Women Who Make First Move in Online Dating Are Rewarded, Study Finds

Women Who Make First Move in Online Dating Are Rewarded, Study Finds

There’s a lot of mixed messaging when it comes to dating advice. Readers can search the Internet and find two pieces of guidance that directly contradict each other.

Is Tinder good or bad?

Does online dating work or not?

Should women ask out men on first dates?

Should women pay for the first date?

When is it appropriate to have sex for the first time?

The problem is that it’s nearly impossible for a single person in the modern dating world to form a coherent theory. That’s a big part of my job – to make sense of this contradictory advice and find the the through-line that ties together the best dating advice: is it effective or ineffective? Most people – and experts – offer emotional choices, based on how they would do things or how they would like to see things done. I try very hard to give advice that actually works, regardless of my feelings. If it works, I feel good about passing it along to you.

So, when there’s so much information out there that tells women to be feminine and receptive, when there are entire books which teach women to let men do the courting, when the core piece of my advice in “Why He Disappeared” is to “Do nothing,” how can anyone, with a straight face, claim that it’s smart for women to make the first move online? Doesn’t this contradict EVERYTHING?

With an interested guy, you don’t need to prop up the relationship yourself.

No. No, it doesn’t. And that’s really frustrating for folks like me who understand that different approaches work in different situations. For example, a guy can’t go up and make an aggressive first move after 10 at Starbucks; but if he’s on a third date with you and he hasn’t gone in for a kiss yet, he should probably get with the program.

So it is no contradiction to tell women that yes, you should let a man court you – call, plan, pay, and otherwise respond enthusiastically to his calls, emails and texts at the beginning… and ALSO be the first person to initiate contact online. Here’s the difference:

When you write to him first online, you’re making an introduction. It’s the equivalent of a guy saying something funny to you at the bar. You’re not complimenting him. You’re not asking him out. You’re not telling him how much you have in common. You’re literally writing a short, funny paragraph designed to break the ice. Now, the ball is in his court. From here on in, you don’t have to do anything except mirror his efforts. This is to prevent you from chasing him down, overfunctioning and being perceived as weak and needy. With an interested guy, you don’t need to prop up the relationship yourself.

But wait – by that logic, aren’t I saying that if a guy were interested, he would automatically write to you? NO! That’s the entire point. There were women on my JDate favorites list for TEN YEARS that I never wrote to. Why? Because I was writing to other women, and other women were writing to me. So did I find them attractive? Yes. Would I have responded if they wrote to me first? Yes. Did I ever meet them? No. There was always something else more pressing – or someone else more aggressive or entertaining.

If you’re dissatisfied with the quantity or quality of men in your inbox, the answer is simple: take control of your own love life.

So, please do yourself the favor of reading this latest OkCupid study, which validates everything I’ve said for 13 years. Just because you get emails from guys does not mean that they are the men that you want. If you’re dissatisfied with the quantity or quality of men in your inbox, the answer is simple: take control of your own love life. Write a great profile. Write a cute email to one new guy a day that YOU choose. While you may only get 30% of men to write back, they will at least be men that you desire, as opposed to passively waiting for the right men to write to you.

Don’t know where to begin? Don’t know what to write in a profile or an email that makes guys want to write back?

Click here and I’ll take care of you.

Your thoughts, below, are greatly appreciated.

Join 10 Million Readers

And the thousands of women I've helped find true love. Sign up for weekly updates for help understanding men.

I hate spam as much as you do, therefore I will never sell, rent, or give away your email address.

Join our conversation (326 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.

Comments:

  1. 1
    Chance

    This appears to be another example of cherry-picking customs to suit our needs.  If you’re not willing/able to have children and willing/able to stay home to raise them, then courtship isn’t really in order.  For older women, it is perfectly acceptable to call/plan/pay, and in fact, hypocritical to refuse to do so.

    1. 1.1
      KK

      Why is it hypocritical for an older woman to expect to be courted? And what (in your opinion) is an older woman? 25? 31? 35?

      1. 1.1.1
        misty

        He’s saying that if you’re not weillng be a traditional wife you don’t deserve traditional courting. To which I say if you’re not willing to be a traditional man (be a gentleman, wait for sex, do the proposing/ring buying, make the money, put family first, etc) you deserve a traditional woman. Works both ways.

        1. misty

          missing word…you DONT deserve a traditional woman… 😙

      2. 1.1.2
        Chance

        It is my understanding that courtship is rooted in the idea that a man must demonstrate that he can protect, and provide for, a wife and their children.  In exchange, the woman will bear his children and keep a home.  If this is not an arrangement that is to be considered between a man and a woman, then it makes no sense for a man to court.  To whom is he demonstrating that he can provide?  To whom is she demonstrating that she can bear children and keep a home?  The case for traditional courtship breaks down in these situations.

        1. misty

          whats your definition of appropriate modern courting then? Just that women in the same income brackets should split costs? Cool if that’s what both want but Remember not all men are ok with that.

          Or is it zero effort and 3 am booty texts and move in with me after 3 months so I can have sex every night without making any effort at a relationship?

          From personal experience the one time I let a guy bypass courting I felt cheated and learned my lesson. It wasn’t about money. It was about feeling special like Im worth getting to know and spending time with, and not just some plug in female companion and a hole to use. he was divorcing (a lot earlier in the process than he originally led me to believe.)  and looking for a replacement wife without having to do the work. Yuck

        2. Chance

          I think you’re conflating a guy who was using you with a man who sees no point in a one-sided courtship arrangement. There are good men out there for you who aren’t interested in courtship, and bad men who ostensibly court, but can subversively use you.

        3. misty

          if you see it as one sided you’re dating the wrong women

        4. Chance

          Misty:  nope, I’ve been with the right woman for several years now.  She’s also older than me, btw.

        5. Stacy

          Courtship has nothing to do with the intention of having kids.  Not all people who want to get married even want kids. Some women can’t have kids. Some men don’t want kids, etc. Any woman needs to be shown that you can provide and/or protect. And even if there are no plans to have children but to marry, your wife is still considered your family.

          Courtship has to do with masculine and feminine energy and what feels psychologically fulfilling to both parties.  By the way, courtship has nothing to do with spending a bunch of money (although some people are into that).

          To say that an older woman shouldn’t expect to be courted is a ridiculous premise.

        6. Chance

          Stacy, a man does not need to show any woman that he can provide/protect any more than a woman needs to show that she can provide/protect.  Any woman who thinks a man should court them in every instance is only thinking about her needs without regard for the reciprocity that is necessary to establish and maintain a relationship.  If a woman isn’t willing and able to raise children at home as well as make a home, then she cannot reasonably expect a man to demonstrate that he can provide and protect.  Older women must bring something else to the table.

           

          I can assure you that many men do not find it psychologically fulfilling to court.  They mostly just pretend to like it.

        7. MikeTO

          Men shouldn’t court women since women expect equality. Plain and simple.

    2. 1.2
      Karmic Equation

      So the guy gets sex for free?

      Face it, Chance.

      As long as men want sex, they have to pay for it in some way.

      To get sex from a prostitute, he pays money.

      To get sex from a non-prostitute, he has to extend some effort beyond asking for her number, if he’s a not-hot guy. And, often even if he is. Effort needed is inversely proportional to his attractiveness (some women value looks; others value money/status) to the woman in question.

      1. 1.2.1
        Chance

        It sounds like you’re saying that all women are prostitutes, even the “non-prostitutes”, as you call them.  I disagree.  I’ve slept with plenty of women in situations where we alternated paying for dates, and there’s nothing special about me.  This was the case with my partner as we alternated paying for dates.  I would agree with you that chumps pay for sex.  However, this is more often due to how they allow themselves be treated as opposed to how women initially viewed them.  Chumps will pay for the opportunity to be with prostitutes as well.  Guys who are viewed as desirable will still pay for a prostitute, but they are paying for her to go away once it’s over.

        1. Karmic Equation

           

          I did a little Googling and this was the best (e.g., non-religious, non-biblical) description I could find from Match.com:

          “Courtship” is a rather outdated word used to describe the activities that occur when a couple is past the dating stage and in a more serious stage of their relationship. It happens before the couple becomes engaged or married and is usually meant to describe when a man is attempting to woo a woman, with marriage as the end goal. Dating has a more informal connotation and implies that the couple is not necessarily exclusive.”

          Chance, I don’t think it’s other folks conflating dating and courtship. It is you. You’re using the terms “dating” and “courting” synonymously when it suits you and differently when it doesn’t 🙂

          If we accept Match’s definition, then Evan is absolutely right. Evan’s target audience are women looking for marriage. Thus,  if a man is unwilling to court a woman (behavior AFTER exclusivity has been agreed to)–because marriage is not his ultimate goal–then he’s not worth dating.

          Now if the question is should a woman share in the cost of dating (before exclusivity is agreed upon), whether alternating or splitting the check, then, personally, I think women should pay their share, if she can afford it. Because, imo, doing so relinquishes her from the unspoken expectation from the MAN that because he buys her dinner 3x, he is then entitled to sex (per Shaukat’s understanding of the dating “rules”).

          Shaukat,

          So if a woman pays for dates one through three with you, then it means she can count on you being her exclusive boyfriend from date 3 onwards? I’m sure some women would go for that exchange.

          Sounds like a ridiculous expectation, doesn’t it?

          So why do men think they are owed sex after paying for three dates if they wouldn’t agree to being in an exclusive relationship if she pays for the first three dates?

        2. Chance

          Whatchu talkin’ ’bout, Willis?  Lol KE, you’ve either had a long week or I have failed to clearly communicate something.  I can’t even guess where I would have conflated the two.  Could you please elaborate?

           

          As it relates to the Match.com definition of courtship, this isn’t consistent with my understanding or with how I think I’ve seen EMK apply it, either.  Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve seen him advocate for courtship (i.e., when his “call/plan/pay” advice applies) in the stage before exclusivisity.  I think he believes that, once exclusivisity is established, then either party can call/plan/pay as they mutually see fit.

        3. Karmic Equation

          Sorry, Chance. I know someone accused someone of conflating “dating” and “courting”. It wasn’t you.

          Now I have to go find that thread where I saw that and ask Evan to change the name from you to that person.

          My bad!

        4. Karmic Equation

          @Chance,

          Found it!

          —————————

           

          Chance wrote at #1

          If you’re not willing/able to have children and willing/able to stay home to raise them, then courtship isn’t really in order.  For older women, it is perfectly acceptable to call/plan/pay, and in fact, hypocritical to refuse to do so.

          Chance wrote in reply under 4.1.1

          Now, you’re conflating dating with courtship.  Completely different things.

          —————————

          It’s unclear to me what you consider “dating” behavior and what you consider “courting” behavior.

          Please clarify.

          Until you do, then I need to un-recant my mea culpa, because I do believe you’re conflating the two.

           

        5. Chance

          KE, courtship=man calls/plans/pays.  Dating=both parties call/plan/pay.  Either arrangement can lead to LTR or marriage.

        6. Chance

          As an add-on, booty calls and treating a woman like crap is not dating.  Misty’s straw man seemed to indicate that there was no middle ground between this type of situation and courtship, which is silly.

        7. Misty

          Chance, it was not a straw man. It was me relating a personal story. Nowhere in my comment did I say this is any reflection on men in general.

          In fact, my exact words were:

          “From personal experience the one time I let a guy bypass courting I felt cheated and learned my lesson. It wasn’t about money. It was about feeling special like Im worth getting to know and spending time with, and not just some plug in female companion and a hole to use. he was divorcing (a lot earlier in the process than he originally led me to believe.)  and looking for a replacement wife without having to do the work. Yuck.”

          Me relating my experience. Can’t see any “straw man” in this.

        8. Karmic Equation

          Chance wrote:

          KE, courtship=man calls/plans/pays.  Dating=both parties call/plan/pay.  Either arrangement can lead to LTR or marriage.

          Oh that makes it much clearer…NOT.

          That’s just splitting hairs, Chance.

          If the woman calls and plans, WITHOUT exclusivity, she runs the risk of being seen as either aggressive or desperate or both.

          After exclusivity, most women do that. In fact, I would say after exclusivity, women do ALMOST ALL the calling/planning, and depending on their ability, probably pays for her fair share. If you include the calling and the planning, then she’s almost always doing MORE than the guy AFTER the exclusivity.

          How do the guys tally this swap of ROI. He now gets sex, she pays her fair share, she plans their dates, etc. And what exactly is he doing? Ohhh yeah, “I’m here, aren’t I?” — Since most relationships, particularly LTRs, last longer than the “dating” or “courtship” phase combined, do you really think that women make out on this deal?

           

        9. Chance

          KE, I really don’t believe I’m splitting hairs.

           

          “If the woman calls and plans, WITHOUT exclusivity, she runs the risk of being seen as either aggressive or desperate or both.”

           

          I personally don’t know one guy who would have a problem with a woman calling/planning.  If this has been your experience, then the only thing that I can think of is that these guys weren’t particularly interested to begin with.

           

           

          “In fact, I would say after exclusivity, women do ALMOST ALL the calling/planning, and depending on their ability, probably pays for her fair share.”

           

          I don’t know… maybe you’re right, and maybe you aren’t.  I’ve seen it go both ways – or equally – in regards to calling/planning after exclusivity, but it seems to me that the men generally do most of the paying.  Here is some research that was done recently, which supports that theory:

           

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/13/men-paying-for-date_n_3749104.html

           

          “How do the guys tally this swap of ROI. He now gets sex, she pays her fair share, she plans their dates, etc. And what exactly is he doing? Ohhh yeah, “I’m here, aren’t I?””

           

          It would seem to me that the tally is pretty much equal in this case.  Each person provides the other with their company.  They both plan dates.  They both pay for dates.  Perhaps they can alternate.  I can’t really process how someone could sincerely think that what I’m proposing would be inequitable.  They both get sex, which until reading your comments, I had thought that women enjoyed on some level.  Do women really hate sex that much?   Then stop having it, then.  I don’t want to have sex with anyone who despises it so much, and only does it in exchange for some type of provisioning.  You’re basically portraying women as prostitutes, whether you mean to or not.

        10. CC

          Correction. They are paying the prostitute for sex, not to go away,  since they are hoping for it to be over as quickly as possible already.

      2. 1.2.2
        Theo

        You are cynical. I have had three relationships in the last four years. In two of these relations I did/do in no way pay to get sex. Rather, we supported and helped each other alot and we enjoyed sex together. There was no economic transaction for sex. However, in one of these relations the woman I dated insisted I’d pay for dates and gifts. I did for two months but broke up with her after only two months.

      3. 1.2.3
        Shaukat

        Hi Karmic,

        You make an interesting point, except I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I most certainly don’t believe that a man is automatically entitled to sex if he plans and pays for three dates, just as I don’t think a woman is entitled to exclusivity if she plans and pays for the first three.

        My point was that since both expectations are clearly unreasonable, then in my opinion it makes more sense for both parties to reciprocate in terms of the paying  and contacting between dates 1-4. For example, I always plan and pay for the first date. Since we usually go for drinks, the tab can cost anywhere from $35-60. I also always follow up and make the plans if I want to see her again. If there’s still mutual interest after the second date, then it’s nice if the woman initiates some contact between dates and covers at least some of the cost of the third date. Initiating contact doesn’t even mean she has to plan at that stage, simply sending a text or calling to say hi as a way of showing appreciation would suffice. In my experience, most women offer to contribute by the second date, so I don’t even think this is much of an issue.

        1. Karmic Equation

          Hi Shaukat,

          Then we’re in agreement. And you are courting, though not in the Match.com definition 🙂

          In Evanspeak, you’re putting in the effort to try to get to know her better. That’s the courting behavior most women want. And as you say, most women reciprocate by at least the 3rd date (if not by the 2nd).

          So, I’m really not getting why some guys are all up in arms about the cost of dating.

          All I can surmise is that those men are dating the “entitled” women, and not the “grounded” women.

          Either that, or most women reject them for 2nd dates, so they never see an ROI (in terms of more dates where reciprocity would go into play or a relationship, assuming that’s what they want). — If it is this latter, then the guy needs to figure out why he’s not getting second dates. He’s the only common denominator.

          Glad that is not your problem 🙂

          And sorry about your recent breakup. It works the same way for men as it does for women. If she didn’t want what you wanted, then she’s ultimately not the one for you. There will be someone else.

          Good luck, honey.

      4. 1.2.4
        Shaukat

        Thanks for the kind words KE:)

        1. Karmic Equation

          YW 🙂

      5. 1.2.5
        Adrian

        Karmic Equation,

        I would like your opinion on something, but I am hesitant, because I really am trying hard to not become apart of this debate; so consider these independent questions of the arguments that are going on here.

         

        I know I must be missing something, and you are one of the few commenters whom I trust to be honest with me regardless of if it makes one gender or the other look bad.

         

        I guess I don’t understand when women say that asking a man out causes men to not be attracted to them. Are these just women who the men were not attracted to or felt neutral about? Are these women taking personal experiences and applying them to all men?

         

        I guess I just struggle with the thought of a women I find beautiful, hot, and sexy walking up to me, asking me out, and as a result, I go from 10-0 in my attraction towards her. BUT all these same women acknowledge that once they become a couple, she calls, plans, and initiates sex, and the guy keeps his attraction to her then. So there must be something I am not seeing.

         

        Guys lose attraction when a new women initiates, but after he has had her for a few months and the newness wears off, when she initiates, the attraction is unaffected?

        …   …   …

        Men who complain about money or equality, I feel are really just using those as mask to hide behind the fact that they are afraid of “date 3” rejection.

         

        It is easier to be rejected when you first approach a women or after the first date, than it is to be rejected after 3 or 5 dates, when your hopes are high and she is no longer just a stranger.

         

        What do you think, and what are your hypotheses on why so many men complain about courtship? Do you think there is a cure?

         

        1. Chance

          When a man meets a woman from online, there usually isn’t going to be a “date 3” rejection because the man is past a woman’s most frequent rejection point by then, which is typically before they ever meet in person.  From my experience, women don’t reject around date 3.  They’re usually very interested at that point.  Therefore, I don’t believe your theory has merit.

        2. Karmic Equation

          I need more time to write the answers to your questions, Adrian. So am just responding to Chance first.

          I suspect Adrian put “date 3” in quotation mark to mean the “sex” date.

          I’ve rejected men on dates 2 through 3. No sex on any and not because of sex.

          One date 2 was a mutual rejection. We didn’t like the way the other kissed. He was a wet kisser, and I really dislike wet kisses.

          The date 3 rejection was because we took almost 3 months to get there, and in that 3 months, he had changed jobs 3 times. It appeared to me that he was either a poor communicator at work or he had issues with authority, and/or both. Red flags.

          So rejection can happen at any date, online or otherwise.

          But I’m only one person. Other women will have to chime in.

        3. yowza

          Adrian can i answer your question or do you only want to hear from women you trust like KE?

        4. Nissa

          Adrian,

          In response to your question, Are these just women who the men were not attracted to or felt neutral about? I would say, yes, that’s exactly why. Those men initially were not attracted enough or interested enough to approach the woman. However, the prospect of easy, convenient sex is enough to get them to accept the woman’s advances. Then, then with any flaw on the woman’s part or if she doesn’t continue to do almost all the planning/paying/calling, the relationship falls apart.

        5. Chance

          KE, how many men would you say you’ve been on 2 or 3 dates with?

        6. Adrian

          Chance,

           

          It is my hypothesis, not my theory.

           

          Plenty of men AND women are rejected after the third date. Many women will give men chances even if she is not sure about her attraction for him, or if she is attracted to a specific trait of his (looks, personality, or morality), but she is not sure she can see herself with him long-term.

           

          Many people (men and women) will continue to say yes, until they are sure; haven’t you noticed the consistency of all the female commentators through the years? They want men to do all these things (courting) because they are afraid!

           

          Afraid he may disappear, afraid he is only saying and doing the right things just for sex, afraid of getting a broken heart, etc. Which is why (in my opinion) they all keep saying that once a solid relationship is established, they are more than happy to initiate, plan, pay, and work to make the guy happy… in other words, they don’t mind courting their boyfriends once he has proved himself to be genuine; they all admit a relationship is give and take.

           

          This is of course, in NO way, me giving all women a get out of jail free card for bad behavior toward men; I am just acknowledging what I “believe” or my hypothesis as to why women value being courted. Everyone wants to be desired, men and women, we both just go about it in different ways.

          …   …   …

          But this is all just brain candy for me, I love understanding myself as well as women; I get nothing out of debating.

           

          And NOT to be rude to you Chance, because I always appreciate other views and opinions, but on this topic I sense that you are incorrigible. I will gladly admit that I may be wrong, but I don’t think you or any of the male or female commenters on this post are open to learning or accepting that another could be correct. It just seems that everyone wants to defend their own opinions, not learn from those who see it differently, again I acknowledge that I may be wrong.

