.
Because while many women can do everything themselves — and often have to — it doesn’t mean we were meant to.
I believe women were meant to have a man in their life.
Not in a disempowered way. Not in a clingy, dependent way. But in the most human and honest way.
We need masculine presence.
We need co-regulation — which, by definition, we can’t do alone.
We need the grounding, the witnessing, the protection, the devotion of a good man.
We need someone to build with, dream with, soften into.
So my invitation is to inquire whether the “I don’t need, I just want” framing isn't masking a fear of disappointment or dependence.
Needing isn’t a weakness. Our current societal paradigm makes us think so. But when we look at our very human nature, dependence and need are relational truths. It’s biology. It’s the natural dance of feminine and masculine.
My take is: we weren’t made to do life alone.
It’s OK to say I need a man — because in the depth of what makes us woman, we do.
(And the same is true for men — they need us too.)
When a woman has a good man in her life — a grounded one, whose presence helps her become even more of who she is — it’s an expression of the divine.
PS. Of course, this is a generalization, and some women and some men are lone wolves. But honestly, I've met many of these, and many of them admitted, in a vulnerable moment, craving a companion.
Beautifully said, Issa. And thank you for sharing with such depth and sincerity—I truly appreciate it.
I think at the core, we’re in alignment. Perhaps my wording didn’t fully capture my heart on this. When I said "I don’t need a man, I want one," I meant “need” in the most literal sense—like how a newborn needs a mother to survive. Not as in, I can or should do this alone, but rather, I have built security within myself first.
That said, your words give me something to sit with. Maybe there is more for me to soften into, more layers to unlearn. I grew up hearing from my mother and grandmother that I needed to be entirely self-sufficient—that I had to create my own security, because no one else would. And while that strength has served me, I also recognize that true connection thrives in interdependence, not just independence.
So yes, I agree—our nervous systems do soften in the presence of grounded masculinity. We do crave that co-regulation, that witnessing, that sacred partnership. And maybe for me, part of my own evolution is allowing myself to need in a way that doesn’t feel like losing myself, but rather, coming home to a deeper truth.
Truly, thank you for this. It’s a beautiful reflection. x
Thank you for receiving me so openly. What beautiful feminine energy I sense.
This landed deeply on me: "allowing myself to need in a way that doesn’t feel like losing myself, but rather, coming home to a deeper truth." You articulated what my intuition has been whispering to me, the quintessence, in this sentence. Thank you for this gift.
Absolutely, and thank you for sharing so articulately. You provided a lot of elements to consider as I’m in the midst of writing my next pieces 💫
Lovely piece— Although I want present a challenge if I may…I’m currently interviewing only MEN for a project / book I’m working on about masculinity in the Moderna era. And I think what women think they want vs what they actually want are two different things. The reasons women want “emotional intelligence” or “emotional support” is because they’re still working through having been emotionally unmet in childhood— which is now being conflated with being seen. Women have now outpaced men in most urban markets, we’ve gotten the equal opportunity we’ve demanded for the last 50 years. As a result men have lost their purpose. Women think they want emotional intelligence someone who can “pacewith their hormones” — a partner to process with, but this is actually a mother/ father wound. What we really want is a stable force that we can rely on no matter what (this is what physiologically regulates our nervous system’s). Within this stability, feeling UNDERSTOOD (seen) is what women really want, which is utterly masculine. The connection crisis we have is not a zero sum game. I’m advocating hard for our men right now, the biggest void is that no one has taught them how to be men, and I do not believe it’s the women’s job to do that…
Thank you for taking the time to share this info (and for reading the post) Talie! It’s clear you’ve been sitting with these questions deeply, and I admire that you’re creating space to uplift and support men in this way, especially through the lens of your project. It’s such important work.
I absolutely agree that emotional support and intelligence are often tied to unmet childhood needs, and I think that’s true for all of us, across genders. We carry forward what wasn’t tended to, and relationships naturally become mirrors where those longings resurface.
I also believe that a strong, steady presence—what you described as “utterly masculine”—is deeply regulating and nourishing, especially when it’s paired with attunement. This notion of feeling understood is a great way of getting to the core desire (and to be honest, has been a through line in my relationships. Whenever I felt understood, there was a different level of connection with my partner.) Would you agree that being able to tune into women to understand them, however, requires some form of emotional maturity and being able to hold space, however?
I'm curious about your work! My partner just read a few books on this subject, including For the Love of Men. I'm curious what the men you're interviewing are saying, too!
