Is it Foolish to Date a Guy Based on His Potential?

Evan Marc Katz

  Pages:   1 2  

Hi Evan,

Is it ever okay to date a man for his potential? I met a nice, smart man, but let’s just say he’s going through a transition right now. He just recently switched careers and is starting from the bottom at his new career. He was successful in his last profession, but wasn’t happy with his job anymore and decided to leave. In the midst of switching careers in a tough economy and getting his second Masters degree, he has accrued some debt (and maybe a little chip on his shoulder, but that’s a different dating question!). He is very smart and I am sure he will get on his feet again, but is it wrong of me to not want to be with him until he does or unless he does? I’ve dated men before who were trying to change or trying to reach their potential, but they never did. I don’t want to get caught up in that again.

If I wait for him to become more stable professionally and financially before committing to a relationship, does that make me a bad person?

(Background so you can better assess the situation and have context:

This man is 40 and has never been married. I am 32 and a successful lawyer, so him not being financially secure right now is not really an issue for me. However, him constantly hinting that he does not have money is kind of off-putting, especially after only the third date. Mind you, I don’t expect extravagant dates and I have paid for half our dates.

We’ve been seeing each other at least two to three times a week for two months. He has asked to be exclusive. He is funny, smart, and attractive. I would not hesitate to get in a relationship with him if he was more stable.) –Jane

Dear Jane,

Once upon a time, I met a 31-year-old woman who we’ll call Donna.

Donna owned her own small business, traveled around the world, and made upwards of six figures. She was also divorced and really wanted to settle down, get married and have kids.

At the time, I was 30 and was a customer service representative at JDate. I was paying my way through film school, where I was getting an MFA in screenwriting from UCLA, so that I could become a college professor and teach the one thing I knew how to do. My income at the time? $32,500 – and all of it went to pay for my cost of living, film school, and my regular dating habit.

My financial state was temporary. My character was permanent.

Donna and I had great chemistry. She was very feminine and playful, and would undoubtedly be a good wife and mother.

We went out maybe 5 times before she told me that she couldn’t continue to see me. She said that I was a great guy. She said I made her laugh. She acknowledged our great chemistry. She basically said what you’re saying about your new guy, Jane.

“I’m ready for the real deal. You’re in transition. I can’t wait.”

I understood her logic, but I also knew something that she didn’t:

Print Friendly

Pages:   1 2  next >>

Related Posts:

1. Do You Know How You Come Across On A Date?
2. What You Should Be Talking About On the First Date
3. Why Do Men Date If They’re Not Ready for a Relationship?
4. I Think My Doctor Has a Crush on Me, But I Don’t Want to Look Foolish By Asking
5. Do You Want To Date People Who Don’t Want To Date You?

Why He Disappeared is the smart, strong, successful woman's guide to understanding men. If you want to learn how men think, and rediscover how to have meaningful relationships - all from a man's point of view - click here to learn Why He Disappeared.

162 Comments »Filed Under Dating

162 Responses to “Is it Foolish to Date a Guy Based on His Potential?”

1. John 1

   “My financial state was temporary. My character was permanent”
   What a great comeback and mindset to have. This should be used by every guy who has ever been between jobs and the girl has second thoughts about him. To the OP, the only thing I would say is that unless he is hitting you up for cash to pay your bills, his financial status shouldnt matter at this point in the game. You paid for half your dates which is a great move. But he has paid for half too so it sounds to me like he is trying to still work within the situation. He probably wishes he could go out more often with you but it is what it is and you should go along for the ride at this point. 

2. Karl R 2

   Jane asked: (original post)
   “If I wait for him to become more stable professionally and financially before committing to a relationship, does that make me a bad person?”
    
   At this point, the only commitment he has asked for is to “be exclusive.” That kind of commitment is rather easy to dissolve if you decide the relationship won’t be beneficial to you in the long run.
    
   Jane said: (original post)
   “I would not hesitate to get in a relationship with him if he was more stable.”
    
   How much more stable? What’s the minimum level of stability/success that he would need to achieve for you to be wholeheartedly interested? If he completes his second masters (giving him a positive cash flow), would that be enough more stable? If so, he will achieve that minimum.
    
   This is something to consider even when you’re dating someone who is not going through a transition. When my wife and I started dating, her employer was in dire financial straits. She could have lost her job at any point during the first couple years. There was no guarantee that she’d be able to get a job with equal pay, or one she liked as much.
    
   However, I had no doubt that she would be able to get another job which met my minimum level of security in a partner … the ability to support herself.
    
   Evan said: (original post)
   “My financial state was temporary. My character was permanent.”
    
   Regardless of my wife’s employment situation, she isn’t the kind of person to sit around and have me support her. That’s not part of her character.
    
   And if Jane doesn’t understand her boyfriend’s character well enough to make that assessment, then she doesn’t know him well enough to answer her question.

3. Cat5 3

   John @ #1 said:

   “My financial state was temporary. My character was permanent”
   What a great comeback and mindset to have. This should be used by every guy who has ever been between jobs and the girl has second thoughts about him.”
    
   Well sure…but that line only works if you are a person of good/decent character! 
    
   The employment or job status of a person (male or female) is irrelevant.  It’s the character that counts, and what actions he/she is taking to rectify the situation demonstrates what type of character they have.  It takes often takes a little time for you to get to know a person and determine whether the words and actions match and show what type of character the person has.  (This is true in most situations in life, not just dating.)
    
   Personally, I would rather date a man of good/decent character who is currently unemployed than a wealthy man of questionable/sketchy/low/bad character.  If I liked him and I saw no read flags indicative of a questionable/sketchy character, I would continue to date him and give him a chance, but try to suggest things to do that don’t require spending a lot of money like cooking a meal together at one of our homes, watching a movie on On-Demand, going for a hike, etc.

4. Anoymous 4

   I date a lawyer just like this one. Everything was about the mask, the image and what her parents and the rest of the world would think. Her entire family was elitist and everyone they met had to kill themselves to prove their worth to them. Her father’s first questions to me were about how I make money, not how much I love his daughter or how happy he was that she had someone who would die for her or brought many gifts to her life. Despite having earned millions of dollars previously, she broke up with me after one year of dating, telling me my dreams were a fantasy and that she never would have dated me if she knew I was financially unstable.
   I am so grateful it ended. She had told me throughout the relationship that she was not materialistic, yet every decision she made was about money or about what her parents thought. She had to live in the exclusive zip code, drive the exclusive car, work at the high position at her firm and kill herself working 60 hour weeks. For what? To have no time to date and relax or you were too busy to speak to me each night or too tired to actually be emotionally present? She had no time to enjoy what makes life worth living. No thank you. And why would I want to bring a child into that elitist materialistic lifestyle? She was the epitome of her workaholic father. Millionaire and ‘retired’ but still had to work because he doesn’t know his own worth if it’s not attached to money and achievement. Ignored his wife who dutifully stayed by his side. And it became clear my ex had the same expectations. When I saw her parents together, I said, oh no, this is what my life will look like if nothing changes.
   I dodged a bullet. As hurt as I was, I know this is not a person who I could build a real life with. She swore she was about integrity, but didn’t live it in her own life. She only cared about the facade, not the depth of love, laughter and loyalty I brought to her life. Funny thing is, she had no real friends and now I know why. We were at a party and she introduced me to her ‘friends’ and they were people she had met only once before and I saw her put up the phony facade with them. I could not imagine living a life like that. If this ever happens to any of you, know that you just escaped pure hell on Earth and be thankful you are free to find someone who actually values what really matters in life… Unconditional Love. Keep your heart open to the one who can give you that. Then you have something real to build on. “Everyone wants to ride in the limo with you. It’s the one who is willing to ride the bus with you that you should be with.” -Oprah Winfrey
    

5. Steve 5

   “There is the 50-year-old dreamer who refuses to get a real job because he wants to be the next Channing Tatum.”
    
   I had to Google on Channing Tatum to know what EMK was talking about, LOL

6. Steve 6

   Jane,
    
   It is time honored dating advice to date someone for who they are now, not who you hope they will become.
   You wrote:
    
   “Successful in his last profession, but wasn’t happy with his job anymore and decided to leave. Switched careers in a tough economy and got his second Masters degree. Very smart and I am sure he will get on his feet again.”
    
   That tells you who he is
    

7. Jenna 7

   This is a very thought provoking post. I don’t think it’s as simple as Evan makes it out to be. I, for one, don’t ask that a guy make more than me, but if he’s not making a minimum of $50,000 (I make nearly 70) i would hesitate. I’d like someone who can have a similar lifestyle and participate in my interests, which aren’t hugely expensive but do require spending some money. I’m also in an unstable profession so I’d prefer the guy be financially stable. But I’ve never been in a position like this poster’s so I don’t know what I’d do if push came to shove. 
   I would actually be more concerned that this guy is 40 and not married, and that he seems so uncomfortable with his financial situation (would he come to resent the poster?) than anything else. 
   I’m also really not sure that what Donna did was wrong, 32k seems practically poverty line in LA and she was at a sensitive age (31) where she had to make the most of her dating options. If Evan was truly in transition she could have reasonably wonderEd if he would have the time and focus to commit. Many men do not commit until their careers and finances are in order. 

8. A 8

   I have to mirror what everyone else here is saying- job/money/status have little to do with character and integrity.  I’m currently dating an under-employed carpenter.  We’ve only been on one ‘date’ that required money and that was going out for coffee.  And you know what, I DON’T CARE, not one little bit.  I’d happily sit around playing cards with him and watching movies every night because he has a heart of gold, makes me laugh, is dependable and consistent, and is a fantastic dad.  What else is there?  Money/status are illusions.

9. Andy 9

   It’s sad to say, but the key point here is that Jane is 32.  If someone is starting over and very likely wants to wait until their financially stable, it’s quite likely that the wait will be 2 or more years.  That’s fine for the 40 year old man.  At 42, if he’s successful, he can find girls to date from 25 to 50.  If Jane waits another 2 years, there’s an excellent chance he’ll be tempted by greener grass.
   He is 40 years old and has never been married; marriage is not his priority. His actions clearly demonstrate that his career is and will be until he is doing what he wants and has a living standard where he’s comfortable.  If Jane wants to get married and have kids, she should invest her time looking for someone who is ready now.
   From a successful 45 year old man who’s changed careers (and girlfriends).

10. Jackie Holness 10

    She has a right to do what she wants, but I hope she has got it going on because she may be making a decision that could set her back some real time in the dating world…Good luck to her, but I would stick it out…

11. LC 11

    I’ve never met a man who wasn’t financially stable that was interested in a relationship.  It seems they’re just interested in casual until they finally make whatever amount of money they deem fit in order to settle down.  Then they find the next new girl–not the one who stuck with them when they were down.

12. John 12

    Jenna #7,
    That is a silly rule you have. Because what if they guy who makes 50k has zero debt and very little expenses? And if you have debt and more expenses then your cash flow could actually be worse than his even though you earn more. You should read the book “The Millionaire Next Door”. It is how cash flow and low expenses and no debt allows you to keep your money and you can accumulate  wealth rather than from income alone. So in your example, the eprson making 50k could be financially better off than you.
    I am more impressed with someone who can live comfortably on 50K and no debt than from someone who makes 6 figures and lives paycheck to paycheck. So before you ditch someone for making less than you, maybe you should look at the overall picture.
     
    Besides, in order to know what someone makes you should be with them for a while and if you have spent enough time with someone then it means they are probably a decent person. And you would throw it all away because he made $50k? I would say the guy dodged a bullet if you did dump him.

13. Jenna 13

    John, you didnt read my post closely — I said $50k is fine. Under that I would hesitate, but it depends. I have no debt myself, not even college loans or a car payment, and am self sufficient and successful, so I simply hope to findsomeone roughly in the same place. Most men post their salary range in their match profile, otherwise I would never ask. And, as another poster just seconded, it’s rare to find a financially struggling guy who wants a ltr leading to marriage at that point in time. 

14. Lance 14

    I was in this same situation recently and it was hell. I had to give up on a relationship because I was so unstable professionally. You suffer emotionally and mentally while these changes are taking place and it definitely affects the people around you. I have a couple of takeaways:
    1. Character is under valued in dating, even though we say it’s not. It’s also difficult to communicate character in the early stages of dating and almost impossible if you’re using online dating as your primary way to meet new people. But I agree, I think character is 100% what it should be about. 
    2. If you’re a guy and you’re in an unstable professional situation like the one described above, I think it’s irresponsible to try to build a relationship under those conditions. You should focus all your energy and resources on getting a good job and moving in a positive direction. On the flipside, I think it’s totally reasonable for a professional woman to make the decision to bail. It’s not the most understanding thing to do, but it’s certainly pragmatic. There are worse reasons to break up.
    3. It’s totally acceptable socially for a successful male professional to date a woman who has an unstable professional situation. Think lawyers dating bartenders and waitresses. It’s no big deal going the other direction. 

15. Fusee 15

    I like how Evan’s response leads us back to the real question: what’s this guy’s character like? Is he really walking his talk or making excuses?
     
    If he has indeed a great character and can show a history of making things happen, then the questions for Jane to answer are: What are her requirements regarding her partner’s income in general? And what’s her relationship timeline? If she can accepts someone who earns less than her (now and later as well), and if he is willing to progress in the relationship without having fulfilled all his career dreams yet, they might be compatible. Otherwise, maybe not.
     
    I would not “bet on potential”, but I would not wait for everything to be “perfect”. It all comes down to priority.
     
    My fiance and I were 33 when we started dating and he was back in graduate school at that time in order to improve his future career prospects. Let me tell you that it was far from the dream situation for me, and not just because of his small income. It did seem “unstable” for our age, and it’s pretty stressful to date a graduate student. However he quickly revealed himself as a man of great character and solid values, and he accepted to progress in our relationship despite his fears and career uncertainties. Technically I accepted his proposal while he was unemployed since he has just finished his program and was not back on the job market yet. I trusted him 100% because he had proven his reliability, honesty, and responsability over and over in the course of our courtship. Three weeks later he had got a better job than he’s ever had and earns 60% more than me.

16. Lia 16

    As I have never made “the big bucks” I don’t see this as a deal breaker.  I think that it is kind of funny that the men on Match list their income.  I always thought asking how much someone made was rude and quite frankly not a good or accurate assessment of their relationship with money.  
     
    I have a friend who worked as a caregiver for a very wealthy woman.  I don’t mean just well off, I mean very, very wealthy.  Millions in income every year.  This little old lady use to sit in front of the television all day long watching the stock market and fret about her money incessantly.  She complained about the cost of everything.  She couldn’t even buy a pair of shoes without grumbling about the cost.  
     
    The amount of money a person makes does not indicate whether or not they are kind, loving, and generous.  
     
    I was dating a guy a few years back who went through a divorce and had lost his business too (he had a construction company). There were so many great things about this man.  He was funny and smart and frankly I was nuts about him.  He took me out very rarely because he couldn’t afford to.  He would come over and I would fix him dinner and we would watch a movie or talk and make love.  
     
    Eventually I did break up with him but not because of his financial situation.  With as hard as he was struggling with his business, the loss of his marriage and being a single dad half time, he didn’t have anything left for me.  He almost never called me, he talked only about himself and his ex-wife (never a good indication).  I made the effort to dress up nice, make dinner for him and spend time with him.  Of course it is likely that I was just the “transition woman”.  I could understand that he was in pain and starting over and for a long time just tried to be there for him.  But at some point, if it becomes all about one person and what they are going through, it isn’t a relationship.  At least not one that worked for me.
     
    I admire the fact the the man the OP is dating had the gumption to quit a job he wasn’t happy with and start over.  Years ago my sister started up a adult foster care home.  She went from working for barely above minimum wage to over $7000 a month within 5 weeks of opening her home.  A few years later she was making over $120,000 a year. (That was 20 years ago.)  Nothing in her past experience would have led anyone to believe she could do that.
     
    The real question for the OP is is he the man for her?  He is smart, funny, and attractive.  Great, but how does he treat her?  How do they feel about each other?  Are they compatible? Is he a man of integrity?  These are the things that matter.  
     
    Andy #9 makes a good point.  If the OP does decide to be exclusive with this guy, there are no guarantees that it will work out.  He or she may decide to move on at some point down the road.  I think that maybe that is the real question.  How can I know what will happen down the road… We don’t we only find that out by living. 
     

17. Goldie 17

    I do not even see this guy as “no present, all potential”. He has already built one successful career; he already has a proven track record, as well as a professional network and a profession that he can fall back on if things REALLY do not work out with career number 2. This is completely different from a 40-year-old genuis who’s never made a decent living, but swears he will be rolling in cash once the great American novel he’s writing hits the bestseller list and gets a movie deal. The guy that OP describes is completely legit. Cannot speak for OP, but being what I am, with my lifestyle and my values, I’d take my chances with this guy.
     
    To Jane the OP: regardless of whether it makes you a bad person or not, waiting for him to become more stable professionally and financially before becoming exclusive is, imo, not realistic. Depending upon what you mean by “more stable”, it could take him years. Neither of you are going to want to wait so long, when each of you is capable of going out and finding someone else (and you both inevitably will, if you aren’t exclusive, i.e. are seeing other people).
     
    @ Lia — wow, I always thought I was the lone eccentric because I found men listing their income on dating sites to be a turn-off.
     
     

18. Jennifer 18

    A few people have hit on it and I’m surprised more haven’t.  It has nothing to do with character or that he doesn’t have money and everything to do with the fact that guys tend to not want to get serious until they are financially stable.  And by serious, I mean thinking about a woman as wife material, not just long term bed buddy material.  If a woman is looking for marriage within the next few years, her chances are higher with a guy who is already financially stable versus one who is not.

19. Karmic Equation 19

    @Fusee 15
     
    Congrats on your engagement!

20. Yuri 20

    I’ll have to agree with Evan here.  My current boyfriend was not gainfully employed when I met him.  In fact, he was getting by on savings and struggling to find a paying job as he was merely an unpaid intern at the time.  Had I known this, I may not have dated him, and I think I would have made a grave mistake.  Why?  Because he was determined to find a job.  In fact, he is grateful for the support I provided him during this time.  He has a stable career now, and we’ve been together for a year.  I’m still super happy I stayed. 

21. Ruby 21

    I’d have to disagree with those who say that this guy won’t get serious until he is more financially stable. Jane’s guy has asked her to be exclusive after 2 months. He’s not unemployed, but is just starting over in a new career. He’s hinting that he doesn’t have a lot of money because, well, he doesn’t. After getting a year or 2 of experience under his belt, that could certainly change.
     
    I think Jane contradicts herself when she says that, “…so him not being financially secure right now is not really an issue for me. However, him constantly hinting that he does not have money is kind of off-putting, especially after only the third date. I think her greatest concern is that her lifestyle will suffer with this man. In our culture, even high-earning women are socialized to seek high-earning men who can take care of them. It may be outmoded for many women, but women still look to men for security. However, a wealthy man can lose his money, but it’s character that will always remain, the same character that gave this man the drive to leave a career he wasn’t happy with, and pursue a new one. 

22. Angie 22

     
    I am sure he will get on his feet again, but is it wrong of me to not want to be with him until he does or unless he does?
    
    Jane, you can’t put stipulations like this on the people you are seeing.  Evan is right.  If you don’t like him as he is, you can’t expect him to wait while you sit around evaluating whether or not his career/financial state improves.  Love is about accepting the person as a whole, and love is also a big gamble.
     
    I also think Evan may be projecting a bit too much of himself onto this man.  While it’s true the signs are good that he has what it takes to be successful, there are no guarantees with anything.
     
    I’d be direct and upfront with this guy, but in a nice way.  Next time he subtly mentions his lack of finances, just ask him about it.  Ask him if money is an issue, if he sees it being an issue for a while and if he still wants to get back to a place where he is making decent money.  I think the crazy-making part of all of this is the ambiguity. You can project all you want, Evan can project as well, but only he can tell you what his current status looks like and where he hopes to be in the near future.

23. Sparkling Emerald 23

    I got engaged to my second husband, when he was transitioning from being a carpenter to going to school to get a teaching degree.  I had just bought a condo (right before I met him) then got laid off my job, and was working temp jobs.  So when we first got married we both struggled financially, him working part time, & going to school, me working temp jobs until until I could get regular employment.  But I believed in him, and I believed in his character and I married him even tho we were both dirt poor and had to make my condo payments. Guess what, even tho we are now permanently separated, it has nothing to do with finances.  He eventually got a great job, and was an excellent provider.  I was even able to be an almost stay at home mom for about the first five years of our son’s life. (I worked part time, or watched children in my  home day care business during that time) In hindsight, I probobly shouldn’t have married him for OTHER reasons, but not finances.  We now have a very nice house (which I stay in) and we have put our son through college using very little financial aid.  So go for the guy who makes you laugh and has potential, if you are otherwise happy. Perhaps my example seems tainted by the fact that we are not together, but believe me, it had nothing to do with finances.

24. Helen 24

    Fixating on a man’s income is not a wise way to choose relationships.
     