           

          This is why I specifically asked Karmic. She has been consistently pragmatic in her reasons for her views; nor does she seem pridefully attached to her opinions. I literally just read a comment of hers toward another female poster advising the woman to use Evan’s method on sex and dating, she even praised it as being a great method.

           

          Why is that important to me? Because, that is a topic that she and Evan constantly disagree on! But yet, she still advised another woman to use it.

           

          While (and please don’t take this personally), you and many of the other commenters on this post have always come off as basing your reasons for your views on raw emotion. Most of you appear  to be in the it is “not fair, so we shouldn’t have to do it” camp, while Evan, Karl R, and a few others are in the “it’s not fair, but it is the reality of dating-so do it,” camp.

          …   …   …

          Anyway Chance, I did not want to make this about you, AGAIN, it is not personal, I was just explaining why I specifically called out one commentator’s opinion, on a post full of very smart and capable people… of both genders.

        7. Karmic Equation

          Hi Adrian,

          Thanks. I guess I’m an equal-opportunity gender-offender, eh? LOL

          And I love your Socratic method of educating the masses. Yeah, I noticed.

          I guess I don’t understand when women say that asking a man out causes men to not be attracted to them. Are these just women who the men were not attracted to or felt neutral about? Are these women taking personal experiences and applying them to all men?

          It does sound that way, doesn’t it? IMO, it’s NOT that chasing a man CAUSES him to lose attraction, per se.

          I, and probably many other women, understand at a subconscious level, than any man who approaches us is attracted enough to us to overcome either his fear of rejection or his inertia. He’s determined he’s attracted enough to us to either risk rejection or have determined we are worth the effort of the approach. So, the other side of the coin is, what does this mean when a man DOESN’T approach us? It means he DOESN’T think we’re attractive enough for him to be either worth the risk or worth the effort. Think about all the unspoken mating messages that is conveyed by a man’s approach (or lack thereof). This is why men who approach ultimately get better results than men who sit back and wait to be approached. Those unspoken messages are heard loudly and clearly at the subconscious level for women who are looking for a mate.

          So, when a woman does the approaching, how does she know if he thinks she’s beautiful, because he might say so after her approach? We all know that men can and will lie for sex (check out this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DQv2GxFHt4) — A woman approaching a man ensures she gets ZERO information about how much, or if, he values, at the least, her beauty, which, as we know from the ever popular Am I as hot as Angelina Jolie thread (http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/understanding-men/i-think-im-hot-but-my-boyfriend-doesnt-seem-to-think-so/), is extremely important to a lot of women.

          In other words, a man approaching a woman indicates he values, at least, her beauty. And a woman who approaches a man, loses that small, yet very important, data point of her “value” to him.

          I guess I just struggle with the thought of a women I find beautiful, hot, and sexy walking up to me, asking me out, and as a result, I go from 10-0 in my attraction towards her. 

          Unless in a teenage movie, 8-9-10 females, don’t approach males. So that means if women do approach men, they are most likely to be in the 7 and below group. And whom do you think those 7 and below women are approaching? The 7 and below men? Or are they approaching the 8-10 men, or at least men above their own league? And what do we know about men who date “below their league”, like your brother?

          BUT all these same women acknowledge that once they become a couple, she calls, plans, and initiates sex, and the guy keeps his attraction to her then. So there must be something I am not seeing<…>Guys lose attraction when a new women initiates, but after he has had her for a few months and the newness wears off, when she initiates, the attraction is unaffected?

          Once an exclusive relationship is agreed upon, then both parties have established their value beyond the superficial. And the process of developing a strong relationship is not about gathering more data points (although both should, about life goals, life values, communication style, and other points of compatibility). So the calling/planning/sex initiation is required to BUILD a strong relationship. It takes TWO to build strong relationship. Both women and men who are relationship-oriented know this at an instinctual level. Thus who does what once IN a relationship is more of a matter of ensuring an enduring relationship and not about attraction. And thus a man’s attraction that was once based upon the woman’s outer beauty at the initial stages should evolve into a deeper attraction for her inner beauty once in a relationship.

          In other words, once in a healthy relationship, the physical attraction a man feels for a woman morphs to include attraction for her inner beauty as well. So the attraction IS affected, but in a positive way. By that time, in a healthy relationship, who does what is irrelevant, and attraction is de facto.

          ——————–

          Men who complain about money or equality, I feel are really just using those as mask to hide behind the fact that they are afraid of “date 3” rejection.

          Honestly, I think those men complain because they’re dating beyond their means. As in dating (and not committing to) more women than he can afford to date. Or asking out t “high maintenance” women.  Or as I wrote to Chance, they’re doing something wrong on their dates, such that they get rejected for 2nd dates, so they never get to the part of dating where they see the reciprocity.

          It is easier to be rejected when you first approach a women or after the first date, than it is to be rejected after 3 or 5 dates, when your hopes are high and she is no longer just a stranger. 

          I’ve written on this before. A rejection before any sex is had is a heck of a lot easier to deal with emotionally than what women have to deal with AFTER they’d had sex with the guy…which usually when men do THEIR rejecting. Men can earn back the money they spent on 3-5 dates a lot faster than women can recover their self esteem after she’s dumped after sex.

          What do you think, and what are your hypotheses on why so many men complain about courtship? 

          I think most men who complain about courtship are the millenials and the MGTOW. We know why the MGTOW don’t believe in it. So let’s not worry about them. Millenial men probably don’t know how to court. And, unfortunately, most males react to the unknown with either anger or dismissiveness. Second, millenial girls don’t help matters because they don’t know how to show appreciation on any courtship behavior that some millenial guys might practice. Finally, the prevailing millenial mindset that they are entitled to what others have (e.g., Sanders supporters are comprised mostly of millenials), without working for it, is all about getting and not about giving. That mindset, of course, would devalue courtship.

          Do you think there is a cure?

          Not unless we can change the mindset of a whole generation. Odds are, courtship will go the way of dinosaurs.

        8. Karmic Equation

          Chance,

          Believe it or not, I created a list when I started online dating.

          Failed phone screen: 23

          1 date only: 32

          2 dates only: 4

          3 dates only: 1

          4+ dates usually resulted in relationships. Only one of below started from online:

          STRs (one year or less) – 3

          LTRs (more than 1 year) – 4

        9. KK

          Adrian,

          I realize you feel KE’s opinions are superior to many others on here and that is perfectly fine. She does make many insightful comments, most of which I agree with. But, when she says something like, “Blame God for that. In most species, nature designed the males to be more expendable than the females. Hence the males do the dangerous jobs.”

          I’m surprised you and the other guys weren’t even a tiny bit offended or taken back by that. I found it offensive but didn’t want to comment on it at the time. Saying something offensive doesn’t discredit any other ideas. Just making a disclaimer, because I’m realizing it’s almost necessary on here and if you don’t say it before, you’ll most likely be following up with one later. Lol.

          Anyway, just an observation.

        10. Henriette

          @Karmic – you are on fire today, my dear!

        11. Chance

          Adrian, no offense taken.  I am incorrigible on this topic, no doubt, by design.  I am under no illusion that I am going to change any woman’s mind here.  Indeed, I’m not here to do that.  I’m here to push back.  I agree that you do what’s effective, which is what I do to a point.  However, if more men feel comfortable pushing back in the future, then they will no longer have to do “what’s effective” because a woman would not be able to easily move on to the next guy who will pay.  This runs a lot deeper than just  paying for the first few dates, and most men seem to carry the financial burden in a relationship (once you get above working class).

           

          Finally, I have to challenge you a bit.    I don’t mean this to insult you or anyone else.  However, have you closely read the comments in this thread?  No objective person would have chosen to trust who you chose to trust (on this topic) given some of the things she wrote throughout this thread. It calls into question whether you are as unbiased as you present yourself to be .

        12. Chance

          KE, thanks for the stats.  That’s fairly in line with my expectation, but more first dates than I imagined.  That says something about one of us;).  Kidding

        13. Karmic Equation

          Chance,

          The #dates data was from about 14 months of online dating between 2013-2014. So that’s about 2.6 dates per month. I’m pretty certain when you were dating, you were probably going on more than 2.6 dates per month. And if we place a value of about $50/date, you’d only have spent $130 on dates. I’m pretty sure that didn’t break you.

          The relationships data is from 30 years of being an adult. And in the 7 relationships I listed, 3 began without any money spent by the guy or me, nor did we even have any official dates before I slept with them. One lasted 1 year, one lasted 6 years, and I just celebrated my 1-year anniversary with the latest guy who spent no money courting me.

          So, what did my dating pattern tell you? That one indeed has to kiss a lot of frogs to find a prince?

          Ohhh. That’s not what you meant?

          You think I was milking the 1-date only guys for dinner or drinks? I offered to pay half at all but 5 meals. I ended up paying the full tab at about 3. The guy I “rejected” at date 3? I paid HIS tab on date 1, and we split the tab on dates 2-3.

          I split the tab with the 2-date guys, except the wet kisser one. I never got to see the tab.

          Or do you think that it means I got a lot of dates from initiating? All but one of the dates approached me first (if online, they wrote me first; if IRL they talked to me first).

          Courting does not need to involve any money. If that is what you’re harping on, you’re way off base. Perhaps some women equate her value with “how much” a man is willing to spend dating her. Obviously, I don’t think like that. And I believe MOST women don’t think like that.

          However, I believe that most women need/require the EFFORT that is part of courting. You see it as one sided: Why does the guy have to “do all the work”? I see it as a neccessary data point.

          Probably what I do is also not what most women do. I’m a high earner. After exclusivity, I footed the majority of the bills and tabs. When I was married, my husband was unemployed for 1/2 of the 9 years we were married. I was the one who brought home the bacon, paid the bills, took care of our dogs. We paid someone to mow the lawn and do the housekeeping.

          I do believe strongly that a man must court to show that he has a genuine interest in me, not just in sex. But I, obviously, don’t need him to spend any money on me to have sex or court me. He doesn’t even have to plan dates. He just has to be willing to spend time getting to know me.

          So please elucidate me as to why you believe I’m biased? Because I believe courting is necessary for a woman to fully vet a guy for relationship-worthiness — and you don’t? Are you sure you’re not the biased one hung up on the “cost”?

          Or did I offend you with the “males are expendable” phrase?

          I don’t believe in the current incarnation of feminism. I personally value men, more than women, as a matter of fact. I LIKE men more than women. So even though that statement is offensive on its face, you can’t argue that nature has designed males to be more fragile biologically (e.g., chromosomally xx is stronger than xy — miscarriages are often male; certain diseases, such as hemophilia afflict more males than females, as does autism; OTOH there are more male geniuses than female, however most genius males are either socially inept or sociopathically inclined) — and more voluminous (up to age 25, and then probably due a lot of factors such as stupid decisions, like driving drunk, playing with guns, joining gangs — more men die than women of that same age) — and because of this attrition of men at age 25, and because genetically XX is stronger, there tends to be more females than males after age 25.

          Sure I’m biased in favor of courting, but I don’t value it as a right or entitlement that you’ve been implying. I see courting as the EFFORT that a man makes to show me he values me for a relationship. No money required.

          Men don’t have to court me for sex. I give that away for free, but usually only on a one-night only basis 😉 However, the guy who does court me gets to have the best relationship of his life. So much so that he ends up valuing the nurturing I give him more than the sex that we have. And in return, he gives me the male form of nurturing: time spent with me doing whatever I want to do and fixing things. Win-win.

          So in my book, “courting” by a man should result in “nurturing” by a woman. If a man wants to be nurtured, he should court. Those two are the opposite sides of the same coin, not “courting” should buy “ability to bear children”. Resources buy that, not courting.

           

        14. Chance

          KE:  Like I said the first time, I was kidding.  I honestly didn’t read anything into your first dates.  Honestly.  Could have been because of anything. The way your post was worded just served as a low-hanging fruit for a joke, but I can see it got under your skin so I am sorry.

           

          Second, I never said you were biased.  I said that Adrian might – as in, possibly – be biased if he was thinking that we are all being unreasonable on this particular thread except you.  I think you would agree, in light of your comments on this thread, that you’re in the same sinking ship as the rest of us.  We all believe what we believe, and we go to http://www.imright.com for support.

        15. Karmic Equation

          Chance:

          I saw the JK, but I didn’t trust that you were JK.

          Not under my skin, but I didn’t like having all the unspoken implications stand, even with the JK disclaimer.

          Ok. I’ll believe you now 🙂

        16. Adrian

          Yowza,

          Hello (^_^).

           

          Sure you may answer.

           

          It is not that I only trust Karmic Equation, it is just that I feel many -NOT all- commentators on this subject are more focused on being right than they are on learning and growing; and I gain very little personal growth from their comments.

        17. Adrian

          KK,

          You know how you always get irritated when other commenters take what you said and try to paint a complete picture of your character?

           

          Well, please don’t do the same with me. I DON’T feel that Karmic is superior to anyone.

           

          Thank you. (^_^)

        18. Yowza

          Hi Adrian, wait I forgot the question lol
          “I guess I don’t understand when women say that asking a man out causes men to not be attracted to them. Are these just women who the men were not attracted to or felt neutral about? Are these women taking personal experiences and applying them to all men?”
          My take…some men want to be the pursuer. For them there is a lot of satisfaction in the hunt. Women pursuing them takes away the fun of the chase.
          Some men are not at all interested in the being the pursuer, but they’ve been conditioned by society to believe that men are supposed to do the pursuing ALWAYS, never women. And so a woman who pursues is thought of as low value and desperate, because she must not have any guy interested in her if she’s the one doing the chasing.
          And then yes some men don’t mind it at all but may not be attracted to the woman.
          “Guys lose attraction when a new women initiates, but after he has had her for a few months and the newness wears off, when she initiates, the attraction is unaffected.”
          he’s already got the prize at that point. He’s moved to seeing if she’s someone he wants to be with LT.
          “What do you think, and what are your hypotheses on why so many men complain about courtship?”
          It is biased in favor of women or more accurately courting is biased in favor of men with means. I actually understand why men begin to feel the investment in dating is just not worth it.
          But I also think men think it’s a numbers game and the more women I ask out, I’m bound to hit the jackpot sooner or later. That just dehumanizes then whole situation. Why not go after only women you feel a strong attraction to (not just I’d make the booty call if I didn’t have anything better) or a strong connection with and up your chances of success versus picking 20 girls a week from online dating profiles you didn’t even read and betting on a 1% return.
          “Do you think there is a cure?”
          yes. Start looking at people as individuals with their own sets of values, beliefs, experiences, and nuances. Stop believing in magic formulas because all men are not x and all women are not z.

      6. 1.2.6
        MikeTO

        Not with me. It’s too easy to get sex. Men do end up paying though. all the nagging and stuff. I’ll pass. Porn is better than any woman because porn doesn’t nag at me.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          As always, Mike, every time you write, you justify why any of my readers wouldn’t want a man like you. So why are you still here again? Bored fucking your low self-esteem women who expect nothing from their men?

        2. MikeTO

          Dear clueless since 1986 I didn’t want to marry. I saw the disadvantages from many married men. As time went by women got worse not better.

          Today’s marriage isn’t a marriage it’s a marriage contract. The government owns you and your children.

          Sorry I’m hurting your business. LOL

          Only an idiot would get married these days.

          His former wife gets 96% of his take-home pay. Is that justice?

          http://www.fact.on.ca/news/news0003/np000328.htm

          https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-new-resilience/201508/women-initiate-divorce-much-more-men-heres-why

    3. 1.3
      sandra

      What do older women have to do with this topic and why are you singling them out right off the bat?

      Do you think “older” women are no longer real women?  Seriously?  Yes, I can see it now.  You ask a woman out , them slam her with, ” Oh, and since you are older and no longer fertile ,  you can  act like a man and pay your own way.”

  2. 2
    Christine

    Writing the first email to a guy on a dating site definitely paid off for me–he then became my boyfriend! It still amazes me how many great things came out of writing just one little paragraph.

    However, even before that, writing emails to men I liked did wonders for me psychologically.  The responses I got back were encouraging.  It got depressing when I only got emails from men I would never want to date.  So when I got responses from men I liked, that increased my confidence.  It showed me that I could attract a man I liked.  Eventually, that increased confidence led to better (and more repeat) dates.

    Even when I didn’t get responses back, it still made me feel better to be active and actually doing something to create opportunities for myself, as opposed to passively waiting for Mr. Right to email me first.  It was like when I was job hunting, and sent out mass (but still targeted) cover letters and resumes to certain employers I would love to work for, whether they had a job listing out or not.

    More often than not, they didn’t have a vacancy at that time–but still wrote back nice letters saying they’d keep my resume on file and keep me in mind if they ever did have one.  Sure enough, later on some of them really did have an opening and interviewed me.  Or, some of them told me that they weren’t hiring, but then forwarded my resume on to other people they knew who were.  Even when I didn’t get hired by these particular employers, it still felt good to create additional opportunities for myself (that I never would have gotten by just waiting for the dream employer to enter my life). That positive mindset showed in my interviews, and I gradually did better on those (getting more subsequent interviews and offers).

    That turned out to be true in dating as well.  Even when actively going after what I wanted didn’t immediately pay off, it still did wonders for my mindset and eventually paid off down the road.

  3. 3
    Rebecca

    Yeah, patience isn’t my virtue, so I was quite happy to write the first message when I was online.  And Evan’s right – those men were usually much more interesting to talk to than the guys who wrote to me first.  AND it was a confidence booster, ’cause I think there’s some truth to the stereotype than men just aren’t as picky as women.

    1. 3.1
      Not Jerry

      Because you picked the ones who sounded interesting.  Of course they were much better.  The cream of the crop. For you!

      I rarely write women first, but as you know so many men send “Hey Babe” messages to hundreds of inappropriate matches.  Most men are not at all picky. But I sure am.

      I let them write to me. I get a few, most that I am not interested in, but I answer nearly all and am cordial.

  4. 4
    misty

    I’m curious to hear from men here). Do you like it when women write to you, provided you’re attracted to her and have interests in common? Or does it make you think  she’s too aggressive?

    And Evan wouldn’t you say that writing to a guy first online is the same as smiling or say hi in person. You’re just letting hi know you’re interested and open so he can make the first move if he wishes? To me and I’m no expert the line between passivity which is essentially waiting for life to happen to you and aggressively going after a guy is not fine. Just m.o.

    1. 4.1
      Chance

      I thought it was fantastic when the women wrote first.

      1. 4.1.1
        misty

        …but yet you think dating is a waste of time ??? I don’t understand.

        1. Chance

          Now, you’re conflating dating with courtship.  Completely different things.

        2. Shaukat

          I don’t think he was saying that dating is a waste of time. There’s a difference between a guy putting in no effort at all, sending drunken texts and expecting to hook up a couple hours after meeting you, and a guy who makes the call, plans the date, but expects some reciprocation in terms of alternating pay and even planning.

          Ladies, if you expect the man to repeatedly plan and pay right up until the point of exclusivity because it’s part of the “rules,” then you should also be okay with other conventional expectations, such as sex by the third date before exclusivity.

        3. Skaramouche

          >>  Ladies, if you expect the man to repeatedly plan and pay right up until the point of exclusivity because it’s part of the “rules,” then you should also be okay with other conventional expectations, such as sex by the third date before exclusivity.

          Are these two rules in the same book? 😛  Because they seem in direct contradiction to me.  The “plan/pay” approach is traditional while the sex before exclusivity (in one form or another) is modern.  So I’m confused 😛

        4. Emily, the original

          Shaukat,

          It’s totally reasonable to expect the women to plan and pay for dates … as the dating progresses. However, if a man asks a woman out, I believe he should plan and pay for the first date. By date 2, maybe he pays for the restaurant and she pays afterwards when they go out for drinks. He may pay for the higher-priced part of the evening. Date 3 it would be her turn to plan and pay for the entire evening.

           

        5. Emily, the original

          Shaukat,

          As for sex, that happens when the time is right. It has nothing to do with who is paying for the dates.

        6. Shaukat

          @ Emily, the Original

          If that’s your position I think we’re in complete agreement with one another. I’m not sure if Chance was saying otherwise. He seemed to advocating that each person should alternate paying.

        7. Emily, the original

          Shaukat,

          A woman does like to feel she is being taken out and courted. So I do think for the first date or two, the man should pick up most (if not all) of the tab. However, once they begin to regularly date, the tab needs to be split. Unless, of course, one person earns $30,000 annually and other earns $100,000. That needs to be taken into consideration.

        8. Chance

          Shaukat, yep, that is what I’m advocating.