“How wrong is it for a woman to expect the man to build the world she wants, rather than to create it herself?” - Anais Nin
Great article.
This illustrates a couple of important points:
1) Not about your husband, but men in general - We must step back and understand that our relationship and even life markers are not the same as those of women, for the most part. Our first inclination is from the perspective of the provider/protector, but we fail to realize that the "intimate, emotional and mental" wants and desires that women cannot provide or fulfil themselves are their first inclinations - especially if she has all the practical bases covered.
2) It was great you recognized what he was asking and why - and didn't take it as a sign of weakness, jealousy or him feeling threatened. As you said, he was genuinely wanting to know, how he could enrich your life and you, and I'm sure took the opportunity to widen his view, of what he brings to the table - those things not always being apparent to us men.
For men who find themselves with an accomplished, strong and capable woman - who has chosen to be with you, as you have her - what you bring to her self-reliant and self-sufficient world is YOU.
Thank you so much for sharing this beautiful reflection. I love how you framed the shift: from the instinct to protect and provide to understanding how emotional presence and curiosity can also be profound offerings. That distinction feels really important, especially in this moment when so many women are showing up with full lives, careers, and self-sufficiency—and yet, still deeply desiring partnership, intimacy, and grounding presence.
I think what you said here: “what you bring to her self-reliant and self-sufficient world is YOU”. This is one of the most powerful truths in relationship. At the end of the day, what we’re all really longing for is someone to see us, to stay curious, and to keep choosing us in both the big and the quiet ways.
Your insight reminds me of how important it is to keep widening our view of love, not as something we give only when we think we're "needed" in practical terms, but as something we offer because we’re human and connected. Thank you again for sharing x
It’s always amazing to find someone who writes about these issues with empathy and respect towards men. Thank you for the read!
Thank you for reading! I truly appreciate your feedback. I’ve noticed that many women today take a negative stance toward men, but I feel this only deepens the challenges we all face. Instead of division, we need openness. When we acknowledge our differences while choosing to collaborate and understand one another, we create the foundation for stronger, more fulfilling relationships.
Love it ❤️❤️
Thank you, Pauline! x
No man wants a “modern” woman.
Thank you for reading the post. Different perspectives are super important, I'd love to know how you define "modern" woman? And why men don't want them?
A Modern woman has been raised, usually by a single mother, to believe she is perfect as she is, and that she deserves a high value man because she has a job, pays rent and has a car.
Meanwhile, she has no desire to have children, no domestic skills, believes men and women are equal, and cannot emotionally regulate.
She's been taught that men are just bearded, incomplete women, and that men exist to pay for her life.
I appreciate this perspective and agree that many women align with this mindset.
For context, I consider myself a ‘modern woman’—I have a stable career, can support my lifestyle, and also have a strong desire to have children. I cook most of our meals (which my partner loves), take care of design-related aspects, and create a warm, welcoming home.
That said, I don’t believe men and women are equal in the sense of being the same—I believe we are inherently different, each bringing unique strengths to a relationship.
For me, the "modern" or "evolved" aspect I seek is emotional availability and maturity in a partner. Not to regulate my emotions, but to support me through them. Women experience emotional shifts, especially at certain times of the month, and having a partner who understands and responds with sensitivity is important. I grew up with a father who wasn’t emotionally available, and I recognize the lasting impact that had on me.
This ties into something you mentioned—women raised by single mothers. Do you think that if more men were actively present in their children’s lives, we would see more women who align with your definition of an 'ideal woman'? I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Sounds like you had a good father, in that he was present. This is paramount. I’m sure you’re aware of the statistics involving any child raised by a single mother. Basically any possible negative outcome becomes far more likely.
It also sounds like you’ve embraced your classic femininity while making your way in the modern world. Kudos for that. It’s the lack of the former, not the latter, that is weakening the US.
Yes, unique strengths. When a woman has been wooed by feminism to believe she needs to be doing traditionally masculine things (career, money, etc.) only, that’s where the problem arises. A good man doesn’t care about your career. He has his enough money for the both of you plus a family. Additionally, the time you’d put into a career takes you away from that family.
Overwhelmingly, single mothers choose that lifestyle. Among college educated couples (supposedly our best and brightest) divorces are initiated by women 93% of the time. Additionally, over 40% of babies in the US are born out of wedlock. Add to that the legal incentivizing done by the family court system, and you get our 44% fatherlessness rate. The ‘dead beat Dad’ is statistically very rare.
I can’t help any of that, sadly. Instead, I write books and record podcasts to help men be better at being men. As so many had no fathers at home to learn from, most men never learned how. This is the best I can do.