    Admittedly, I was cringing at the naivate of Jane’s letter; not because I disdain her for it, but because she is clearly going to have a lot of life-learning ahead of her, some of which may be painful. Jane, my two-word bit of wisdom to you is this: CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE.  A man’s income now, no matter how stable a person he seems, is almost certainly not going to be an indicator of what it is in the future. Nor can you count on your relative positions wealth to stay the same, or even your desires about who works more, who stays at home more, etc., if children ever become part of your future.
     
    For most of our marriage, my husband’s income exceeded mine. Then his career direction changed, which led to a substantial drop in salary, and now I’m making more. I have no problem with it because I love and trust him, and don’t want to be with anyone else. You should only be married to a person you care enough about to want to stick with forever, even if his income goes to zero.  Does that sound exaggerated?  Does that sound like a tall order?  It is reality in today’s job market.  That could happen any day to either one of you.  Wouldn’t you want to be married to a man who would stick by you even if you lost your job?
     
    So it boils down to what Evan wrote about: character. Character is the foundation for respect, trust, and ultimately love. You yourself can decide whether this man has a character you’d be comfortable living with for the rest of your life. He might, he might not.
     
    It’s not wrong to be at least somewhat concerned about finances for your future well-being. But don’t make that the kingpin of your decision, because then you might be in for a series of shocks in your married future.

25. Lia 25

    @ Goldie #17
     
    “To Jane OP: regardless of whether it makes you a bad person or not, waiting for him to become more stable professionally before becoming exclusive is, imo, not realistic.”
     
    I agree.  I see exclusivity as an agreement to get to know each other better without the distraction of dating other people.  I don’t see it as a promise to get married and be together forever.  In an exclusive relationship we find out more about things like compatibility, integrity, values, etc.  Maybe the question Jane should ask herself is… Is there enough interest and feelings to take the next step with him?
     
    @ Jennifer #18
     
    “A few people have hit on it and I am surprised that more people haven’t.  It has nothing to do with character or that he doesn’t have money and everything to do with the fact that guys tend to not want to get serious until they are financially stable.”
     
    I was wondering about that.  I don’t think that all guys are that way but I think that a lot of them would be.   Not being a guy myself I don’t know that for sure but with the reading I have done I think that that is a valid point.
     
    @ Ruby #21
     
    “However a wealthy man can lose his money.”  
     
    TRUE!!  Life has a way of changing things up despite our best efforts and against all our plans. 
     
    @ Angie #22
     
    “Next time he subtly mentions his lack of finances, just ask him about it.  Ask him if money is an issue, if he sees it being an issue for a while and if he still wants to get back to a place where he is making decent money.”
     
    YES!! when in doubt ask.
     
    @ Helen #24
     
    I was going to pull some quotes from yours but instead I’ll just say a blanket AMEN to the whole thing!

26. sarahrahrah! 26

    @ EMK — Good advice and I like the pluck you demonstrated after the breakup with “Donna.” 
     
    @ Jane –
    There is a lot of good advice here, but only you really know this man and how much of a discrepancy there is between your respective incomes.  I recently saw a study that concluded that men whose wives made more money than them were much more likely to cheat.  You might want to consider this.  However, you really won’t know what he is thinking unless you ask him about it.  You don’t want to push him, but you could ask him where he sees himself 5, 10, 15 years from now.  If he doesn’t mention being married within the time frame you’re thinking of OR if you think he’s career plans aren’t realistic, you could call him on these things (or cut him loose).   

27. Barbi Girl 27

    I do not see this point brought up, but it could be very valid: 
    With Jane being 32 already, if she waits several years for this man to achieve stability, her chances of having children and a family will decline. I could see if she were 25-30, but if they do not get serious and/or married for several years (if it goes that direction) due to him needing to get his second career off the ground, she would be pushing mid-late 30′s, and may struggle to ever have children. Men do not have quite the biological time lines that women do, so that could possibly be a part of her consideration here. Just a thought.

28. Androgynous 28

    Lia said :
    Andy #9 makes a good point.  If the OP does decide to be exclusive with this guy, there are no guarantees that it will work out.  He or she may decide to move on at some point down the road.  I think that maybe that is the real question.  How can I know what will happen down the road… We don’t we only find that out by living. 
    Personally, I feel that if you have doubts, which Jane is certainly expressing, then it is best to leave. The thing you need to have most at this point in a relationship is Faith – faith that he will not let you down, faith that he will do the right thing by you, and faith in yourself that you can deal with whatever happens.
    It sounds like Jane has already made the decision to leave, but worries about coming across as materialistic, and maybe a little unsettled by the realisation that she IS materialistic, despite her beliefs about herself.

29. Mark 29

    Damn!! No wonder your all single!!!  STOP focusing on the WRONG things, then complaining that there’s no “good” men or “women: out there.
    GEEEZZ!!!
     
    I’m beginning to think most relationship failures ARE self inflicted.
    Minimum salary? 50K. Really?  Do you do a credit check on the date?

30. JB 30

    @ John #12 –  I’ve often written about this topic in other threads but it’s certainly relevant in this one. MOST (not all) women are fixated on the dollar figure of “annual salary” and/or “job title” especially in your online profile on dating sites. They want to tell their friends and themselves “he’s a ______ and makes $_ _ _ K a year so they feel secure. They don’t seem to realize that “net worth” can be or IS so much more important. In other words the guy making 100K who’s divorced with 3 kids doesn’t HAVE as much money as myself making 75K with no debt and a positive net worth. They see what they WANT to see.
    @ Jenna#13 “Most men post their salary range in their match profile, otherwise I would never ask”. Most men lie about their salary in their profiles….LOL Gee……why do you think they do that?   
    In an unrelated but still sort of kind of way. I “noticed” my twice divorced ex girlfriend’s Facebook page recently and it said she’s “in a relationship” with “so and so” who turns out to be a lawyer. Well his George Costanza looking pic doesn’t intimidate me….LOL They can have each other! “But he’s a lawyer!” Yeah but you have to kiss THAT face!

31. Frimmel 31

    Lia #25 referencing #18
    As a male it is very difficult to get dates with women if you don’t have a job. It is unreasonable to expect that she’ll be interested in you long term if you are not employed. It is rare to find women who don’t expect to bear less, if any, of the burden for your entertainment together. I don’t come across women looking for stay at home husbands. On a lark I pushed my income on my dating profile way up. Had a lot more traffic for those couple of days.
     
    I came across something about why women aren’t as focused/interested/captivated by naked men as men are by naked women. If a man is naked, one can’t tell anything about his status and income and his worth as a provider.
     
    Jane’s story is a common one these days, accomplished women only being interested in more accomplished men. Seems Jane is scared she might end up having to be the primary breadwinner or that when this guy gets a job it won’t be the right job with the right income.

32. Karmic Equation 32

    @JB
     
    I tried eHarmony when I separated from my now ex-hubby, and I am definitely in the minority of women. I remember what I focused on were the pictures. And I think I had my age search was set between 35-50 (I was 39 at the time) — And I remember being aghast at the pix of the men who were “50″ but looked like my grandpa. Maybe they didn’t age well, but I was thinking they HAVE to be lying about their ages, because they look so much older than their posted ages. I never even bothered to look at their profiles. Maybe I missed out on a lawyer or successful business owner. LOL. I don’t regret that. Like you said, I have to kiss that face. No way!

33. Lia 33

    @ Mark 29
     
    I was baffled by your comment so I went back a read the other posts again.  There is an overwhelming majority that say finances are not the thing that determines whether or not he would be a good relationship for her.  Most said that character and integrity are what matters.  Nearly every post has this thread.  
     
    There were a few posts that stated that men who are focusing on getting a new career going and stabilizing their finances may not be in a space where they want to commit.    
     
    Even the one who posted the comment about what level of income she personally would be comfortable ($50K) with also stated, “many men do not commit until their careers and finances are in order.”  
     
    Not everyone on here is single.

34. Joe 34

    Jane, if you’re sure he’s going to be successful again, why are you thinking about giving him up until that happens?  When he’s successful again, it will probably be without you.  In the meantime, you’ll be starting over with someone else (and someone else, and someone else).

35. Nicole 35

    @Barbigirl 27,
    This woman doesn’t need to wait for her boyfriend to achieve stability before they get married and have children.  It’s so funny, women can quit their jobs, have no education, and don’t expect to have it held against them.  Plus, she is putting the cart before the horse b/c he just asked her to be exclusive, not to marry him.  Dating a man who left a lucrative career and who is starting over should not be such a source of anguish, esp. if he’s a great, intelligent guy who will “make it” again.  
    The great thing about the 21st century is that when women have good careers, they don’t need to worry about men who decide to quit higher paying jobs to perhaps teach or work in a non-profit.  Of course, women who think that men should pay all of the bills do care I guess.
    It’s hard to say without her input…is she worried about what people will think that her BF makes less money, is she still wedded to the idea that even if she doesn’t need his money, he should be able to take care of her.  There some dissonance between what she CLAIMS is important to her and what she CLAIMS she doesn’t care about and the fact that she is actually torn about dating him exclusively (not marry, just date).  I’m not sure she realizes that she is contradicting herself here.  
    If the roles were reversed, this wouldn’t even be a question.  Starting a new career does not equal deadbeat.  If she listens to a lot of my fellow women here, she will probably wind up like Evan’s ex, still hoping for a perfect unicorn and getting nothing.
    One of my friends, an ex-lawyer who hated that lifestyle remarried a fellow lawyer a couple of years ago.  Well, turns out he hated the law too and he quit and is now in grad school.  She is not freaking out about that.  He’s a smart guy, he’s in an excellent program, and when he starts over, he’ll be happy.  She has a very good paying job and they can afford kids even if he is a student.  She used to be the kind who thought the man should make more money and she would quit and be taken care of but she grew out of that and it let her have a happy marriage with a very nice guy.  She said “I just want him to be happy whatever he decides to do.” And women with that attitude are way more likely to live happily ever after.

36. starthrower68 36

    Well ladies, we wanted equality and we got it because men are asking these sort of questions now about us.  Yes I am aware that men don’t generally care what our profession is but they are looking at how we handle money and our ability to support ourselves.  So for every finger we point at someone there are 3 pointing back at us.

37. Ruby 37

    Maybe this is harder to grasp for a 32-year-old who probably hasn’t been in her job that long, but these days, it’s not uncommon for someone to have 2 or 3 careers over their working lifetime. Gone are the days when everyone spent 40 years at the same company and retired with a gold watch at the end. Marrying later and not having kids, or having them later, has given some people the freedom to do make those kinds of changes. There’s much more of an emphasis on job satisfaction and fulfillment these days, coupled with an uncertain economy in which many people have no choice but to change careers if theirs becomes redundant.
    Do Jane and her boyfriend share the same goals? Does he really want to be married? Does he want kids? Where does he see himself 5 years from now? As long as someone has the talent, ambition, and drive, why not give them a chance, especially when it’s only 2 months in?

38. nathan 38

    Have to say that the fixation on dollar amounts is laughable. As is the idea that men won’t commit until they’re financially stable in their “chosen” career. Furthermore, people have children under all sorts of economic circumstances. It may be easier to have a child when you’ve hit some sort of “stability point,” but if the majority of people actually waited for that to happen, the planet would have a hell of lot less humans on it.
     
    It’s much more likely in this day and age for both major financial fluctuations to occur, as well as multiple career shifts like the one Evan wrote about. Definitions of success – even superficial ones based on money – are tied less and less to someone picking a single career path and then climbing up the corporate ladder. You can be in a financially stable career one day, and out on your ass the next. Often for no other reason than because of “downsizing,” “retooling,” “off-shoring,” or “phasing out.”
     
    Jane needs to understand that men still feel the pressure to “be the breadwinner,” even when it’s not necessary. In addition, men are still defined in large part by their careers, even though our lives are so much more than that. Her bf’s comments about money are probably tied to that as much as anything else.
     
    I think people who are focused heavily on how much a potential partner makes need to be honest with themselves. You want a partner who will compliment your material needs, and see that as important. Stop lying about it being about the quality of a person, or whether or not that person would make a good partner. That’s bull. It’s about you and your needs.
     
    Frankly if more people – men and women – would just be honest about this kind of thing and stop dating people who don’t “measure up,” there might be less misery and judgment. However, I’m guessing that at least some those material girls and guys have that nagging voice, deep down, that says “no amount of wealth and entertainment will guarantee a good life.” If Jane’s bf is an otherwise great partner, I hope she listens to that deeper voice before it’s too late.

39. JB 39

    @Karmic #32 – Well all you have to do is watch any episode of Patti Stanger’s “Millionaire Matchmaker” to see how “attractive” below average to down right ugly men become to SOME women just because they’re “rich”. Yes, but before you marry them you still have to kiss them and have sex with them. I guess the richer a man is the”ewwwww” factor becomes less and less? 

40. Karmic Equation 40

    @JB 39

    Agreed. Can we say Bill Gates and Zuckerberg??

    I avoid watching non-cooking reality shows (love Chopped and the Iron Chef shows)… Anyway, there was a show about Sex (“Evolution of Sex” maybe?) on Discovery. It’s shown periodically. There were lots of experiments about how women and men differ about sexuality and attractiveness.

    In one segment they showed pix of men of varying attractiveness to women and had them rate them on just physical attractiveness. Most men graded out the way you would think. Then they did the same thing BUT ADDED HOW MUCH the man was making to a different set of women, inverting the $ with the men’s rated attractiveness in the first experiment. So the least physically attractive guy was shown to make the most money (over $200k), and the most physically attractive guy made the least (less than $30k)… And wouldn’t you know it, the least attractive guy who was a 5 in the previous experiment became an 8 and the 8 became a 6.

    You’re not wrong that the more money a guy makes, the more attractive he’ll be to a lot of women.

41. Goldie 41

    While I believe that there probably are women who date and marry men they aren’t attracted to, strictly for these men’s money, I’ve got to ask… Do we need to bring people’s looks into this? Because this really rubs me the wrong way. After a certain age, none of us look like Hollywood stars, especially if (as is the case with most of us on this thread) we never did to begin with. After a certain age, it also no longer matters. Thank god we’re not in junior high anymore, and are capable of being attracted to people for who they are, not for their stunning good looks. JB, how do you know that your ex-gf’s lawyer boyfriend isn’t a fun, caring, loyal, and otherwise great guy and that’s why she is with him? Heck, maybe he even reminds her of you, who knows? Personally, I’ve kissed a number of faces that may not meet your standards of male beauty, and guess what, it wasn’t for the money, and I would totally do it all again.
     
    Nathan — I like a man that enjoys what he does for a living, and is good at it. I find it a turn-on. It’s not like I choose my partners for their career accomplishments or salary, but there appears to be a correlation. I do agree with you that no one is job-secure these days.

42. Jenna 42

    I’m still not sure why people here think it’s so taboo and awful to have certain expectations about someone’s finances when you’re looking for an ltr leading to marriage. If you want a guy to make MORE than you, you’re foolish. If you make a very high salary – six figures – and want someone with the same, you’re foolish. But to expect a reasonable, moderate salary to ensure compatibility is just being realistic. That doesn’t mean you cut off anyone who doesn’t make that, just that it’s a potential red flag to be aware of. For the record, I am also wary of guys who make way more than me, and don’t want a flashy wealthy alpha male. I don’t require a college degree either. My last bf was 35 and making 45k, we split dating costs, and it was fine- he was smart and hardworking. But his lack of ambition to seek a better job I found puzzling because he was so brilliant, he really could have done more. 

43. John 43

    Jenna #42,
    One  more time for Jenna and those in the cheap seats…You dont need a moderate salary to ensure compatibility. Good investing and debt free living will accomplish that same goal. Cash flow comes from good investments and salary. You just look at the salary part. Thats why you are foolish.
    You keep trying to defend your stance but in the process you are excluding guys (or deem them to be red flagish)  who dont meet your threshhold. SInce you have made it  clear that your guy has to make a certain amount, can I ask what do you bring to the table besides your $75k salary?
    Maybe the guy with a 45K salary has almost a million in his IRA because he is a great investor. Maybe he has other investment income separate from his job that wouldn’t be included in his Match.com profile. You just look at the occupation and salary and assume that is it. That tells me that you are a lousy investor or a naive investor because anyone who is financially OK knows good wealth is  generated through debt free living and investing. Not just a job.
    And remember this is a blog for women to understand how men think. And there have been a few guys here telling you how we think. Instead of embracing it and adapting to it, you continue to fight it and justify why you are right. Makes me wonder how serious you are about really wanting a LTR.

44. Goldie 44

    Jenna is actually making a lot of sense. She says she isn’t chasing after the wealthy, doesn’t require college degree, splits dating costs… Sounds reasonable to me. As for minimal income requirements, I’d say we all have those. Show of hands, who here will marry a man in his 40s that has never in his life been able to support himself? there you go, there’s your minimal requirement. It may be 10K/year, but it exists. Personally, I’d be wary of a hypothetical guy who’s made all his money by investing but cannot go out and earn any (not sure that people like that exist in real life though). If he has a job and loses it, he’ll still be qualified to find another, but, if he doesn’t have any and a market crash wipes out all his investments, what is he going to do? Take my savings and invest them, since his are gone? Nah, I’ll pass.
     
    That said, my advice is to completely ignore the salary part of Match profiles, and to take the occupation part with a grain of salt. The salary piece especially is just begging people to type inflated numbers into it. On a few occasions I have seen guys enter accurate numbers under their salary. It usually was high, in the six figures, but they had nothing else to offer. Their salary was their only selling point. I would not recommend anyone to date any of those men.

45. Girl in the Midwest 45

    @ John at #43.
    You’re right that good investing and debt-free living is a very important skill.  I prefer a guy who can live within his means.  However I also find what Jenna at #42 says to be very reasonable.  I think she’s saying that there shouldn’t be too much discrepancy in the overall financial situation between two people.  And I agree.  I think that too much difference (in any aspect such as education, finances, age, etc.) between two people decreases the likelihood of a stable long term relationship, in my experience.  Of course, I am still at an age (28) where I can be picky about these things and still end up with a reasonable pool of men who are willing to date me.  I’m sure my standards will change as I age, that’s just life and adaptation and being realistic.
     
    And you’re right, this is a blog for women who want to understand men.  I think about each piece of advice critically and cherry-pick the ones I think may be useful to me.  Then if that doesn’t get the desired result I try a different bit of advice.  I’m willing to deal with the consequences and don’t blame men or other women for the results.  It works for me, and may not work for everyone.  So even though I may question and challenge, I’m still very receptive to Evan’s advice and find this blog very very valuable.  Maybe that’s what Jenna is doing.

46. JB 46

    @Goldie – After a certain age, it also no longer matters(looks)….LOL What planet are you living on? This is the most superficial society in the world. Yeah, you know what “certain age” that is? 85+ in the nursing home.
    “JB, how do you know that your ex-gf’s lawyer boyfriend isn’t a fun, caring, loyal, and otherwise great guy and that’s why she is with him?” I don’t know and never will but she’s still gotta kiss that ugly mug…..lol and I can assure you He DOESN’T remind her of me. He might remind her of Larry David. Oh and for the record of this discussion……she’s a secretary. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
    To you and Jenna I think the point John was mostly trying to make is a man’s “salary” MAY just be a part of his income/net worth potential due to many circumstances. Yes John we all know about the “wealth building” courses/infomercials and the people that are “great investors” etc….. Good for you if it works for you. Most women just want stability. I don’t think Jenna is being unreasonable at all at what she’s looking for.

47. RW 47

    @Goldie
    Thumbs up!
    @John
    Interesting that you should make comments about cheap seats, hehe.  Agreed about debt free living and good investing but neither of those comes magically.  The man in your example with a 45K salary, has that BECAUSE he has investments not the other way around.  It is difficult to begin investing with a 45K salary and nothing else.  I’m not saying it can’t be done but I’m saying it’s rare.  So either the man had parental money to begin with or he had another influx of cash, neither of which says anything about his abilities as a provider.  This brings me to my second point.  I share Jenna’s views and I don’t want a provider.  What I do want is a man who, at the beginning of our relationship, has the means to support himself while maintaining the sort of lifestyle I am used to.  I am not talking about 2, 3 or 5 years into marriage when one of us loses our jobs or becomes incapable of working.  But when entering into a relationship, income (be it from investments or working a 9-5 job) IS important.

48. Jenna 48

    John, you’re trying too hard and sound kind of bitter. Give it a rest, you’re obviously not reading these posts too carefully.

49. RW 49

    Sorry for the double post but to be clear, I’m not talking about Jane’s situation.  Chanceshate high that she has a winner on her hands but he also has extenuating circumstances.  I’m just refuting the idea that thinking about income is somehow shallow.  It’s one of many deciding factors but it IS a factor.

50. John 50

    Jenna,
    My last bf was 35 and making 45k, we split dating costs, and it was fine- he was smart and hardworking. But his lack of ambition to seek a better job I found puzzling because he was so brilliant, he really could have done more.
     
    Was your boyfriend happy? I bet he was. Maybe he liked that lifestyle and it worked for him. Whats so puzzling about that? So then you come along and it bothers you.   Then you try to justify it by saying he could have done more. Maybe he didnt want to do more. And that makes you sound bitter. So instead, you post on the boards trying to get people to buy into your belief that a guy should make X number of dollars. Because you know, if other women agree with you, then you did the right thing by not being with him anymore.
     