      2. 4.1.2
        Emily, the original

        Something tells me, based on your earlier responses on this post, that ain’t happening often for you.

    2. 4.2
      J

      I wouldn’t have a problem with women writing me online. It shows they’re putting in effort to find someone instead of sitting back and waiting for the emails to come in.

    3. 4.3
      ScottH

      I thought it was great when a woman made the first move and I had no problem taking the lead from there.

      1. 4.3.1
        Emily, the original

        Scott H,

        Just out of curiosity: Do you like a woman to make the first move physically, i.e., the first kiss?

        1. ScottH

          Hi Emily The Original

          I’ve never been in the situation where she made the first move and I’ve been on a lot of dates (51 y.o., divorced 4+ years).   If she did make the first move, I suppose I would be ok with it as long as I was interested in her.

          Usually, she will indicate that she is receptive and then I will feel safe to make the first move.  Indicators of receptiveness include tilted head with smile, gazing eye contact, batting the eyelashes, close physical proximity, etc…  I think if you indicate receptiveness and he doesn’t make the move, this indicates dysfunction or lack of interest on his part and you might have an uphill battle on your hands.

          Two gf’s ago, we had 3 dates with none of the above indicators so I didn’t make any moves.  On the 4th date, I decided that I was going to make the move regardless (time to shit or get off the pot) and it turned out fine.  Actually, that first kiss literally made my legs quiver.  I might never forget that one.  But she was still suffering from her cheating narcissistic ex and was in no position to be dating.  Oh well….

          does that answer your q?

        2. Emily, the original

          Scott H,

          Yes, that answers my question. Thanks.

          I am 44 and have only made the very first move with a guy twice. (Both times were the first kiss.) And both times were within the last few years. I was in my 40s before I could do it! Man, that is not an easy thing to do!

           

        3. Emily, the original

          Scott H,

          Did you see Helen Mirren kiss Stephen Colbert while on his show? She about knocked him over!

        4. Not Jerry

          Emily, how did those two first times work out?
          I always make the first move, it’s expected.

        5. Emily, the original

          Not Jerry,

          Nothing much happened with the first guy. The second guy I hung out with (not sure how else to describe it) for a couple of months.

          It’s been almost 2 years since I’ve been that bold with a man. I would not do it again unless I was extremely interested.

           

    4. 4.4
      JB

      Misty we’re only happy when women we’re attracted to email us first which in my case was rare or never but maybe for many men especially the top 5% it happens more frequently. Kind of like a woman that starts emailing who SHE’s attracted to because she’s not attracted to the men that are emailing her. Ironically even when I used to put up tall, gorgeous, high status/high income recon profiles for experiment even THEY didn’t get that many in their own league. 2-3 notches below mostly. Those actual men wouldn’t of been emailing those women back I can assure you.

    5. 4.5
      Not Jerry

      I rarely write women first.

      I love when women write to me.  It shows interest, at least there’s that.

      I get a few, most that I am not interested in, but I answer nearly all and am cordial.

      But my profile was specifically written to encourage it.
      To reel them in. To reel you girls in. Heh.
      It’s not for everyone, it is also intended to make the ones I wouldn’t want to talk to to click through to the next one.

      No problem with that.

    6. 4.6
      Willowandy

      No, definitely not aggressive. And it is great if they write more than just one line or two.

      The best relationships I have had were with women who wrote to me first.. which sounds like it says something about my judgement..! 🙂

  5. 5
    S

    Evan, I find your advice comprehensive & congruent/complementary. I started slowly implementing your advice maybe 8 or 9 years ago, tailoring it to fit my personality and what I was looking for (particularly since I was then in my early twenties & you were mostly speaking to older women, who were more established in their careers).

    Anyway, I never lasted long online because it was so time consuming and because I tended to have relatively quick success at meeting people I was interested in &who earned an exclusive try-out… just under five years ago I got back online and decided to email the men I was most interested in (using my own searches, not just who showed up at the top… but still having a firm “percentage match” cut off). I emailed my now-husband less than 24 hours after signing up for okc. We were exclusive in less than 2 weeks. I used all your advice about mirroring, saying yes, and mulligans throughout our courtship (and still use a fair amount), and it was absolutely compatible with the first move I made. My husband only showed up because I ran narrow searches, okc never would have suggested him anywhere near the top (though we were 92%matched overall, as high as 99% in some fields). He also wouldn’t have picked me from the online crowd (my photos were apparently underwhelming–he was thrilled when we met in person), but he dug into my profile bc I wrote him & saw the same potential that I did.

    Basically, this long post is to say, “yes, I’m glad you’re explicitly sharing this as part of your advice”! because it absolutely works and is compatible. Also… to pat myself on the back for being an early adopter (or adapter, more accurately).

  6. 6
    SparklingEmerald

    KE has posted this article here, as well as someone else, but I am going to post it again

    Guy Talk: The Real Reason Women Shouldn’t Make The First Move

    Ok, maybe making “the first move” online is different, but for you guys who wonder why women prefer men to take the lead rather than vice-versa, here it is from a GUY.  Other male dating coaches advise against women chasing men as well, in fact, I think an online dating coach calls women initiating one of the “10 ugly mistakes” that women make that ruin ANY chance of a relationship.

    In my younger, dumber days, when I used to chase men, It NEVER led to an LTR.  In fact, that’s when I usually heard the “disclaimer”  (google Marni Batista for her take on the “disclaimer”)

    With the men who pursued me, I got better results.

    So for the male commenters in general who think women should do the calling, planning, paying, initiate the kiss etc.  I can tell you that the reason I STOPPED initiating (in my mid 20’s) was not because of some “rule”, or that I am stuck on gender roles, but because it was INEFFECTIVE !

    Now, that’s not to say that I think an introductory e-mail is “chasing”, I suppose that’s the equivalent of a real life smile and being the first to say “hi”.  However, the very few times I made “the first move” online, never worked for me.  (I never went as far as to write an e-mail, but I would comment on a guys picture, or put him on my favorite list, never got anywhere with that)

    But there are male commenters here who seem really put out by planning a date.

    For me courtship isn’t about the guy spending his dime on me, it’s about him spending his time and making his intentions very clear.  I am more than just fine with free dates, in fact I PREFER the dates to be no cost or low cost in the beginning.  There are PLENTY of free things to do, and by a guy stepping up and planning the date, he can control the cost AND week out the gold diggers.  If she turns up her nose at the free concert in the park, then move on.

    My sweetheart made his intention to build a loving long term relationship with me crystal clear from the moment we met.  THAT’s what I love most about the way he “courted” me.   While I did appreciate that he insisted on paying for everything (it was quite a while before he accepted my offers to leave a tip, buy a frozen yogurt, etc), it wasn’t his wallet that I fell in love with. It’s the way he makes me feel cherished and adored.  I NEVER had to guess where I stood with him, I never had to initiate the “talk”.  No BS games, no ambiguity, no games of him trying to get ME to do the chasing.  He made it very clear from the beginning that he wanted me.  It’s been over a year, and we are still going strong.

    Oh, and we are both well past our child bearing years, and yet he still values the comfort and companionship we give to each other.  Imagine that !

     

     

     

    1. 6.1
      Joe

      I don’t think anyone is saying men are “put out by planning a date.”  I think they are saying men are put out by planning every date.

      1. 6.1.1
        Henriette

        I think many men are also tired of feeling taken for granted. When a fellow plans and pays for a date and the woman doesn’t even seem appreciative, that must sting. Ever since I’ve started dating, I’ve always been grateful for guys trying to give me a nice evening out. It always garners a big smile and a heart-felt thank you… even if it’s a free concert in the park and an ice cream cone, afterwards. I suspect some women are worried that showing appreciation will come across as desperate, or if they’re not interested in continuing to get to know the guy that showing appreciation will send mixed signals.

        So, to my fellow Single Ladies, if we want men to continue to court (and I certainly do), even if you decide a guy is not for you, be sure to take a moment to affirm the fact he did a lovely thing by planning and paying for you.

        1. misty

          Me too. Even when I don’t feel a match I at least say thanks for dinner/whatever. (Like when you have a job interview and it becomes clear right away it’s not a match or the hiring manager is a dick, you close it by saying thanks for your time and don’t send a thank you letter and passively take yourself out of the running)  We all have stories of men who took it wrong and later got upset when you turn down a second date but sometimes I think we jusr have to stop letting our experiences with the jerks dictate our behavior with all men.

      2. 6.1.2
        misty

        is that plan every date with a specific person you’re dating? Or is that plan every first date? Cause if it’s the latter the guy might want to ask himself why he’s in the position of being a serial first dater vs being annoyed that he has to come up with ideas all the time. If it’s the former I would hope that after a few dates you’ve conversed enough to know what your mutual interests are and you’re both finding things to do on dates. And as long as both are ok splitting checks or switching off who pays then go for it. But I have to echo most women here in that I’ve met very few men who want that. They want to pay at least most of the time if not all.

        1. Chance

          How old are you?  I ask because I get the impression that men from baby boomer (or before) generation seem to feel worthless if they aren’t providing.  Millennial men generally don’t appreciate paying for the majority of things since millenial women take pride in not adhering to traditional female gender roles.  It’s also worth noting that many men pretend to enjoy paying, and therefore insist on paying, out of fear of how women would react if they suggested going D utch or alternating.

        2. Misty

          Chance are you asking me misty how old I am?

        3. Chance

          Yes, just to gain some insight on the types of men you’re dealing with.

        4. misty

          Chance, I’m 44. I date men in my age range/generation. In my experience many prefer to be the one paying for more dates, making more money than their SO, etc.

          Does this mean every GenX man is like this? No.

          Does it mean I am judging those that arent? Absolutey not.

          Does it mean that I never pay or expect that I never have to? Of course not.

          Is it possible for whatever reason I juts date more men who are like this and it’s not a generational thing? It’s  possible.

        5. GoWithThe Flow

          I’m an early Gen Xer, so the men who are interested in me (and thus who I date) are generally late Baby Boomers.  My oldest son is a Millennial.  There absolutely are generational differences in how men approach dating/initiating/paying.  Boomers tend to be very traditional, they like to initiate and will refuse a woman’s offer to split the check.  Millennials are more egalitarian, and my son and his friends say there is typically a back and forth in who pays and plans, though the guys tend to do first date duties.  Gen Xers are a mixed bag.

           

      3. 6.1.3
        SparklingEmerald

        Who’s advocating EVERY date ?  The consensus seems to be the first 1 -3 dates.  Women don’t like to feel like they are “chasing” a guy, and many guys consider women who initiate to be desperate.

        And in an LTR, do you think in most relationships the man continues to plan every “date” ??

        I think once long term exclusivity happens, you are beyond dating, and are relating, which is much better IMHO.

        My sweetheart and I do a lot of activities together like hiking, biking, playing card games, doing crossword puzzles, game night parties with friends, attend weddings, work parties together, binge watch TV.  I would hardly call those dates.  We like to take vacations together.  I like relating better than dating.  We share costs for these activities, of course.  He’s my boyfriend, not my ATM machine !  There is very little “planning” of these things any more.  If I get a wedding invite, we go together.  On weekends we are in a routine of hiking, biking or going to the gym, then binge watching netflix, cooking together, drinking wine, playing games, etc.  We don’t plan these things, they are a matter of routine, and we both decide.

        We still “date” for special occasions, like birthdays, anniversaries, and at this point, it really doesn’t matter who’s idea it is.  If friends or family come in from out of town, we generally will go out and do something with them.

        That is what is great about being in an established relationship.  Questions of who’s idea it was to go to the movie, or who decided on the restaurant, and who called who first have pretty much become irrelevant.

        If any guy has lingering resentment that he planned the first 2 or 3 dates after he has been in a long term relationship that has more or less “evened” out, he probably shouldn’t be in a relationship.  And if months after a relationship has been established, his girlfriend still expects to be fully subsidized, and won’t so much as buy his favorite coffee and keep it on hand, well then he should find a new girlfriend.

        1. misty

          Who are you directing these questions to sparkling emerald?

      4. 6.1.4
        Sparkling Emerald

        Hi Misty That was in response to Joe at 6.1 who said men are put out by having to plan EVERY date.

         

    2. 6.2
      Shaukat

      @Sparkling Emerald,

      I have to take issue with some of your points regarding pursuing, and with that piece you linked to. I’m not a big fan of the “gaming” dating coaches like Doc Love, but I do remember reading something of his a few years ago that was quite astute: “If men gave up pursuing after rejection as quickly as women, then virtually nobody would go on any dates.”

      You say you never even emailed a guy while online dating, but you did add a few to your favourites list and send out some winks, and because that didn’t work you assume men don’t like it when women flip the gender script? How many actual emails do you think men send out before something turns into a relationship? Besides, that type of anecdote can easily be countered with others; three of the nicest relationships I had, short-term and long-term, emerged because the woman contacted me first, either through a wink or an email.

      I’ve met a few women who faced the same type of rejection, and they all say a variation of what you state above. They tried pursuing a guy they liked maybe three or four times, and when it didn’t succeed they just say something like “oh well, I tried it but I guess guys don’t like to be chased.” The possibility that these guys jut weren’t interested in them, independently of who was doing the pursuing, apparently never occurred to them, or if it did the thought was so disturbing they immediately shut it out.

       

      1. 6.2.1
        DeeGee

        Shaukat said: “I’ve met a few women who faced the same type of rejection …”

        Good post.  I agree with everything you said.
        Women want “equality” except when it doesn’t suit them or when the going gets tough.

        1. KK

          Everyone wants equality, but women don’t want to be men. What’s the problem?

        2. Misty

          So you all keep telling us…

      2. 6.2.2
        Emily, the original

        Shaukat,

        Do you mean Doc Love on askmen.com? While I admit his endless plugging of his book and materials is annoying, he does have some good ideas about creating interest. Like getting a girl’s number and waiting several days to call. When you do call, keeping it short and only for date-planning purposes. No texting. Don’t post anything on social media. After you go on the date, you repeat the same procedure. Wait several days to call, then make a short call to plan the 2nd date. No communication between dates.  You want to create a certain level of mystery and not bombard her  with communication, like most guys do. It will make you stand out and not seem overly eager.

        1. DeeGee

          KK said: “Everyone wants equality, but women don’t want to be men. What’s the problem?

          Because women want to be able to choose what “equality” they take.
          “I want equal pay, but you have to ask me out and pay for the dates, and I get half of your stuff when I divorce you.”, etc.  (women do get equal pay for the same job anyway but that is another discussion).
          Do men get to choose what areas of equality they want?  No.  So then it’s not equality, is it.
          It’s spoiled brats choosing what they want to make their life easier.  “I want this one.  This one is yucky, men can have it.  I want that one…”.

        2. Adrian

          Emily,

           

          I really did not want to dip my toe into this post (it deteriorated into another petty argument. Men fighting women over courtship, women fighting women over feminism, and who knows what’s next).

           

          But because of how much I enjoy your comments Emily, I ultimately decided to just say, “mystery and attraction should be natural not faux”; only insecure men play games.

           

          Any new person you meet will be a mystery to you; that is why we get to have fun spending time together learning about them-comparing their words with their actions

           

          Well, in my opinion anyway (^_^)

           

          Don’t Call Us, We’ll Call You

        3. Emily, the original

          Adrian,

          Where have you been, DAWG?! Having fun during Spring Break?

          Yeah, I agree. This whole post was hijacked by a side argument, like that one where the woman had to be the hottest thing on the planet for her boyfriend.

          Anyway, I will have to beg to differ with you. Men seem to have two approach styles — they come at you like a freight train or do the dating hokey pokey. Neither is, of course, optimal, and it always seems the guy you really want picks option B …

           

        4. Adrian

          Emily,

          Next Spring Break, I’ll take you to Cancun with me, we can both take turns being chased by sharks… I’ll let you go first. (^_^)

          …   …   …

          I don’t think we disagree, I just think we are talking about two different subjects. To me, any stranger is a mystery to me until I get to know them, so there is no need for a person to “play games” to create mystery. People who play games turn me off because it is manipulation, again, just for me, courting should be natural and fun.

           

          As far as the two type of approaches you mentioned, both are from different type of men, but there is also a third, a fourth, a fifth, etc. Remember the podcast Evan just did on You Can’t do the Wrong Thing with the Right Guy, I believe that any guy that is attracted to you, will not do the “dating hokey pokey, nor complain about courting you, or how much it cost.

           

          Trust me, we all (male and female) suffer from what you speak of; not always being wanted/attractive to the person who we desire/are attracted to.

           

          If you find the solution to that, let me know… So I can steal the idea from you, say it was mine, and become rich! (^_^)

        5. Emily, the original

          Adrian,

          I only want to go someplace where young men in very tight pants serve me drinks with little umbrellas in them! Don’t worry: We’ll go someplace where the women are inappropriately dressed, too!

          Anyway, I don’t think playing it cool in the beginning is a bad thing. I don’t see it so much as playing a game as having some self-restraint and knowing it’s best not to hand everything over right away. But then, I like the chase. Or at least a little bit of it.

        6. Shaukat

          Hi Emily,

          I’m sorry for the delayed response. Yes, I was referencing the Doc Love from asmen.com. I do agree that he has some intriguing concepts, such as gauging the woman’s interest level at all times and calibrating based on that, but some of his recommendations have always struck me as overly gamey. In fact, he suggests that men do the exact opposite of what EMK states women should look for in a boyfriend: Show disinterest, never communicate between dates, only text to set up the next meeting, never show vulnerability or say “I love you” before she says it. I’d be interested to hear your perspective as a woman,  if you like a guy and he follows those steps, does your interest level grow? And Evan, if you have time I’d be interested in knowing what you think of such techniques, and if you ever used them when dating.

           

        7. Emily, the original

          Hi Shaukat,

          I actually just yesterday read DocLove’s response to an OP asking how long to wait to call a woman after getting her number. He recommended week. Several women decried loudly in the comments section that a week was too long. I think waiting a few days is good — that shows interest but not desperation — but I’m afraid I am showing my age. I didn’t grow up with instant technology. Many of the women wrote that, if they didn’t hear from the guy within 24 hours, they assumed he wasn’t interested. That seems ridiculous to me and, frankly, a bit demanding. It’s not that I think men shouldn’t show interest. I just think that incorporating someone into your life (and by that I mean, among other things, daily contact) should be a PROGRESSION. It should take a few weeks, at least. I think it is strange to be texting someone daily who you have not yet gone out with or maybe have only dated once. It’s almost as if people want to remove every bit of the uncertainty of dating by immediate confirmation that the other party is interested. But a little bit of uncertainty can actually create attraction.

        8. Evan Marc Katz

          You get a number, you call the next day. Any guy who doesn’t is a) a game-player or b) an insecure guy worried about scaring a woman off. Put it this way: if she likes you, she’s glad you called right away.

        9. ScottH

          waiting a week would absolutely be off-putting.  Definitely call within 24 hrs.  Maybe even send a text and ask when would be a good time to call.  that shows consideration.  A week is ridiculous.

        10. Emily, the original

          ScottH,

          Once you call and set up the date — let’s say it’s 5 days away — how often do you text and/or call again before you go on the date?

        11. Shaukat

          I fully realize that when you get a number you should call the next day or as soon as you can to set up the date. In fact, in online dating the date is usually set up before numbers are exchanged. I was referring to the period between dates 1-3 or before date 1. In my experience, it’s best to keep contact at a minimum during that period.

        12. Emily, the original

          Shakut

          I was referring to the period between dates 1-3 or before date 1. In my experience, it’s best to keep contact at a minimum during that period.

          I agree. Maybe you make the arrangements over the phone a few days before the date and then have no contact until the day of the date. Perhaps then you send a text to confirm everything. That seems ok to me but I mentioned that on another blog and was lambasted by other female commenters.

    3. 6.3
      DeeGee

      SparklingEmerald said: “KE has posted this article here, as well as someone else, but I am going to post it again (link to article at thefrisky.com) …”

      IMHO.  That article is complete garbage.
      It reads like it was written by a guy who has taken some courses in PUA and being a player.
      What a load of rubbish.

    4. 6.4
      Nissa

      SE,

      Exactly what you said. I also tried initiating, paying, planning…their marginal interest died even faster. If I was doing online dating now, the ONLY thing I would do is send an initial email saying something specific to his profile. If he doesn’t pursue after that, it’s a dead end and I move on.

      1. 6.4.1
        SparklingEmerald

        Hi Nissa

        For me, it’s not about “rules” or being stuck on gender roles.  Believe me, I WISH pursuing, courting etc. worked for me, but I came of age in the 70’s, when gender roles got thrown out the window, but I NEVER caught anything but a player when I was the aggressor, so it the article I posted sounds like it was written a player, it probably was.  And I see lot’s of player advice to men, on how to get the woman to make the first move, so he can , well play her.