Without a doubt, if you put fathers back in homes you not only improve young men, you also produce solid young ladies. This is the answer.
I really appreciate you taking the time to read and share your perspective, it's such an interesting one.
I want to make sure I’m understanding correctly. Are you saying that you would rather learn Russian to be with a woman you perceive as more feminine than focus on developing emotional awareness? Would you be more willing to tap into your emotions if modern women were more feminine?
I’m also curious—what specific qualities or behaviors do you feel make modern women less feminine?
As I read more Substack posts—from "Men need to be emotionally open, slow, and caring rather than fast and lustful" to "Men need to embody the Eastern European brand of machismo, fierce yet contained", I’m starting to think there is no single overarching philosophy of the ideal man. Some of these ideas even seem irreconcilable and contradictory. I suppose at this point, it’s all about the kind of audience or partner you want to attract and build a life with. One has to make their own bed and lie in it.
Great points - the more that I've read people's comments and interacted with conversations on what they're looking for in partnership (and form the opposite sex), there really isn’t a single, universal blueprint for the "ideal" man (just as there isn't a single blueprint for a "modern woman.") I wrote this piece from my personal perspective (and from the conversations I've had with women in similar life stages and life circumstances as me).
At the end of the day, it really is about alignment. For me, I had dated overly masculine men who weren't in touch with their emotions, and though that was fine at a certain trajectory of life, the more I learned about myself and evolved emotionally, the more I became ready for a man who was emotionally mature and able to hold space for all sides of me.
I agree with you, however, that every person and every dynamic thrives on a different balance of traits, and what works for one couple might not work for another. Curious what works best for you, or what dynamic you're in search of?
I love this question, John. I believe parents can nurture both strength and softness. To raise a son who knows how to hold his own in the world, who can take up space and be playful and bold, but who’s also not afraid of his emotions, connection, or tenderness.
Part of that, too, is letting a boy be a boy. Letting him roughhouse, climb trees, play sports, push boundaries, and explore what his version of healthy masculinity looks like — without shaming him for the parts of himself that are energetic, competitive, or driven. It’s not about softening boys into something else, it’s about expanding the definition of what it means to be a man.
I think it starts young, teaching boys that their feelings are valid, modeling emotional maturity in the house, encouraging empathy, showing them that vulnerability isn’t weakness, and that kindness is as important as courage. It’s about raising a whole human.
Ultimately, we all play a part in shaping the world we want to live in, and parents have such a beautiful opportunity to raise sons who are not only good men, but good people.
Let me know your thoughts, and if any of this resonates x
I think there's a major hurdle for men here in that this is a great way to be, but flies in the face of what many (most?) men will feel makes them masculine, and will often not help in actually attracting someone in the early stages. We have to simultaneously be traditionally masculine and fully in touch with our emotions at the same time. It's a bit of a double bind and not many can really do that. Too masculine? Oh, he won't be in touch with his emotions. Too in touch with his emotions? Oh, he's just not masculine enough for me to be attracted.
Put it this way, if it was simple for men to just be like this, fit what you're talking about here, and get into a loving relationship we wouldn't be having this discussion. Singlehood wouldn't be rising and everyone would be much happier. But it isn't something most men can just switch into and succeed at.
Part of this might be age. I suspect older women are more open to men that are more emotionally mature and are more willing to look the other way when they aren't as traditionally masculine. So men probably learn at a younger age that no, you have to be very masculine and hide your emotions, then they get older, find the game has changed, and have now developed habits and an identity that doesn't match the new game and can't be easily reversed.
You bring up such important points, Noah. I imagine that the balance between emotional depth and traditional masculinity can feel like a double bind for men, especially in the early stages of dating. And you're right, many women are initially drawn to confidence, decisiveness, and strength ("traditional masculine qualities"). At the same time, from my perspective, a lack of emotional depth can create problems in long-term relationships.
You’re completely right on the age and experience element. I can speak from my own experience and societal conditioning that when I was younger, I was drawn more to the "traditional masculine" ideal, but as I've grown and matured, emotional intelligence has become far more valued. I also don't think I would have been ready for an emotionally evolved and present partner back in the day.
I think the challenge isn’t about choosing emotional depth and traditional masculinity, but perhaps about their integration. Masculinity doesn't have to be about suppressing emotions, but a mastery over them. An ability to be strong and steady while also being emotionally attuned. For me, a man who can hold his ground but also hold space for his partner’s emotions is rare and deeply attractive.