     

51. Dean 51

    JB you said “Most women just want stability. I don’t think Jenna is being unreasonable at all at what she’s looking for.”
    From my understanding, it seems that Jennas boyfriend did have stability. Its just that his stability didnt come with a high enough salary for her. That is her right of course but she doesn’t sound that much different than Donna in Evans story.
     
    Evan it would be an interesting twist if Donna ever did consult with you on what she is doing wrong that she cant find a guy to settle down with.

52. Goldie 52

    @ JB 46: “@Goldie – After a certain age, it also no longer matters(looks)….LOL What planet are you living on? This is the most superficial society in the world. Yeah, you know what “certain age” that is? 85+ in the nursing home.”
     
    It really depends on the person. To some of us it’s 85+, to some it’s 25+, to some it’s always, and to some it’s never. Whatever planet I’m living on, I am not the one wondering why women choose “ugly” men. This reminds me of another poster I saw on here a few months ago, a woman in her 20s, who couldn’t understand why she, with her amazing looks, was single, while her fat and ugly girlfriends were getting paired up? I find it amusing when people assume ulterior motives right away — oh, the fat girl has no trouble getting dates because she must be easy. He must have married her because she’s a pushover and lets him get away with anything. Or, as we see here, let’s assume that anyone who marries an unattractive man (did I hear the names Gates and Zuckerberg?) is only doing so because she prostitutes herself in exchange for his money. Melinda Gates? Really??? now I’ve heard everything. FTR, I find BG pretty attractive. He reminds me of what my Dad used to look like at that age.
     
    Anyway, what I’ve found is that a person’s brains, personality, character etc, at a certain point in their lives, actually become what makes them attractive. They shine through to the point where you don’t notice the flaws in their appearance anymore — you genuinely find them good-looking because of what they are. Not what they have, what they ARE. Just like a technically good-looking man or woman will quickly become unattractive to others if they don’t have any of those things. Granted, it depends on what social circles you move in. What I just said is probably not as true in showbiz as it is among high-tech professionals, in academia etc. Still, even if you and your friends place a high value on appearance (which I find pretty weird at 50+, but who am I to judge), it still wouldn’t hurt you guys to learn how the rest of us operate, just so you aren’t always left wondering or assuming the worst of people. For most of us, being able to see past the looks is a natural part of growing up. Shortly after my divorce, I dated a guy who looked like Brian Posehn (go on, google him). As in, people would approach us at parties and tell him he looks like Brian, and he’d say “I know, I get it all the time”. But he was smart, he was funny, great companion, easy to be with. When I looked at him, I really and truly saw a stud. I used to be pretty shallow in my 20s, and to be able to see people like that, for what they are instead of what they look like, was a hugely liberating experience for me. I highly recommend to everyone that they try it, if they haven’t already.
     
    FTR, I agree with your other point that it’s possible to have a high salary and low or no discretionary income, if the person has to support a family. Personally I find this acceptable in a partner (especially since I’m in that position myself), but understand people that don’t.

53. Lia 53

    I “window shop” on Match from time to time (my profile is hidden) and I have noticed that there are men who have an income preference for the women they date.  I don’t look at the women’s profiles so I am not saying the percentage is close but that there are men with an income preference as well.  
     
    I would also point out that a lot men have an age range preference that is far younger than them for the bottom age (sometimes as much as 20 years) and a top age preference that  doesn’t even include women their own age.  Does that mean all men who have a preference for how a woman looks are shallow and only want to date women who were embryos when the man was graduating from high school?  NO, NO, NO!!!
     
    Jenna #7 got quite a bit flack for stating what she did.  She is not bad or wrong and she only stated “… but if he’s not making a minimum of $50,000 (I make nearly 70) I would hesitate.”  she wrote “hesitate” NOT “I would can his worthless ass.”
     
    Goldie #44 I believe the last paragraph is good advice.  
     
    From time to time I still hear from the man I was dating over three years ago.  He is still struggling financially and he is still bitter over his divorce.  It is not his financial situation that gives me pause.  Maybe it should but I believe in him I know he is a man of integrity and he is brilliant.  But that bitterness and his lingering obsession with his ex-wife does give me pause… not just pause but a NO FREAKING WAY attitude.  
     
     

54. Anita 54

    Question: Is this guy’s story a Slumdog Millionaire kind of story or a Les Miz kind of story? Point: Good character is a good thing, but it really isn’t a predictor of how the story will end. Especially when what you’re trying to predict is how much you may lose if you stay invested in something. Not just talking about money here. You can also lose time, opportunity, self-esteem, self-respect. Next point: No one can say with any certainty how anyone else’s story will end.
     
    EMK: Think you are too hard on Donna. Maybe she realized that it was hypocritical of her to be dating and pretending that she wanted to be married with kids because she didn’t really want that. Maybe she realized that she would only get married and have kids under certain conditions. Maybe the great marriage + kids lies in her future yet. Point: No one can say with any certainty how anyone else’s story will end.
     
    IMO, best we can all do is focus on our own story and be of good character, no matter what happens.  

55. Anita 55

    PS: EMK, not to diminish at all the crushing pain of having someone dump you when you’re struggling to become all that you are meant to be. Sometimes it seems like a power play, like that person who sees your vulnerability uses it against you, and that it’s almost like sabotage. You think you’re showing tremendous courage and talent and initiative (character) and they’re just being some narrow-minded lemming who is looking to use people. It’s normal to want to punish them in our minds. I do it all the time. In my mind. Working on that.

56. Karmic Equation 56

    @John

    I hear where you’re coming from and agree with you AND Goldie, because you’re both saying the same thing–you shouldn’t focus on a man’s salary–but for different reasons. YOU are saying guy’s salary is not a good indicator of his financial health or ability to provide. GOLDIE is saying that people lie in their profiles, so you can’t really go by that. Either way, the takeaway is that salary should not be important in deciding whether or not to date someone from an online service. You’re both saying the same thing but from different angles.

    @Women who think that salary is RELEVANT in deciding whom to have a relationship with or not.

    If you are smart, strong, and successful (which I read to be FINANCIALLY successful)–AND YOU BELIEVE IN EQUAL RIGHTS (the silence from most women to support my position on sexual equality was absolutely deafening, so I’m gonna assume most of you were NOT in support of my position…totally ok, btw, I didn’t take it personally, but I did notice) — then why are most of you so AGAINST dating a man with low or no salaries? You should be willing to share YOUR wealth — in the same way you would have EXPECTED *HIM* to share his if the positions were reversed (“If we only did things together that I can afford to pay 50% of, we probably wouldn’t go out, wouldn’t travel, and would go on a lot of nature hikes!” – Goldie # 39 in The Secret to Successful Long-term Relationships  thread) ).

    There are LOTS of good men out there. As long as they ENJOY the job they have, even if it’s being a busboy, and he has all the other qualities you need in a BF and is a GOOD MAN, you should be happy for him and with him.

    That said, I think many of you may be using salary as a code word for ANOTHER quality that you really want:

    from RW#47: …has the means to support himself while *maintaining the sort of lifestyle I am used to*

    That is the problem: Most women want to do things with a man as long as he can pay for it, at least for himself, if not for the both of them. Why should SHE pay for him even though SHE makes enough to support the both of them? — I believe that is a selfish way to think if you’re really looking for a partner and not a provider.

    If you are worried about being “used” or feeling like a sugar mama, that’s a legitimate concern. At that point you need to trust your instincts and feminine intuition and walk away when you feel the relationship is going wrong for those reasons. Sometimes these things don’t appear until you’ve known the guy for while. Hopefully you haven’t married the guy yet, so you can still walk away relatively easily if this happens to be the case. Waiting the 2 years or so that Evan recommends before marriage has many practical benefits.

    As Nicole #35 wrote, “There (is) some dissonance between what she (OP) CLAIMS is important to her and what she CLAIMS she doesn’t care about and the fact that she is actually torn about dating him exclusively (not marry, just date).  I’m not sure she realizes that she is contradicting herself here.”

    OP doesn’t want to provide for him while he’s in transition. That’s ok. She just should acknowledge that to herself. It doesn’t make her a bad person. We all have different tolerance levels for different situations. This one’s making her uncomfortable, she should leave him and not beat herself up over her decision. Sure, he may become the next Bill Gates, but that is the risk she takes to feel comfortable NOW. Nothing worth having is free.

57. Evan Marc Katz 57

    @KarmicEquation, who wrote: “If you are smart, strong, and successful (which I read to be FINANCIALLY successful)–AND YOU BELIEVE IN EQUAL RIGHTS — then why are most of you so AGAINST dating a man with low or no salaries? You should be willing to share YOUR wealth — in the same way you would have EXPECTED *HIM* to share his if the positions were reversed.”

    Best. Paragraph. Ever.

    I’ve written about this extensively – notably here and here - .

    And while I can certainly appreciate how nice it would be to have a spouse who makes more than I do, I presume that if my wife makes X and I make 4X, then I’m pretty much gonna be footing the bills. So when women tell me on the phone with righteous indignance – “You mean I have to fly HIM to Istanbul if I want to go?!” – I can only marvel at the lack of awareness. If you make more, you don’t need a man to be a “provider” of anything but love. Men have been dating this way for years. Welcome to equality.

58. Goldie 58

    @ Anita, I think Evan is pointing out the irony in the situation – Donna broke up with him so she could be free to find exactly the guy that he is now (accomplished, successful, etc.). Aparently, today, she is still looking for that guy, while Evan is that guy, she could’ve had him, but chose not to, and now he is  no longer available. Not sure what Donna meant by wanting “the real deal”, but sounds to me like she missed the part where, in order to become the real deal, you have to be “in transition” first. Of course, there are always wealthy guys 25+ years our senior, who have the career, the assets, and are more than willing to date or marry a woman half their age. I guess they qualify as the real deal. I don’t get it from Evan’s post that he thinks she was looking to use people – she just appeared to not have enough understanding of how life works. You cannot assume that, if someone makes 30K/year when they are 30, changing careers, and going to grad school, they’re going to keep making 30K/year forever — they’re upward mobile at that point in their lives.

59. Goldie 59

    @ Karmic Equation, ouch! That quote is way WAY out of context. *he* likes to go out and travel. *he* wants to do things together that he knows I cannot pay half of. I’m cool with nature hikes 100% of the time. I’ve had dates at dog parks, for crying out loud, when none of us had any money, but both of us had dogs. Furthermore, I never expected anything from him. He offers, because he likes doing these things, he likes doing them with me, and he knows that, if he requires that I pay half, he won’t get to do those things with me. Common sense. You’re making a great point, but I really disagree with the way you’re using me as an example.

60. Dean 60

    Lia at #53
    I was a little surprised by Jennas comments at #7 but then in comment #47 she says this:  “But to expect a reasonable, moderate salary to ensure compatibility is just being realistic. That doesn’t mean you cut off anyone who doesn’t make that, just that it’s a potential red flag to be aware of.”
     
    I find it offensive that because he doesnt have a high salary that it is a potential red flag? No Jenna, its only a red flag if he hits you up to pay his bills. Otherwise that is not a potential red flag that he makes less than your magical $50k.
    Karmic Equation at 56:
    Good job recapping the majority of the comments from this article. Spot on.
     

61. Karmic Equation 61

    @EMK

    Thank you! I love your blog and your true passion for helping women. I read a lot of other dating coach blogs, just for their insights, but NONE are as generous as you with your time and energy to give free advice. The other sites spend a lot of time pushing their “programs” and I find that way too commercial and often take their advice with a grain of salt.

    Your advice is eloquent, to the point, and doesn’t pull punches. I respect and appreciate that and have found it tremendously helpful in fine-tuning some of my thoughts, mindsets, and behaviors.

    @Goldie 59

    Your explanation of how I took your quote out of context actually supports my original use of your comment. It doesn’t matter if it’s him or you who wants to do these things. The point is that if the party having more didn’t contribute more, then neither party gets to do any of the “more” things *together.* The party who has more should willingly and graciously assume the larger financial burden of a relationship (like your bf does), if what they are truly looking for is a provider of “love” (you) and not a provider of “a certain standard of living.” If he were looking for a provider of a certain of standard of living, he wouldn’t be with you, right?

    In the past, this has been the man’s role. But due to “feminism” we can all look forward to women taking on this role…But see, the problem is, most women are selective about which equality parts they’re willing to support and sign on for.

    I’m personally willing to take on the burden of finances, because money is gender neutral to me. The person who makes more pays more. That is just a fairness thing. It’s about economics and practicality, not love or romance. But who is the hunter, who is the prey…that goes back to our lizard brains and inner hamsters, and I think changing THAT is “social re-engineering” (thanks for the term starthrower68) that doesn’t necessarily produce good relationship results, because it goes against our intrinsic masculine and feminine instincts/behaviors. In other words, hunter and prey are NOT gender neutral, but “provider” is and should be, imo. YMMV

    @Dean 60

    Thanks!

62. Amelia2.0 62

    I think Jane would be correct in her doubts if the man in question weren’t working towards his goals, but existed as if opportunity would drop in his lap one day and expected her to carry him until then.  That’s usually someone you cut loose so they can figure things out on their own.  However, it seems to me like she has met a guy who knows what he is doing and is willing to risk a lot in order to feel more accomplished and to better himself.  This is a huge thing to overlook, even if he may not be at his most financially secure.  I also think it’s great of him to make Jane aware of this situation so that she isn’t blindsided by it if she does choose to get more involved.

    Also, let’s imagine a flipped scenario.  What if Jane met him while he was in a great career and was making decent bank, but then an illness or layoff or some other financial setback occurred for HER that was out of her control?  Could she hold it against him if he were to dump her because he wants to live a life without a financial burden, as great of a person as she may be?  That would be his prerogative, certainly, but giving that as the primary reason would not reflect very well on his character and I would probably say Jane would be better off without him.  Neither does the same kind of reason reflect any better on Jane’s character, in my opinion.

    I’m currently very happy with a man who had switched careers in his mid twenties, even though by now sticking with it would have been very lucrative for him.  Despite that, he gave it up because he realized that to do well in the industry he would have had to take clients who he felt needed different help than he was able to provide.  So, it was either quit or get comfortable with taking advantage of people, so he chose the former, despite nearly going broke as a result.  This was long before I met him, and he is much happier with what he does now, but I found that piece of his history to be very endearing, because it told me that he wasn’t the type who sells off his self-respect and that he has a healthy conscience that he listens to.  I admire him very, very much for those choices, not for his paycheck.  And when I think about it, I think it’s likely that’s the real issue here.  Jane is not OK with her boyfriend’s choices.  That’s fine – she doesn’t have to like his choices – but I think that cuts to the chase a lot better than pinning it on incompatible financial expectations.

    Sorry if I sound like I’m coming down hard, but I’m the camp that says the size of a paycheck is a painfully short-sighted if not disingenuous reason to base personal relationship decisions on.   

63. Goldie 63

    @ Karmic Equation #62
     
    Oh I see now. Thank you for explaining. My ex and I, when we were married, used to split all family expenses down the middle, and I admit, it kills me that I cannot do so now. So in that light, I originally read your post as being about women expecting men to buy them stuff. I completely agree with what you say here.

64. Karl R 64

    Karmic Equation said: (#56)
    “You should be willing to share YOUR wealth — in the same way you would have EXPECTED *HIM* to share his if the positions were reversed”
     
    A lot of women (including Goldie) don’t actually expect the man to pay for nice trips. If Goldie’s boyfriend wanted to go to Europe, I don’t think she’d expect that he was obliged to bring her along.
     
    But if a woman is willing to accept a wealthier boyfriend paying for a date/trip that’s too expensive her, she should also accept that she should be willing to pay for both when the situation is reversed.
     
    Karmic Equation said: (#56)
    “But who is the hunter, who is the prey…that goes back to our lizard brains and inner hamsters, and I think changing THAT is “social re-engineering” (thanks for the term starthrower68) that doesn’t necessarily produce good relationship results, because it goes against our intrinsic masculine and feminine instincts/behaviors.”
     
    Karmic,
    Name a species where the male is a predator and the female isn’t. (I won’t even limit you to lizards and hamsters.)
     
    Your belief that these behaviors are intrinsic to one sex or the other seems to rely completely on a misunderstanding of basic biology.
     

65. marymary 65

    Karl
    Male lions are predators and females aren.t  Oh hang on ….
       The animal thing doesn’t work, I think it,s only humans where it,s the male who hunts *tries to think*. Birds. Male birds bring female birds gifts even though she can get her own prey. But that has more to do with provision than pursuit.
    fighting! Male animals fight for females. Walruses.
     

66. Lia 66

    @ Dean #60
     
    You have a point.  I agree that, for me personally, a “low” salary is not a “red flag”.  I can understand why you feel that statement is offensive. 
     

67. Liz 67

    I was in a similar situation: 
    When I was in my early 20′s I had dated guys who made less and didn’t have good character, and I felt like the “sugar momma”.  It was unpleasant. After that, I had a few nice long term relationships with men who made more money than me, they generally worked out better. 
    Now I’m in the best relationship I’ve ever had, we’re both 30 and there is a BIG income discrepancy: I make six figures, he’s a student (went back to school after the military) and works part time at a restaurant. It’s not always easy, for reasons stated in some of these comments. I’m used to a more expensive lifetyle, more traveling and taking vacations. This caused some static with a trip we were trying to plan, I was happy to pay but he felt that he didn’t want me “doing everything for him” . He also felt this pressure to keep up with the “lifestyle I’m used to”, as he said, while knowing he was at a different point in his life and that would be impossible. 
    Here’s how we made it work: I booked my big trip by myself, and we planned a weekend getaway on a different date for just the two of us. Since the place I wanted to stay was still out of budget for him, I suggested a creative solution: we would split the cost relative to the income we were earning. Not 50/50. This came to 20% for his share, 80% for me. 
    This made possible for both of us. He was happy to feel like he could contribute  and that I had respect for his feelings and his financial situation. My point is this: When it’s the right guy, you find a way to make it work. If I had eliminated him based on finances I wouldn’t have him in my life and that would be a shame. 
     
     

68. Liz 68

    Evan: while I support the idea of women paying for everything if they make more, my personal experience is that most good men DO have a pride issue with this. 

69. John 69

    Liz @67,
    I applaud your theory on making it work no matter what. There should be more women like you. But I am curious how big is “big” in your vacation. I mean you can take a cruise for 2 for a week and spend about 5 grand combined. Thats reasonable and I think many people would consider 5K for a vacation to be big. Are you splitting that 80/20?
    Or is your definition of a “big” vacation something that costs between 10 and 15 grand? Because if your definition is between 10 and 15 grand then you are probably a bit high maintenance. Of course if “big” is 5 grand then you are pretty cool about splitting it and not high maintenance at all. Just curious because the crux of your statement has such a vague and subjective definition.

70. Goldie 70

    Liz, I really like the way you approached this!!
     
    I agree about the pride issue. Reading these past few comment threads, I keep remembering something a male friend told me once — he said that, if a woman offers to pay half on a first date with him, then, in his words, “there won’t be a second, because she’s sending me a message that this isn’t a date at all, that she doesn’t want to get romantically involved”. So, going back to John’s (I think) posts a few days earlier about who should pay on first dates — men’s opinions on this are all over the map, and on first dates, we cannot really tell what it is this specific man wants us to do. Maybe it’s a deal-breaker to him if I don’t pay half, but maybe he’s like my friend and it’s a deal-breaker if I do pay half. So what I did on my first dates was, I’d do a half-hearted reach and the guy would usually say “nah, I got it” or “okay, you can get the tip”. Maybe for men, it’d be best not to make this such a heated issue on first dates, because we’re not mind-readers and don’t know what you want us to do with this check.

71. Karmic Equation 71

    @Karl R

    I’m really tired of your contextomy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contextomy) and prooftexting my statements (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prooftext), along with the additonal fallacies of:
    - Ad Hominem Tu Quoque (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem-tu-quoque.html)
    - Strawman (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html)

    …to refute my positions–as if refuting my statements somehow makes you what? Righter, smarter, what? All it proves is you can’t argue a concept, only semantics; and you don’t have any imagination, only that you can dissect a sentence and argue semantics to death. Not impressive.

    I challenge you to state YOUR position, assuming you have one other than contrariness; without quoting anything out of context, which I have yet to see you do; and without strawman arguments, something else that you don’t seem to be able to do.

    @marymary and @karl R

    It’s common to refer to men as hunters in dating: http://maryelena.hubpages.com/hub/Why-Men-are-Hunters-in-Dating
    http://www.divinecaroline.com/22064/97743-won-t-commit-dating-hunter
    http://www.examiner.com/article/men-are-hunters-women-are-nesters-ah-so-what
     
    …and if men are hunters, then, what do you normally call what hunters hunt? Lionesses? I call them prey. Of course, a lioness could be prey to a hunter that hunts lionesses.

    Please don’t let Karl entice you into debating semantics.

    Both of you know what I’m talking about but are deliberately misstating me. Not appreciated.

72. Lia 72

    Liz # 68
     
    I was wondering about that.  I would be worried about hurting a man’s pride.  (If I actually had a lot of money.)  You seem to be working with the differences.
     