        Not every guy who started off as the pursuer ended up as an LTR, but EVERY LTR that I have ever been in, was when the guy set his sites on me and pursued.  (if I was attracted to the guy I was very responsive to his pursuit, didn’t play games, hard to get etc), so it seems really silly to think that I should start using a technique that has NEVER been effective at getting me what I wanted, when letting the guy lead is the ONLY way my LTRs have started.

        However, we are all unique, if a woman has pursued a man and has been successful in getting the relationship she wanted, then she should go for it.  If a man has done better letting the women chase him then that is what he should do.

        But since I have had better luck being pursued one, that is what I should stick with.

        It’s a moot point for me now, as I’ve been with my boyfriend a little over a year now.

         

        1. McLovin

          I’ll tell you what men get told when they pursue and get blown off:

          You’re trying to date out of your league.

          Lower your standards.

          And this is exactly why I let women pursue me. At least I know they’re interested, which for a man is the hardest part…finding a woman who is interested.

           

           

        2. Emily, the original

          McLovin,

          It’s no easier for women. It’s not like we just show a sliver of interest in our hot male co-worker and he falls at our feet …

  7. 7
    JB

    In 18 yrs of online dating when my profile was “searchable” it just seemed as though any women that ever contacted me first were never the ones I wanted to or I EVER had on my list of favorites.       I also don’t remember having relationship with any even after returning their email or wink. What always used to make me say WTF is when a woman initiated contact with me I would email them and STILL get ignored. Now I keep all my profiles in hidden/under cover/incognito mode so the only ones that see me are the ones I write to. Yep, I know if a woman is doing the same thing we’ll never even know each other exists. Oh well.

  8. 8
    Steve in Big D

    Hi Everyone,

    Steve in Big D here.  I’m using this name to differentiate from the other Steve that posts here from time to time.  Long time reader, first time poster.

    To answer Misty’s question, I don’t think it’s too forward at all for a woman to reach out to a man via Online Dating.  I ended up dating a woman for six months who contacted me first on POF.  So I do think there’s a time and place for women to reach out to men.

  9. 9
    Chance

    The article attached above from the Frisky is complete garbage.

  10. 10
    MilkyMae

    Find a couple who met online and are happily together for more than a year.  Ask the man who contacted who and I’ll bet he won’t even remember.  Ask anybody how they met and the story will be embellished or downplayed to confirm their attitudes about gender roles.

  11. 11
    Shaukat

    @ Emily, the Original

    If that’s your position I think we’re in complete agreement with one another. I’m not sure if Chance was saying otherwise. He seemed to advocating that each person should alternate paying.

  12. 13
    Sage

    The book Dateonomics looked at OkCupid’s stats and found women are more likely to get dates if they contact first. The book’s whole premise though is that their is an under supply of men in major cities, so men expect to get chased now, especially if they’re millennials. Interestingly enough that book backs up another of Evan’s claims that the more attractive a woman is the less likely she will be approached. Everything is relative.

    1. 13.1
      Misty

      Was it written by the same people who wrote freakomincs, claiming that row vs wade was responsible for the drop crime rates in the early 90s? When it was in reality harsher sentencing for drug related offenses? I take these theories with a grain of salt.

      I put millennials in an entirely separate category. I won’t bother bashing them here but let’s just say their upbringing and views are very different than previous generations in many, many ways.

       

      1. 13.1.1
        Sage

        It wasn’t written by the same people. It was written by this guy who was confused he had a lot of really nice single female friends. Interestingly enough it does touch on what you said about millennials and changing views as well. I’m not saying the book is right or wrong.

    2. 13.2
      Stacy2

      I am an older millennial at the upper end of the officially quoted age range (and I really think it is too wide a range as I feel 22-somethings may be from a different planet), and chasing men is the last thing that me or any of my girlfriends who are still on the market want to do. Sure may be you will get more dates, as in more dudes will agree to chat with you over a cheap drink in hopes to sleep with you. But the goal is not to get more low-quality dates with ambivalent men. The goal is to be in a rewarding relationship, which is not really possible with a guy who need to be chased (unless you are a woman who has so much masculine energy that you actually  want to play this role your whole life, I suppose).

      The shortage of men in big cities is also a statistical myth of a sort, when broken down by age and demographics the genders in my group at least are pretty evenly matched.

      1. 13.2.1
        DeeGee

        Stacy2 said: “The goal is to be in a rewarding relationship, which is not really possible with a guy who need to be chased (unless you are a woman who has so much masculine energy that you actually  want to play this role your whole life … ”

        Oh, so you want “equality”, except when you don’t want equality.

        1. KK

          DeeGee,

          Despite what many believe, there are still a lot of women who enjoy traditional gender roles. Not all women are feminists. Men and women should be seen as equals, but we will always be different. We will always have different needs, contributions, and expectations. It’s yin and yang. Different but equal with different roles that create harmony within a relationship.

        2. Misty

          KK, you’re actually doing exactly what you’re upset with Deegee for doing. Feminists all want to act like men and take on masculine roles? Here I thought feminism was about women having choices, including the choice to embrace traditional gender roles if you want.

           

        3. KK

          That isn’t my understanding of feminism.

        4. Misty

          Then your understanding is wrong. I’m sure it would shock you to know that there are feminists who have chosen to be stay at home mothers.

        5. KK

          Not shocked at all Misty. Feminism has become one of those terms that people use and interpret for themselves to suit their own needs. One person may claim it’s about inclusiveness and equal rights for all, yet another gives Ted talks and calls for killing all men. Feminism has become synonymous with “man hater”. I believe everyone should have the same opportunities and equal treatment. However, I don’t believe in special treatment. If you’re not qualified for a job, you don’t get it. If you don’t have the GPA required to get into a particular  university, you don’t get accepted. No exceptions. Feminism has hurt our society in many ways. The bad greatly outweighs the good.

        6. misty

          “Feminism has become one of those terms that people use and interpret for themselves to suit their own needs.”

          Thats exactly what Dee gee says about women who want equality but have different expectations for the men they date.  See any similarities?

           

        7. DeeGee

          Misty said: “Thats exactly what Dee gee says about women who want equality but have different expectations for the men they date.  See any similarities?

          Thank you.

          IMHO Feminism in large part has destroyed dating and marriage.  Men no longer know their role, because they no longer know what they are supposed to be, because each woman “interprets Feminism to suit her own needs”.
          Walking up to a woman, to talk to her, to ask her out, to date her, is like playing Russian Roulette.  That’s why so many men just give up.

        8. misty

          Dee gee, don’t make the mistake of thinking I’m defending you. I’m not. I’m pointing out what narrow minded hypocrites you both are.

        9. KK

          “Feminism has become one of those terms that people use and interpret for themselves to suit their own needs.”
          “Thats exactly what Dee gee says about women who want equality but have different expectations for the men they date.  See any similarities?”

          Yes, Misty; which is exactly why I said not all women are feminists in my earlier comment, which you had a problem with. DeeGee basically said all women are hypocrites. I objected. I said he’s referring to feminists, which not all women are.

          And then… “Dee gee, don’t make the mistake of thinking I’m defending you. I’m not. I’m pointing out what narrow minded hypocrites you both are”.

          Interesting take on that, Misty. I’m a hypocrite because I don’t identify myself as a feminist? You do though, right? So, as a woman, I have a right to believe what I want, right? Or do I only have that right, as a woman, when my beliefs line up with yours? Hmmm… Interesting.

        10. Misty

          KK, Never said you were a hypocrite because you don’t identify as a feminist. You’re a hypocrite because you crticize Deegee for stereotyping all women but it’s ok for you turn around and sterotype all feminists (which you define as every “bad” woman who doesn’t agree with you, how convenient). Surely you see the hypocrisy in that.

          It’s too bad that even as you reap the benefits of feminism you decry it as destructive. But You have every right to identify as whatever you want. Some of us are mature enough though to realize that just because we don’t identify with a group doesn’t mean we should act like we are superior and all of our problems can be blamed on them. Notice I never criticized women who prefer traditional roles. Even if that’s not for me, I don’t have to sit on my high horse and blame them for my own dating problems. See how that works?

           

           

        11. KK

          I never said anything about dating problems. The problems feminism has caused go way beyond that; problems that have greatly affected our society. I’m not talking about people who believe in equal rights for all. That’s where I fall in the spectrum. I’m talking about the far end of the spectrum; “the feminazi mentality”. They do not advocate equal rights. They advocate superior rights. How is that not the very definition of hypocrisy? Once again, my comment to deegee was in regard to him saying all women and I said no, not all women.., feminists, especially those on that far end of the spectrum that believe in superior rights. That is wrong.

           

          Furthermore, feminism has done nothing for me. There was a time when women were respected and revered in our society. If you chose to work outside the home you could, but it wasn’t an expectation like it is now. Sexual freedom has backfired as well. What was once mostly bad behavior by men is now supposed to be acceptable for women as well. Hence, the expectation of sex very early on without commitment. I could go on… Wow, the feminist movement has greatly improved my life and society in general. How dare I be such an ingrate?

        12. DeeGee

          Misty said: “I’m pointing out what narrow minded hypocrites you both are.

          Misty said: “Thats exactly what Dee gee says about women who want equality but have different expectations for the men they date.

          Tell me exactly what I was being hypocritical about.
          Women do want equality.  And not just some women.  All women.  Or are you not for any of the rights that women have in today’s western world?

          There is no such thing as a women who desires traditional roles anymore.  Because she sure isn’t going to pass on any of the areas of equality that she has gained that she wants.
          Such as the man paying, reproductive rights, alimony, etc.
          You can’t just pick and choose what areas you want to be traditional on, how is that fair and equal?  What if I want to then choose what areas that I treat you equally on?  Do you think I can get away with that as a man?  Of course not.

          If you as a woman want equality, except when it comes to the man asking for dates and the man paying for dates, that does not make you a “traditional” woman.  It makes you the hypocrite.

        13. Misty

          “Furthermore, feminism has done nothing for me. There was a time when women were respected and revered in our society.”

          you are laugably ignorant of history.

          ” If you chose to work outside the home you could, but it wasn’t an expectation like it is now.”

          so you’re mad at feminists because you have to go out and get a job? It’s an expectation now because of feminists? It has nothing to do with capitalism, inflation or the disappearance of jobs that once supported a family in a middle class lifestyle? I see you’re also woefully ignorant of economics.

          “Sexual freedom has backfired as well. What was once mostly bad behavior by men is now supposed to be acceptable for women as well. Hence, the expectation of sex very early on without commitment.”

          Are you required to participate in those sexual freedoms? No.

          What was that about not blaming feminists again?

        14. KK

          DeeGee, We didn’t make the rules. Those things were set in place by previous generations. You can choose to live your life however you want; including whether or not you choose to date or remarry or whatever. If you want to remarry, you can choose a woman who wants to be a housewife or a career woman or someone that doesn’t mind you staying home while she is the bread winner. There are lots of women with lots of different ideas about love and marriage and gender roles, etc. If you’re not inclined to marry, just date who you want when you want. If you don’t want to date, don’t. You have lots of choices. But try to refrain from blaming all women for the current state of affairs.

        15. Misty

          “There is no such thing as a women who desires traditional roles anymore.”

          Talk to KK about that.

          “You can’t just pick and choose what areas you want to be traditional on, how is that fair and equal?”

          Re divorce, reproductive and selective sevice rights, I agree with you 100%. But last time I checked, most family court judges and lawmakers carrying out these rules were male. Have the conversation with them if you want things to change.

          As far as who pays on a date, that’s the business of the two people on the date. You dont want to date women who don’t share costs, don’t date women who don’t share costs. Period end of story.

          “What if I want to then choose what areas that I treat you equally on?  Do you think I can get away with that as a man?”

          All the time. (Some) Men have all kinds of double standards for women, I don’t think I have to name them here, we all know what they are.

           

           

        16. Misty

          KK “But try to refrain from blaming all women for the current state of affairs.”

          you literally just blamed feminists for the current state of affairs for women which you think is horrible.

          i give up.

        17. Evan Marc Katz

          Misty, you have to learn how to have a disagreement without personal attacks and exasperation. KK has a valid point, which you haven’t acknowledged. I’m staying away from this conversation, specifically because your tone makes me realize that we would not have a pleasant exchange.

        18. DeeGee

          Misty said: “But last time I checked, most family court judges and lawmakers carrying out these rules were male. Have the conversation with them if you want things to change.

          The feminist agenda is what brought that inequality into law, which is what the male judges are following.
          It will take rational men and women pushing back to get those laws changed back to something reasonable.
          But I think this is moving off-topic now.

        19. DeeGee

          KK said: “We didn’t make the rules. Those things were set in place by previous generations.

          You are perfectly fine with sticking to the status quo.
          Even though that means women have more rights than men do.

          KK said: “There are lots of women with lots of different ideas about love and marriage and gender roles, etc.

          Part of my point exactly.
          Men are pretty basic and easy to please.
          Women are all over the map.
          Like I said in another post, dating women is like playing Russian Roulette.
          Or I guess in a less violent metaphor I could mis-quote Forrest Gump “Dating women is like a box of chocolates.  You never know what you’re gonna get.”

          KK said: “But try to refrain from blaming all women for the current state of affairs.

          Is it ok if I blame most?  😉

        20. DeeGee

          Misty said: “(There is no such thing as a women who desires traditional roles anymore.)  Talk to KK about that.

          I would guess that would depend on a person’s definition of “traditional”.  I don’t recall KK specifying what she believes “traditional” means.
          Reading some of the posts here one might assume that “traditional” meant “the man is supposed to ask for the dates, and the man is supposed to pay for the dates”, since that is what the topic essentially is about.

          To me, a person in his mid-50’s who grew up at the tail-end of it, “traditional” means exactly what we saw on 1950’s TV or read in books of that time.

          The husband works nine-to-five, pays all of the bills, on weekends he cuts the lawn or does house repairs or goes fishing for a few hours.
          The wife stays at home, raises the children, does all of the cooking and cleaning and dishes and laundry and ironing and mending, buys the groceries, keeps the house orderly.

          A disclaimer first, I have never said that this is what I am looking for in a woman, but good luck to any guys in finding a “traditional” woman like that if that is what you are looking for.

          I guarantee that the husband will have to at least do dishes and laundry and half of the house work in addition to working nine-to-five, and the woman will still classify herself as “traditional” because she believes that she is a “stay at home mom” and to her that is the same thing as “traditional”.

          Of the many married couples I know here where I live, if the husband is working and she is not, he is still expected to do his “fair share” (in her words) of the house work, she will also usually want (or get) a maid or weekly house cleaner “so she doesn’t have to work so hard at home”, and she probably never mended a single item of clothing in her life (after all, she has his charge card, so why mend when you can buy new).

          Being a “house wife” is not a difficult job.  Any job that you do while you are in your pajamas is not difficult.

        21. KK

          DeeGee,

           

          You said, “Men are pretty basic and easy to please”.

           

          Lol. Do you consider yourself in that category? Not one of your comments comes across as someone easy to please. I’m really not trying to be antagonistic, but when you complain about an entire gender without exception, I seriously doubt how basic and easy to please you are. 😀

        22. KK

          DeeGee,

           

          You said, “Being a “house wife” is not a difficult job.  Any job that you do while you are in your pajamas is not difficult”.

           

          That simply isn’t true. Raising children is the most difficult, most important, and at the same time most rewarding job anyone will ever do. I read the rest of your comment and I pretty much agree with everything else you said. Just keep in mind that while the husband is off at work, the wife is working too, even if it’s at home with the kids. While he enjoys daily adult interaction and the occasional ‘atta boy’, she gets none. There is nothing wrong with a man doing the dishes or a load of laundry occasionally, even if his wife is home all day. Her efforts and sacrifice should be applauded. I get the impression you think this set up is unfair to the man. And yes, most women in this situation are very grateful to be stay at home moms. But do you know who benefits the most? The children. Having a loving, nurturing mother to take care of them and teach them right from wrong will mold them into good, productive human beings. So… If you’re able to make a good living and support your family without a second income, but aren’t willing to because it is “unfair”, what does that even mean?

      2. 13.2.2
        Sage

        I would like to clarify what the book meant by shortage. It meant that statistically in major North American cities, that if all university educated women in big cities want to date/marry university educated men there is a shortage. I went to a university  in a capital city where the gender split was 60:40 women to men.  There are more women seeking post secondary education than men. There isn’t  a shortage of men if education isn’t  taken into account.I’m not taking a stance and saying millennials or you or your friends should live their life in anyway. I just found the book interprets dating pattern data interestingly.

        1. Nikki

          It’s definitely true in some big cities like Boston where any under 30 hangout has a 8:1 female to male ratio. It sucks being a 2o something college educated woman looking for a 20 something college educated man in that city. It’s why I moved.

        2. Joe

          But the shortage is dependent on your criteria.  Is having a degree the only qualification required to be a “quality man”?

        3. Nikki

          Hi Joe, I was responding to Sage’s comment about the shortage of college educated men versus college educated women in some cities. I wasn’t saying I think a college education is what makes a man quality. From my perspective it’s simply a matter of common lifestyles and goals. College educated people tend to look for husbands and wives among other college educated people.

        4. Nikki

          Hi again, I found this from the Atlantic:

          The first thing you notice is the BA/non-BA gap. Of this population, 71 percent of college graduates married another college graduate. Women college graduates were less likely to hold rank, with just 65 percent of them marring above the BA line, compared with 78 percent of male college grads. 

          Can I post links here?

          http://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/04/college-graduates-marry-other-college-graduates-most-of-the-time/274654/

          If you look at the graph. Women tend to marry the same education level up to professional degree and phd but they still marry college educated men 88-92% of the time. For men it’s similar but the percentages are lower for professional degress and phds. For both sexes presumably there are fewer people who hold these two degrees so maybe it’s harder to find a spouse at your education level.

      3. 13.2.3
        DeeGee

        This probably comes off as misogynistic, but that is not the intent under which I wrote it, and I am not a woman hater.  I don’t trust them, but that is another story.

        KK said: “Not one of your comments comes across as someone easy to please.

        My comments about the subject under discussion are not relevant to how I am in a relationship.  To address your concern, when I went to marriage counseling many years ago, the counselor said that I was a very good husband.  FYI the divorce was initiated by me but due to my ex-wife.  I’ve dated since then, but I will instantly drop a women at the first sign of any red flag (liar, cheater, princess, gold-digger, etc).

        KK said: “Just keep in mind that while the husband is off at work, the wife is working too …”

        Because it’s so much work to walk 10 feet to put the laundry into the washing machine, or all of the dishes into the dish washer, or to use any of the modern conveniences that men invented to make housewives lives easier — I speak about this from experience because I have had to do all of this for myself for most of my entire adult life, it is not work — Or to play hide-n-seek, or color with crayons in a book.

        You seem to be mistaking “nurturing” for “work”.
        The reason why the traditional relationship worked, was because women are typically better at nurturing and men are typically better at physical labor.

        If both people are working outside of the home, then of course they should share house duties.

        But that’s ok, I don’t expect you to have an objective view.

        If I could find a women who was tall dark and gorgeous, who made a $million a year, where I lived in a nice house and drove a nice car, if I could get away with staying at home and spending an hour a day doing laundry and dishes and vacuuming, don’t you think that would be great?  A man who is like that is a wimp or a useless person to women though, and to most other men too.

        I work 40hrs/wk as an IT Admin, I work an additional 40+hrs/wk at my own media company.  Plus I own my own home, where I do all of the cooking, cleaning, laundry, yardwork, and most of the maintenance.  I typically work 15+ hour days, and have for decades.
        Now tell me again where a stay-at-home mom does so much “work”?
        The question is rhetorical, I don’t expect you to have an objective opinion.

        1. DeeGee

          To append to my post above.
          Doing things like putting the laundry in the dryer, or the dishes in the dishwasher, or watching a movie with the kids, has value, but it is not work.

        2. Stacy2

          This is such a ridiculous comment. Maintaining a household with kids PROPERLY takes a ton of work. Do not confuse it with just cleaning up after yourself. Even with just one person it is a lot of work. I don’t know what your house looks like, but most single men who can’t afford or simply won’t hire a housekeeper live in a pigsty and keep their clothes in the dryer. Their idea of “clean” is that there’s no beer bottles in sight. You get the idea.

          And if there are kids in the household? The mom wakes up at 6am to get the kids ready for school, pack them lunches, then she does grocery shopping, cleaning, picks up the kids, drives them to “activities”, play-dates and what not, helps them with their homework, makes dinner, etc., puts them to bed. And what about planning those activities for the kids, maintaining family’s social schedule (as in sending cards to all cousins on their birthdays, weddings, anniversaries, etc.), and what about planning dinner parties, and waking up at 7 on weekends for those stupid soccer games and stuff? This is what SAHMs who I know do with their time. And yes all of them have housekeepers to scrub their toilets, but their husbands are also making well over 10x of what you are making so they can afford it. There’s a lot more that goes into making a home than just taking out the garbage and throwing your dirty socks in the washer.

