Hijacking terminology makes talking with you very difficult, and you're using definitions that other people in this field don't use.
References are not the same thing as pointers. Variables aren't "evaluated" except in interpreted languages.
You're complaining that C++ makes you write:
void Fun(Object *Foo);when you want to write:
void Fun(Object Foo);despite the fact that would confuse C and Objective-C programmers. Neither of those are references. Saying "reference" to someone who knows C++ makes people think you are talking about this:
void Fun(Object &Foo);which is identical to VB's ByRef which stands for by reference. It just so happens that C++ and VB share a definition of Reference.
If you wanted to be understood, you would say "I hate that C++ doesn't automatically make all class-variables pointers to classes by default"
Then we could have a meaningful discussion about what's involved in that, why that would be good, and why it would be bad.
Instead you come off as critiquing something you don't understand, and you really don't know what you're talking about. Saying things like "the OOP way" and "proper OO languages" reinforces this.
It makes it seem like you believe that Object Oriented Programming Languages never existed before Visual Basic. Now by confusing references and pointers, Java and Python can be Object Oriented languages too- but these are also very young indeed!