    I am curious.  These questions are for the men on here:  
     
    1. If your girlfriend had a lot of money (let say 5X your income) but in other areas you are compatible how would you feel if she wanted to do and have things (vacations, a big home) that you couldn’t possibly afford?  
    2. How would you feel if she wanted to just pick up the tab all the time? 
    3. Do you let her?
    4. Would that be hard on your pride?
     
    I believe men bring many things to a relationship that have nothing to do with money.  I believe that women do too.  
     
    However, the money thing seems to be kind of a hot button.  I would find it uncomfortable dating someone who had a lifestyle and expectations far beyond my means. Being the one with less financial flow seems to be a vulnerable position.

73. John 73

    Goldie @70,
     
    I am sure you have experienced this. But it seems like a lot of women trot out the “guy will be offended ” excuse. I can tell you for myself, my single guy friends and Evan himself- an offer to pay will not be offensive. and thats probably a fair representation of most guys.  Any guy who gets offended by that is in the  minority.  And if you really did run into the exception, you can alleviate his anxiety that you dont want to see him (when you really do) by saying quickly after the date you had such a good time and look forward to it again. Either way a group of guys is going to be turned off. Would you rather turn off the minority (by offering) or the majority (by not offering)? Common sense says women would please the majority. But women will use the minority point of view to justify your own reason for not wanting to open their purse.
     
     

74. Karmic Equation 74

    @Goldie
     
    Read this: http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2012/01/who-pays-on-dates.html
     
    Key takeaways:
     
    1) always assume you are going to split the check, and offer to do so.
    2) If he refuses your offer to pay for yourself, don’t insist.
    3) Never offer to pay for the whole date (i.e. pay for him and yourself) until you’ve been out several times, or received some kind of commitment from him.
    4) If you are short on money and can’t afford to pay for yourself (e.g. for an expensive dinner), tell him this when he asks you out. Say something like “I’d really like to but I can’t afford to [whatever the date is] right now. Could we go [somewhere else] instead?” (the key is suggesting an alternative).
    5) If he pays, make a point to say thank you.
    6)  A date is nothing other than two people who are attracted to each other spending time together. Neither of you knows the other well enough to be sure that the investment of time and money will be worthwhile, so neither of you owes the other anything – let alone paying for the other.

75. Liz 75

    John @69
    Thank you for the compliment! To satisfy your curiosity: the ‘big trip’ was a fitness retreat in the Carribean that he’d wanted to go to after hearing my experiences when I went last year.  It costs $1500 per person total for everything including room, food, classes, and transportation. So $3k for both of us, plus drinks. Alcohol not included, but usually not more than $100-$200 for the whole time  I was going to get our flights using my frequent flier miles,  I had enough miles for both of our tickets becuase of past trips, and a good miles-earning personal credit card. While he was initially excited about this trip, it turns out that it was out of his budget. Not just becuase of the cost (he could have done it for about $600) but it would also cost him 8 nights of income at the restaurant, and a week away from school.  This trip is important to me, so I booked it solo.
    The trip we planned for the two of us is one weekend (only two nights of missing work for him), and within driving distance.  The hotel is lovely, and I found a deal for $600 for the weekend. Depending on what we spend on food and drink it should come to $800-$1000 at most. So his share will be $160-$200.
    Goldie @70
    Thank you! I’m glad you appreciate it I was thrilled that the idea of how to split the cost worked for him. I wasn’t sure if it would.
    It was an ackward process to get there, to be honest, I was dissappointed when he first said he couldn’t go on the “big trip”. And I wasn’t sure we were really listening to each other at first. But relationships are a lot of work. The important thing is to be WILLING to work it out, and open to the other peron.  
    Regarding offering to pay on dates, I usually did what you do: offer and reach for the purse. It’s funny, we still don’t split checks on dates even though we’ve been together for awhile….becuase it doesn’t feel romantic to me, it makes me feel like it’s a work dinner or ‘just friends’. So we just trade off who gets the check. When it’s his turn to pick where we go for date night, he pays. So he can choose a more modest place if money is tight. And if I want to go somewhere fancy, I get to do that when it’s my turn to choose.

76. Liz 76

    This is the another reality of equality. If guy is making less, and the woman is cool with it but his pride is hurt…this may be harsh but “man up”!!!  Work together to find a solution, or get a higher paying job or stop dating high-income women! 
    This is a different situation from our outmoded cultural stereotypes. But BOTH genders need to adjust to the change, or be alone, or be limited by the “perfect person list” for the rest of their lives. 
    And it’s already been mentioned that in these tough economic times, the tables can turn at any moment. There was a study that men were hit harder than women by layoffs, so I understand the challenge in not being able to provide what they’re used to providing, but this is today’s economic reality. 

77. Chance 77

    Lia said/asked in # 72
     
    I was wondering about that.  I would be worried about hurting a man’s pride.  (If I actually had a lot of money.)  You seem to be working with the differences.
     
    I am curious.  These questions are for the men on here:  
     
    1. If your girlfriend had a lot of money (let say 5X your income) but in other areas you are compatible how would you feel if she wanted to do and have things (vacations, a big home) that you couldn’t possibly afford?  
     
    I wouldn’t mind it if that is what she really wanted, and I’m confident that I speak for >95% of men in the post-baby boomer generations.

    2. How would you feel if she wanted to just pick up the tab all the time? 
     
    See first answer.

    3. Do you let her?
     
    Yes.
     
    4. Would that be hard on your pride?
     
     
    No.
     
    I believe men bring many things to a relationship that have nothing to do with money.  I believe that women do too.  
     
    However, the money thing seems to be kind of a hot button.  I would find it uncomfortable dating someone who had a lifestyle and expectations far beyond my means. Being the one with less financial flow seems to be a vulnerable position.
     
    If the money thing is ever a hot button issue, it’s usually with women.  My answers would be exactly the same if the roles were reversed in your questions btw.  Hope this provides insight into how most guys think

78. Helen 78

    Karmic 61 wrote: “who is the hunter, who is the prey…that goes back to our lizard brains and inner hamsters, and I think changing THAT is “social re-engineering” (thanks for the term starthrower68) that doesn’t necessarily produce good relationship results, because it goes against our intrinsic masculine and feminine instincts/behaviors. In other words, hunter and prey are NOT gender neutral, but “provider” is and should be.”
     
    Karmic, I agree with part of this statement and disagree with part. I don’t think Karl R and marymary were deliberately trying to provoke you. They, like I, fundamentally disagree with the “biology” in your statement above. As Karl tends to phrase his points in questions, I’ll state it outright: There is no species in which only the males are the predators and females are not. Not to mention that it is technically incorrect to designate “predators” and “prey” as being members of the same species, as cannibalism is relatively rare.
     
    This isn’t just a matter of arguing semantics. What it boils down to is that we don’t have biological proof of one sex being more predatory than the other, except when it comes to mating, in which case FEMALE black widow spiders and FEMALE praying mantises are more predatory.
     
    I do agree with you that providing is gender-neutral. There are many different ways to provide, depending on our gifts, and we must find those with whom the right balance of provisions is achieved.

79. Lia 79

    Chance # 77
     
    Thanks for answering the questions!

80. Locutus 80

    I agree with Chance #77.  I would feel the same way.  I wouldn’t want someone else to pay all of the time though, because that is not fair.  The pay thing goes beyond dating.  If travelling somewhere with a friend or a family member, I would not want them paying 100% of the time for me.  My family is not rich, but apparently generous compared to what I have read here.  Usually everybody wants to pay and we even get into arguments over this.  I guess if you were brought up by cheapskates then maybe that is why some men and women turn out the way they do and view things the way they do.

81. Karl R 81

    Karmic Equation, (#71)
    I’ll keep this simple. You’ve been “arguing your concept” by making up “facts” to support it. Complain all you want, but I’m not going to let you (or anyone else) make up facts unchallenged.
     
    There’s no evidence that there’s a biological basis that men should do the pursuing. There’s no “lizard brain” or “intrinsic instinct” driving us to do it. It’s a societal construct.
     
    And it’s not a universal societal construct. There were some Native American tribes where women were initiators. For huge portions of the population (India, China, etc.) parents arranged marriages for their children.
     
    You’re trying to claim there’s a biological basis for a relatively recent Western societal construct. And you can complain all you want about how I debate, but the facts are against you.

82. A 82

    I think the issue of whether a man’s pride is hurt if his woman makes/pays for more depends on the man.
    I’ve dated 2 men who were in financial trouble:
     One would never ever let me pay for anything and was very sensitive to that.  It was a huge pride issue for him, so we never went out or spent money.  He wouldn’t even think outside the box and do free things with me, because he felt like he should be taking me out and spending money on me but couldn’t.  Needless to say, that relationship didn’t last.
    My current bf couldn’t care less.  He is working on getting back on his feet, but doesn’t let it effect his self-esteem like guy #1 did.  So, I think it really depends on the man.
    To the OP:  One thing I learned from both of these situations is that if a man is working on getting his life/finances in order you have to be okay with that.  Otherwise, constantly wanting more from him (more time, more attention, more going out) will only make him feel like he can’t give you what you need- compounding whatever stress he may already be under.  I’m not saying you can’t have your own needs- but if you need things he can’t give, it will cause big problems in the relationship- as it did in my previous relationship.  I’ve found it takes a great deal of patience to be with a man who is in an unstable place financially.  With my current bf, he’s totally worth it and is really clear about his feelings for me so I feel comfortable with taking a back seat to the obligation he has to himself to get things back on track.  With the former guy, I always felt unstable with him and didn’t have the patience to be #2 to his financial troubles.
    Just wanted to share my experience…

83. Lia 83

    Locutus #80
     
    Thank you that is a good point.
     
    When my daughter was living with me money was always tight.  I worked while she was in school and would save money for her caregivers for when she was out of school on breaks.  My mother on the other hand was very comfortable financially.  She and my step-father could afford a nice place to live, vacations, and living in southern California three months a year during the winter.  Still when she tried to insist on paying every time we went out to lunch I wasn’t comfortable with that.  If she didn’t agree to let me pay on my turn I would refuse to go.  
     
    My family is like yours.  We all reach for the check.  I think that anyone (male or female) who feels entitled to have everything paid for sends a message that would be offensive to others.  Maybe it is not that men resent paying for dinner or drinks but that the women they date EXPECT it.  I don’t like to do things that I feel others expect me to do for them, because then it is not a gift, it is an obligation. If someone EXPECTED me to pay for them I would think to hell with them!!!
     
    @ Karmic Equation # 56
     
    Great post!  I enjoy reading your contributions!
     
    and #61
     
    ...“provider should be gender neutral”  WOW!!! I loved that!!  
     
    I get what you are saying about the lizard brain.  I get what point you were making about  the hunter (pursuer) and prey (pursued) I think the lizard thing and animal analogy got mixed up for some people.  But I agree that biologically men and women are wired differently and men are predisposed to pursue.  I really love that about them!!    
     
    #74
     
    Good points thanks for the link.

84. marymary 84

    Helen
    True, I was not trying to be provocative but I do like animals and was having some fun with it. Re cannibalism, in the animal world that happens when they eat their young, or someone else’s young, or their nest/littermates.  I hope we wouldn’t take too much from animals!
    My point re male animals fighting was to back up karmic’s viewpoint actually.  Male animals make more effort for sex or it’s equal.  Off the top off my head, I can’t think of an animal where it’s the female who does the heavy lifting.

85. Karl R 85

    Lia asked: (#72)
    “1. If your girlfriend had a lot of money (let say 5X your income) but in other areas you are compatible how would you feel if she wanted to do and have things (vacations, a big home) that you couldn’t possibly afford?  
    2. How would you feel if she wanted to just pick up the tab all the time? 
    3. Do you let her?
    4. Would that be hard on your pride?”
     
    1. I never felt that my girlfriends could spend their time/money however they chose. Wealthier girlfriends generally owned their own homes. Since I had a small apartment, moving into my wife’s house seemed to be the logical course of action.
     
    I have more money than my wife, but she has more vacation time. That means she takes some vacations without me. (She can’t give me the time to join her.) I have no issue with that.
     
    If it came down to finances, a girlfriend could either choose to pay most of the expense of having me join her, or she could take the vacation by herself. I would enjoy the former option more, but either is acceptable.
     
    2. Even if she’s earning 5x what I am, there’s still room for me to pick up smaller tabs occasionally. For example, if she buys expensive tickets to a show, I’m still capable of buying drinks for two of us.
     
    3. I would certainly let her pick up most of the tabs, particularly the expensive ones. If she wanted to pick up all of the tabs (preventing me from making the occasional thoughtful gesture), I’d probably want to discuss it with her.
     
    4. Pride has not been a driving force in my adult life … particularly as it relates to wealth or status. But I’m atypical in that regard, so I might not be the best person to ask.
     
    Liz, (#68, 75 & 76)
    If the man has an issue with pride, that’s his issue. You can only control whether you have an issue with it. You can control the attitude you express toward him. Beyond that, as you said, it’s all on him.

86. Frimmel 86

    Lia in #72
     
    1. If your girlfriend had a lot of money (let say 5X your income) but in other areas you are compatible how would you feel if she wanted to do and have things (vacations, a big home) that you couldn’t possibly afford?  
     
    That would depend on what she expected me to contribute to the cost of these things but if we were fighting over this we wouldn’t really be compatible. I’m okay with being ‘kept.’ I’m capable of graciously accepting generosity.

    2. How would you feel if she wanted to just pick up the tab all the time? 
     
    If any woman expects me to pick up the tab all the time after say the second date we would not be compatible. If she makes more, complains about the pay gap and expects me to pay all the time well I’m not sure how we’d be able to be in the same room.

    3. Do you let her?
     
    Of course. If she can afford to do so and wishes to do so I’d let her.
     

    4. Would that be hard on your pride?
     
    Possibly but women entirely paying comes up so rarely (ever? I recall one long distance affair where she picked up the whole hotel bill but I paid for all the meals) that I’m not really sure how my pride would take it. I don’t really envision my pride being hurt by living a lifestyle beyond what my own income could provide.
     
    The whole handling money and what is money for and how much should be spent on what sorts of things is key to compatibility for me.

87. Frimmel 87

    Oy. Misread number two. I probably wouldn’t like her to pick it all up all the time. I’d at least expect to pay part or my half for chain restaurants and movie tickets type dates. I expect she would need some demonstration that I understand money doesn’t grow on trees and I wouldn’t plan things expecting her to pick up the entire tab.

88. Karl R 88

    marymary said: (#84)
    “Male animals make more effort for sex or it’s equal.  Off the top off my head, I can’t think of an animal where it’s the female who does the heavy lifting.”
     
    Honeybees. Ants. Termites.
     
    In bonobos (one of the species most closely related to humans) it the effort seems to be equal.
     
    If you look at the species where males aggressively fight for females (sea lions, hippopotamus), you’ll have a “winner-take-all” where the dominant male gets the harem of females.
     
    It’s probably not the ideal situation for most human females.

89. Locutus 89

    Lia #83,
    I agree with you 100%.  We obviously come from similar backgrounds. 

90. Karmic Equation 90

    @Kar; R 81
     
    I’m not complaining, I’m stating (with facts)that you do not know how to argue the POINT BEING MADE, but instead argue the point YOU wish to argue. Stop it the with the strawman arguments. You did it yet again…and committed yet another fallacy…the No True Scotsman fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy#No_true_Scotsman
     
    Please if you can’t argue the point being made, don’t argue YOUR version of the point to point. That  method of doesn’t make the original point wrong, it just shows that you are incapable of arguing without committing a fallacy.
     
    @Lions, Lionesses, and Black Widow spiders
    I’m very sorry that I may have confused you with my hunter/prey references. For some reason, since I am posting on a DATING forum for HUMANS, I thought it was understood when I referred to hunters and prey that I’m talking about HUMANS in the context of DATING. I did not realize that species such as yourself read human dating blogs and needed me to clarify that I’m referring specifically to HUMANS. I didn’t realize lions, lionesses, and spiders would read dating threads meant for humans. It was a truly EGREGIOUS mistake on my part. What could I have been thinking? I will endeavor to be clearer in the future, so that you will not be thus confused again.

91. Karmic Equation 91

    @marymary 84
     
    My apologies for my sarcasm towards you. I didn’t read your post first.
     
    In the animal world it’s usually the MALE that is more beautiful (e.g., peacocks, lions (manes), moose (horns)) — they attract the females visually. The most beautiful males get the babes A total flip-flop of the human world. I believe it’s because the females need to be less obvious to predators so that they can more safely rear their young.

92. Karl R 92

    Karmic Equation said: (#90)
    “Please if you can’t argue the point being made, don’t argue YOUR version of the point to point.”
     
    Okay. Perhaps you need to explain what point you were making.
     
    Karmic Equation said: (#61)
    “I’m personally willing to take on the burden of finances, because money is gender neutral to me. The person who makes more pays more. That is just a fairness thing. It’s about economics and practicality, not love or romance. But who is the hunter, who is the prey…that goes back to our lizard brains and inner hamsters, and I think changing THAT is ‘social re-engineering’ (thanks for the term starthrower68) that doesn’t necessarily produce good relationship results, because it goes against our intrinsic masculine and feminine instincts/behaviors. In other words, hunter and prey are NOT gender neutral, but ‘provider’ is and should be, imo. YMMV”
     
    Let’s start over.
     
    What’s the point of the part that I bolded?
     
    It doesn’t support the point you’re making about providers. (I happen to agree with that point.) It appears to be irrelevant to that point. I inferred that you included it in order to make another (separate) point.
     
    So what point were you trying to make? Can you rephrase that point without making references to lizards, hamsters, predators or prey? And if you want to make that point using references to “intrinsic instincts/behaviors”, could you provide some scientific evidence that those intrinsic instincts/behaviors actually exist in humans?

93. Karmic Equation 93

    @Karl R 92
     
    No Karl. You still don’t know how to argue. YOU decided to debate ME, so YOU need to counter MY points, IN THE CONTEXT in which I made them. I do NOT need to restate my points.
     
    You are committing yet another fallacy, the fallacy of CHERRY-PICKING (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking_%28fallacy%29). It’s interesting how you did NOT highlight, ‘IMO”, “YMMV” — but perhaps that is because you don’t understand IM speak, so I will enlighten you:

    in my opinion = in my opinion
    YMMV = Your Mileage May Vary = you may have a different opinion

     
    I’m entitled to my opinion. Please show scientific evidence that I’m not.

94. Evan Marc Katz 94

    Karl and Karmic – Please, stop fighting. Your opinions are two of the more valuable ones on the website. Karl provides a very logical, scientific point of view. Karmic provides a very self-aware female point of view. There’s no reason that either of you has to keep this up. I’d much rather you spend your time smacking down the people who don’t “get it” instead of smacking down each other.

95. Karmic Equation 95

    I am on board with the cease-fire.

96. Lia 96

    Karl R # 85 and Frimmel # 86
     
    Thank you for taking the time to answer me.  I have had this false viewpoint for so long that men were threatened by a woman who makes more money.  That false data came from the way I was raised (watching my mother and father) and my first boyfriend who told me that he would not want his wife to make more money than him.  I no longer believe that that is the way all men feel.
     
    Karmic Equation
     
    I shared what you wrote with my sister.  She loved it.  Thank you again from me and her.

97. Karmic Equation 97

    @ Karl R #92

    I just re-read your post #92 after I calmed down and the red haze had cleared from my brain.

    You were being conciliatory and I was a bitch (in a non-Sherry Argov way) in my reply #93, so I apologize for the tone as your post #92 didn’t deserve it.

    While I won’t restate my points per se, I will put forth some definitions that might help clarify my thinking on the part you highlighted:

    - Lizard brain = “the Male Brain, as seen by women” (http://thelizard-brain.com/definitions/def_li.html)

    - Hamster = “the Female brain, as seen by men” (http://toomuchonherplate.com/stop-the-hamster-wheel-i-want-to-get-off/) – There is actually a very descriptive use of this term on the Chateau Heartiste website, which is where I originally got this term from, but I couldn’t find it again when I searched for the original description there. It’s not for the easily offended, so it’s just as well that I can’t find it.

    - Hunter = pursuer = male human in the context of dating = masculine.
    I didn’t invent this term. It is a common term to refer to men in dating, just google “men as hunters in dating” and you get a lot of articles using this terminology. I have NEVER used the term “predator” to refer to men in general because “men as predators” connotes rapists and pedophiles to me.

    - Prey = pursued = female human in the context of dating = feminine.
    If men are the hunters, then the females are the prey in *MY* posts. As always, YMMV.

    - Intrinsic = native, innate, natural, true, real (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intrinsic?s=t)

    I will grant you that my segueway into the Hunter/Prey analogy was non-existent. Here is my thinking on that as I was writing that sentence:

    - Disclaimer – my OPINIONs only -

    Becoming a PROVIDER is NOT ONLY EASY to accomplish since making/spending/sharing money is GENDER-NEUTRAL, BUT ALSO may have a POSITIVE impact on relationships. In contrast men and women flipping roles of hunter/prey is NOT ONLY DIFFICULT as we are asking men and women to act against their intrinsic male and female natures (GENDER-SPECIFIC), BUT ALSO may have a NEGATIVE impact on relationships. So why object to becoming the provider and NOT object to becoming the hunter? In other words, why object to PAYING for a man but NOT object to CHASING him? (a subconscious response to Jenna’s posts perhaps, as I know she’s not opposed to hunting?)