          And, if you’re wondering, I am not a SATM, never has and never will be.

        3. Stacy2

          ” Doing things like putting the laundry in the dryer, or the dishes in the dishwasher, or watching a movie with the kids, has value, but it is not work”

          Of course it work! You can hire people to do that work and where I live they charge starting $25/hr.

        4. KK

          DeeGee,

          I get it. Your ex-wife did something terrible to cause you to initiate divorce, which was a very painful experience. You most likely live in a no fault state and feel like the family court system hosed you good. Your hurt and anger towards your ex wife has caused you to believe all women are the same. Am I close? Hot? Warm?

          I will say this. Women get screwed over in the divorce process too. Lots of women. Men aren’t the only ones who lose. And often times it’s the innocent party that seems to not only suffer from abuse or infidelity, but then gets a double whammy when they lose out financially or lost time with their children. It’s never a one size fits all. Plenty of good women and good men get a really bad deal in the divorce process and it sucks and it’s unfair but people pick up and move on and do the best they can do to start over.

          I hope you’re able to come to terms with that eventually and heal, because even though you went out of your way to make a point of saying that you’re not misogynistic, surely you know that every comment you made on here was in fact misogynistic. You also said the comments you’ve made do not reflect how you treat the women you date. Don’t they have a right to know how you really feel? Women are all brats that want equality when it suits them. SAHM’s don’t work. All that good stuff. If I was dating someone that felt that way, I’d surely want to know.

        5. Dogwood

          It most certainly is work…not hard labor, or pressure filled, but it’s urgent, must do work or the family suffers.  It also has an opportunity cost…if someone is doing that work (which must be done, it’s not optional), they can’t engage in much else that might forward their personal goals, or things that they really enjoy.  They lose ground professionally by devoting themselves to what DeeGee has called ‘not work’ but ‘has value’.  Can’t work on a masters degree, attend networking events, exercise, socialize, read or relax.

          My ex (who is a narcissist) always devalued this type of work.  He too, called it ‘not work’.  Doing laundry wasn’t work, he said…it’s what you do while you are doing something else.  Cooking wasn’t work either, he said.  Nor was grocery shopping, or taking the kids everywhere.  Or taxes.  Or cleaning up after everyone, or taking care of the car maintenance, dishes, dry cleaner, doctor, dentist, orthodontist, the pets, vacation planning, bills, buying and wrapping birthday and holiday gifts,  doing college research and visits, etc.  All while he went golfing, fishing, fitness clubbing, extended business trips, and engaged in house projects that didn’t need doing.  I also wasn’t ‘allowed’ a house cleaner because they were never good enough.

          ‘Not work’ took up every minute of my time after my day job and on weekends.  Also, my job paid more than his, took more hours per week, and was more pressure.  DeeGee, no way is running a household an hour a day.  I am happily single now but with a serious boyfriend, and my kids are gone and I spend quite a bit more than an hour a day taking care of my house and personal business.

          SAHMs don’t have it easy.  I will admit that it’s probably easier than working and doing most of the house’not work’, but these ladies are not all career volunteers, expert tennis players, or addicted to shopping.  Most I knew worked part time, or wanted to transition to something (and did) after most of the kids were older…so this period in their lives was of limited duration.  But they paid dearly for it, in terms of lost rank in the working world.  Most of them made the world a better place for my kids as they were the team coaches, event chairs, scout leaders, ran the pool, managed the swim team, etc.  And some of them did not do well at all in their divorces; they will never make what their exes make, they got little to no alimony, and got to split half of very little…or better yet…half the debt he ran up because they trusted him implicitly with the finances.

           

           

           

           

           

        6. DeeGee

          Dogwood said: “DeeGee, no way is running a household an hour a day.”

          As a matter of fact I am.  Yes, I am single.  And there is no reason why it should take longer.
          Even if I was living with someone, it would not take any longer for the two of us.  We wouldn’t do our dishes or laundry separately, and adding a few more items to each load in the machine is nothing.  It doesn’t take twice as long to vacuum the house just because there are two people living in it.
          Would you like to see photos of my house?  It’s cleaner than most people’s.
          How long does it take me to walk downstairs to put the laundry into the washer and dryer?  30 seconds?  And then the machines do all of the work.  I’ll bet none of you are using a tub and washboard, so don’t tell me it takes you more time than that.
          It’s exactly the same with the dishwasher.
          Vacuuming?  15 minutes.  And that isn’t every day.
          Cleaning the bathroom?  15 minutes.  And that isn’t every day.
          And every four months or so, washing all of the lino floors is 20 minutes.

          Why not have Evan put a poll onto his blog, asking all of the women a Yes/No question:
          “When your boyfriend or husband does the dishes, is he working?”
          I have no doubt that 99%-100% of the women responding to the poll will say “No”.
          And no doubt many of you laughed when you read that question, and what went through your mind was “No, he wasn’t working, he was doing what he should be doing.”
          Nice double standard…

        7. DeeGee

          Stacy2 said: “I don’t know what your house looks like, but most single men who can’t afford or simply won’t hire a housekeeper live in a pigsty and keep their clothes in the dryer.

          My house is cleaner than most stay-at-home moms.
          I would attach photos if I could, or if we were Facebook friends you could see photos of how I also decorated the house.
          I am asthmatic and OCD about cleanliness.
          Even my socks are folded and sorted by color and type in their own drawer.  Everything has its place, and everything is always in its place.
          And it only takes me at most an hour or so a day to keep my house in order, including cooking healthy meals (I exercise and weight train almost every day).
          My house order and cleanliness has put some women off, who felt that if we dated that I might be overly strict on them.
          And I’m not BS’ing.  I have no problems proving it.

        8. DeeGee

          Dogwood said: “Doing laundry wasn’t work, … Cooking wasn’t work …  Nor was grocery shopping, or taking the kids everywhere.  Or taxes.  Or cleaning up after everyone, or taking care of the car maintenance, dishes, dry cleaner, doctor, dentist, orthodontist, the pets, vacation planning, bills, buying and wrapping birthday and holiday gifts,  doing college research and visits, etc.

          We must live in entirely different worlds.
          I’m being totally honest in saying this, my ex was not like that, and in none of the married couples that I’ve ever been friends with has the wife been like that.
          I live in oil country in north eastern BC Canada (near Alberta), and the relationship dynamic must be totally different here.

          Dogwood said: “All while he went golfing, fishing, fitness clubbing, extended business trips, and engaged in house projects that didn’t need doing.

          This one I’ll give half-points on, as about half of the husbands I know do (what I also consider) time wasters with such things as quad’ing and hunting.

        9. Nissa

          My two cents –

          I live alone with pets and do about 5 hours of housework a week. Vacuuming the house – 1 hour. Laundry -1 hour. Pet care, yard work, dishes, dusting/wiping, trash, fridge cleaning, bathroom, etc is the remaining 3 hours. (Doggie bath day is three hours by itself). So since DeeGee  does about an hour of cleaning a day, he does more than me, but I do it in one day vs each day because I work a 10 hour work day, plus an hour each way commute and have a part time job that takes 1 1/2 hours three days a week.

          This is about what I did when I was married too, except that my husband had his own bathroom and did his own laundry (he was fussy and spent about 2 hours every week on his bathroom alone; he spent another hour in the kitchen wiping and bleaching, including the top of the fridge).

          When I do those things it’s WORK. When my ex did them it was WORK. When I can afford it, I pay someone else to do this work, because 1) I loathe housework 2) I’d rather have my sweetie spend time with me than be doing housework and 3) I want to spend my life doing things I like and enjoy, or at least, don’t despise every moment of the task.

          I would say what makes something ‘work’ is a subjective value based on how much one dislikes or doesn’t mind the task.

        10. Dogwood

          DeeGee, let’s admit that perhaps we have different standards, and workloads.  My house is large and I have pets, and gardens.  Lady laundry is quite different than gent laundry.  I hand wash things, I sort darks and lights, I hang things to dry, I dry some things flat.  I have workout clothes, work clothes, lingerie, casual items, sheets, towels.  And it’s not the actual putting it in the machine that takes time…it’s putting it away, folding it properly, remaking beds, etc.  My personal laundry takes at least 2 hours a week.  When my daughter comes home, it takes more.  When my kids were younger, I did 4 people’s laundry, plus towels and sheets.  I would do 5 to 10 loads a weekend.  It forces you to stay home to complete.  You must move it along or no one will have clothes come Monday…so, no, it’s not a one hour job by any stretch.  And you do it while you are doing many other things – it’s funny you think it takes so little time…it shows you’ve never done it for a family routinely, week in and week out – or you did it, but didn’t fold and put away, or re-make beds.  Planning and cooking good meals, and cleaning them up, also takes a considerable amount of time – when I did it for my family on a weeknight…about an hour to an hour and a half from start to finish, but including dining.  I don’t have a double standard at all…I have accurate estimates of time based on real life experience.  “30 seconds” is a large underestimation of the time it takes to do laundry and put it away.  Running a household and raising kids well is very time consuming .  I left so much off the list in my prior post too.

          To get back on track and tie in with the original purpose of the thread…I make >150k per year and  have a large amount put away, none of which came from my ex or family.  I received no alimony or child support.  In my new life after divorce, I did not pursue my guy at all, and expected to be courted.  All the men I dated exhibited courting behavior; but it felt very uncomfortable.  It took everything I had not to insist on paying half.  But the courting behavior (asking, planning and paying) shows to me the man desires me – otherwise you’d have no idea.  Once exclusivity and a real relationship was established, I began to pay for some dates…we tend to alternate paying, and it seems NOT to emasculate him and it makes me happy.  Vacations are also split, not necessarily 50/50.

          He has been saddled with lifetime alimony for his ex, and I see how difficult that is.  But he shows no bitterness, and does what he is required to do.  He is such a wonderful man.  But financial hurt in divorce cuts both ways…I’ve actually never met a woman who fared well – they either received exactly what they should have, or left with nothing.  Most left with nothing, or far less than they should have because they could not afford the legal battle.  In past generations, they were left with no child support…it’s only been in the last 30 years that it’s been strictly enforced.

          DeeGee, your dismissive tone is speaking volumes about you.  It sounds startlingly familiar.  

          Beware those who disrespect and diminish others’ contributions.

           

        11. DeeGee

          Dogwood said: “laundry takes … 2 hours a week – it’s funny you think it takes so little time

          That’s 17 minutes per day.

          I said in my post that it takes 30 seconds to walk to the machine to put the laundry in.  You are the one who conflated ‘sorting/washing/drying/putting away’ into what I said.

          Dogwood said: “or you did it, but didn’t fold and put away, or re-make beds.

          It’s apparent that you didn’t read my posts.
          I stated that I am very orderly, even to the point of folding socks by color in the sock drawer.

          Dogwood said: “Planning and cooking good meals, and cleaning them up

          Again, you never read my posts.
          I stated that I work two jobs plus housework including making my own healthy meals because I do weight training and yoga.

          Dogwood said: “30 seconds is a large underestimation of the time it takes to do laundry and put it away.

          And again you didn’t read my post.
          Apparently you must have seen the first word of my post or just saw my name tag, got angry because you figured I must be dissing women, and hit that reply button.

          Dogwood said: “Most left with nothing

          Then the divorce laws must be substantially different where you are located.  And that is too bad and unfair.  As I stated, and I used my country for the example, the divorce laws here give the woman at minimum 50% of everything, even if she played a small role or no role in accumulating it, for example she would get 50% of the house even if she was only married for a few years and it was purchased prior to their marriage.  Or if they have kids, she gets almost everything.

          Dogwood said: “Beware those who disrespect and diminish others’ contributions.

          And once again you never read my posts.
          It never fails to astound me just how myopic some people can be.

          Most of the replies by most of the women on here make it apparent that all they see me and my posts as, and probably most men as, is some loser guy wearing a wife-beater t-shirt, who sits around all day in his big chair watching sports, drinking beer, beer cans strewn around the messy unkept room, scratching his butt.

          That is so far away from me and from what I said that it is astounding.

          And I’m touted as the one with narrow vision.

        12. Evan Marc Katz

          DeeGee – one of these days I’m going to write a post eviscerating your claim that stay at home moms have it easy. Just not today.

        13. DeeGee

          Evan Marc Katz said: “one of these days I’m going to write a post eviscerating your claim that stay at home moms have it easy.

          I look forward to reading it.

          However, I do again wish to clarify that what I said was:

          Being a “house wife” is not a difficult job.
          It sure isn’t the most difficult job in the world.
          It may be tiring at times.
          It may be exasperating at times.
          It may be many hours of time each day.
          But it is not difficult work comparatively.

  13. 14
    Stacy2

    Actually yes, I prefer equality and would rather be in an egitarian relationship. But i still need men to do the “courting” even if that’s symbolic such as asking out, planning dates, being a gentlemen.

    1. 14.1
      McLovin

      “I would rather rather be in an egalitarian relationship, except for all of the heavy lifting of the traditional expectations placed on the man.”

      You can’t be serious with this, Stacy2.

  14. 15
    Stacy2

     

    Evan: “I’m staying away from this conversation, specifically because your tone makes me realize that we would not have a pleasant exchange.”

    So, when a guy is assertive in his comments, he is confident, but when a woman is assertive she is a bitch? Not to call anyone out, just one of those neat double standards somebody was talking about…

    1. 15.1
      Chance

      No one cares if a woman asserts herself.  People don’t like it, however, when others are being judgmental and closed-minded.

    2. 15.2
      Evan Marc Katz

      Those are your words, not mine. I just banned a man who had similar conversational tendencies so beware before you call me a hypocrite. I’m an equal opportunity offender, if anything.

  15. 16
    Karmic Equation

    @DeeGee, from one of your replies under 13.2.1:

    “Being a “house wife” is not a difficult job.  Any job that you do while you are in your pajamas is not difficult.”

    From a meme:
    A man came home from work and found his 3 children outside, still in their pajamas, playing in the mud, with empty food boxes and wrappers strewn around garden, The door of his wife’s car was open, as was the front door to the house and no sign of the dog, walking in the door, he found …an even bigger mess. A lamp had been knocked over, the throw rug was against one wall, In the front room the TV was on loudly with the cartoon channel, the family room was strewn with toys and various items of clothing. In the kitchen, dishes filled the sink, breakfast food was spilled on the counter, the fridge door was open wide, dog food was spilled on the floor, a broken glass lay under the table, and a small pile of sand was spread by the back door. He quickly headed up the stairs, stepping over toys and more piles of clothes, looking for his wife. He was worried she might be ill, or that something serious had happened. He was met with a small trickle of water as it made its way out the bathroom door. As he peered inside he found wet towels, scummy soap and more toys strewn over the floor. Miles of toilet paper lay in a heap and toothpaste had been smeared over the mirror and walls. As he rushed to the bedroom, he found his wife still curled up in the bed in her pyjamas, reading a novel… She looked up at him, smiled and asked how his day went. He looked at her bewildered and asked, ‘What happened here today?’ She again smiled and answered, ‘You know every day when you come home from work and you ask me what in the world do I do all day?…

    ”Yes,” was his incredulous reply..
    She answered, ‘Well, today I didn’t do it.’
    ——————————
    I love that meme. Says it all about how men misunderstand what the stay-at-home wife/mother does when she’s at home.
    ——————————
    If a man works outside the house at a FT job, and the wife’s ONLY job is to be a stay-at-home mom, then it IS unfair to ask the man to do 100% of the chores and childcare when he comes home. However, if you do the math. If the woman is minding the kids and doing a great job keeping the house and running errands, etc, that she is ALSO working when the husband is at work. Thus when the husband comes home it IS fair if he does 50% of the childcare and 50% of the remaining chores. Then BOTH husband and wife are working 150%.
    Otherwise, if husband comes home and wife CONTINUES to do 100% of the chores and 100% of the childcare,then the man is only doing 100% and the woman is contributing 200%.
    Now if there is housekeeper/nanny arrangement, all paid for by the man’s salary, then, and ONLY then, would it be fair that the WIFE does 100% of the chores and childcare when the husband comes home from work.
    However, once again, if BOTH parties contribute to paying for the houskeeper/nanny, then the husband needs to put in as much work as the woman in the childcare and remaining chores that haven’t been done.
    Just simple math.

    1. 16.1
      DeeGee

      Karmic Equation: Apparently you never read my comments, because I stated before that if the wife works as well, they should both share house chores.

      1. 16.1.1
        Karmic Equation

        “Never” DeeGee? Hyperbolic much?

        We may have crossed.

        Or more likely, MOST of your posts on this topic is that SAHM work is not work, and I missed that one sentence disclaimer.

        1. DeeGee

          Karmic Equation said: “Or more likely, MOST of your posts on this topic is that SAHM work is not work, and I missed that one sentence disclaimer.

          If that is what you believe most of my posts said, that’s fine, I’m not going to sit here and repeat what I said when you can simply scroll back through the comments here and read it again for yourself.  It’s apparent that women see what they want to see in discussions on topics such as this one.

  16. 17
    Misty

    Deegee you tell me it’s off topic but i believe you were the one who brought up alimony and reproductive rights into the conversation first. Check your comment under 13.2.1.

    1. 17.1
      DeeGee

      Misty: I said that I was getting off topic from what the blog subject is.

  17. 18
    Stacy2

    @KK

    “We didn’t make the rules. Those things were set in place by previous generations”

    KK, I wonder what “rules” do you speak of? Is there a rule that says you now must sleep with a guy on a second date? Or a rule that says you must work outside of home whether you want to or not? I didn’t think so.

    Women’s rights movement has given women freedoms that allow them to make the same choices that men can make and achieve economic empowerment. Your view on this subject is highly myopic. Today, a woman can have a life she builds for herself through her choices, work and talent – not through her parents or husband’s money. This gives freedom to pick partners (husbands) without monetary considerations, not stay in abusive relationships, and move up the economic ladder. That said, I can assure you that women born into affluent or wealthy families to this day don’t “work outside the house” (just look at Chelsea Clinton who did the whole 6 months of work in her life and got like 4 advanced degrees in English or something) and stunningly beautiful women can still land a rich husband and not work. On the other hand, women like me who did not come from any money are able to move up in life because we are no longer confined to a “teacher or a nurse” career options that the older generation “enjoyed”. Women run companies, direct billions of dollars of capital, argue cases in court, perform complex surgeries, etc. This change has been great for women, and especially for less affluent.

    Likewise, to this day women with healthy self-esteem don’t sleep around…

    You are blaming women’s rights for what’s wrong with your life, but may be you should look elsewhere.

    1. 18.1
      KK

      Stacy,
      Here we go:

      “KK, I wonder what “rules” do you speak of? Is there a rule that says you now must sleep with a guy on a second date? Or a rule that says you must work outside of home whether you want to or not? I didn’t think so”.

      No, Stacy. There aren’t and I haven’t followed those “rules”. Perhaps I should’ve been more clear. It is more of an overall attitude of what’s expected and acceptable in today’s society. I made the mistake of not being 100% crystal clear in my use of words because it seems that the commenters here are reasonably intelligent and can easily decipher intent. But if you want to play the game and get technical, now you know exactly what I meant.

      “Your view on this subject is highly myopic “.  To you, I’m sure it is… because I disagree with you. I think your views are myopic. Tit. Tat.

      “I can assure you that women born into affluent or wealthy families to this day don’t work outside the house and stunningly beautiful women can still land a rich husband and not work”.

      Ummm, okay. And???
      I can assure you that I’m not from a wealthy, affluent family nor would I be delusional enough to ever consider myself ‘stunningly beautiful’ and yet I  was able to be a stay at home mom for many years, which I absolutely loved. I can also assure you that me and other women in my position put up with lots of snide remarks and attitudes over the years. Think DeeGee… People who have zero respect for stay at home moms and don’t consider it work. Did it make me change my mind? Nope. Would it be nice to live in a world that actually valued SAHMs? Yes, it would, but I see that attitude (DeeGee’s) in the majority of people nowadays. It also comes from the… gasp… feminist. Do I have to reiterate what I said earlier now? That not all feminists, blah blah blah… on a spectrum, blah blah… You get the point.

      “Likewise, to this day women with healthy self-esteem don’t sleep around…”

      Right on Stacy! Couldn’t agree more.

      “You are blaming women’s rights for what’s wrong with your life, but may be you should look elsewhere”.