It's a really interesting conversation that warrants more exploration and conversation :)
I think what's missing from this is what you still want on the masculine side of the ledger. There are a lot of men ("nice guys", of which I count myself as one), who are in touch with their emotions, a shoulder to cry on for female platonic friends, etc, but don't generate romantic interest. And the drivers of attractiveness we thought would be true when we grew up in the 90s -- successful career, wealth, a comfortable lifestyle -- suddenly aren't the drivers of attraction in an app based world.
Would be worth hearing your thoughts on what to keep doing on the traditional side of the ledger to keep driving initial and enduring attraction. I suspect that these are the things modern feminism refuses to state in public if it shows a desire to be anything other than self-sufficient.
Thank you for these questions; these are really good points for me to consider. I feel that I'll need to do a deeper dive into it, but perhaps my initial answer will be useful in the meantime.
I do believe that attraction still comes down to polarity to some degree. Feminine energy is drawn to masculine energy, not just in terms of roles but in presence. Women want men who are grounded in themselves, who lead their lives with confidence, direction, and a sense of purpose.
What men can keep doing on the traditional side is to continue to embody the kind of strength that provides emotional stability. They can still cultivate ambition, especially as it relates to personal growth and vision for their lives. They can be deeply passionate about something. They can be decisive. (Nothing kills attraction faster than passivity.)
The challenge with the "nice guy" dynamic isn’t kindness, because kindness is an asset. But I think that the way that attraction works is important - the playing, teasing, connecting. That's an element in initial attraction and connection that's definitely important that I haven't gone into exploring in-depth.
My head is spinning with more ideas about this, so will give it some more thought!
I’m glad this wasn’t another “men suck” post which the internet is overly saturated with these days. I think it’s a good starting point for the conversation of how both men and women can show up for each other.
Super top level, be the healthiest version of you so you can show up for and create a healthy and safe space for your partner. This goes both ways.
What I think needs further understanding and conversation is how men can really feel like men in their roles. The meaning of this will differ by individual. But we live in a world that overly generalizes and classifies too many masculine traits as toxic. While there’s obviously a line, I do think the pendulum has swung too far and over corrected.
In general, there are differences in male and female communication. The experience of men and women is also very different. I believe the key to healthy relationships (romantic and otherwise) between the sexes is an understanding and appreciation for those differences while simultaneously not allowing them to be excuses for bad or unhealthy behavior.
Side note, I am curious how you see yourself or other women showing up in relationships to allow your significant others to be in their healthy masculine and feel like needed, purpose driven men.
Really appreciate your thoughtful feedback, Aristidis. I completely agree that showing up as emotionally mature and healthy individuals is the foundation of any meaningful relationship.
The question of how men can truly feel like men in their roles is an important one, and it’s something I’ve been discussing more with my partner as well. He’s mentioned how many men today feel like they’re walking on eggshells—good guys who are caught in a shifting landscape where even well-intended actions can be misinterpreted or called out. It’s a complex issue that deserves more nuanced discussion.
Your last question is a great one, and it’s something I'm planning to explore further in a future piece. In the meantime, I'd love to hear your perspective—what male traits do you think should be more appreciated by women? And how do you personally feel a partner can best support and create space for you to feel masculine and purpose-driven?
Thank you for asking!
I don't have a singular answer as I am still exploring what it means to be a man, a healthy one, in today's society.
Let's break it down by generalize male traits:
- Problem-solving: this is a strength, immensely valuable in its practical application. They key is for men to know when they are being asked for this and when they are being asked to lend a sympathetic ear. For women, there should be an understanding that, at some point, action needs to be taken and if a problem is recurring, sympathy can only extend for so long if no action is being taken.
- Protectiveness: The desire to protect and provide security is a strong desire in many men and can be built into their identity or purpose. While physical protectiveness is more obvious, men can also learn how to be more in touch with their emotions so that they are better equipped to provide emotional security. Women need to find the balance between relying on men's protectiveness too much (this could indicate lack of personal development) or not nearly enough (over development of independence, walling them off from true vulnerable connection).
- Emotional Vulnerability: Or lack thereof given societal norms and pressures over centuries/millennia. In order to be of service, men need to take care of themselves first. This includes building the courage and comfort of allowing themselves to be emotionally vulnerable. Women need to create space for this. So many say they want an emotionally intelligent man to hold space for them, but how many are willing or equipped to do the same for men? How are they when confronted with a visibly upset man? Can they handle the tears? The anger? Or will they mock, belittle, or shame the man? I've seen and experienced too often how horrible women can be when a man shares his true emotions and thoughts. We think men emotionless, but they are very much emotional creatures. The feelings are merely stuffed deep within without healthy release.