    @Goldie #63

    Thanks for understanding. I loved your “master key / shitty locks” anecdote. I will probably reference that at some point. LOL

    @Helen #78

    I apologize for my sarcasm towards you as well in my post #90. You were trying to mediate, but I didn’t feel like being mediated at.

    @Lia #83 and #96

    Thank YOU!

98. Michelle 98

    At 40, most men are close to the top of their earning potential.  According to the director of quantitative analysis at PayScale, salaries “top out” around age 40.  To be more precise, PayScale says salaries max-out at age 38 for women ($61K), and age 45 for men ($95K). 
    
    http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2011/02/07/salaries-top-out-at-age-40/
    Statistically speaking, the 40-year old man in the middle of a career change is a dangerous bet — more dangerous than a 31-year old man making the same move.  The 31 year old has more time before he hits his earning peak. 
    
     

99. Liz 99

    Karl R, Frimmel, Chance, and Locucus:
    I also appreciate you for answering Lia’s question! It’s nice to hear the other side of it from other men besides my BF. I’m glad that attitude is more common. 
    I agree that its important to leave space for a man to contribute too. If a woman insisted on picking up the tab ALL the time, I would think that It would come across as mothering/condescending. 
    Lia: I don’t think it’s a coincidence that when men seemed to be “threatened” by my money/success, they were lacking in emotional maturity in other ways too. They were more boys than men. 
    Karl R: THANK YOU! 

100. Liz 100

     Karmic Equation:
     I think you bring up a good point, I agree that the role reversal of Hunter and Prey can be harmful to relationships. 
     Men get their wires crossed here because they associate “money” with “providing”. They’re not the same thing. 
     *Money is something that women can provide for themselves*
     That doesn’t make a woman with more money the provider.  
     Men can provide things that we can’t provide for ourselves, the list is endless but some of my favorites include: caring, affection, the feeling that theres a man in your corner who has your back no matter what (of course we can do everything ourselves, but getting a break from it is an exquisite feeling) …and back rubs I can’t rub my own  back. Sure I can pay to have a massage , but waking up to a back rub from my boyfriend  is PRICELESS!!!! It’s happened before, and it’s awesome. 

101. Lia 101

     @ Liz
      
     #99  You make a good point.  I agree that picking up the tab ALL the time could be seen as mothering and condescending espcially if it was done with that attitude.  
      
     Locutus, Karl R, and Frimmel all stated that having the woman pay ALL the time would not work for them.  For them it didn’t seem to be about pride, but about being fair.  I respect that.
      
      
     #100  I agree men provide so many things in a relationship that have nothing to do with money.

102. RW 102

     @Karmic, #56
     There’s a TON I have to catch up on but before I read everything else I would like to reply to you, even at the risk of repeating things others have already said.  To be very clear, this is not about undermining equality or about not wanting to pay for my man.  For the record, my husband of 6 months and I just bought a place and I made the down payment and paid for renos because he is slightly incapacitated at the moment for valid reasons, i.e. not irresponsible squandering of money.  It is tough on the pocket but I was happy to do it because he is my husband, I love him and what is mine is his no matter what happens to either of us financially.  BUT, and this is a big but, at the beginning of our relationship, I needed to know that his earning potential was similar to mine.  To your point, no, I cannot maintain my standard of living and also support another person at this point in my life.  If I could, I wouldn’t insist on this point.  I am not extravagant but something would have to give.  Savings?  Something else?  It doesn’t mean I’m not flexible on the issue.  If I had found an amazing man who for whatever reason made much, much less than me, I wouldn’t have abandoned him without finding out why.  If, like in Jane’s situation, it appeared to be a temporary thing, I would take the risk.  I have no problems footing the bill in the short term.  However, it does not make me shallow or “anti-equality” to suggest that I will probably not be happy with a man who makes only 20K (arbitrarily chosen low number) in the long term.  Please note that I am only talking about pre-relationship filtering.  At 28 (when I  started dating my husband), my options were plentiful and there were so many men with similar salaries that I didn’t even have to wonder about this.  It’s only after reading this blog that I have realized that internal requirement.
     Maybe that is where the disconnect is.  I had this requirement because I was 28 with a fair number of options that met it.  In fact, not consciously, but I don’t think I’ve ever dated someone who didn’t meet it.  I did date one or two men with big salaries and as they had egos to match, that didn’t work out too well.  So in my experience, aiming for a similar salary has worked pretty well.  If I were 20 years older, at the peak of my earning power and possibly with fewer dating options, I would be fine with relaxing that expectation.

103. David T 103

     Back on the subject of the blog post, I have a speculation about Donna. I am going down a winding path in my mind, so I could be dead wrong, but bear with me, because I do believe people get in their own way sometimes when they are looking for an LTR.
      
     Donna met a man she knew was partner material. Donna wanted marriage and children, but something else in her was afraid of settling down. No telling the reason; afraid of making the Wrong Choice, afraid of being invested and being left; wanting some of what a marriage would bring, but fearing other parts of it; maybe afraid of being a mama at some level or some other hang up.
      
     She was not consciously aware, she just knew something about Evan made her uncomfortable, because he was a threat to whatever her subtle fear wanted to protect. Donna needed to move on, but she needed a reason…so she looked around and found one.  10 years later, and still not married. I have no doubt she broke things off with several other men during her journey for one reason or another.  I don’t know how long she was in the relationship Evan observed 10 years later, but I bet if had been a long ongoing one, she was content in it because it was safe; because it was with a man who she could tell was not a real marriage threat.

     Unrecognized motivations cause people to rationalize why to stay in bad relationships, so it should not be a surprise if some people will rationalize their way out of good relationships. I think unconscious fears or discomforts can cause people to look for reasons to run from LTRs and still make believe they are really looking for an LTR by finding dating partners that they know won’t work out in the long run.
      
     Do people break out of relationships for good reasons rather than rationalizations?  Sure they do.  Do I know Donna dumped Evan after 5 dates because she was actually fearful of settling down? Who knows, (I think it is likely if she still had not hit her stated goal 10 years(!) later) but it is a plausible guess.
      

104. RW 104

     So I’ve finally gone and read everything I missed.  Wow, Karmic.  I wish I could take that last post back..I think it might make you angry again  (I hope this is not misunderstood…it is said in an affectionately kidding manner).
      
     I can see you are passionate about your point and I agree with parts of it but I am also passionate about mine.  I agree that the role of provider is gender neutral in today’s terms.  At no point did I argue against that.  But I still think you’re missing my original point.  Maybe I am explaining it badly. I don’t want either of us to be the provider in the relationship.  THAT is the point.  That is what I got from Jenna’s comments as well.
      
     I’m not opposed to sharing my wealth, far from it.  That’s why I’m in the relationship….to share the good and inevitably, the bad.  But, I am opposed to it if said sharing of wealth significantly reduces my standard of living over the long term.  It is one thing to sacrifice for a partner you already love and quite another to begin a relationship knowing you’re going to have to sacrifice.  I am impressed that Lia has made it work.  Her boyfriend is obviously amazing and worth the effort.  But I’m sure things would be easier if this same boyfriend was in an income bracket closer to hers.  From the sounds of it, he will be, some day.  If the choice is between said amazing boyfriend with low income and not so great boyfriend with high income, it is a no-brainer.  But if the choice is between amazing boyfriend with low income and amazing boyfriend with moderate to high income, the choice is also a no-brainer.  That is all I’m saying.  I was in a position to hold out for the latter and so I did.  I found it.  I don’t specifically remember but I may have passed up some great men with low incomes.  My husband still beats them hollow.  That is not selfish, it is just common sense to me.  

105. marymary 105

     David T at 103 raises a good point. Sometimes the “reasons” for breaking up with someone hide a deeper reason in that the person doesn’t actually want a  relationship. I can see why (it makes you vulnerable, you fear boredom, your parents marriage was a trainwreck, you’re too complicated, you worry about your standard of living, you don’t want to shut down your options, you don’t want to lose your independence, you’ve got too much baggage,  you don’t  think you can do it, you want to keep shagging new people, you’re just not happy with yourself [insert reason]).
     these people don’t know they fear relationships, so that never gets addressed, Instead it’s an eneless parade of men/women who aren’t hot enough, or rich enough, or educated enough, or interesting enough. No man or woman is that amazing that they can overcome our own fears.  It might be worth asking yourself “Am I really this unlucky or am I sabotaging myself?”
     To the OP, his lack of funds right now isn’t a problem to me, it’s the fact he keeps dropping hints about it. Maybe the hints are his way of warning you he has no intention of getting his act together, or they are his way of telling you that this is temporary and he is a man with a plan.   Maybe he wants reassurance that you support him in this. Ask him (but not in those exact words).
     Good men aren’t so scarce that you have to accept the first one that comes along but neither are they so abundant that you can keep passing them over for Mr. Perfect (who doesn’t exist). You will not meet someone who ticks every box unless you can get him created especially for you.  And even then you’d  look at him and thing “dang, I forgot  something!”

106. Ruby 106

     David T #103
      
     Hmmm, sounds to me like Donna saw herself on a very upwardly mobile track. Evan just didn’t fit the kind of guy she saw herself with. No offense to EMK, but I think she felt he was beneath her. At 31, having already achieved a great deal of success, she didn’t realize that it takes some people longer to get there. I don’t think she took Evan seriously enough, and from his description, she didn’t seem too upset about breaking up with him. Of course, there were stupid things that I did at age 31, that I would not do 20 years later.

107. Lynn 107

     Totally agree with Evan. There’s a difference between being in transition and being a deadbeat. A guy who has goals and is taking actual realistic steps to reach them, has set and reached his goals in the past (successful career, bachelor’s degree, master’s degree), is a good bet, not a bad one. The unambitious pot-smoking guys are deadbeats, but the man described in this woman’s letter is not a deadbeat.

108. David T 108

     @Ruby
      10 years later she still hadn’t settled down with someone who “fits the kind of guy she [sees] herself with.” If she was that clear on knowing current financial success was important, she would have known Evan was not right sooner than 5 dates! Between that and her failure to be married after a decade of looking means there was more to her decision than Evan’s then present financial success.  My particular speculation could be wrong, but I think your hypothesis stretches credulity.

109. Joe 109

     Karl R: I gotta back Karmic up. In the context of dating, men are clearly the hunters. Evan himself always says that women shouldn’t make the first move, but should be receptive to mens’ advances. If you want to call men the aggressors instead of hunters, that’s fine, but then Karmic is right–you’re just arguing semantics.

110. Karl R 110

     Karmic Equation, (#97)
     I think our opinion differs in whether the pursuer/pursued behavior is an intrinsic instinct/behavior (as you have stated), or whether it’s a social convention (my opinion).
      
     It may be difficult to circumvent social conventions, but it’s far easier than overcoming intrinsic instinct or behavior. Furthermore, a social convention only applies in certain times, in certain places, and with certain people. (Some people enjoy defying social conventions.) If you have two people who prefer to defy the social convention, it’s easy for them to do so, rather than both trying to abide by a convention they dislike.
      
     Other than it being completely ineffective to pursue someone who does not want to be pursued, can you give me a concrete example how switching the pursuer/pursued could possibly hurt the relationship?
      
     I’ve been pursued. Those relationships would have failed regardless of whom was the pursuer. The only difference: if the women had not pursued, the relationships might never have started in the first place.
      
     Joe said: (#109)
     “Evan himself always says that women shouldn’t make the first move, but should be receptive to mens’ advances.”
      
     Evan gives that advice because it works best for women who want to date alphas (which describes most of his client base). Evan agrees that approaching shy men can be highly effective … provided that’s the type of man the woman prefers.

111. Karmic Equation 111

     @Karl R 110

     I guess you’re not on board with the cease-fire. Evan, I promise not to answer any more of Karl’s questions, even though that may appear rude or weak, in order to abide by the cease-fire.

     Last post to you Karl…

     Opinion (from dictionary.com)
     1. a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
     2. a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

     Our OPINIONS (aka JUDGMENTS – ATTITUDES) differ. Yet, you are trying to argue that YOUR OPINION/JUDGMENT/ATTITUDE of “convention” is “better” or “more valid” than MY opinion of “intrinsic instinct” that MEN are the pursuers, making women the pursued. (We are on a hetero dating website, so please don’t tangentialize into gay men, lesbians, or transvestites).

     So, you’re being disingenuous, you’re NOT arguing OPINION, you’re arguing SEMANTICS. – “Convention” versus “Intrinsic Instinct”

     Semantics (from dictionary.com)
     1. Linguistics .
        a. the study of meaning.
        b. the study of linguistic development by classifying and examining changes in meaning and form.

     No one’s OPINION is better than anyone else’s OPINION, e.g., your experiences that form your thoughts cannot be more valid than the experiences that form my thoughts.

     However, SEMANTICS can be compared, e.g., your choice of words can be better than my choice of words.

     Now if you want to argue against MY OPINION, the argument should be phrased, “Karmic, why do you believe MEN ARE PURSUERS? Can you provide evidence that men are the pursuers?”

     My reply would be, “Karl, why do you want to argue against my opinion? I don’t need to provide evidence of my opinion to anyone. That said, While it is only my OPINION, there actually is evidence that men are considered hunters. Please GOOGLE “Men as Hunters in dating” and evidence abounds.”

     YOU ARE ENTITLED to your OPINION, and you can knock on my SEMANTICS. But you cannot ask me to support your SEMANTICS with evidence of my OPINION. That is just non-sensical.

     So you have two choices, as I see it:

     1) Challenge my SEMANTICS (that IS actually what you’re doing, even though you won’t cop to that)

     OR

     2) State whether you agree or disagree with my opinion, provide the reasons why, and then LEAVE IT AT THAT.

     But you keep doing #3, what I consider to be an illogical thing for a logical man:

     3) You keep trying to argue that your SEMANTICS is MORE VALID than my OPINION. In essence, comparing apples to kangaroos. We’re not even in the category. That is BEYOND illogical.

     So if you have an opinion, STATE IT, without bringing mine into it. Because OPINIONS are not subject to comparison. There is no such thing as a BETTER opinion. You can AGREE with an opinion or DISAGREE with it. That’s it.

     Karmic paraphrasing Karl R:

     “I believe that men as pursuers and women as pursued is NOT how we humans are programmed, it is not “intrinsic”; to me, it is a social convention, a learned behavior, and here is the literature that supports my opinion.”

     And if you want to challenge my semantics:
     “Karmic, I disagree that the term “intrinsic instinct” is the reason why men are hunters. I believe that “social convention” is a more accurate term for why men are hunters. And since I would like you to provide proof of your terminology, I will be the bigger man and show you MY proof first…”

     You can HAVE and STATE YOUR OPINION and CHALLENGE my SEMANTICS in any which way you want. It’s your prerogative. But to ask me to provide evidence to support my OPINION to DISPROVE your SEMANTICS makes no sense. My opinion is my personal view and I don’t need to support it with any SCIENTIFIC evidence. My personal, EXPERIENTIAL evidence is all I need to support MY opinion. And if YOU wish to argue semantics, then the burden of proof is on YOU to provide the proof that your semantics are more accurate, not on me to disprove my own semantics.

112. Ruby 112

     David T
      
     You’re right that this was probably not an isolated incident, but but Donna could have broken things off with other men for the same reason she did with EMK; she imagined herself with a very successful, wealthy man, and the other men she dated didn’t measure up, and the Alphas she did meet turned out to be unsatisfying for other reasons, or just too difficult. Doesn’t mean that her expectations haven’t been skewed or unrealistic. Could there be reasons that go deeper? Possibly…

113. Karl R 113

     Karmic Equation, (#111)
     Where did I say (#110) that your opinion was wrong? I stated my opinion. I tried to clarify the difference I saw between our opinions. I stated the outcome one might expect to see if my opinion is correct. And I stated that my experiences did not match your opinion.
      
     I did all of the things that you’re claiming that you have the right to do (#111). I did approximately the same things you did (#97). If it’s okay for you to do those things, why are you trying to chew me out for doing the exact same things?
      
     Definitions:
     Difference between instinct (follow link) and social convention (follow link).
      
     I don’t see the difference between the two of those to be a merely semantic difference. They’re not even studied by the same branch of science (biology vs. sociology).
      
     If you still feel that it’s a semantic difference (after reading both definitions), that’s fine. I’m just making it absolutely clear that in my opinion, I’m discussing something more significant than a semantic difference.
      
     Reread how you responded to my opinion.
      
     Furthermore, I didn’t ask you to provide evidence to support your opinions. I didn’t ask you to disprove my opinion. I asked you to provide one example of how flip-flopping the pursuer/pursued role could have a negative impact on a relationship. (It’s the only question I asked in #110.)
      
     If I were to claim that eating oranges may have a negative impact on a person’s health, I wouldn’t find it unreasonable for someone to ask me for an example of how that might happen. (And just to head off any potential fireworks, I didn’t choose eating oranges in order to be ridiculous. I chose it because I have a food allergy to oranges, so my ridiculous-sounding claim makes perfect sense … in the context of the example I provided.)
      
     And I’m still curious about what type of negative impact could occur if men and women flip-flop those roles.
      
     As to your final sentence (#111), I am perfectly willing to accept the burden of proof. However, in the spirit of the cease fire, I tried to match my response (#110) to yours (#97). I don’t think disproving your statements can be done within the boundaries of merely stating my opinion. Evan requested a cease-fire. I feel that your first response (#97) and mine (#110) met his request. Despite your most recent response (#111), I still intend to honor his request.

114. Jennifer 114

     Karmic, given the way youve chosen to harp on some posters in the past I’m surprised you are upset right now. Karl is not even being flip with you the way you’ve been with so many others. He won. I hope you will indeed let it go

115. Sparkling Emerald 115

     Karl – You said
     Other than it being completely ineffective to pursue someone who does not want to be pursued, can you give me a concrete example how switching the pursuer/pursued could possibly hurt the relationship?
      
     I’ve been pursued. Those relationships would have failed regardless of whom was the pursuer. The only difference: if the women had not pursued, the relationships might never have started in the first place.
       ———————————
     I think you provided your own answer.  I think when a woman pursues a man, she is pursing a man who’s “Not that into her”.  You even admit, the relationships never would have started in the first place unless the woman pursued you.  If a man is interested, he will pursue.  I don’t pursue men, because I don’t want to chase after a man who isn’t interested.  If he’s not asking me out, asking for my #, etc. I assume he’s not interested.  However, although I let a man make the first move, I don’t take the “playing hard to get ” thing to ridiculous extremes, like that silly book “The Rules” says. 

116. Helen 116

     Karl R #110 wrote: “I’ve been pursued. Those relationships would have failed regardless of whom was the pursuer. The only difference: if the women had not pursued, the relationships might never have started in the first place.”
      
     Yes. This was exactly the point I made a few months ago in another of Evan’s posts. Most relationships fail, regardless of whether the man or the woman pursued first. However, people may REMEMBER more that a failure occurred when a woman pursued, because it’s rarer for women to pursue in general, and we remember rare events more easily. Therefore, we perceive women’s pursuits as being less successful, when in reality, rejection rates are probably the same.
      
     I think that a woman who pursues would not want a man who didn’t like her proactiveness anyway. Perhaps by pursuing, even if she’s rejected, she’s doing herself a favor.
      
     In finding career opportunities and collaborations, I am very proactive. Some respond favorably, others do not. Yes, I’ve gotten hurt. But I am most satisfied by being the one seeking the opportunities, regardless of constantly facing rejection. I would never recommend to anyone to sit back and wait for people and opportunities to come to her. She may face fewer rejections, but she will not be as happy and confident as someone who goes for it, getting smacked down a few times along the way.  I cannot believe that the world of relationships is that different.
      
     You have to live. You have to be proactive. Goodness, it’s Stephen Covey’s first Habit. He didn’t mean for his 7 Habits to be only for men and not for women.

117. Liz 117

     This is gpong to sound crazy. You may not believe it and I dont think it’s even sunk in for me yet:
      
     I just lost my 6 figure job after 5 years with the company. Found out yesterday. Still in shock. 
     Holy Sh*t! 
     How’s that for irony? All the comments about how financial status can change overnight in this economy.  What a nightmare. 
     It’s nice to have a good man by my side as I’m going through this.

118. Lia 118

     @ Liz # 117
      
     So sorry about the shock and pain of losing your job and so glad you have a man who loves you and has your back!   I hope for you the best in this time of change!

119. Liz 119

     Thank you Lia! I appreciate your kind words. I have faith I will get back on my feet and I’ll find something better after the initial storm passes.

120. Jennifer 120

     Yes Liz, definitely wishing you the best!

121. Karmic Equation 121

     Karl R #113

     “I asked you to provide one example of how flip-flopping the pursuer/pursued role could have a negative impact on a relationship. (It’s the only question I asked in #110.)
     <snip>
     And I’m still curious about what type of negative impact could occur if men and women flip-flop those roles.”

     Here are the examples you’ve asked for:

     I’ve had five meaningful romantic relationships in my life. And I’m defining “meaningful relationships” as relationships that helped me learn more about myself or more about dating/relationships.