      Haha. No. Much worse in fact. I’m blaming women’s rights for A LOT of our modern day problems. Human rights is where it’s at. Do you think it’s fair that a white male with a superior GPA and test scores gets rejected by the same medical school that accepts a black female with the lower GPA and test scores? It happens all the time. So much for living in the land of opportunity for ALL.

      1. 18.1.1
        Stacy

        Well it seems like we can agree on a lot of issues. I have respect for SAHMs even though i am not one and never wanted to be and never will be.

        What you are missing is that now women have CHOICES. If we were living here pre women’s rights movement, our choices would be limited to stay at home mom or “teacher or nurse” job,  which you would be expected (talk about expectations) to stop working once you have kids. For women like me, that would mean staying in relative poverty – i never had access to affluent circles growing up to find an affluent husband, so i would marry lower middle class peer and pinch pennies for the rest of my life. You see? Instead i went to a grad school and had a career, (and through that got access to affluent men to find a husband for that matter)

        Women in their 60-ies today in any position of power were really trailbazers and were going against “expectations” of their time. Now, many women stay at home and more don’t. Whether you do one or another has become largely a personal and economic choice, i.e. whether you can afford to or not. If you are from an affluent family, you are probably married to an affluent husband and the two of you can afford one person working and whether you want to be a stay at home mom. May be you will alternate. Whatever. Options.  Visit any affluent suburb today and you will see lululemon moms lunching in the middle of the day. Those are SAHMs, alive and well. Visit any downtown and you will see working women in the middle of the day. Options=good.

        Now, if you think somehow you can’t afford to be a SAHM because your husband doesn’t make enough money – blame your husband, blame your choices, blame globalization and stagnant wages and the Fed, but please don’t blame women’s rights movement (or feminists for that matter), They had nothing to do with it, and benefited a lot of women.

        “Do you think it’s fair that a white male with a superior GPA and test scores gets rejected by the same medical school that accepts a black female with the lower GPA and test scores?”

        I would think that this is an affirmative action issue more than anything else. So if your question is where i stand on affirmative action – i don’t know if it’s “fair” but i know it is needed and i believe our society benefits from it. Yep, i said it.

        1. KK

          Yes, we do agree on some things.

           

          “What you are missing is that now women have CHOICES”.

           

          Choices are good. Yes. Please do not misunderstand me on this. We should all have choices. But along with these choices, have also come changing attitudes and expectations of women in our society in general. Women who choose to be SAHMs or God forbid, housewives (without children or grown children), are generally looked down upon and treated as second class citizens. That includes all income levels. That isn’t good for women. It’s easy to say we have all these choices, on the one hand, while simultaneously saying I will only respect you if you choose what I think is best. I’m not saying you are like this, Stacy, but it is a pretty prevalent attitude. And now they’re talking about forcing girls to apply for the draft. Really?!? Yay, feminism! Thank you for turning us into men!

          Like I’ve said before, the bad (in my opinion) outweighs the good. The overall thoughts and attitudes reflect that. There is more division now than ever seen before in our society. The battle of the sexes. Racism. Ageism. It doesn’t have to be that way. I understand men’s frustration with the way things are. I understand women’s frustrations. If you think you should have SUPERIOR rights over men, that is wherein lies the frustration. The idea that we should all be brought up to the same level is great, but to tip the scales IN FAVOR of women is wrong. That applies to age, race, religion, whatever. I feel this way and I’m a woman! I don’t need special accommodations. If you think you do, what does that say about you? Are you saying that you’re not as smart or talented or accomplished, but please give me a leg up because I need it?

           

          I have an older brother. Four and a half years older. When I was a young girl, he would play darts with his friends and when I played with them, they would say, “You get a handicap. You can stand way up here in front of the line”. It was a nice gesture. I did better than I would have, but I still never beat them. No big deal. But.., I don’t need any handicaps in real life. To suggest that women or minorities or whatever group does need one is implying that the group is inferior. How is that good for anyone? And that goes for what you said about affirmative action. You admit it isn’t necessarily fair but you’re all for it. Why? I don’t understand that mentality. This is one of the main reasons we have so much divisiveness. Equality? Yes. Superiority? No. Hell no.

           

           

        2. Misty

          Don’t know if Stacy2 and Stacy are the same but thank you (both?) for your comments.

      2. 18.1.2
        Misty

        KK — Only posting this for clarification about some of the assumptions you are hinting about with regards to me — since it seems we have some trouble communicating with each other, I believe it’s just because we are both passionate about our views, and I do concede I can get a little worked up.

        I may call myself a feminist but that does not equal disrespect for SAHMs.
        I was one for 2 years. I’ll say that again — I was one for 2 years.

        Some feminists may not have respect for SAHMs but I guarantee you can find a cohort of anti-SAMHs in any labeled group — including men, as has been demonstrated here.

        That’s all.

      3. 18.1.3
        Misty

        “Do you think it’s fair that a white male with a superior GPA and test scores gets rejected by the same medical school that accepts a black female with the lower GPA and test scores? It happens all the time.”

         

        Actually that’s not how medical school admissions work. That may be the case with civil service exams and police and fire departments, but not medical school.

        I also don’t want to assume you believe that women of color are automatically less capable than white men or white women so I will give you the benefit of the doubt in your comments.

        1. KK

          “I also don’t want to assume you believe that women of color are automatically less capable than white men or white women so I will give you the benefit of the doubt in your comments”.

           

          Thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt. I think that is the greatest frustration on comments made; being accused of feeling a certain way that you never said and then having to go back and qualify every single statement; especially when you simply state facts such as someone’s grades. I have a hard time understanding how anyone could twist that into anything else, but it happens all the time. Why is it necessary for me to make a disclaimer and say I don’t think blacks or women or whoever else is any less capable? My example given was a personal one from someone I know well and I have no reason to believe he would lie to me. He and a fellow classmate both applied to the same program. I’m relating what I was told.

      4. 18.1.4
        DeeGee

        KK said: “I can also assure you that me and other women in my position put up with lots of snide remarks and attitudes over the years. Think DeeGee

        You completely fail to see the entire point of anything I said.
        I have no hate or derision for SAHMs.
        If I were to get involved with a woman who wanted to stay at home instead of working, I would have no problem with that either.  And I would not think less of her.
        But if you wish to reference me on here as the example for the “bad guy”, go ahead, you won’t hurt my feelings even though it is a false accusation.

        1. KK

          Ok, DeeGee. Fair enough. I apologize if I misinterpreted your comments. I’m unsure of where I did so considering several others called you out on what you said as well. I’m not a mind reader. You made several comments about SAHMs not REALLY working, so yes, if you respect SAHMs you never made that clear (to me, at least) in your comments.

        2. DeeGee

          It pushes one of my buttons when women say “Being a stay-at-home mom is the toughest job in the world”.
          Really??
          More difficult than soldiers fighting overseas?
          More difficult than ER doctors?
          More difficult than First Responders?

          It is a feminist statement targeted at making the world more gynocentric and to minimize the difficult jobs done by other people especially if those jobs have a high percentage of males.  You may not agree with this statement, but that is ok.

          And I’m sorry to report that it is an almost unanimous consensus among sociologist etc. that the current generations coming up are among the worst there have ever been.  So most SAHMs are not doing a very good job.
          Most kids these days can’t even do basic math without a calculator, they know nothing about history or any facts and can’t function without using Google search (even many schools are now allowing students to use their phone to access Google during exams!), they are addicted to their cell phones and social media, distracted driving has become one of the biggest accident, injury, and death causes, I could go on.

          Society needs SAHM’s, there is nothing wrong with being a SAHM, but it sure isn’t the most difficult job in the world.  It may be tiring at times.  It may be exasperating at times.  It may be many hours of time each day.  But it is not difficult work comparatively.
          Had anyone asked me what I did for a living, I would have confessed that 3/4 of what I do I don’t classify as “work” either.  As an IT Admin most of what I do is click a button every hour and get paid $45/hr to do it.  It’s being easy is one of the reasons I chose it.

          I echo what Stacy said below.  I don’t see very many people looking down on SAHMs or treating them like second-class citizens, and that surely is not what I was getting at in any of my comments.

        3. KK

          DeeGee,

          “And I’m sorry to report that it is an almost unanimous consensus among sociologist etc. that the current generations coming up are among the worst there have ever been”.

           

          Exactly. And you think that’s because children are being raised In their homes by their SAHmothers???

           

          It is because kids are thrown in daycare 10+ hours a day, sitting around an empty house all summer long with nothing to do but get into trouble. Hours of free time to look at anything they can find on the Internet. It’s because they’re from generations of single parent homes living in poverty. It’s because they have parents who don’t really care, are too permissive, don’t teach them right from wrong, or simply don’t have as much time as they’d like because they’re doing everything they can in order to survive.

           

          All that to say that there are still good kids that are being raised right and even though they might be in the minority, the credit goes to conscientious parents who put their children first. And yes, that very much includes the SAHM.

      5. 18.1.5
        GoWithTheFlow

        KK,

        Your assertion that black women with inferior GPAs are getting accepted to medical schools ahead of better qualified white men is a myth that does not reflect reality.  It only serves to encourage a cult of “reverse discrimination” victimization in society, while reinforcing negative stereotypes about the intelligence of women and racial minorities.

        When I was a (white female) pre-med student I worked at a hospital with 4 white male students from my college who were applying to medical schools at the same time I was.  Of the 5 of us, 2 were accepted (including myself) and 3 weren’t.  Two of the guys who weren’t accepted asserted to anyone who would listen that the only reason I got in ahead of them was because I was a woman.  Both made wild statements that they were going to talk to an attorney and sue the state university medical school.  (Didn’t happen)

        In reality, these two guys couldn’t accept that they weren’t competitive candidates.  They had low B average GPAs and scored less than the 50th percentile on the MCATs (medical college admissions test).  That just doesn’t cut it in a year when only 48% of all first time applicants in the US were admitted to medical school.  (I had a 3.78 GPA that I earned while working part to full time, and I was in the 92nd percentile on the MCATs.)

        One of the young men had a record of signing up for a full load of courses each semester and then withdrawing from one or two late into the term.  The dropped classes weren’t factored into the numerical GPA, but they showed up as a W on the college transcript.  In med school I got to know the Dean of Admissions quite well, and I described this guy’s academic record to him.  The Dean explained that not only was this student’s GPA and test scores sub par, but his record of routinely dropping classes was a red flag that indicated he wasn’t able to handle a full load of classes and was therefore unlikely to get through the heavy coursework med school entails.  The student also lacked any job or research experience that might show superior performance in another venue that could possibly make up for being an unremarkable pre-med student. Ironically, this student was the most aggressive one in claiming he had been wronged.

        The admissions Dean had been in his position about 7-8 years at that point and he said that in that time, the only rejected applicants who ever requested a review of their file or threatened legal action (about 3-6 per year) were all white males with uncompetitive GPAs, test scores, and academic records.  The only two people to flunk out of my med school class were two white men in their 30s who were admitted, despite borderline pre-med performance, because they had interesting job histories;  a paramedic who set up a rural emergency medical response unit and a master’s level biology teacher.  In contrast, the two black students (out of 120) had A- GPAs and MCATs in the upper 25th percentile.  They both graduated in the top quarter of our class and one landed in a top residency training program in a highly competitive specialty.

        Since I went to a state school (that is vulnerable to lawsuits) the Dean said they kept extensive statistics about the gender, racial/ethnic makeup, and pre-med academic performance of all applicants.  The statistics that they gave to attorneys of potential sue-ees was always successful in heading off any lawsuits because it showed no bias towards any demographic group in the admissions process.

        As per the Dean, when an applicant is evaluated, the first question that is asked is can this person make it through the coursework and become a licensed physician.  A student’s GPA and the rigor of their academic studies is correlated to their ability to complete med school coursework and graduate.  Solid MCAT scores correlate to being able to pass the USMLE (United States medical licensing exam) and be a licensed physician.  A state (taxpayer funded) school cannot afford to have students flunking out because they were admitted despite subpar pre-med performance that indicated they were unlikely to get through the program no matter what gender or ethnicity they are.

         

        1. KK

          GWTF,

          “KK, Your assertion that black women with inferior GPAs are getting accepted to medical schools ahead of better qualified white men is a myth that does not reflect reality”.

          First of all, I didn’t claim anything about black women, plural. Nor did I say medical schools, plural or white men, plural. I relayed one story about one individual white male and one individual black female.

          “It only serves to encourage a cult of “reverse discrimination” victimization in society, while reinforcing negative stereotypes about the intelligence of women and racial minorities”.

          Secondly, I do not personally believe that women or minorities are intellectually inferior. There are smart people, stupid people, and people in between, and each group consists of both genders and all races.

          But… denying that reverse discrimination actually exists doesn’t make it disappear or solve any problems.

        2. misty

          KK if reverse discrimination is such a rampant problem as you claim… then explain why white men still hold the overwhelming majority of powerful and influential positions in society.

          as Chris Rock says, if you’re losing, who’s winning?

        3. KK

          Misty,

          How ’bout I quote you instead of doing what you do and accuse others of saying things they didn’t.

          “KK if reverse discrimination is such a rampant problem as you claim…”

          When did I ever make such a claim? I said it was a problem. Saying something is a rampant problem is quite an embellishment versus saying that something is merely a problem. I’m a pretty patient person Misty, but you really are a pain. This isn’t the first time you’ve ensenuated or outright fabricated what I actually said. I see how you and Stacy agree on so much now. She did the same exact thing to Evan by ensenuating he thought you were a bitch; which he never said or implied.

          I tell ya what. You stay in your own little world and worry about what’s best for you and to hell with anyone who faces reverse discrimination or anything else that doesn’t directly concern you. Oh wait.., you’re already there.

  18. 19
    Stacy

    @KK

    “Women who choose to be SAHMs or God forbid, housewives (without children or grown children), are generally looked down upon and treated as second class citizens. “

    Are you kidding?? By who, some trolls on the internet?? Who cares. Their husbands? Chose the one who is on the same page with you. Legal system? Not the case, our  whole system is designed in favor of women who chose to be SAHMs (think lifetime alimony). Is your whole beef with today’s world that somebody said something mean about SAHMs on the internet or in the media? Come on, we are not in high school.

    And now they’re talking about forcing girls to apply for the draft. Really?!? 

    Yes, really. This has been a system in some countries (Israel) for a long time, and there women don’t just register, they actually serve (in roles appropriate for their physical abilities, naturally). Nothing is wrong with it.

    And that goes for what you said about affirmative action. You admit it isn’t necessarily fair but you’re all for it. Why?

    Because you need it if you hope to correct the wrongs that went on for centuries over a short period of time. “Abilities” and “opportunities” are such funny things, even when they’re supposedly equal money still buys more. More nurturing, safer environment, better tutoring, connections, etc. The GPA score isn’t everything and the only thing it measures is pretty much how well the system has trained one particular person to take standardized tests, which really is a function of parents’ income and innate intelligence. AA strives to lessen the impact of the former, which is a good thing.  As far as favoring women (by gender) goes, i don’t think that it exists, nor have i ever experience it, personally. Never happened to me nor anyone I know. I have been pushing against completely male dominated industry my entire career and did not feel either discriminated against, or favored.

    1. 19.1
      KK

      SAHMs do NOT get lifetime alimony. It is possible they do in California and some other areas, but  in general they’re very fortunate if they receive it for more than a year.

       

      Highschool? Really, Stacy? I already stated I did exactly what I wanted regardless of other people’s attitudes. It doesn’t change the fact that most people have a negative attitude towards women who don’t work outside the home. I’m not saying I ever let it affect me. Nor did I say or mean to imply that I’m scarred or bitter in some way. Lol. It still doesn’t make it right.

       

      Your comment on the draft. Just smh…

       

      Your comment on affirmative action.., same. We should right the wrongs? I hope that comforts you when your life is in the hands of an incompetent physician or lawyer or unqualified truck driver going down the same roads as you. You don’t deserve anything Stacy. Neither do I or anyone else. If you earn it fair and square, congratulations. If you get special accommodations for any reason, you haven’t earned anything. You’ve simply prospered because of societies belief you weren’t capable without extra help. I say, no thanks.

      1. 19.1.1
        Stacy2

        Why are you “smh”? (i thought we were not in high school and capable of spelling things out but YMMV haha)

        Of course women should register for draft. If we participate in the economic life and we vote we should fully have skin in the game. Don’t want to be drafted? Don’t vote for politicians who will start wars.

        I hope that comforts you when your life is in the hands of an incompetent physician or lawyer or unqualified truck driver going down the same roads as you.

        Just because somebody had a lower GPA doesn’t mean that they are stupid or less competent. You just cant judge person’s abilities by this one number (obviously YOU can, but we as a society shouldn’t). The opposite is also true. I have seen some completely incompetent lawyers who in terms of sheer intelligence and GPA should have been super stars, for example.

         

        1. KK

          That is the second comment you’ve made comparing me to a highschooler. Not offended, just baffled. Lol.

           

          We can agree to disagree on everything else. Maybe you want to be like a man. I don’t. I don’t want my daughter to be forced to serve in the military because of some crazy feminists crying for equal rights. You talked earlier about choices. Isn’t this just one example where there is no choice? Who I vote for has little significance if our president chooses to engage in war. We have to go to war in order to protect our country. I hope that whoever is in office doesn’t get us involved in conflicts except when it is absolutely necessary for our own protection. That gives me little comfort considering the state of current affairs in our world today.

           

          I agree that there is more to a professional than their GPA. However, it should be a qualifier and a starting point. In other words, you can’t cut it, you don’t get accepted. No exceptions. From there, there are many other considerations as to what makes someone a successful physician, attorney, whatever.

      2. 19.1.2
        DeeGee

        KK said: “SAHMs do NOT get lifetime alimony. It is possible they do in California and some other areas, but  in general they’re very fortunate if they receive it for more than a year.”

        I believe it varies by the location and country.  I’m in western Canada.

        FYI my ex was a stay-at-home wife, we did not have children.
        I was told by my lawyer that it would have been even worse for me if we did have children.

        When I divorced in 1995 (finalized 1997) I was told by the lawyers that if my ex decided not to work full time, I would be on the hook for alimony for 10 to 20 years or more.  If she chose to work part-time, I would still be on the hook for alimony for that entire time.
        The only thing that would ‘cancel’ the alimony is if she worked full time or got re-married.
        I was given the choice to pay either monthly alimony for years, or to pay a large lump sum value agreed to by her and her lawyer.
        I chose the large lump sum.  I got a loan.  It took me more than 10 years to pay that off making large monthly payments.  I also had to buy her a new car and to take on all of the credit card and other debt that she accumulated during the marriage.

        The lump sum, car, credit cards, and other debts I managed to get paid off just a few years ago.

        To top it all off though, she is still entitled to 1/2 of my old age pension when she reaches retirement age.  So not only does she get 100% of her own retirement pension, she gets 1/2 of mine.

        So I have very little sympathy for many women when it comes to alimony complaints.  I’ll bite my tongue until I hear the details.  But I won’t assume that women are going to get some raw deal, the laws typically do not reflect that outcome.

        1. KK

          Okay DeeGee,

          What you said confirms my suspicions. You got screwed. I sympathize with your situation. I  won’t take back what I said earlier though, which is that the same thing happens to women and children.

        2. DeeGee

          KK said: “You got screwed.

          This is the standard divorce settlement laws in Canada.
          This is what every man faces in Canada.  Welcome to the socialist gynocentric society.

          A wife is entitled to live at the same level of comfort that she is used to in the marriage.  Therefor if she works part-time she is entitled to alimony so that her income totals what essentially half of the married income is.

          She is entitled to half of the house and half of the vehicle and other belongings.  If there is children she gets the ENTIRE house and vehicle and belongings.  Plus child support.

          She is entitled to half of his retirement income.

          That is the law in Canada.

          I got screwed mostly because I already owned the house and car and furniture etc.  She came into the marriage with nothing but some clothes and personal items.  But she left with half of everything.  A great deal for her.

          The laws were changed in Canada sometime thereafter, because women were doing to this to men after being married for only a couple of months.  Then on the next guy to get half of his stuff too.  The laws were changed so that the couple has to be married for longer than (I believe it is) 3 years before she gets half of everything.

        3. Tom10

          @ DeeGee
          “This is the standard divorce settlement laws in Canada.
          This is what every man faces in Canada…
          She is entitled to half of the house and half of the vehicle and other belongings…She came into the marriage with nothing but some clothes and personal items.  But she left with half of everything.  A great deal for her.
           
          I know it’s a bit late now, DeeGee, but I just have to ask, why exactly did you marry a woman who brought nothing (financially/asset-wise) to the marriage, considering the laws you complain of were in place prior to marrying her?

        4. stacy2

          What happened to you is completely atrocious. Personally i think no adult should be required to support another adult. I think that complete abolition of alimony, regardless of the situation would do us a lot of good.