- Drive and Ambition: This isn't unique to men, but it typically classified as a masculine trait. These are two powerful forces that move society forward. It is up to men to control and direct these forces towards something fulfilling and beneficial to themselves, their loved ones, and beyond. This is another area women can create space for and help nurture through compassion and understanding.
Their needs to be mutual respect between men and women. A mutual desire to understand each other's unique and individual perspectives, hopes, dreams, and fears. Typically, what women want from a man isn't too far from what men are looking for from women.
Just like women want men to understand their struggle over centuries, so too do they need to understand those that men experienced. Men have also suffered under the "patriarchy", though it looks different from the issues women have historically faced.
Women today are more educated, wealthier, more independent, and (this varies drastically by individual) more emotionally self aware and intelligent than men.
This isn't the fault of individual men unless they don't even try. It hasn't been part of the social and cultural language. This is new and men are trying to find a way to catch up and find their place in a world that criticizes them for nearly everything that feels natural to them or what they've been taught.
If we create more safe spaces for men, encouraging, compassionate, and loving spaces online and in real life, we will allow them to share their stories, explore their feeling and thoughts, learn and grow.
This isn't a zero sum game or "us vs them". While men need to find it in themselves to do the work, women also play an incredibly important role in shaping the very men they seek.
I could continue on this topic for a while, going down various tangents, but hope this helps the conversation for the time being!
I read your stack with interest. I’m an independent man who asks the same questions when I date. I’ve been criticized for my “cruelty” but I disagree with such perceptions. When you are an independent person for so long, you ask yourself what your partner brings to the table. You need someone who complements, supports and enhances you. Not drags you 10 feet under to a lesser person than you are.
Thank you, Sachin, I really appreciate that. I completely agree with your sentiments. We need expansive relationships that help us grow, change and evolve into our best versions. And add positively to our lives!
“What can I offer you in a relationship, if you can provide everything for yourself?”
I think it was a honest & meaningful question! 👆
A very meaningful one that started an entire exploration! Thank you for reading, ER! x
I agree, but how can men “advertise” they have these qualities in the usual places and quick/surface level interactions where people usually meet?
This is such a good question, Drew, and honestly, something I think a lot of emotionally available men are trying to figure out right now. In early interactions, you don’t want to lead with, “Hi, I’m emotionally mature!” because that’s a bit of a nonstarter. But what can come across early is presence, attunement, and self-awareness.
That might look like asking thoughtful questions, listening without jumping to fix, or reflecting back something the other person said in a meaningful way. It might mean sharing just enough vulnerability to signal depth without oversharing. You don’t have to be performative about your inner world, but giving little glimpses that show you’re grounded and open can go a long way. And honestly, the right person will pick up on that. (I’ll probably write more about this—it’s a great topic.)
What do you mean by “holding space”?
To me, holding space means creating a safe, nonjudgmental environment where someone can fully express their emotions. It’s about listening without trying to fix, offering presence rather than solutions, and allowing them to feel what they need to feel—without dismissal or interruption. It’s choosing curiosity over judgment. Holding space is supportive.
Does that clarify? And if so, does it resonate? Curious to hear your thoughts.
This 'holding space' thing sounds like therapy-speak, which is likely to be off-putting to most men.
The desire to have men listen without offering solutions suggests that you think that the feminine communication style is superior to their more natural masculine style. Do you really want your husband to talk or act like a woman?
That’s a totally fair reaction. I know “holding space” can sound like therapy-speak, but at its core, it’s really just about being present without immediately trying to fix or redirect. And I don’t think that’s exclusively feminine, or that one communication style is better than the other.
It’s more about expanding the toolkit. There are moments when a solution-oriented approach is incredibly valuable. But there are also moments, especially in intimate relationships, when someone just wants to feel understood before being advised. It’s not about asking men to be more like women; it’s about both partners learning how to stretch a little to meet each other in the middle.
For a lot of men, this kind of presence can actually be strength; it’s not passive or weak. In fact, it takes a ton of self-awareness to listen without immediately solving. And when it’s done well, it actually builds trust, which uplifts the whole relationship.
I don’t want my partner to act like a woman. I want him to be fully himself, and also emotionally intelligent enough to recognize what the moment is asking for. That, to me, is the evolution of healthy masculinity.
Maybe say active listening, I think “holding space” is too vague for guys to understand without clarification. Otherwise great article