     In chronological order:

     #1 – Lasted 4 years – I ended the relationship
     #2 – Lasted 7 months – HE ended the relationship
     #3 – Lasted 11 years – I ended the relationship
     #4 – Lasted 3 weeks – HE ended the relationship
     #5 – Lasted 6 years – I ended the relationship

     I was the initiator / pursuer in TWO of those relationships. Can you guess which?

     Negative impacts:
     1) Shorter relationship
     2) HE typically ends it

     ——————-

     I do understand the difference between instinct and social convention.

     INSTINCT: Little boy likes little girl; to get her attention, he pulls her hair. He knows HE has to do something if he wants her to notice him. Standing around looking good isn’t going to fly. He “pursues/initiates” contact instinctively, by pulling her hair. He’s too young to send over a drink (convention).

     CONVENTION: Negative attention is still attention. I would propose that this INSTINCTIVE use of an age-appropriate neg by a 6 yo (pulling hair) is equivalent to the male PUA CONVENTION of a verbal neg (e.g. “Did you choose that color for your hair or were you born with it?”) to get a girl’s attention.

     ——————-
     @RW 102

     There is absolutely NO PROBLEM with wanting a partner who has money as opposed to being indigent or, if all being equal, that you choose the man with more money than less.

     What I think is a problem is a woman’s general unwillingness to share her wealth with a man.

     Let me share with you how MEN can be generous in a way I don’t think women can:

     When I met my now ex-husband, I had just been laid off from my job of 4 years and was living off my meager savings, which would run out by December (I started dating him in late August). I ended up moving in with him when my landlord let me out of my lease in December when I informed them I had lost my job.

     My exhusband was a frugal man, but not miserly. After I moved in I had to change banks to deposit my unemployment and temping checks, pay off student loans, bills, etc., and he said “just open up an account at the same bank I bank at.” I said sure. We went together and the ONLY option that matched my means was a non-interest-bearing checking account. An interest-bearing account would require that the account maintain a $10,000 balance. Without batting an eye, he told the agent to transfer $10,000 from HIS account to MY new account, so that I could have the interest-bearing account instead. He TRUSTED me with his wealth, because he KNEW the kind of person I was. BTW, he wasn’t elderly. He was hot. Looked like Ryan O’Neal in Love Story. And I never touched that $10k. I never thought of that as mine. And I had had NO IDEA he had that kind of money. That never came up in conversation.

     I would say that 3 months is a short amount of time to entrust someone with that amount of money. He was probably an exceptional man and extreme in that regard…or I’d like to think my character inspired his trust. In any case, he shared his wealth beyond the who pays for which date, or who pays for the vacation, etc., because he wasn’t dating me to maintain his standard of living. He willingly shared what he had, to make my life easier and less stressful simply because he loved me.

     I guess my OWN indigent-once-upon-a-time story is what makes UN-afraid of dating men with low or no salaries. It’s character of your partner that counts in a relationship, not the salary they make.

     ——————-
     @Liz

     I’m sorry to hear that. The very best of luck to you.

122. marymary 122

     Karmic
     yes but … couldn,t this mean that pursuit or sharing wealth is a failing strategy for men if she can still leave you after x years?
     i expect that the relationships ended for reasons that were  unrelated to pursuit and wealth.  in which case, maybe those two things – provided the basics are covered in that you both like each other and are on the same page re finances – aren,t the deciding factors in the success of a relationship over the long haul. 
     back to the OP
     I say give him a chance, wholeheartedly, if you like him and believe in him. It,s all very well saying, “all other things being equal i,d prefer someone wealthier”. Trouble is, it  seldom works out that way or we would all have it. the universe is not cranking out men that are good hearted, attractive and wealthy.

123. Lia 123

     @ Karmic #121
      
     I too believe that flip-flopping the roles can have a negative impact.
      
     I have no scientific evidence to support that belief.  However, I have observed that in relationships where the women pursued the men there wass something lacking.  I have yet to see a woman who did the pursuing feel desired and secure.  I am sure there are exceptions to that even if I haven’t seen them personally.  But the women I know who pursue never seem to have that partner who is truly on board in the relationship.   
      
     Does this mean that every man who pursues is going to be wanting a relationship.  Clearly not.  And no relationship lasts forever (someone dies or leaves).  But it seems to me that when the man does the choosing and the woman accepts then she feels desired and wanted.  For me as a woman that is no small thing.  
      
     When the man pursues and sets the pace of the relationship it seems to go so much better.  If I see the woman trying to dictate the pace (even if he initially  pursued her) it does not go well.  I don’t know why that is.  I wonder if it is because he feels like he is being pushed or told what to do.
      
     My step-father once said to me, “men don’t like to be told what to do.”  He was a man of few words and the way he said that told me that that was very important to remember.  Every time I would be tempted to give “suggestions” or unsolicited advice to a man those words would come too mind and I would shut my mouth.

124. Karmic Equation 124

     @marymary

     “yes but … couldn,t this mean that pursuit or sharing wealth is a failing strategy for men if she can still leave you after x years?”

     Couldn’t you then say any dating strategy which doesn’t result in X [insert goal, i.e., a second date, sex, exclusivity, marriage, etc.] a failing strategy? Buying flowers, long weekends in the Bahamas, taking dancing lessons, Online dating, a marriage proposal (which is rejected), etc? No one will stop doing those things, I suspect

     “i expect that the relationships ended for reasons that were  unrelated to pursuit and wealth. in which case, maybe those two things – provided the basics are covered in that you both like each other and are on the same page re finances – aren,t the deciding factors in the success of a relationship over the long haul.”

     Agreed.

     Eliminating the salary requirement in dating simply opens the door for you to meet more people, expanding your chances to date and marry someone whom you would consider a good husband/wife within the timeframe you wish to do so. Whether that person will indeed be a good marriage partner to you, or whether the relationship withstands the test of time, are independent of dating strategies.

125. Mickey 125

     I’ll give someone my potential if she’ll give me a prenup.

126. Helen 126

     #121, the examples you gave are not evidence of something negative happening if the woman pursues. Leaving aside the small sample size for now: all these relationships ultimately ended. The longevity of the relationship is not necessarily a good thing. Indeed, if the relationship was not meant to last, it may be that a shorter one is better for a variety of reasons. From what you shared, I find it hard to believe that you did wrong by pursuing.
      
     #123 wrote: “I have yet to see a woman who did the pursuing feel desired and secure.” Well, now you know one, somewhat, if it counts to know another commenter on a blog.
      
     Most men are not such egomaniacs that they must always be in charge where a woman is concerned. What they like even better is seeing a happy woman, and feeling that they in some way contribute to her happiness. Men are on our side, women; don’t forget that. Reach for what makes you happy, and recruit men to help you get there.

127. Lia 127

     @ Helen #126
      
     I wrote, “I am sure there are exceptions to that even if I haven’t seen them personally.”  Glad for you that you are one. 
      
     I didn’t write that men are egomaniacs on any of my posts.  I can’t remember Karmic Equation ever writing that men were egomaniacs, controlling, or bad on her posts.

128. Karl R 128

     Lia said: (#123)
     “But the women I know who pursue never seem to have that partner who is truly on board in the relationship.”
      
     That sentence describes most of my dating experience. I pursued someone whom I was interested in, but she was never truly on board.
      
     If you’re the pursuer, you’ll likely experience all the downsides that the pursuer normally experiences. If you’re the pursued, you’ll likely experience all the downsides the pursued normally experiences. Flip-flopping the roles flip-flopped the downsides. While that changes the experience (for the people involved), I don’t see how it affects the ultimate outcome.
      
     You’re correct that something was lacking. It just happens to be the same thing that’s lacking in most relationships where the man pursues.
      
     Similarly Karmic Equation’s example #4 (#121) is very dependent on whom is having which experience.
      
     While I have to guess at the reason the man broke things off, the 3 week duration suggests that he simply wasn’t that interested in the first place.
      
     I can think of a few times when I dated a woman for 2-4 weeks. She just wasn’t that interested in me, and broke things off for that reason. I don’t believe any of those women would describe the experience as a “meaningful relationship,” or as a relationship that helped her “learn more” about herself or more about dating/relationships. She knew she wasn’t that interested from the start. She confirmed what she already knew. There was no meaning, nor anything to learn.
      
     It’s a stretch, but I could even argue that pursuing provided a positive result, since Karmic Equation managed to learn something from a 3 week relationship (which apparently hasn’t happened when she was the one pursued).
      
     Helen said: (#116)
     “Most relationships fail, regardless of whether the man or the woman pursued first. However, people may REMEMBER more that a failure occurred when a woman pursued, because it’s rarer for women to pursue in general, and we remember rare events more easily.”
      
     I think you may be correct.
      
     Also, did you notice that the second “negative impact” described by Karmic Equation was that the man ended the relationship. Quoting the Behrendts: “It’s called a breakup because it’s broken.” If it’s broken, why would it be more negative for the man to end it instead of the woman?
      
     I suspect this has nothing to do with the impact on the relationship, but rather the impact on the individuals. The person initiating the relationship is hurt less, while the other person is hurt more. If you swap which person is more/less hurt, I would see that as an equivalent negative result to the relationship. But to the person who was hurt more by the breakup, one would seem more negative than the other.

129. Goldie 129

     Wow, Helen, we have even more in common than I thought! I totally pursued the man who later became my husband. I didn’t have any other serious relationships, so my list only has one item on it: 22 years together, I ended the relationship. I chased that guy for months! Goes to show you that anecdotal evidence isn’t very reliable in general.
      
     Post-divorce, I’ve been following Evan’s advice and letting men initiate, but mainly because, after making what I thought was a bad choice for both of us, I didn’t trust my own judgement. Also, guys were coming at me so fast, I didn’t really get a chance to pursue anyone this time around. Maybe next time? Honestly, in this day and age, and depending upon what one means by pursuing, I don’t think it matters as much who pursues whom. I assume that by pursuing we mean initiating contact, getting yourself noticed by the person, maybe asking the person out — nothing too aggressive or stalkerish. I’m pretty sure that, regardless of who contacts whom first, after a while it is up to both sides to decide whether they are going to work out as a couple or not. Just like I approached my x-husband first, and then after a while I guess I grew on him enough that he decided to become a couple and get married. He initiated both of those things. I just initiated the original meet and greet, more or less.

130. Karmic Equation 130

     @Helen

     It’s interesting that your sample size of ONE is more significant than my sample size of 2 or 3 or 5 (not sure which sample size you were minimizing).

     Ok, I’ll bite. I invite you, Karl, and the other posters here to list their meaningful relationships in the same manner as I (#months/years of duration, who ended it, and who was the pursuer/initiator). You must list AT LEAST five relationships and EXCLUDE ONS (as I did, and FTR, I’ve only had 4 of those in my early 20′s; and I had two “flings” that I didn’t list, as they weren’t meaningful, I have trouble remembering I even had them). — I’ll collate the data and chart them out so as to get a collective sample size that would pass muster with you. – I get to choose the parameters, because neither you nor Karl had the imagination to provide any parameters when you asked. In the future, if YOU want to dictate the terms, you have to state them first, and provide them first. Dinging me and pointing out where you disagree doesn’t make your position true. — All, I’m not being flip. I’m actually interested in the relationship/breakup data.

     (A) You seem to often forget that the exception to the rule doesn’t disprove the rule.

     And you and Karl seemed bound and determined to prove my “opinion” wrong. Why? My opinion is as valid as either of yours. They’re based on MY experiences and MY feelings, which you aren’t privy to and which I don’t feel like sharing — and which are NOT yours to minimize or dismiss. The outcomes and the meaning I assigned to them, as indicated in my opinion, I did wish to share, so I did. If you have a differing opinion, you are free to state them. But you are NOT free to tell me MY opinions are wrong because YOUR interpretation of MY experiences are different.

     I think our initial disagreement stemmed from our disagreement on what constitutes “proactiveness” in dating. You NEUTRALIZED the action of “pursuit” and I…uhh…GENDERIZED it (for lack of better word), which got under your skin. Why? Re-read (A) above.

     Additionally, I’ve stated that women can be proactive in other ways (work on becoming as attractive as possible; become irresistible prey, yada yada) INSTEAD OF DIRECTLY asking for dates. Being attractive person is NOT LIMITED to the physical (if that is what you’re objecting to) — because I’ve indicated in many posts women need to get rid of their insecurities, become happier people, be positive, be radiant, etc., to be attractive.

     At which point you then generalized proactiveness to life and dancing etc. I AGREE with being proactive “in life in general”. What I think you fail to understand is that if the women on this board are “smart, strong, and successful” they ALREADY know the meaning of proactiveness in LIFE, and in BUSINESS in particular. These women DON’T need you and me to tell them to be “proactive in life”. HOWEVER, they ARE on a dating blog to seek help in finding satisfying relationships, so what I’ve EXTRAPOLATED from those two data points (I know that’s scientifically faulty, but relationships are NOT a science) is that perhaps, whether consciously or not, they may have extended that same proactiveness you are passionate about to dating and, unwittingly, shooting themselves in the foot in the process. As a woman, I’m saying if they’re having trouble finding people to have relationships with, there are OTHER ways to get dates, that doesn’t require directly asking men for dates.

     I’m saying DON’T PURSUE a man, especially an ALPHA man, you’re not going to like the results — because if the result is an LTR, it’s not likely to happen…AND you’re going to feel rejected in the process. That’s what my terse summary meant:

     Negative impacts:
     1) Shorter relationship = NOT an LTR
     2) HE typically ends it = YOU are rejected

     You and Karl have both indicated that no-one should be AFRAID of rejection. I agree with that. As long as you live, you are going to face rejection, so not doing something because you are AFRAID of it is not personally empowering. You apply for a job, you may not get it. You want to be the lead actor/actress in a play, you may not get that role, etc. You have to learn to live with rejection and disappointment. Perhaps you and Karl LIKE being rejected. I don’t, so I don’t waste my time applying for jobs I’m not qualified for nor dream of being the lead in a play if I lisp. Why SEEK rejection and disapointment, when life will just throw that at you unsolicited (see Liz 117). And let’s just say for the heck of it, I got the job for which I’m unqualified (let’s say CEO) or the lead when I lisp, I’m just going to put myself under a lot of unneeded stress, because I’m going to be insecure because I KNOW I’m not qualified in being a CEO and that having a lisp is not ideal for a lead. Why subject myself to undue stress and face insecurities of my own making?

     I can get the SAME RESULTS without being rejected. In fact, I get BETTER results when I take the PATIENT, less DESPERATE route, which I believe directly asking a guy out is. You see it as “proactive” I deem it “desperate”. Therefore, I would not promote having a woman ask a guy out UNLESS she’s okay with seeming desperate. (She may not “be” desperate, but it can certainly appear that way, quite possibly to the guy she’s asking) — A guy approaching a woman does not appear desperate to anyone. It’s accepted as normal. Granted, letting a guy approach IS the “safe” way to avoid rejection, BUT that does not NEGATE it’s value as an EVALUATION tool for a woman. You and Karl focused on the “safe” part and think that “playing it safe” is not good, agreed, as long as we’re not talking about dating. Yet you both dismiss the “attraction factor” part, when THAT part is more important for a WOMAN, than whether or not she gets to date the 10 she’s attracted to. ANY MAN who’s attracted to her is worth more than a 10 who is not. It doesn’t mean that she should DATE a 1. It means she has THE CHOICE to date him if she wants to, which is valuable.

     @Sparkling Emerald & Lia

     Thank you for getting it.

     @Karl R

     I guess I need to explain my explanations in excruciating detail:

     Here’s the back story in #3 – He initiated and I pursued him right out of my life. Lesson learned: Pursuing was not a good idea.

     I karaoke a LOT. One time, at the bar I regularly karaoked at, a new guy was singing. Great singer. Good looking (reminded me of Justin Timberlake, but sharper jawline and nose). My first thought was “Wow” But he didn’t even know I was alive. I watched him, somewhat lustfully, out of the corner of my eye following another woman out the side door for a smoke and thought cattily, I’m better looking than HER. And then I did a mental shrug and thought to myself, “Too bad.” And never gave him another thought.

     Two weeks later, at the same bar, he sat down next to me in the booth, because the bar was unusally crowded and there weren’t too many open seats. He could have sat elsewhere, though, but didn’t. He struck up a conversation with me. We actually met “spontaneously” at the bar in the next week, traded emails. Made out a few times, but no sex. Well kinda, does 5 strokes count as sex? He was well-endowed. After the not-quite-sex, I started initiating contact via emails (this was before texting) almost daily. But they weren’t “mushy” emails, just “Are you going to karaoke” “when” “Should I pick you up” — yada yada. I’m pretty sure this turned him off…and I have to say I never felt comfortable sendind the emails, but I couldn’t help myself. My hamster was working overtime. The last time we met at the bar, he told me he was leaving to go back home to his family in the midwest. I gave him my number to contact me. Never heard from him again. I have no clue if he really even left town. I’m 100% confident that he wasn’t married and that he was turned off with my pursuit. Which was quite pesty in retrospect.

     My lesson learned was to do the OPPOSITE of my craving when it comes to contacting men. The more I want to contact him, the more I need to REFRAIN from contacting him. It was a great lesson and meaningful     to ME. I don’t give a darn if wasn’t meaningful to you or Helen.

     To bring it all back Karl and Helen, my ORIGINAL words were (#61): “…that doesn’t necessarily produce good relationship results…” — Karl, you were the one who changed it to “Negative Impact on Relationships” — Because you knew that would be harder to defend and easier to refute. Strawman fallacy and bad sportsmanship. So I would say that my answers throughout all my posts consistently support MY ORIGINAL CONTEXT which you conveniently twisted to something I never said.

131. Lia 131

     @ Karl R. #128
      
     Well thought out points.  The thing I appreciate about the way you disagreed with my post is that you didn’t accuse me of saying something about men that I didn’t, and I don’t feel like you are attacking me just disagreeing.
      
     I can see how it would be hard on men or women if they are in a relationship with someone who isn’t on board.  I have been in that position, I think most of us have.  
      
     I always believed that men know that they are interested immediately (maybe I should use the word attracted) and women can think that they are not and then have that change.  An example of this is a man that I met on-line years ago.  After meeting him I decided that there was no spark and didn’t want to date him.  I told him that I didn’t feel there was a spark but he asked if we could be friends.  I didn’t see any harm in that, I agreed to see him as “just friends”, spent some time with him and fell hard for him.
      
     Most of the men I fell for, I fell for over time.  I had a theory that men knew what they wanted immediately and women didn’t necessarily know right off.  Maybe I should not have generalized my personal experience.  I will tell you that for me not being the one who pursues does not mean that I am not onboard in the relationship. 
      
     I want to preface this question to you by saying I am not trying to prove some point I am genuinely curious.  Have you met a woman that you were not attracted to initially and have that change after spending time with her?  By that I don’t mean just think you could stand to sleep with her, I mean really fall for her.

132. Goldie 132

     @ Karmic Equation #130
      
     I cannot comment on all of your post, but this, to me, stood out:
      
     “2) HE typically ends it = YOU are rejected
      
     You and Karl have both indicated that no-one should be AFRAID of rejection. I agree with that. As long as you live, you are going to face rejection, so not doing something because you are AFRAID of it is not personally empowering. You apply for a job, you may not get it.”
      
     This is the opposite of how I see the job application process. Many people appear to think that, when they are interviewing for a job, the purpose of the interview is for them to close the deal, i.e. to get an offer. It is not. The purpose is to gather as much reliable information as possible about the company, the position, that would allow you to determine whether you’ll like working there. Of course it doesn’t hurt to make a good impression on the employer as well, so they know that *they* will like you working there. But you don’t want them to trick you into accepting, and being locked into, a job you’re going to hate. You don’t want to accept a job that they tell you requires working 40 hrs/week and then find out it’s really 60-70. You don’t want to spend a month at the new place and then find out that they expect you to do something shady or illegal for them. You don’t want to accept a job close to your home, only to find out on your first day that they have contracted you out to a friend of the owner’s and your commute will be 65 miles one way, every day, permanently. (Happened to me.) This is actually worse than rejection.
      
     Which leads me to what I was going to say in the first place. When an employer tells me no after an interview, I do not see it as rejection. I do not take it personally. I see it as a sign that I would not have liked it at this job. I’ve been told no by companies that no longer exist; that have been laying people off by the hundred; that drive their employees into the ground with brutal hard work. Being told no by those guys is not rejection, it is a huge favor. I have dodged a bullet with every one of them.
      
     It is the same thing with a relationship, except worse. Ideally, we aim to be married for life. You will come to hate your life pretty quickly if you have to spend it with someone who is a bad match, no matter how promising they may have looked during the first few weeks. Being told no by a man is not a judgement on you. It doesn’t mean that you’re bad or inferior. All it means is you and this man would not work out as a couple. I’d rather have him say that than trick me into a crappy relationship with him.
      