          However i gotta point out that this is a moneyed/non-moneyed spouse issue, not male/female. I was a higher earner in my marriage and would have been on the hook for alimony which would have been completely crushing (where i live its formulaic) if it wasn’t for one lucky caveat in my case. Still i had to pay thousands for his medical expenses. Marriage laws here are the worst.

        5. DeeGee

          Tom10 said: “why exactly did you marry a woman who brought nothing (financially/asset-wise) to the marriage, considering the laws you complain of were in place prior to marrying her?

          I’m naive?
          I doubt that most people get married assuming that they will get a divorce.
          I also come from a more traditional background where the wife stays at home and the husband works.
          Also, I found out too late that she was a masterful manipulator and liar.  She had me fooled for the two years that we were dating.  It wasn’t until after married that I found out what she was really like.  Deception can hit you hard.

        6. DeeGee

          stacy2 said: “However i gotta point out that this is a moneyed/non-moneyed spouse issue, not male/female.

          I agree (mostly).
          I don’t think it is necessarily a gender thing, although the laws tend to still be biased towards women.

          Also, I can’t speak for every country, but here in Canada, and especially 20+ years ago, per capita, men typically had higher income, and women typically were assigned the children after a divorce.
          The end result of this was that the men paid alimony and child support and the house mortgage (even though he could no longer live there), and the women got the house and car and kids.

          My observations are that this still remains typical true.
          Only in rare cases where the woman is a high-end high earner do we see the opposite occurring.  In most cases where women are higher earners they usually just split whatever assets were accumulated during the relationship and go their separate ways.  This is most likely because a man who doesn’t support himself is ridiculed and classified as a bum.

      3. 19.1.3
        misty

        Is it not possible to be in the hands of an incompetent physician, lawyer, truck driver who is a white man?
        This is the problem with that line of thinking KK.

        1. KK

          Misty,

          Please show me / quote me wherever I said that. You can’t because I didn’t say that. So please tell me again what is wrong with my line of thinking? You mean where I’ve repeatedly said that opportunities should be available to everyone? Or when I said that employment and education should be merit based? Not based on affirmative action or gender equality; which often times means ‘in favor of women’. So, the problem with my line of thinking is that the fairest system and standards should be in place? And if a white male is the most qualified for the job, he should have it? Are you saying that if the white male is most qualified, he shouldn’t get it? Please explain that line of thinking. Please tell me how that isn’t straight out of the ‘I hate men handbook’. Please explain how this is fair. How this isn’t a double standard?? It isn’t rocket science really. Whoever is best gets rewarded.

        2. Misty

          “We should right the wrongs? I hope that comforts you when your life is in the hands of an incompetent physician or lawyer or unqualified truck driver going down the same roads as you.”

          Thats what it sounds like when you make statements like that. You didn’t mean it that way but that’s how it sounds.

          Ues you’ve said employment should be merit based and id guess most people would agree with you. But if an employer can’t see merit in a qualified candidate because of assumptions they’re making based on that candidates gender or race, that’s a problem. Why on earth would you think I am saying that white men should not get a job their qualified for? These two are not mutually exclusive.

          i see that you still want to insist that I hate men which could not be further from the truth. Or more accurately I hate white men (someone should have told my white husband and perhaps should warn my white boyfriend). The man hater insult is getting old and so is this exchange.

  19. 20
    McLovin

    Ahhhh, I love these threads, Evan. Shows just how charmed of an existence Western women live, yet they still find plenty to complain about.

    I want an egalitarian relationship, now pay for my dinner!

    Feminism: Choices for women, obligations for men.

    1. 20.1
      Chance

      Dude, it’s incredible.  All through these comments, there are different takes on things from different women, but there is one constant:  they all only care about what is best for them without regard for fairness.  I just can’t figure out how much is due to innate solipsism or societal conditioning.

      1. 20.1.1
        misty

        “innate solipsism” Someone’s been on red pill reddit.

         

        1. Chance

          Point?

        2. misty

          Point – it’s a broken record we’ve heard a billion times before. The manosphere and it’s followers are not know for originality. Just saying.

        3. Chance

          Ah, I understand now.  I thought you were making a relevant point about the topic, but you weren’t.

      2. 20.1.2
        McLovin

        Direct quote from Stacy2 above:

        “Actually yes, I prefer equality and would rather be in an egitarian relationship. But i still need men to do the “courting” even if that’s symbolic such as asking out, planning dates, being a gentlemen.”

        I mean, what!?!?! I had to work it out in my mind. Is she trolling? Is she serious? How can those 2 sentences exist in that juxtaposition?

        It’s mind boggling.

        1. misty

          You missed the first part of this conversation.

          Consensus was 1) no one is talking courting in the traditional sense where the man does everything up to the wedding day, 2) no one is saying women never plan dates or pay, the focus was on first 1-3 dates.

          Now assuming, you are at the same starting point as every one else….

          Are you suggesting that in an egalitarian relationship, a man can’t be a gentleman, ask a woman out, plan dates? If a woman wants to date, sleep with and marry someone who views her as an equal human being, that means she must do all of the heavy lifting??

           

           

        2. DeeGee

          McLovin said: “How can those 2 sentences exist in that juxtaposition?

          It’s really easy actually.

          Women want to be equal with men.
          It’s just that their idea of equal is that they are more equal.

        3. Tom10

          @ McLovin
          “Actually yes, I prefer equality and would rather be in an egalitarian relationship. But i still need men to do the “courting” even if that’s symbolic such as asking out, planning dates, being a gentlemen.”
           
          Actually that’s a good point McLovin, I’d be interested in how Stacy2 rationalizes those two (seemingly contradictory) statements.
           
          In general I don’t have a problem with her comments on feminism/equal opportunity etc., but that one left my scratching my head as well.
           
          Well Stacy2…?
           
          “I want an egalitarian relationship, now pay for my dinner!”
           
          Lol, I burst out laughing when I read this.

      3. 20.1.3
        Karmic Equation

        I would say societal conditioning.

        Men still rule the world. And almost all the time, men are applying the rules

        How many men are in Congress? How many are governors of states? How many are CEOs of corporations? How many are Supreme Court Justices. Are there any religions where women are the ombudsman? (Other than Wicca, which is demonized?) What is the percentage of women to men in those positions? Still far from less than half in ALL of them.

        Men run society, religion, and culture.

        Until women are in the position to run cultures, religion, and societies, I don’t really see why men require women to give up the few places where women have more (or better) rights than men, such as family court.

        In general, men have more power and rights in everything except family courts, and the initial stages of dating/mating.

        While most men on this board may be stand up citizens who would live up to their responsibilities even if there were no laws to govern their behavior (e.g., help support their WANTED children, never mind the unwanted ones) — MOST men would not live up to those obligations unless required to do so by law.

        So until men COLLECTIVELY behave ethically when relationships fail, particularly when children are involved, the laws need to stay on the books to protect women who would otherwise have no protection.

        1. McLovin

          KE,

          Whenever this line of reasoning is pursued in response to Chance and I’s conversation, what is conveniently ignored is that men also almost exclusively occupy the LOWEST positions in society as well. Oddly enough, women are not clamoring to be allowed into coal mines, or dangerous industrial jobs. Men comprise 97% of workplace deaths and injuries. Men are 75%+ of the homeless.

          The sob story just doesn’t resonate, sorry.

        2. Karmic Equation

          Sorry McLovin.

          Blame God for that.

          In most species, nature designed the males to be more expendable than the females. Hence the males do the dangerous jobs.

          -Thousands of drones protect the queen bee. Because she’s the only one who can give birth to more baby bees.

          -Black widow spiders and Praying Mantises. Females ingest the males. To feed the pregnancy (I presume).

          -Most spontaneous abortions are of the male fetus

          Women didn’t make the rules. God/Mother Nature, whatever, designed that.

          Take it up with Him/Her.

          While you’re at it why don’t you ask Him/Her to make males less beholden to their hormones so that they would rather have LTRs than casual sex.

          Go on.

           

        3. Stacy2

          Women do not have more rights in family court, are you kidding, me? Have you ever been to a family court? Please stop perpetuating this myth. And by the way, divorces are NOT handled by family courts, they are handled by state supreme courts. Only some issues are handled by the FC.  The court is primarily concerned with income redistribution from the higher earning spouse to a lower earning spouse regardless of their gender.

           

        4. Nissa

          I agree with KE – biology is to blame. After all, most of women’s wage inequality comes from the time taken off to bear and care for children. Because of oxytocin, we get bonded into baby making traps. Only since birth control became more (though still far from universally) available has a woman had a more fair chance to gain the education, experience and position that would enable her to stand on equal ground.

          And in California, alimony is paid to both men and women, depending on who was the higher wage earner. Retirement funds from both are factored into divorce proceedings. Alimony is based on a formula via a software program, is not automatic / must be requested, and typically exists only for half the life of the marriage. Since few marriages are “long term” or over 10 years in duration, MOST alimony is not for life but only to the point of ‘returning that person to the point at which they existed prior to the marriage’. Also, divorce occurs in the Superior court, not the Supreme court.

        5. DeeGee

          Karmic Equation said: “Blame God for that.  In most species, nature designed the males to be more expendable than the females. Hence the males do the dangerous jobs.  Thousands of drones protect the queen bee. Because she’s the only one who can give birth to more baby bees.

          Sorry, but this is one of the worst replies I’ve seen you post.
          Males are expendable?  That is totally feminazi.

          So because it occurs in a species in nature, that makes it the proper direction for humans?  Tigers eat their young, should humans too?

          Do you believe that humans should be like spiders where the females eat the males when they are done with them?
          Unfortunately, it seems that many of the laws and feminism would agree with you on this, at least symbolically and financially.  Is this the secret to a long-lasting relationship (for women)?

          Why aren’t you using other species for your examples, such as those species like eagles and owls and beavers who have a single mate for their entire life.  Or those species who share raising and feeding their young.  Or for example the male Sea Horse, he is the one with the egg pouch and who raises the young, not the female.

          But I guess those examples don’t fit with the feminist agenda.

        6. DeeGee

          Karmic Equation said: “Men still rule the world.

          This is simply not true.
          Sure, most presidents and rulers may be men, but behind them will be a nagging wife telling him how to vote and what laws to bring in.  Why else do you think pretty much everything that has been invented or done has been for the benefit of women.

          Karmic Equation said: “In general, men have more power and rights in everything

          Again, completely false.
          Name me one right in the USA that men have that women don’t.
          I can name you at least 5 rights that women have that men don’t.  In fact there are YouTube videos BY WOMEN even covering these rights that women have that men don’t.

        7. Chance

          KE, you really are better than this.

           

          “How many men are in Congress? How many are governors of states? How many are CEOs of corporations? How many are Supreme Court Justices. Are there any religions where women are the ombudsman?”

           

          Can’t speak for religion (and I don’t know how much power religion has in our society anyways), but you – as a woman – have equal access to all of those posts that you mention above.  Women typically value work/life balance so it naturally works out that most of these posts are held by men.  If you have actual evidence that women are discriminated against, which has caused this one-sided representation, I am all ears.

           

          “Until women are in the position to run cultures, religion, and societies, I don’t really see why men require women to give up the few places where women have more (or better) rights than men, such as family court.”

           

          They are in a position to do these things.  Can you name a right that men have, which women do not have?  There are rights that men don’t have, which women have.

           

          “While most men on this board may be stand up citizens who would live up to their responsibilities even if there were no laws to govern their behavior (e.g., help support their WANTED children, never mind the unwanted ones) — MOST men would not live up to those obligations unless required to do so by law.”

           

          Where is your evidence that “most” men would not live up to those obligations unless required to do so by law?

           

          “So until men COLLECTIVELY behave ethically when relationships fail, particularly when children are involved, the laws need to stay on the books to protect women who would otherwise have no protection.”

           

          Again, where is your evidence?  How do you know that men collectively behave any worse than women when relationships fail?  Your entire argument appears to be based on the false premises that men have more rights than women and that most men are bad fathers when relationships fail.  Please provide evidence.

        8. DeeGee

          Nissa said: “women’s wage inequality

          There is no wage inequality, and I wish women would quite using that false statement.

          The so-called “wage inequality” argument is based on a flawed study that compared total wages across all work sectors (the median annual earnings compared across ALL jobs), and since men will also take high-risk high-pay jobs, while women tend to take supportive jobs like nursing and home care, the average wage across the genders shows as less for women.
          Men are also more likely to ask for raises etc.
          But for the exact same job men are effectively not paid more money.
          Google it if you don’t believe me.  There are also hundreds of YouTube videos on this subject that give the proof refuting it.

          I can also prove it with this one example:
          Corporations are totally profit based.  If I as the CEO of BigCorp can hire women to do the exact same job, but pay them 21.4% less money (which is a figure that many put forward as the “pay gap” which as I stated is based on flawed data since it is across all work sectors and not an equal job-to-job comparison), then I would get the same work completed and make ~22% more profit.
          This is not happening in corporate America?  Gee, why not?  Because the “pay gap” is a fallacy based on a flawed comparison.

  20. 21
    MJ

    Long time lurker on your site and wanted to chime in. I challenged myself to write to at least on man a day on match when I joined 3 months ago, and now my subscription is running out but I no longer need it. I met a great guy within the first couple of weeks (dated a few duds first), but luckily for both of us I wrote him a joking email regarding something in his profile and that got the conversation going. I would never have heard from him otherwise as he can be a bit shy. Your blog really helped me to just relax and enjoy the interactions on Match and it worked!

  21. 22
    stacy2

    @McLovin

    “How can those 2 sentences exist in that juxtaposition”

    You mean, how can a self-supporting woman want some romance in her life? Mind boggling indeed.  Rolling my eyes.

    1. 22.1
      McLovin

      Exactly, you and KE want the same thing….equality with none of the downsides or responsibility, along with special treatment.

      I’ll pass. And an ever-growing number of men feel the same. After all, that’s why you are all here in the first place.

      1. 22.1.1
        Stacy2

        You’ll pass? oh my god that is hilarious on so many levels. Do you really, really think that you’re what women like me want? 

        And i am sorry, responsibility for what? I am fully responsible for myself and some other people too, thank you very much.

        Aside from that. I want to make sure that I get this straight. So, if a woman was broke, had no real job or skills and wanted to be a SAHW, you would agree to romance her, but if a woman was educated, self-supporting and had a good paying job, you’d pass? Or expect her to court you?

        So, then, how do you complain about alimony? This would be such an appropriate punishment for such a …ughm… incoherent position.

        Dating is nothing more than role playing. Its a game. Just because we all have jobs and i can earn same income doesn’t mean that the guy i am dating can’t send me flowers or open the door for me. Your “oh, you wanted to make money? so screw you i am not asking you out! You ask me out now!” is basically a sign of a huge chip on your shoulder (feeling insecure? can’t stand being challenged by women academically or professionally?) and soooo unattractive. I bet that most women that are worth anything pass on you, dude.

        1. misty

          “Do you really, really think that you’re what women like me want? “

          LOL! Or any woman.

          You hit the nail on the head with the competition thing. That’s the biggest issue right there.

          If you can figure this one out…

          SAHMs = lazy, do nothing because raising kids and caring for a home is easy and “not a job,” live off their man, expect lifetime alimony when they divorce

          Working women = feminazi ball crushing bitches who though they may be able to support themsleves thus not put all the pressure to bring in income on you and won’t be entitled to half your stuff in a divorce, are unsuitable wives

          So…they just hate women, no matter what we do.

           

           

           

        2. McLovin

          No Stacy, I’d pass on any woman who exhibits the level.of entitlement that is on display in your comments.

        3. Chance

          Misty said:  “You hit the nail on the head with the competition thing. That’s the biggest issue right there.”

           

          Couldn’t be further from the truth.  I, and many men I know, thing it is fantastic when a woman is successful regardless of whether she is more successful than me or not.  No one is afraid of the competition.

      2. 22.1.2
        Misty

        And why are you here … If you’ve gone your own way, why do spend time a blog for women??

  22. 23
    Stacy2

    @ Tom:

    “I want an egalitarian relationship, now pay for my dinner!”

    McLovin said that, not me. So, I guess the two of you can have a discussion of this imaginary position that you invented.

    1. 23.1
      Tom10

      @ Stacy2
      I realize that McLovin said that, not you, but it still made me laugh nonetheless: it did summarize the gut reaction of many guys when we try to understand women wanting some parts of equality, but not all parts.
       
      In fairness Stacy2, I didn’t mean to take a shot at you, and I think most of your comments on this thread are reasonable and balanced. But when you argue so passionately and eloquently for the rights of fairness and equal opportunity in all aspects of women’s lives (something I agree with you 100% on) except…when it comes to dating, it does make every guy think: “well, that’s very convenient isn’t it,”.
       
      For what it’s worth I don’t think that the dating game can ever fall entirely within the remit of absolute equality due to inherent biological gender differences, but isn’t discussing these themes what makes this blog so interesting!
       
      Furthermore, as a dating tactic, I actually agree that for women, it’s in their interest to observe the effort guys make (i.e. courting) as it is a useful metric to gauge the interest of the particular guy concerned.

      1. 23.1.1
        McLovin

        “it’s in their interest to observe the effort guys make”

        Absolutely, Tom. I think this is what rubbed me the wrong way about Stacy2’s comment. She called men’s courting effort “symbolic.”

        Symbolic? Excuse me?

        How.many women have you heard say that their relationships “just happened?” Uhhhh, no they didn’t. That man noticed you, spent some time thinking about how he might approach you in an engaging manner, figured out how to place himself in your path at an opportune time, and while potentially knowing only scant details about you, proposed a meeting that he thought you would find enjoyable.

        Just happened? “Symbolic?” Give us a break, ladies.

        That took some thinking and planning. And the majority of times for us guys, that effort will be REJECTED.

        Gee, thanks for the recognition of my “symbolic” effort to even have you wave your hand and accept me as a potential suitor.

        Absolutely zero appreciation.

      2. 23.1.2
        GoWithThe Flow

        Tom10,

        Okay, reading this thread makes me want to both laugh and cry, so I hesitate to comment, but here I go. . . some points that came to mind while laughing/crying:

        Evan has written in a previous post that a study/studies have shown that women spend just as more or more money on preparing for a date than men do on paying for the activity portion of the date.  It’s common for women to get hair hair and nails done and buy a new outfit and makeup for a date.  When that is taken into consideration, men and women have equivalent amounts of money invested in the dating process.

        As for your thoughts on the statement “I want an egalitarian relationship, now pay for my dinner!” that “it did summarize the gut reaction of many guys when we try to understand women wanting some parts of equality, but not all parts,”  I would propose that women are playing a very traditional female social role when they spend time and money getting all pretty-ed up for a date.  So a man paying for the activity portion of the date playing a reciprocal traditional male role.

        So if we go all out egalitarian with dating, women will take on paying for half of the cost of the activity portion of dates, but we get to drop the whole feminine routine of shaving legs and armpits, styling hair, painting nails, makeup application, and wearing dresses and high heels.

        Just another way of looking at it!

        1. KK

          Good point, Gowiththeflow

        2. Evan Marc Katz

          I’ve been intentionally staying away from this, however, I’m pretty sure this wasn’t me: “Evan has written in a previous post that a study/studies have shown that women spend just as more or more money on preparing for a date than men do on paying for the activity portion of the date.”

          Women don’t need new clothes, nails, hair, shoes for EVERY date; as such, it’s a silly claim designed to suggest that women spend as much at dating.

          Here’s an easier way to look at it: pay for every online dating date with a man. Every stranger. Every coffee. Every creep. Every glass of wine. With every single person you meet. That goes on your credit card bill – regardless of whether you like him or want to see him again. Now make the argument that it’s a fair arrangement. Sorry, but it can’t be done.

          I believe that male courtship is EFFECTIVE and I endorse it; but it’s certainly not FAIR.

        3. Christine

          I know of one woman who really did what you propose!  A male friend of mine couldn’t believe it when a woman showed up to their first date with no makeup on, her hair in a messy ponytail, and sweat pants.   She paid for half the meal, but he didn’t seem all that thankful about it.

          Well, maybe it would be all out egalitarian to split activity portions with metrosexual men, who invest as much as women in their beauty routines.  For instance, my friend’s boyfriend wears foundation, gets regular facials and hair treatments.  I’ve seen for myself that he has as many face and hair products as she does (and, unfortunately, takes as much time as her to get ready–it takes us forever to go anywhere!)

          For the most part, though, I think women generally still invest more in their appearance (I seriously wonder where he gets that foundation.  Most of those products are geared towards women)

           

           

        4. KK

          I hadn’t thought of it like that, Evan. Excellent point. We enjoy and learn different prospectives from your comments on here. Thank you.

