Confidence, men, and the "two extremes"

[Kaesekopf]

Unsure where this fit, so this seems appropriate.  Because I say so. 

On another thread, Penelope said/asked:

Can we start a conversation about the seeming confidence dichotomy in modern males? From my experiences as a college student in the recent past, I've discovered that young men generally fall into two major categories: 1. The overly confident jerk who thinks that he can do no wrong, or 2. the otherwise sweet-natured guy who totally lacks confidence in himself, such that it renders him socially paralyzed. Has anyone else noticed a similar trend?

My recommendation for Catholic young men would be to avoid this dichotomy.

There was some discussion on this in the original thread, but I thought it was well worth discussing in its own thread. 

What do you think is the root of this?  Why does it continue?  Why do women seem to complain about it?  What can men to do solve/"fix" it? 

Or any general thoughts you have on the topic. 

[Theophilus]

I would have to say there are three types of men at least.

1. The overly confident jerk who thinks that he can do no wrong,
2. The guy who totally lacks confidence in himself, such that it renders him socially paralyzed.

3.  The sweet-natured guy who watches women fawn over the jerk and himself gets lumped together with the confidence lacker.

Number one is that way from watching a father who is the same way and never getting taught any different.

Number two is that way from an overbearing mother and a father who has to look at the mother every time he speaks to see if it is going to be approved. 

Number three is that way from having manners and girls not being raised to recognize number one and look past him to number three.
Just my thoughts...

[Cesar_Augustus]

Ah, the typical nice guy vs. jerk.

In all the Catholic forums I have participated, this topic comes sooner or later, without any consensus or clear solution yet.

[Mithrandylan]

I don't really know what to say.  I think that this may 'generally' be true, but considering that so many trads get married and stay married (not that all do, or that there aren't problems) I don't really see this dynamic as being definitive.  In other words, I wouldn't worry about it.

[Cesar_Augustus]

I don't really know what to say.  I think that this may 'generally' be true, but considering that so many trads get married and stay married (not that all do, or that there aren't problems) I don't really see this dynamic as being definitive.

Maybe distance from secular culture could be a factor in that?

[LouisIX]

Guys need to learn how to find a healthy middle in between the first two types that TTBG mentioned.  There's a way to be confident without being a jerk.  A lot of guys that I know push too hard.  They think that winning a girl over is something accomplished with hard work or grand, romantic gestures.

It needs to be natural.  In order for it to be natural a guy must be happy alone, not needing the girl.  A lot of guys suffocate women and do not leave them the room to develop an interest in them.

Be yourself, be confident in who you are, and don't show all your cards too early.

[Graham]

Women tend to lust after confident jerks, so women's lib has created an environment where confident jerks are sexually rewarded for being so. Meanwhile, boys in general are raised to be submissive white knights who are afraid to cross a woman, kind of like they're afraid to cross a minority -- these people's feelings are treated as sacred, to the extent that men will find themselves sanctioned and even stripped of their livelihood for transgression. That ubiquitous environment of shrunken manhood is passively imbibed by young boys, and does damage to their yet-plastic personalities. So we see a double movement, where confident jerkitude, innate or learned, is incentivized in those few men who can pull it off, while the rest are browbeaten into being 'sweet-natured' and, well, unnattractive. Please don't let the sweeping generalizations distract you from the grains of truth.

This dynamic is found among Trads as well, minus the sexual liberty. So we can actually isolate explicit sexual favours from social favours -- in an environment where women have too much social power, we will tend to see this dynamic, of most men submitting to them, and some socially gifted outliers holding them in contempt (and being rewarded for it).

The unfortunate fact is that one generally has to treat women as unreliable witnesses on this topic, since they're feelings are mysterious even to themselves. So the best bet is to try to be a man according to the role models of manliness you discern around you. In an epicene culture, this is immensely difficult even for Catholics.

In a culture where early marriage and family were the norm, men would more easily learn to combine dominance and providership into a healthy sense of fatherly leadership.

[LouisIX]

Let's not try to peg this too much on women.  A large (note I said 'large' and not 'only') reason for women being drawn to over-confident, jerk, frat types is because this all that is left in terms of men with any confidence whatsoever.  It's the cocky jerk or the needy effeminate.

I think a lot of women want something different, but are unable to find it, and so learn to settle for the former.

Be John Wayne.  Be a gentleman, be kind, forgiving, intelligent, and warm, but learn to be emotionally independent.  I truly believe that any man worth dating, much less worth marrying, has to be completely comfortable and happy with himself, so much so that he would be ok with living the rest of his life single. 

There's really nothing more to dating and courting than being friendly and confident, striking up conversation, asking a girl to coffee or dinner at the right time in a friendship, and moving on immediately and completely with a smile if she says 'no'.  No whining.  No trying to gain her love through putting words together in just the right order or phrasing. 

If you're the sort of guy that has a lot going for him then the rejection of a girl with whom you have little to no history will be water off your back.  And this will show to all of the girls around you.

[Graham]

Let's not try to peg this too much on women.

The impact of feminism is one obvious explanation. Obviously not all feminists are women, though. But liberated women create a demand for confident jerks and subservient lickspittles.

A large (note I said 'large' and not 'only') reason for women being drawn to over-confident, jerk, frat types is because this all that is left in terms of men with any confidence whatsoever.  It's the cocky jerk or the needy effeminate.

OP asked for an explanation, this is just a restatement of the problem.

[Bonaventure]

Alright, let me keep it real. Be confident, be yourself, and have swagger. Not the stupid pictures ghetto people put on Facebook, but style. Class.

I don't care if you're 600 lbs. and wear 7XL shirts or are a little shrimp. You can have style. I saw a store for pregnant women at the mall recently. If they can do it, you can.

Never change who you are for a girl either.

[Heinrich]

Sensei was pretty confident:

http://www.hark.com/clips/fqykzdvvqn-this-is-a-karate-dojo-not-a-knitting-class