     I mentioned the one guy that I think had played me while I was out dating. One of the times he asked me out, we met at a bar and he came on pretty strong. He seemed really attracted and wanted to meet again as soon as possible, so we met again two days later. Here’s what happened in those two days, as I later found out. Apparently, after I left, another girl came out to meet him. Not sure of their relationship at that moment, but they used to be a couple, and from her posts that I saw on his FB later, she still considered them very much a couple. She then drove him to her place and he spent the night there. Then the next day he met with me and took me to his place. I never saw him again, and a few days later he gave me the “we should just be friends”. Now on the surface, I was the one rejected. But in reality, she is the one stuck with him. I am the one that dodged a bullet. I could never dream of my boyfriend going out with other women and taking them to his place while he’s dating me. Apparently he does this to her on a daily basis. Who’s better off? I, who was rejected, or she, who wasn’t?
      
     Way I see it, when I put things in this perspective, it really doesn’t matter who asked whom out first. If both sides agree that the relationship will work out, then it will. If one sides disagrees, then it won’t. Honestly, now that I think of it, in my opinion, no sane man will throw away a good relationship just because she asked him out first and not the other way around. I don’t mean going all Sadie Hawkins on a guy, but just sitting there looking pretty waiting for him to come along is, IMO, not enough.
      
     Also, I would’ve really liked it if my ex had ended our marriage and not me. We both knew it was dead. But he wanted to stick it out for the rest of our miserable lives. I’d have taken rejection (?) over that any time. Instead I had to do all the heavy lifting, which was insanely hard in every way. It’s safe to say we are both happy with our new lives now, so I believe what I did was best for both of us. I do not see it as me rejecting him: we had already rejected each other years ago.

133. Lia 133

     With the EXCEPTION of the back and forth posts regarding the pursuing/ gender thing, I would like to express…
      
     Karl, I like the way your mind works – linear, methodical, analytical.  I have enjoyed many of your posts for that reason.  I think that your posts are well thought out and I find myself nodding as I read them.  Following your mind is like driving on the interstate with the exits clearly marked and signs that let you know where you are.  It is a pleasure to follow your mind.  I really like smart men and you are obviously one of them.  
      
     I like the way Karmic Equation looks at things and how she expresses herself.  I have called my sisters more than once to read her posts to them.  Following her mind is like riding the river.  I never know when I will come upon some new amazing place just around the bend.  She has shifted my paradigm more than once.  I get her because I think from that emotional, creative, yin place.  
      
     I can see how that kind of thinking might be seen as wrong or not as good when looking through the eyes of one who is very analytical because it does not always follow a linear, analytical progression it is more emotional.  
      
     I am not disputing points on either side.  I will say that watching the back and forth feels awful.   
      

134. nathan 134

     Lia 131
     “Most of the men I fell for, I fell for over time.  I had a theory that men knew what they wanted immediately and women didn’t necessarily know right off.  Maybe I should not have generalized my personal experience.  I will tell you that for me not being the one who pursues does not mean that I am not onboard in the relationship.”  I think that so much of this stuff that gets pinned on gender differences these days is really just untested, unquestioned assumptions. Knowing that you “want” someone immediately is lust, end of story. The times I have “wanted” a woman right from the start have always gone no where. It’s only been the women whom I eventually warmed up to that became long term girlfriends, including my current one.
      
     Karmic, it’s interesting to see how you are progressive around this financial question, and yet quite socially conservative in your response about initiation and “pursuit”. Clearly, you get the complexity around money, and how a person’s situation can change quickly, and sometimes unexpectedly, as in the case of commenter Liz above. The way I see it, gender roles are no less complex – especially in this modern world of sexual liberation, gender bending, online dating, and the like. Even if some of this stuff you’re arguing is hardwired, humans can – and do – override instinctual elements every day. Frankly, one of the greatest things about being human is that very ability. That we can move beyond instincts and habitual responses. That we have some level of freedom, including how we are going to approach dating and relationships. In fact, I’d argue that the very fact that you seem to be skilled at pursuing and yet have chosen to do the opposite is a demonstration of that freedom.
      
     Let’s go a little further here on issues of data, rules, and the like. It’s only been less than two generations here in the US where there could even be debates like this with significantly conflicting responses. Before that, social norms dictated who pursued and who was pursued, and there was only a tiny percentage of deviation from those norms. And all of that done underground, and rarely spoken of. In addition, nearly all of the research conducted on gender and relationships pre-1970 was done by men for men. The social scientists of the 1950s were not speaking to women when they wrote that women were intellectually weaker, in need of a protector, and best suited for taking care of the home. They were speaking AT women, and helped other men (and women) reinforce the roles and assumptions they felt would maintain the status power quo. I’m saying all this because the research that is being conducted today, by people across the gender spectrum, is decidedly more complex and conflicting. Furthermore, it’s my view that the younger folks – those under 30 – aren’t nearly as fixated as a group on issues like who “should” pursue or who “should” pay for the first date as those of us over 30 clearly are as a group. The internet, online dating, texting, sped up sexual development, the shift away from aiming for a single lifelong career, increased mobility (i.e. moving away from one’s birth location), the move towards shared societal leadership across gender, GLBTQ liberation – all of this has redefined what dating looks like, and how it unfolds. Which doesn’t mean that “traditional” gender roles and approaches have disappeared, but more that they have become more of a choice amongst other choices. And that’s the case even if some of those “traditional” ways are instinctual patterns being overridden.
      
     Anyone who has read my comments here, or my blog, knows that I tend to prioritize learning to pay attention and see what’s actually happening, as opposed to relying a set of rules or assumptions that may or may not be accurate. What I know to be true is that it’s easier to go by a set of rules or assumptions than to learn to be present and aware. It may be true that the kind of men Karmic and a few others on here are interested in are – as a group – more turned off by women who initiate and pursue. That we could say is the “pattern.” And I’d say it’s certainly fine to have the pattern in mind as part of your considerations. However, it’s also the case that even some of those men aren’t going to fit the pattern. In addition, it might also be the case that the woman in question has her sights set on the wrong kind of man, and so it really doesn’t matter whether she is proactive or not. Furthermore, all of this might end up being moot because you end up meeting each other under non-formal dating circumstances, and things just unfold without a lot of heavy thinking and considering who should do what first.
      
     At the end of day, you all can believe what you want. The question is “Does it help liberate you to live and happier, more joyful life, regardless of results?”

135. Lia 135

     @ Nathan # 134
      
     Thank you for sharing your personal insight with me in regards to women you “wanted” vs women you “warmed up” to.  I wonder how common that is in the dating world.  I think that your knowing that shows a level of self-awareness that is unusual in my experience.
      
      
      
     I enjoyed your post and it gave me much to think about.  I liked your question at the end.

136. Karl R 136

     Lia said: (#131)
     “I will tell you that for me not being the one who pursues does not mean that I am not onboard in the relationship.”
      
     I understand and agree. Let me rephrase to illustrate the distinction I’m making:
     The person who is pursued may or may not be on board.
     A person who is not on board will never be the pursuer.
      
     Lia asked: (#131)
     “Have you met a woman that you were not attracted to initially and have that change after spending time with her?”
      
     I’m going to split this up into physical attractiveness & compatibility. Every woman I’ve dated I considered to be sufficiently attractive from the beginning. I have met women where I didn’t bother to pursue a relationship immediately (because I felt there wasn’t enough compatibility), but I changed my mind about the amount of compatibility as I got to know them better.
      
     Most notably, that was the case with my wife. I thought she was cute, but I didn’t think we had enough in common. 10 months later, I’d gotten to know her a bit better and changed my mind.
      
     Lia said: (#131)
     “I want to preface this question to you by saying I am not trying to prove some point I am genuinely curious.”
      
     For future reference, you don’t need to make the disclaimer with me. I’ll answer the question in the same way in either case. You won’t offend me either way.
      
     Lia, (#133)
     Thanks for the compliments.
      
     I don’t see a creative/feeling outlook as being wrong. It’s frequently helpful. But it can also be misleading.
      
     The world is the way it is. It won’t change to match the way you feel it is (or the way you feel it should be). However, the way you perceive the world is heavily affected by the way you feel about it. If you can change the way you feel, you can change your perception of the world around you.
      
     If someone’s feelings are limiting their actions, those feelings should be challenged, just like we would challenge any other piece of information.
      
     Karmic Equation: (#130)
     I only have four meaningful relationships:
     1. She pursued. 5 months. She broke it off because she was a commitment-phobe and still in love with her ex.
     2. She pursued. 5.5 months. I broke it off due to communication & intimacy issues.
     3. I pursued. 4.5 months. She broke it off because we disagreed about kids/no kids.
     4. I pursued. 3.5 years. Hasn’t ended yet.
      
     I’m not about to challenge what you’ve experienced or what you feel.
      
     If you broke things off with a man, you are the ultimate authority on why you ended the relationship. If a man broke things off with you, he is the ultimate authority on why he broke things off with you. (His decision is, after all, based on his feelings, which neither of us is privy to.)
      
     Why the Justin Timberlake look-alike broke things off:
     He left town to go back home to his family in the Midwest. (His words, as described by you.)
      
     I’ve been pursued by women that I wasn’t interested in. I’ve been pursued by women where my interest was small, but theirs was much larger. I understand how a man feels in that situation.
      
     I might move to a different part of the bar under those circumstances. I’m certainly not going to leave town or move to a different state to avoid her. (My job is here; my friends are here; my wife is here; my home is here.)
      
     Karmic Equation said: (#130)
     “I have no clue if he really even left town.”
      
     Have you been running across him regularly at karaoke nights? I wouldn’t give up a favorite hobby or a favorite bar just to avoid a woman.
      
     He left town because of family. He broke things off because he left town. You’re blaming yourself for an outcome that had nothing to do with you.
      
     Putting myself into the look-alike’s shoes:
     Since none of us can read his mind, we don’t know what he was thinking. But I can tell you what I would have been thinking in a similar situation.
      
     Every time I’ve moved, I started making the decision more than a month in advance (frequently several months). By a month out, I was already putting plans in place.
      
     If I’m going to move out of town (or out of state), I don’t want emotional entanglements. I don’t want to leave half my heart behind when I go. So I would avoid emotional entanglements in that situation.
      
     Most men can compartmentalize. I’m no exception. I am capable of having physical intimacy without getting emotionally involved. Therefore, if an opportunity for physical intimacy occurred, I wouldn’t turn it down (and might even pursue such opportunities). I would just keep my emotions in check while doing so.
      
     After moving, there’s no reason to keep in touch with someone who was just a fling. A Justin Timberlake look-alike can easily find sex partners in the Midwest too.
      
     Karmic Equation said: (#130)
     “I would not promote having a woman ask a guy out UNLESS she’s okay with seeming desperate. (She may not ‘be’ desperate, but it can certainly appear that way, quite possibly to the guy she’s asking)”
      
     When women asked me out, I never saw it as an act of desperation. I saw it as an act demonstrating her good taste in men.
      
     If she’s asking every man out (or if a man is asking every woman out), that seems desperate to me.
      
     Karmic Equation said: (#130)
     “my ORIGINAL words were (#61): ‘…that doesn’t necessarily produce good relationship results…’ — Karl, you were the one who changed it to ‘Negative Impact on Relationships’ —”
      
     Search this thread for the words “negative” and “impact”. You were the first person to use either word in the thread (#97 – where you said “NEGATIVE impact on relationships”).
      
     It appears that you “conveniently twisted” your own words. Then you blamed it on me.
      
     Yeah. I know. I just disproved your opinion … again. And I’m going to have to ignore another diatribe about how I can’t disprove your opinion.

137. Karmic Equation 137

     @Goldie 132

     My analogies need work but I get what you say.

     You stopped the quote before you got to the real meaning behind the examples, which is that I don’t recommend SEEKing rejection.

     I actually do know people who think going on interviews, or indeed, simply submitting an application will get them a job, and have felt rejected when getting no responses. I tell them that isn’t how it works, but they feel what they feel.

     I agree with you that being the DUMPER is MUCH EASIER than being the DUMPEE, even though I see being dumpee as negative.

     When I was the dumpee, I only had to work on two things:
     1) Not contacting the dumper – easy. My indignation and pride take over: “They would be LUCKY if they ever heard from me again!”
     2) Working to forget him – harder but with a silver lining: I’ve always looked my best after being dumped Lost weight, great clothes, better hair cut, etc. LOL

     When I was the DUMPER, I got assailed by
     1) Guilt – I didn’t want to hurt the guy
     2) Second thoughts – did I really make the right decision?
     3) No contact – I can’t check in, because that would be unfair and interfere with his healing process
     4) Feeling bad if I wanted to start a relationship
     *) In the case of my divorce, I left money on the table, so that divorce wouldn’t be drawn out.

     The reason I think being the DUMPER is better, is because you are empowered. You made a decision and you DID something about it. You were unafraid of the consequences and broke the status quo when it wasn’t working, and are willing to live with the decision.

     As the dumpee, all I could do is REACT appropriately and learn from the relationship. In all other aspects, I felt helpless. I hate feeling helpless.

     @Karl R 136

     “Search this thread for the words “negative” and “impact”. You were the first person to use either word in the thread (#97 – where you said “NEGATIVE impact on relationships”).”
      
     I forgot I wrote that. I’m sorry I blamed you for that.

     “Yeah. I know. I just disproved your opinion … again. And I’m going to have to ignore another diatribe about how I can’t disprove your opinion.”

     That was a fact you disproved, not an opinion – I said you did something and you didn’t do it, it’s a fact. I’m ok with being shown I’m wrong on the facts. So, you’re off the hook for a diatribe for now. But I reserve the right to diatribe the next time you challenge what I consider to be my opinion

     @Lia 133

     Thanks for the analogy. I understand and hear what you’re saying.

     @nathan 134

     I agree that we can overcome our own instincts. But we can’t overcome OTHER people’s instincts. I pursue or not pursue depending on my objective (sex or relationship) — but unless the MAN I’m interested in can overcome HIS instinct to lump me into “plaything only” if I pursue, then while I might get to date him and even sleep with him, an LTR would be unlikely, imo.

     Thus if I’m “conservative” — (I don’t LIKE this word, because it has NEGATIVE connations) — I’ll change the word to FEMININE — Thus if I exercise my FEMININE power of attraction instead of my MASCULINE power to pursue, I INCREASE my chances that – if he’s attracted to me – he will initiate, giving me a data point that I would not otherwise have had if I pursued him. That data point is important to ME, but perhaps, not to other women who pursue regularly.

     Frankly, going back to Goldie’s point, I’m much better at FILTERING from amongst a selection, than ID’ing off the bat the kind of man who would be a good partner for ME. The REASON for this is probably because I have strong FEMALE intuition or power of observation, which is triggered when a man approaches, but which goes into hibernation when I pursue.

     So I limit pursuit to men I only want ONS with. If I don’t know for certain what I want from the guy, I return to my default setting of feminine power mode.

138. Karmic Equation 138

     #137 – Correction
      
     I mean being the DUMPEE is MUCH EASIER than being the DUMPER.
      
     Sorry!

139. Evan Marc Katz 139

     Karmic - Um, no. Being DUMPED by someone you love is MUCH harder than DUMPING. You have no control over being dumped and it brings up all your insecurities. When you dump someone, it’s because you determine that you will not marry that person or you’d be happier without him. No matter how much you mourn the loss, there’s no WAY it hurts more to break up with someone than it does to get dumped yourself.

140. Lia 140

     Karl R. #136
      
     You wrote:  “The person being pursued may or may not be on board”
     A person who is not on board will never be the pursuer.”
      
     I can see that.  Thank you for the clarification.  
      
     #136
      
     Thank you for answering my question in #131.  
      
     #136
      
     You wrote:  “If someone’s feelings are limiting their actions, those feelings should be challenged, just like we would challenge any piece of information.”
      
     I agree.  That is why I am reading this blog and comments and asking questions.  I looked at my past relationships and saw that they all had one thing in common… me.  I knew if I wanted to have a relationship that was going to be a lasting, loving connection that I would have to change.
      
     I am questioning everything I “know” and I am open to learning.  When I first read the original post I thought that because I did not have the belief that a man had to earn X amount of money that I didn’t have my own false beliefs in this particular area.  WOW was I wrong.
      
     When Karmic Equation wrote “providing is gender neutral” I realized that though I was not looking for someone to provide for me I did have an old beliefs still sitting there from long ago.  Those beliefs were in conflict with what I wanted.  
      
     There have been questions I have asked that you and others men on have answered that have given me a different perspective, I like that!

141. Karl R 141

     Karmic Equation said: (#137)
     “if he’s attracted to me – he will initiate, giving me a data point that I would not otherwise have had if I pursued him. That data point is important to ME, but perhaps, not to other women who pursue regularly.”
      
     I agree with this statement. If the man initiates pursuit, the woman gets this data point instead of the man. If the woman initiates pursuit, the man gets this data point instead of the woman.
      
     If the data point is extremely important to both people, neither will initiate a relationship.
      
     Karmic Equation said: (#137)
     “I pursue or not pursue depending on my objective (sex or relationship) — but unless the MAN I’m interested in can overcome HIS instinct to lump me into ‘plaything only’ if I pursue,”
      
     Speaking as a man with a large number of male friends, none of us see this as an instinct. It’s a decision based on the situation. (There may be men who act this way instinctively, but I don’t know any.)
      
     If I don’t find a woman attractive, I have one objective (avoiding sex or relationship). If she doesn’t pursue, that objective takes no effort. If she pursues, I have to express my lack of interest.
      
     If I find a woman attractive but incompatible, I have a possible objective (sex). Even if I pursue, I will not be interested in a relationship. If she pursues, it becomes much easier to achieve the objective (sex), but she still won’t get a relationship. Therefore, it’s possible for a woman to end up as a “plaything” either way.
      
     If I find a woman attractive and compatible, I have two possible objectives (preferably a relationship, with sex as a secondary option). If she decides to pursue, I don’t suddenly lose interest in the relationship.
      
     Men aren’t stupid. A great woman doesn’t seem undesirable just because she’s pursuing us.
      
     As the pursuer (or pursued), you should never try to overcome the other person’s instinct, habit or preference. Your only goal is to identify the instincts, habits or preferences, and act on that information. The pursued (female or male) gets a few extra data points.
      
     Karmic Equation said: (#137)
     “I’m much better at FILTERING from amongst a selection, than ID’ing off the bat the kind of man who would be a good partner for ME.”
      
     That’s an excellent reason for you (and anyone who shares that trait) to be the pursued instead of the pursuer.

142. Karmic Equation 142

     Evan,

     Yes, it is more PAINFUL to be the dumped one than the dumper. I’m sorry that I didn’t mention that part. It is definitelyLESS PAINFUL to be the dumper than dumpee for the reasons you stated, which were the same as I stated, just a little differently. That said, while the PAIN for the dumper is less compared to the pain of being dumped, the dumper who truly loved you suffers too.

     I know you’ve been the dumper and dumpee, maybe I’m wrong, but I think you dumped only those you DIDN’T love? Which was everyone before your wife (I’m just extrapolating from your comments that “once you decided they weren’t your future wife, you moved on”). So you may not ever have felt more than “mourning” for a lost relationship, when you did the dumping, because you didn’t love them.

     Having been the dumper in 3 LTRs lasting beyond the “honeymoon period” of 1-2 years, I dumped guys that, at one point, I thought I would spend the rest of my life with, and whom I still loved even though I was dumping them. As Fusee once said “Love isn’t enough.”

     The “rules of engagement” for lack of better terms, is much more difficult to adhere to for a dumper who truly loved you.

     1) I felt extraordinarily guilty, because I knew I had hurt him. (Not exactly a rule, but this guilt permeates all activities and thoughts UNTIL I knew he found someone else).

     2) I couldn’t contact him to see how he was doing, to ease my guilt, as that would be unfair to HIS healing process.

     3) I found it difficult to be fully into another relationship, because of that guilt. I dated sure, but I felt it was a betrayal of the love I felt to “replace” him so quickly. So I did the opposite of rebound dating, and dated people I knew WOULDN’T be good replacements.

     4) Even though I KNEW I made the best decision, I was STILL assailed by 2nd thoughts…Remembering all the good times, and forgetting about the bad, wondering why I wasn’t willing to work just a little harder at fixing things…

     When I was the dumped one, I only had to focus on two things:

     1) Not contacting the dumper. It was actually easy as my PRIDE and INDIGNATION saved me from doing that.

     2) To forget about him. I had carte blanche to do whatever I wanted to forget him, replace him, etc., without feeling guilt. In fact I was MOTIVATED to do so. I channeled my indignation and wounded pride into motivation to better myself (lose weight, buy new clothes, learn new skill, etc) so that should I ever run into him again, he would regret tossing a catch like me back into the sea.

143. Ruby 143

     Karmic #142
      
     In my experience of being dumped, “2) to forget about him” was more difficult and painful than all 4 of the dumper’s experiences combined. I think the main reason for this is that, as the dumper, you have the option to re-evaluate and contact the person if you do decide that you made a mistake. You still have more control over the situation. Most dumpees, as a result of “1) Pride”, as well as the great fear of further rejection, are very reluctant to contact their exes. They are simply left to deal with the pain of rejection, as well as the loss of the loved one.
      
     Wanting to minimize the possibility of rejection is what keeps me from pursuing guys. While I know the relationship could end in any case, I prefer to date men who express clear interest in me from the beginning. So I do agree with you in that respect.

