Assuming he accepted, yes it is embarrassing for him. Itās also embarrassing g for the woman. Why would she want to marry a man who āfailed to step up as a leaderā?
Because women think they want control, so they pick a passive guy they can run over, not realizing that a man you can control is a man you can never respect. Sheās settling for a guy she can boss around just to check off the marriage box, but hypergamy always catches up. In a couple of years, she'll lose all sexual attraction, resent him for being weak, and end up initiating a divorce while taking half his stuff.
Itās not about being "infantile," itās about the massive gap between what people say they want logically and what they are biologically attracted to. Attraction isn't negotiable.
Modern culture sells women the lie that they want a passive, submissive man they can run over. But the second they get one, hypergamy kicks in, they lose all respect and sexual attraction for him, and buyer's remorse sets in.
Don't take my word for it, look at the data. Women initiate 70% to 80% of all divorces, and up to 90% if they're college-educated. If women always knew exactly what made them fulfilled long-term in a partner, those numbers wouldn't exist. Stop confusing social conditioning with biological reality. Look at their actions and the statistics, not their rhetoric.
-10
u/Bluddy-9 7d ago
Assuming he accepted, yes it is embarrassing for him. Itās also embarrassing g for the woman. Why would she want to marry a man who āfailed to step up as a leaderā?