Interesting results!

I'd be interested to hear more details on the demographics - I suspect that as the demographics get younger, the less these points will hold true.

My comments below are based in my own experience, and observations of my peers (ETA: Comments here are are all analysis of hetero relationships):

The points where I would expect to see the most variance from individual to individual:

> Men should take on all form of "handyman" chores ("it's so hot when he uses his tools")

In several heterosexual families I know, it's the woman who does most to all of the "handyman" type chores, and it's preferred that way.

> Men should pay for dates/meals (within reason - but the baseline expectation of a "man who can provide" is there)

This varies by couple in my experience. Some split everything 50/50ish, some the man pays by default. Don't think I've seen any where the woman always pays.

> Men should always "take the lead" in dating and even throughout relationships. My follow-up question was: "but at what point does equality or partnership come into play?" To which the common response was: "I like taking the lead sometimes, but I don't want to be the leader."

I'd be very surprised to see this play out at 100%, but I could be wrong. Most healthy relationships I've seen have been very much equal back and forth, or having each individual lead where they are most qualified (regardless of traditional gender roles).

> Men should not cry unless there is a "good reason." This is actually a more complicated answer, and I'm still trying to figure it out. When pressed, women said that men crying can be very attractive if grounded in emotional maturity rather than "childish crying." Again, still trying to figure this one out.

A "good reason" is doing a lot of heavy lifting there. I'd say it would be reasonable to not expect any adult not to cry if not given a "good reason". An analysis of what constitutes a "good reason" will vary individual to individual in all likelihood, and is probably too complex for an HN comment :P.

Ones I'm not shocked by:

> Men should pursue women. Women find it unattractive if they have to pursue men.

> Women highly value men who approach them in public (in an appropriate environment). My follow-up question was: "what if they're not attractive?" to which they replied something like "it's fine as long as they handle rejection well."

In my experience and observation of others, no one wants to make the first move :P . As such, with societal expectation being on the man (in hetero relationships), it makes sense the woman would be happy with that.

> Women prefer "dad bods" as opposed to "jacked" or "body builder" looking men. This article: https://nypost.com/2021/03/25/dad-bods-are-the-biggest-turn-... was used as one of the references. I would describe this as men who are physically strong but have 12-18% bodyfat. - Women prefer tall men, but "it's more of a wishlist item than a strict requirement"

These check out with everything I've seen/heard.

> Women want men who are more confident than they are.

Everybody likes confident people. (I think?)

Other comments:

> but some of them were shocking to me because I've read a few too many "articles" from blue checkmark Twitter users which made me think traditional masculinity was an inconvenient character flaw rather than something women were directly attracted to and looking for.

This is probably due to the distaste for "toxic masculinity". Healthy masculinity is what's described above, whereas "toxic masculinity" is that taken to extremes where it is no longer healthy (ie. "Men no longer should cry at all", as opposed to "Men should cry if there is a good reason" or "A man should be able to provide" vs "If a man isn't providing everything from outside the house, he and his wife are failing")