144. Jenna 144

     I think it’s a mistake to get caught up in a bunch of dating rules and arguments about who should pursue. Really. Far and away the most important thing is believing you are lovable, being confident, having a full life, and being a truly great person who believes in herself. When you are that way, it doesn’t matter whether you talked to a guy first. It’s better to be that way than be an insecure, timid, less dynamic woman who waits for a guy to do everything. Personally, I prefer that a guy does most of the pursuing but I spend my time now thinking of ways to be more truly confident and dynamic from the inside and out rather than memorize superficial dating tricks. 

145. Goldie 145

     I find it puzzling that the discussion here is strictly in terms of dumping, with one of the sides doing the dumping and the other not wanting to be dumped. I thought, if a relationship isn’t working out, it isn’t working out for both of them? Do people ever agree that it doesn’t work and separate peacefully, or is one side always oblivious to the fact that the other side isn’t happy? how’s it even a healthy relationship when your partner is miserable and you have no idea? to me that means your partner isn’t communicating their feelings to you nearly enough, while you are paying no attention to the signs.

146. Karl R 146

     Goldie asked: (#145)
     “I thought, if a relationship isn’t working out, it isn’t working out for both of them?”
      
     In many cases, that would be correct. However, you can also have cases where someone breaks up for a reason that most of us would consider questionable. For example, I knew someone who bailed on two consecutive relationships due to her commitment-phobia (that was her explanation of the situation). She would start freaking out because it was working out well for both of them.
      
     Goldie asked: (#145)
     “Do people ever agree that it doesn’t work and separate peacefully,”
      
     Yes. We broke up because we had incompatible long-term goals. Speaking from personal experience, however, I was still disappointed that it didn’t work out. My girlfriend (who initiated the breakup) seemed even more upset that it didn’t work out.
      
     Goldie asked: (#145)
     “is one side always oblivious to the fact that the other side isn’t happy?”
      
     Not necessarily. I dated one woman who was quite vocal about anything that made her unhappy. She would blow up at least two or three times each month (starting in about the second month).
      
     She’d get angry over things that I was incapable of changing. She’d blow small things out of proportion (and only realize it later). At one point she was angry/guilty about something she’d done … and that caused her to go on a fault-finding tour through my life for two weeks. I was aware she was unhappy. I didn’t know how to change things, though.
      
     Goldie asked: (#145)
     “how’s it even a healthy relationship when your partner is miserable and you have no idea?”
      
     At that point in time, I had no idea what a healthy relationship looked like. My ideas about healthy relationships were formed by watching my parents. My mother was frequently (and loudly) angry, and my father put up with it.
      
     They’ve been married over 50 years.
      
     Even people who have unhealthy ideas about relationships still want to be in them. Even unhealthy relationships have their good points. Therefore, people get upset when their unhealthy relationships come to an end.
      
     I dodged a bullet when that woman dumped me, but it took several years for me to understand how lucky I was that it ended.
      
     Goldie asked: (#145)
     “to me that means your partner isn’t communicating their feelings to you nearly enough, while you are paying no attention to the signs.”
      
     In all of my breakups (of serious relationships), the cause of the breakup had been openly discussed weeks or months before the breakup. For example, one girlfriend and I were not compatible when it came to physical intimacy. Neither one of us was capable of changing enough to reach an acceptable compromise.
      
     The breakup was not a surprise. It was absolutely necessary. It was still disappointing right at that time.

147. Karmic Equation 147

     @Ruby 143

     There is no doubt being the dumped one is MORE PAINFUL in every way than being the dumper. All I’m saying is that a dumper who loves you suffers too, and don’t get off scott-free. And the guilt can negatively affect their dating lives for a period of time.

     Out of curiosity, what did you ACTIVELY do to try to forget about him? Eating lots of ice cream watching Lifetime does not count. While I’m trying to be humorous, it actually doesn’t — because you’ll get fat and Lifetime shows can be so sappy and remind you of the better times. That’s bound to make you feel even worse.

     So, I’m really curious, what did you do to try to feel better?

     @Jenna 144

     “…superficial dating tricks.”

     I think that’s where you’re wrong, being RECEPTIVE is NOT A TRICK. It’s actually one of the great ways of being feminine and “attractive” — as in “being able to attract” — is not an easy task to accomplish without effort, unless you’re a 10 in your 20′s which most of us are decidedly not — even then she probably puts effort in at the gym to stay a 10. There’s a lot of work that goes on behind the scenes that culminates with a woman being attractive, inside and out.

     However, I think you’re equating being receptive or attractive as sitting around waiting for guys to do everything. When you’re attractive in the way that I mean it, guys approach when you’re just doing your thing, not even looking for attention.

     I put in a lot of table time to get better at pool. I’ll shoot alone in a far corner of the pool hall, hours at a time, because I want to achieve and satsify my competitive streak. Guys approach me to play. There are other people they can ask, who would probably give them a better run for their money… Now you could argue that if I’m the ONLY female in the joint then what do I expect. I would say, well then aren’t I being smart and PROACTIVE in choosing a hobby where the majority of the hobbyists are men?

     Ultimately, if you don’t need the datapoint to see if the guy is attracted to you organically (e.g., approaches/initiates), then pursue to your heart’s content.

     @Karl R 136

     Data is interesting depending on one’s bias and how one spins it…

     You were pursued by two women who had “issues” — I could interpret that to mean that since they weren’t great women, they needed to pursue discerning men in order to get dates with them. You said yourself you wouldn’t have pursued them if they hadn’t initiated.

     One of the two women you pursued, you were serious enough to have discussions about children…and the other you married.

     I could interpret that to mean that MEN are better able to discern partners they want to marry, so why not let them pursue you if marriage is what you ultimately want? They have better radar for women they want to settle down with. So while pursuing may not be harmful to a woman, per se, as it CAN get her a relationship, she has to recognize that it’s probably NOT going to get her a marriage proposal.

148. DinaStrange 148

     Sometimes i truly wonder about maturity level of people talking here. You guys really are trying to overcompensate too hard.

149. joy 149

     If I have to pursue, I lose interest not too long afterwards for some reason. Not sure why. Biology perhaps?

150. Karl R 150

     Karmic Equation, (#147)
     I can see how someone could draw those conclusions given the limited amount of data that I provided.
      
     In part, you misread what I said. I never said that I wouldn’t have pursued those two women. I said they pursued me (and they did so more than I pursued them). I was certainly very interested in both of them before that point.
      
     The first two relationships occurred back when I lacked self-confidence about dating, and I lacked experience and insight about relationships in general. Since I lacked self-confidence in dating, I was hesitant to approach women whom I was interested in. It was easy for those women to beat me to the punch and initiate things. Years later (thanks to a lot of experience) I had a lot more self-confidence, and I was a lot more proactive.
      
     My inexperience during the two relationships had additional effects. I recognized the issues in those relationships, but I hadn’t yet realized that I could do better than that. (I was in the process of learning that I shouldn’t accept relationships with the wrong women … and I eventually figured it out in the second relationship.)
      
     The last two relationships demonstrate a higher level of discernment than the first two … because I was a lot more discerning in my mid-to-late 30s than I was in my late 20s and early 30s.
      
     And looking back at it, the discernment and self-confidence even developed at different rates and different times. I don’t think we can even safely conclude that a man who has self-confidence will be more discerning than one who lacks self-confidence.
      
     Joy asked: (#149)
     “If I have to pursue, I lose interest not too long afterwards for some reason. Not sure why. Biology perhaps?”
      
     It’s probably just the likelihood of statistics. Most women aren’t good matches for me. Therefore, most of the women I pursued weren’t good matches for me. Therefore, I lost interest in most of them fairly quickly.

151. Karmic Equation 151

     @Karl R

     #141

     “Men aren’t stupid. A great woman doesn’t seem undesirable just because she’s pursuing us.”

     Stated this way, I cannot possibly disagree…as I’d have to admit either I’m pursuing stupid men or that I’m not a great woman. LOL. Touché

     #150

     “The first two relationships occurred back when I lacked self-confidence about dating, and I lacked experience and insight about relationships in general. Since I lacked self-confidence in dating, I was hesitant to approach women whom I was interested in. It was easy for those women to beat me to the punch and initiate things. Years later (thanks to a lot of experience) I had a lot more self-confidence, and I was a lot more proactive.”

     This sentiment supports the two reasons why I like being the pursued: I want men who are confident and who are attracted to me. When a man approaches me, he’s telling me without words that he is both.

152. Jenna 152

     Karma, , the pool thing is an excellent idea! I will have to try it. 
     All I meant was, it’s pointless to get caught up in who’s pursuing who — at least in my experience. When men pursued me in the past, and did most of the  work, I was unhappy and felt like they were getting their dream girl but I wasnt getting my dream guy. Ive also absolutely played by the rules plenty of times and still had men not want a relationship and flake. I did some reflection and realized I needed to improve my beliefs, thiughts, overall confidence, get more of a life, etc. From observations and experience in my age group (20s) a confident, cool girl who makes some moves (not taking the lead, just splitting the pursuing a bit more) can get plenty of guys , certainly more than a less dynamic woman who waits to be “chosen.” it really depends on how you do it – for example, I moved somewhere a year ago and talk to men with the attitude of always looking to meet new people and friendS, I’m always organizing social gatherings and having dinner parties and it’s easy and casual to invite some new guy along. I’m not chasing him, I’m just being friendly and extending social invitations to many people. 
     There’s a book out there that explores some of this called the new rules of attraction by Arden Leigh. 

153. Ruby 153

     Karmic #147
      
     “So, I’m really curious, what did you do to try to feel better?”
      
     After a breakup, I’ve done all the things you are supposed to do to get over someone: reading about the stages of grief, no contact, working out so I look great, buying new clothes, hanging out with friends, social activities, dating, even therapy. I’m experienced and savvy enough to know that eating ice cream while watching TV isn’t a panacea (although that may have been one part of my breakup arsenal).  Of course, it depends on the circumstances, and how attached you were, but breakups are painful and hard, at least to varying degrees. It takes time to heal, even if you know the breakup was for the best.

154. Goldie 154

     @ Karmic Equation #147:
      
     “Out of curiosity, what did you ACTIVELY do to try to forget about him? Eating lots of ice cream watching Lifetime does not count.”
      
     Ooooh ooooh I know the answer to that one! In one word, endorphins. Pick your favorite physical exercise and do it till you’re ready to drop. (I hiked, 8-12 miles, 2-3 times a week. Picked up trail running since then, so if it happens again, I’ll be running a lot too.) Your workout will make you feel good for a while. When the good feeling wears out, go work out again so it comes back. I tried it after my unfortunate player episode and it was the only thing that got me through that month, I was so depressed. By the end of that month, I was in amazing shape and, coincidentally, that was when I met my current boyfriend. When he first saw me, he was in awe of how I looked. What can I say, I was kind of in awe myself — rarely do I work out that much! lol

155. Karl R 155

     Karmic Equation said: (#151)
     “This sentiment supports the two reasons why I like being the pursued: I want men who are confident and who are attracted to me. When a man approaches me, he’s telling me without words that he is both.”
      
     I agree that by approaching, the man immediately provides very strong evidence that both are correct.
      
     Attraction:
     How important is it for you to know this immediately? Is it a big negative against the man if you don’t know whether he finds you attractive for the first month?
      
     I want women who are attracted to me. However, I didn’t always know whether they were attracted on the first date. Even with my wife, I didn’t know for certain initially. A few days of uncertainty really hasn’t made a difference in the long run.
      
     Self-Confidence:
     My wife has plenty of self-confidence, but she doesn’t have nearly as much as I do. She underestimates her own abilities and accomplishments (less than most people, but a noticeable amount). I realize that you and I have different dating criteria, so it’s possible that self-confidence is more important to you than it is to me. However, I believe I would have done myself a disservice if I’d ruled out my wife just because she had less self-confidence than me.
      
     As long as your criteria (and your actions taken in pursuit of those criteria) are getting you what you want/need in a partner, you’re doing fine. If you discover they’re not, it’s in your best interest to reevaluate.
      
     And this ties back to Evan’s example (original post) of Donna. She had criteria. She acted on them. Her criteria and actions got in the way of her goal.
      
     Karmic Equation said: (#151)
     “Stated this way, I cannot possibly disagree…as I’d have to admit either I’m pursuing stupid men or that I’m not a great woman. LOL. Touché”
      
     I should probably point out that it’s the other person’s definition of “great” that matters. If my wife had moved to the Midwest 3 weeks after we started dating, our relationship would have ended as a short fling. She would still be the same terrific person, but it would have gotten in the way of having the kind of relationship I wanted.

156. Karmic Equation 156

     @Jenna 152

     Pool is FUN. If you decide to take it up, go take some lessons before heading to a pool hall to practice. You need to look competent while you do it. If you’re a true novice, guys will know it’s as a ploy.

     I had played in college and was a mediocre player when I stoped. At one of the pool halls I play at they have a lot of cute waitresses. I started showing up regularly to play in the tourneys there and got a lot of male attention as I’m good enough to compete, but not yet good enough to win regularly. The cute waitresses noticed all the male attention I got and started playing in the tourneys too, even though they barely know how to hold the cue.

     The guys are chivalrous and kind and patient. The waitresses are cute after all. However, the men know the waitresses just want attention and don’t actually love the game like I do. I get respect as well as attention.

     @Ruby 153

     When I was dumped by the man in my #2 relationship, I was inconsolable. I cried for 4 days non-stop. Didn’t eat. And I had very UN-characteristically violent thoughts, I literally dreamed of bashing his car windows in with a crowbar. This was really WEIRD for I’m SUCH a pacifist. I’m the kind of person who cradles a spider I find in the house in a napkin and then lets it out on the front steps.

     So, I had to figure out why was I SO ANGRY, more so than sad. On day 5, it finally dawned on me and I woke up laughing. I figured out my problem. Somewhere during our relationship I started to think of him as a loser…So…um…what did that make ME when *I* was dumped by this loser? Was I a DOUBLE loser? Is there a name for a person LOWER than a loser? What kind of a super-loser was I such that a LOSER would dump ME?

     I was so relieved — it wasn’t my HEART that was broken. I wasn’t mourning the loss of my RELATIONSHIP — I was mourning the destruction of my PRIDE.

     Day 6 – I was back to normal, but 10lbs lighter and a thousand times wiser.

     Lesson learned: Don’t date losers.

     @Goldie 154

     I usually just go shopping. But I bet that doesn’t burn the same amount of calories. My wallet gets lighter, though. Does that count? LOL

     @Karl R 155

     “Attraction:
     How important is it for you to know this immediately? Is it a big negative against the man if you don’t know whether he finds you attractive for the first month?”

     Well, I’m going to sound egotistical…But I assume EVERY man who doesn’t have a “real purpose” in talking to me (like coworkers, salesmen, teammates, lost sight-see-ers, etc.) — but yet initiates contact with me find me attractive to some degree. My need isn’t “immediacy” but rather “degree”. The degree being that they find me attractive ENOUGH to risk rejection or regret that they didn’t at least talk to me. For some that’s a small degree (i.e., men with experience); for others it’s a huge degree (i.e., the “shy” guy). I’m sure most men fall between those two degrees.

     By extension, the men who don’t approach don’t find me attractive “enough”; so why waste my energy with them?

     So this “attraction factor” as Michelle had put it in another thread, is just a filter. Once he passes that filter, other filters/criteria come into play to determine his worthiness for whatever he’s seeking.

     Regarding self-confidence – I used to be more flexible about this. My #5 (6 yr relationship guy) — was attracted to me enough to hold eye-contact for an obscenely long time, but would not approach even though I smiled, and even waved to him (he did smile and wave back though). I actually had to crook my finger and pat the chair next to me before he got up from where he was sitting to sit next to me. You could say I helped him with his approach.

     I would say that HE was attractive enough for me to overcome my desire for a self-confident man. I came to find out he was quite beta in many ways. But he was alpha in the bedroom (which if you read the Chateau Heartiste website, WARNING – not for the easily offended — is what they deem a requirement for a beta guy to keep an alpha female happy – I would agree). The problem was that when he lost his job, he had little motivation or self-confidence to seek a new one. Or rather, he would apply for jobs and get discouraged every time they didn’t respond. I told him over and over to not worry, just keep trying. I could support us until he found a job, however long it took. But he started drinking heavily and spent more days drunk than sober.

     Lesson learned: It’s better to date a self-confident man. He will handle adversity better.

157. Goldie 157

     Karmic Equation — no way, I release spiders into the wild too! My kids used to think I was out of my mind, but now at least one started doing the same thing. Now cockroaches, that’s another story, those guys get no mercy from me. I guess I’m only a pacifist when I find a creature cute and fuzzy, not gross and disgusting. oh well, room for growth.
      
     Shopping would just leave me feeling upset the next day, for having spent all that unplanned money. Physical workout is known to give you a natural high.

158. Karmic Equation 158

     @Jenna 152

     “…I’m always organizing social gatherings and having dinner parties and it’s easy and casual to invite some new guy along. I’m not chasing him, I’m just being friendly and extending social invitations to many people.”

     I FINALLY get what you mean by “dynamic” – You mean that you actively set up social events to meet men. I don’t see that as pursuing, nor even being dynamic at dating, but rather as socializing, which is indeed a great way to meet men.

     “All I meant was, it’s pointless to get caught up in who’s pursuing who — at least in my experience.”

     I understand where you’re coming from. I’ve pursued when all I’m interested in is in sex.

     Yet I believe that pursuing when you’re interested in MORE than sex is trickier. This is an interesting blog post on initiate/don’t initiate (http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/09/23/relationshipstrategies/should-women-make-the-first-move/)

     Even the guy who is on the Yes side of girls initiating (Dude at College Candy) writes

     “Many times, physical contact is the ‘signal’ to us that you want to get more serious. That being said, it’s important to know what you’re saying with your move. I don’t think I have to tell you that getting all up on it in the bar reads more as ‘I’M LOOKING FOR CASUAL SEX AND THERE’S A DECENT CHANCE I DO THIS PRETTY OFTEN/AM HAMMERED’ than, ‘I really like you and want to establish something long-term.” If you wanna get down, alright; but if you’re looking to let a guy know you really like him this probably shouldn’t be in the play book.’”

     I never wrote the following reason as why I don’t think women should pursue, but I feel this on some instinctive level, and is probably one of the many reasons why I instinctively resist pursuing guys I may want to have a relationship with:

     “In fact, that cute guy who flirts with you and acts interested, but never actually does anything about it, can turn out to be a totally different breed of guy. He’s not timid, or awkward, or nervous. He’s manipulating you.

     This is the guy who’s not looking for anything serious (or, more specifically, not looking for anything serious with you), but wouldn’t be opposed to a casual fling. This may also be the guy who prides himself on being a “good guy.” And true to his self-professed nature, he doesn’t want to play you. That’s why he never comes right out and makes any overt moves on you.

     On the other hand, if you initiate all the moves, he’s certainly not going to stop you. And whether consciously or subconsciously, that’s the trap he has set for you.

     <snipped>

     Here’s the bottom line:

     If I really like a girl, I’m going to make the first move.

     So, go ahead. Make the first move on that cute, coy guy if you want. Just remember the Get Out Of Guilt Free card you may be handing him if you do.”

     Excerpted from: http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-09-05/guy-talk-the-real-reason-women-shouldnt-make-the-first-move/

     ********************
     I’m sure that there are exceptions to the rule (Helen, for example) — but if all the women (and men) here do post-mortems on their relationship outcomes based on who initiated, I would bet that the majority of the ones that resulted in marriages or in LTRs that lasted more than 2 years (beyond the honeymoon period), were initiated by men.

159. Lia 159

     @ Karmic Equation # 158
     “In fact, that cute guy who flirts with you and acts interested, but never actually does anything about it, can turn out to be a totally different breed of guy. He’s not timid, or awkward, or nervous. He’s manipulating you.
     Wow, the light bulb just went on.  I can remember one guy in particular that that statement brought to mind.  I knew something was “off” with him but I couldn’t really verbalize what it was I picked up on. That statement right there did it.  Oh sh*t make that two guys…
      
     Thanks!  This is why I look forward to your posts. 

160. Shannon 160

     I ain’t saying she a gold digger. But she aint messing with no broke…YOU KNOW THE REST!
     Anyway, I agree with Evan. Like always!

161. Mickey 161

     About 20 years ago, I had a conversation with a co-worker in which she told me that she wanted to date an attorney. When I asked her if she would be willing to date that same guy while he was in law school and trying to establish his career, she responded HELL NO!!!
     So much for “potential.”

162. Karmic Equation 162

     @Mickey 161

     This post (http://www.therulesrevisited.com/2012/04/analogy-between-confidence-and-beauty.html) makes an interesting analogy between beauty and confidence (which I completely agree with).

     However for most women, it’s really “status” that’s desired (and if a guy has status, he’s usually confident also, so those qualities do go hand in hand). So for MEN to understand women better, substitute the word “status” where you would normally says “beauty” and you’ll finally see the light.

     While I don’t think it’s to women’s advantage to look for “status” in a mate when she herself has achieved a high status, I understand the desire. By the same token, I never rip a man for admiring/desiring beauty in a mate. Opposite sides of the same coin.

Comments RSS

Leave a Reply