        5. Christine

          Well, I admit I didn’t buy new outfits and makeup for every date–those makeup products usually lasted long enough to carry me through a few dates (as was the case with those outfits).  But I did always make a salon trip before each date to always have nice hair (my hair is naturally coarse/frizzy and professional styling does make a huge difference).

           

        6. DeeGee

          Evan Marc Katz said: “I’ve been intentionally staying away from this

          You are a wise man.
          I think next time I will do likewise…

        7. ScottH

          I’ve read that comment before but it was from another commenter, not Evan.  And it seemed a bit far-fetched to me.  Why would you need to buy new clothes and makeup unless you’re looking for an excuse to do so.  The person you’re meeting has never seen your clothes before and you likely had makeup on anyway.

        8. Chance

          How does it work if a guy is on a date with a woman who isn’t fashionable?

           

          “You don’t look like you spend a lot of money on clothes and makeup so do you mind if we go Dutch?”

        9. GoWithTheFlow

          ScottH,

          I am currently reading Have Him at Hello by Rachel Greenwald.  She is a dating coach who, in an effort to get useful feedback for her clients, started doing “exit interviews” of men who went out on first dates but never sought out a 2nd.  I believe she has a database of over 1,000 of these interviews.

          Based on what she learned, Greenwald says that how women dress for work can lead them to look unfeminine in the context of a date situation.  (Whereas a lot of the time a man can go straight to his date in his work clothes and still be considered appropriately and attractively dresses.).

          Because of the importance of clothes, Greenwald does a wardrobe review of all of her clients and many require new clothing purchases.  Most women have separate clothes for work and dating.  What works for the job doesn’t work for a date and vice versa.  Lucky for me I immediately change into scrubs at work so I’m spared a work wardrobe expense.  I do have a female colleague who would wear date type clothes into work, and even though she was going straight to the locker room to change, she still received criticism that she was dressing inappropriately fir work.

          Does every specific date require a whole new outfit?  No, but there is a big clothing expense when a woman shifts into the dating market, and it goes away when she is off the market.  sometimes specific dates do require specific clothing purchases.  Also keep in mind that what is considered fashionable changes much more rapidly for men and women.  If I was invited to a semi-formal event, I would look dated if I wore the dress I had on the last time I attended such an event a few years ago.  But my date could probably wear a suit that was equally old and he would look just fine.

          Probably the most common thing a woman spends money on before a big date is a trip to the salon for a hair cut and style.  That alone can run $60-120.  Nails can add another $20 on up.

          Appearance/presentation expectations are higher for women than they are for men.  That’s the main reason why it costs more to raise a daughter than a son!

        10. GoWithTheFlow

          Chance,

          “You don’t look like you spend a lot of money on clothes and makeup so do you mind if we go Dutch?”

          LOL!!!

          And I suppose if a woman dressed to the hilt is taken to a roadside hot dog stand she can say “Really?  You think THIS (hand sweep gesture from head to feet and back) just happens?”

        11. Joe

          That’s a bogus argument.  You don’t need to buy new clothes for dates, unless your existing clothes are horribly out of style.  You’re buying new clothes because you want to buy new clothes and just need an excuse, as mentioned earlier.  On the first date the bloke hasn’t seen any of your clothes before, unless you wore them in your OLD profile pics.  Odds are you’re not wearing an out of style evening dress to a first date.

          Wouldn’t you be eventually getting your hair cut and styled at some point, anyway?  How much makeup would you buy ordinarily, and how long does it last you?  Less than a week?

          I think the point about women not being able to roll out of work in their work clothes, the same way men can, is valid though.

      3. 23.1.3
        Adrian

        GoWithTheFlow,

        Hi, haven’t seen on here in awhile, how is “our” plan for you to be the first doctor to ever transplant talent from one bad actor to another? Start with Matthew McConaughey… Please! (^_^)

        …   …   …

        I don’t buy new outfits for every date, but I do buy new cloths for dates, spend money on haircuts, and cologne, and general hygiene products, in addition to paying for the dates, and the time spent planning the dates.

         

        To me, that is the hardest part, not the money spent, but all the pressure of making the first date fun for a stranger whom you barely know, and whom you don’t know what they will consider fun, or what they may consider boring, or offended by, or if there is a food, restaurant, or activity they hate. And all the while, wondering, is she attracted me.

         

        But I am curious, what is your opinion on people who show up for first dates in casual everyday clothes? I’m not saying that you have to dress to the 9s, but every time I show up for a first date, I dress to impress; yet I always have had women show up in jeans and a T-shirt.

         

        I always took it as she wasn’t really into the date or me, so I usually never ask them out for a second date. They are always shocked by this, I tell them why I thought she wasn’t excited by the date and by default me, and then they always say some variation of: “they shouldn’t have to dress up for a man, I should like them for who they are on the inside, not just their looks.” So I never say anything after that for fear of being perceived as a misogynist.

         

        I’m a millennial, do you believe this is a generational thing, or do you think their is a correlation between how you dress for a person on the first dates and how attracted to them you are? Their actions and their words are confusing me.

        …   …   …

        Oh and get to work on Colin Farrell too! I’m already planning my retirement from your hard work and innovation… because we’re a team. (^_^)

        1. Joe

          How are you supposed to like them for who they are on the inside when you don’t know who they are on the inside?  It’s a freakin’ first date!

  23. 24
    McLovin

    I guess my last comment was too edgy and Evan saw fit to delete it. My apologies.

    However, turnabout is fair play in this instance, KE.

    Blame nature for the position women are in then, too.

  24. 25
    Misty

    There’s a little too much MGTOW bitching going on here. Peace Out

    1. 25.1
      McLovin

      You do realize, misty, that sounds a lot like a statement an MGTOW would make, don’t you?

      “This situation doesn’t cater 100% to my needs, so I’m taking my ball and going home.”

      Irony at its finest.

      1. 25.1.1
        misty

        Irony is declaring to the world you’re a man going your own way without women yet constantly finding your way to places where women gather (like this blog) to complain about women.

        And you know very well that any woman who shows up on manosphere blogs gets promptly insulted, shown the door and banned.

        Try harder.

        1. McLovin

          Hey misty,

          You are placing the mgtow label on me. I’m not even sure why I’m responding because it’s clear you have a chip on your shoulder the size of Idaho.

          For the record, I am in the 95th percentile for partner count. I don’t say that as any sort of humblebrag, but rather because it seems that since I’m calling you out on your a-la-carte equality, you need to place me in the bitter permavirgin category.

          I don’t know how Evan does this day in and day out. I mean, look at the pushback he’s getting at the mere suggestion that women should send an anonymous freaking email to the men they might be interested in.

          Good lord.

          I’ll pose to you the same challenge as I did Stacy2. Why don’t you enlighten us all as to when, exactly, you would like equality and when you would like chivalry. I ask this only so that I may make my dating strategy more effective. Please use specific examples.

          I suspect, however, that neither you nor Stacy will do so, because it would paint you in a rather unflattering light.

          For instance: “in a meeting at the office, I want absolute equality. But when I get pulled over for a speeding ticket, I’d like to get teary eyed and then receive chivalry. When it’s time to go on a date, I want chivalry. But when it’s time to do the laundry and the dishes, I want equality.”

          I mean, I’m trying hard to not be cynical here. It is obviously coincidence that the gender role that women seem to want at any given time seems to directly benefit her in that particular situation.

          I know I’m wrong on that so I’m hoping that you and Stacy will set me straight.

        2. Misty

          “I am in the 95th percentile for partner count.”

          Now THAT made me laugh out loud.

          I saw a whopping total of one comment here from a woman who pushed back “at the mere suggestion that women should send an anonymous freaking email to the men they might be interested in.” I saw lots of comments in support of it and some even indicating it paid off for them in a great date or relationship. You know, the whole point of this post.

          You’d know that if you actually took the time to read the previous comments instead of blowing in here, pounding your chest and jumping all over people without understanding the context.

          where there disagreement has been is about who does the asking and paying on the first few dates. And what women here have said is that when they did that, men interpreted it negatively and disengaged. So perhaps you might want to talk to your fellow brothers about this lack of equality that has you in a tizz.

          no i do not mind splitting costs in a relationship. No I don’t mind paying for drinks or splitting the check while dating if he’s ok with it. But if he’s walking around with a mental spreadsheet tracking who paid for what, he’s not the one for me. If he sees it as transactional, he’s not for me.

          As for chivalry, don’t confuse politeness with chivalry. holding a door for someone, male or female,is not chivalry, it’s politeness. No I don’t need chivalry. I do need politeness.

          “I ask this only so that I may make my dating strategy more effective.”

          I think guys like you are just better off not throwing your hat in the ring. Keep focusing on upping your partner count and save dating and relationships for the adults.

      2. 25.1.2
        misty

        edit: Irony is declaring to the world you’re a man going your own way without women yet constantly finding your way to places where women gather (like this blog) to complain about women.

        But at least you admit MGTOWs are whiny toddlers who pout and stomp home with their toys.

  25. 26
    Stacy2

    I find this MGTOW stuff both juvenile and funny. I gotta wonder though. Men, ughm, who want to apply “equality” literally to all spheres of life including dating/romance, and want to be courted. asked out and for women to pay for them (?) i am presuming, do they also want to then take turns in the bedroom being a “woman”, ughm-ughm? Or do they draw the line at who pays for dinner, and after that they want to be 100% male? Hilarious..

    1. 26.1
      McLovin

      Why don’t you tell us where you’d like the line drawn? Clearly we’re not getting it. When, exactly, would you like equality and when would you like special treatment?

      I understand the need to place me in the mgtow box, though I don’t identify with them, it certainly resolves a lot of cognitive dissonance for you.

      Evan has seen a lot of my comments here and I’m trying my best to be respectful and not inflammatory here, but I’m genuinely curious.

      Also, declaring that no woman would want me because I’m calling you out on your selective gender roles seems pretty juvenile.

      Is this how strong, independent, successful women act?

      Seriously.

      1. 26.1.1
        Sracy2

        I think i stated it pretty clearly actually. In my experience the absolute majority of men get it (or at least the ones I’ve dated). Just because I have a career doesn’t mean that i want to play a role of a man in a relationship. What can possibly be so confusing about it? May be you’re just in general are confused about what male role constitutes?

        When I am with my man, i act like a lady and i expect him to act as a gentleman. I will let him take the lead in most of what we do as a couple and will reciprocate by being warm and supportive and make him feel good about himself. Once in a relationship we will each pay our half (this is what egalitarian relationship means FYI).

        Equal rights before the law don’t mean identical roles in relationships, no matter how much you want to twist it.

      2. 26.1.2
        misty

        McLovin, for a guy who insists you’d never date a woman like Stacy, you are awfully preoccupied with picking apart her dating preferences. Wonder why that is.

         

    2. 26.2
      Shaukat

      “do they also want to then take turns in the bedroom being a “woman”, ughm-ughm? Or do they draw the line at who pays for dinner, and after that they want to be 100% male? Hilarious..”

      It’s not clear what you mean by this, but if you’re suggesting that men who state that the courting process is unfair should show their commitment to equality by submitting to penetration during sex, then you’re drawing a meaningless comparison based on two completely different processes. Courting is a socially constructed tradition that lacks a natural foundation, whereas the male/female sexual dynamic is rooted in biology and evolution. If you’re trying to highlight male double standards, you need to find a better example/hypothetical.

      1. 26.2.1
        Stacy2

        Oh that’s wonderful. So civil liberties and dating are the same, but dating and sex are “different processes” all of a sudden? So, you want to be completely equal and gender neutral in absolutely everything up and until the point that you enter the bedroom? Kinda of hypocritical of you, no?

        “male/female sexual dynamic is rooted in biology and evolution. ”

        Oh you better think twice before making statements like these. What are you saying, same-sex relationships are “hypothetical” because they are not “rooted in biology”? Are you anti-gay? I would give you the benefit of the doubt here.

        You understood exactly what i was saying and yes. If you are accusing your opponents of being hypocrites for not extending “equality” into dating, you can not pick another arbitrary line to which to take “equality”. No, you have to take it all the way. Or else you’re also a hypocrite.

        1. Shaukat

          @Stacy2

          To answer your inflammatory accusation, No, I am not at all anti-gay, and yes, homosexuality is rooted in biology and the evolutionary process, as most scientists will tell you.

          You seem to be using the term equality in a manner that’s quite different from how it’s normally employed. When I say equality, I mean it to be roughly synonymous with fairness, you seem to think it means eliminating difference entirely. By my definition, it does make sense to compare courting with other political/social customs and practices, but not to sex, since the latter is an instinctual process largely divorced from political factors. If you drop two male and femal toddlers on a remote island and then return in twenty years, both will have figured out how to have sex if they chose to do so. However, if you then tell them, “Now start courting,” both would scratch their heads and look at you in confusion.

           

           

           

           

      2. 26.2.2
        Stacy2

        @Shaukat

        you are simply wrong. “Courting” is every bit as rooted in biology as sex itsel. Just look at the animal world. Ever seen pigeon males all fluffed up dancing around females in the spring trying to convince them to build a nest together? Make bulls of elk and various other species fight during the mating season, etc. Courting is a very natural process. So yes, my argument stands, and sorry, you can’t have “equality” in datingg but not in sex.

         

        1. Chance

          This supports the argument that women who aren’t willing/able to have or raise children cannot expect to be courted.  Reproduction, not sex, is the more appropriate term.

        2. Stacy2

          “This supports the argument that women who aren’t willing/able to have or raise children cannot expect to be courted.  Reproduction, not sex, is the more appropriate term.”

          This can be a valid argument but only if you only going to have sex to reproduce, ie no contraception at all and if she’s knocked up you’re becoming a daddy! See, can’t have it both ways.

        3. Chance

          Courtship among humans in our society has been to show that a man can provide and protect, while the woman stays home to raise the children.  The logic is straightforward.  Yes, the purpose is to reproduce.  No logical case for courtship in any other situation (except adoption).

        4. Chance

          It’s about providing, not access to sex.  You’re not entitled to anything in exchange for sex unless you’re a prostitute.

        5. Shaukat

          That doesn’t cut it, Stacy. Courtship in the animal kingdom is inextricably tied to the mating process. In fact, it’s exclusively about mating. And when the female is in heat, the mating happens immediately, provided the male is healthy and is there. A female leopard or lioness in heat makes herself available right away.

          This has nothing to do with modern courtship. If you’re going to hold up animal courting as a model, then you would have to make yourself available for sex to the first willing, healthy male who courts you for one date. I can’t imagine any man would complain about modern courting under those circumstances.

        6. Stacy2

          @ Shaukat 

          “… If you’re going to hold up animal courting as a model…”

          Waaait a second. When did i try to do that?

          I merely used animal courting to demonstrate that courting as a behavior is biological, just like sex itself, unlike your belief to the contrary.

          No, of course i am not going to hold up animal courtship model as a model, especially since there’s no general model across all species. There are different models and we, humans, as a specie have our own. And our model historically is based on our own reproduction system if you will, namely that human females are never “in heat”. Unlike some mammals that can only get pregnant during certain time (to naturally match warmer seasons, obviously), women can get pregnant all the time. So there’s never urgency to “make yourself available for mating”. Moreover, it takes much longer than one season to bring up our children, so proper partner selection is more important. Hence our “rituals” are different.  Did your high school science classes cover any of this material?

        7. Shaukat

          I realize this thread is exhausted, but I initially missed this comment, Stacy, and wanted to respond.

          First, my university, not high school, classes covered this material. For someone who apparently believes in rigid gender roles, you sure don’t mind arguing like an aggressive, confrontational alpha male:) Kidding. At any rate, your info, whether acquired in high school or college, is false:

          ” There are different models and we, humans, as a specie have our own. “

          And if you’re talking about the period during and after the hunter gatherer, or Pleistocene, period, then courting has always been regulated through custom, culture and tradition, not solely biology or nature. Prior to the hunter gatherer phase, or during its early period, human courtship would have resembled animal courtship, with males attempting to maximize their reproductive success by mating with as many fertile females as possible. In fact, some biologists have argued that male sexual aggression may have its roots in this early evolutionary process.

          Once civilizations and large agricultural communities formed, courtship was infused with different cultural and political practices. The best evidence for this is that the meaning of courtship differs even in the modern period across cultures. For example, arranged marriages don’t take place in West, but is the custom in much of the world.

          So once gain, your analogy comparing courtship to sex is, I’m afraid, simply false.

  26. 27
    McLovin

    Does it make me a bitter misogynist loser because I, along with other men here, are casually noting that women seem to want equality when it benefits them, and chivalry when THAT benefits them?

    ————————————————————————

    Each morning I get up I cry a little,

    Can’t barely stand on my feet,

    Take a look in the mirror and cry,

    Lord what ya doin’ to me?

    I spent all my years believing in you,

    But I just can’t get no relief, Lord.

    Somebody, ooh somebody,

    Can anybody find me,

    Somebody to love?

    ~Freddie Mercury

    1. 27.1
      Misty

      So McLovin are you telling us men don’t have double standards when it comes to dating and relationships?

      Men don’t enjoy the benefits of modern dating — casual/early/easy sex — but then shame and reject those women for nice inexperienced girls when they want to settle down?

      Men don’t slut shame women, marry the virgin and then act bewildered as to why their sex life is horrible?

  27. 28
    Stacy2

    McLovin

    “For instance: “in a meeting at the office, I want absolute equality. But when I get pulled over for a speeding ticket, I’d like to get teary eyed and then receive chivalry. When it’s time to go on a date, I want chivalry. But when it’s time to do the laundry and the dishes, I want equality.”

    I don’t mean to insult you, but have you ever tried to take an IQ test? How did you do on the odd one out types of problems? Kinda like this:

    pick an odd one out:

    1. Equality

    2. Discrimination

    3. Fairness

    4. Chivalry

    5. Tolerance

    ?

    May be if you understood that these belong to two different categories and that one person acting “chivalrous” towards the other doesn’t make them not equals, you wouldn’t have that problem and wouldn’t be posing retarded questions like the one quoted above ^^.  You may also want to educate yourself on the actual meaning of the word “chivalry”. You may be surprised.

     

    1. 28.1
      McLovin

      Wow. Just…..wow.

      The cause of your needing dating advice should be crystal clear to everyone by now.

      As a matter of fact, I have had an IQ test Stacy, it was good enough to get into MENSA. And while you’re insulting me, I also scored 90th percentile on college entrance exams…..in 7th grade.

      Again, I know you need to make me an idiot, because only an idiot wouldn’t see how awesome you are.

      This string of comments from Stacy and misty is, hands down, the most disgusting and offensive string of comments I’ve ever seen allowed onto this blog.

      Truth be told, a lot of the reason I come to this blog is to assuage my own guilt over the gauntlet I run women through. I feel bad about how easily they are gamed onto my program, so I come here to see the kind of astounding female entitlement that is only on display from behind the safety and relative anonymity of the internet.

      Mission accomplished.

      Thank you, Stacy and Misty.

      1. 28.1.1
        Misty

        bye Felipe

      2. 28.1.2
        Stacy2

        All those impressive credentials and you can’t use Google? Something is amiss here. lol.

        There’s plenty of damaged women out there who will sleep with just about anybody. I think a “red pill” guy and a chick who doesn’t know her self-worth make a perfect pair of two damaged individuals. Somebody has to write a study on this. Women who have standards, which you mistake for “entitlement” would snuff you out in a split second, Mesa and all.

        1. McLovin

          Your type is, without question, the easiest to game, Stacy.

          “I expect an egalitarian relationship, now court me!” is not having standards, it’s actually the definition of entitlement.

          I know exactly what’s going on beneath the thin veneer of “you go grrrrl” that you’re fronting.

          I’m running some online game right now that would make a clinically-diagnosed psychopath blush.

          I’ve detailed a few of my schemes here before, this one is really appalling. 50 shades-esque.

          Ciao.

        2. KK

          McLovin,

          You went off on Stacy and Misty because of their hypocritical stance on relationships, because in one breath they said they wanted an egalitarian relationship and in the next breath claim they want to be courted. I get it. But their biggest crime is either confusion about the terms they use or a sense of entitlement and cherry picking what benefits them in each situation without concern for the fairness of it all.

          Then you make a claim about your “game”. So it’s okay for you to be a cold hearted, calculated, deceptive user in your dealings with women but you’re going to call these women hypocrites??? What you’re doing is worse by far. You said, “I’m running some online game right now that would make a clinically-diagnosed psychopath blush”.

           

      3. 28.1.3
        KK

        I think we have to be careful when we use certain terms.

        wEgalitarian relationships are those in which partners equally share all benefits, burdens, and responsibilities.

        I think Stacy either misspoke or doesn’t know the definition. What I gathered from her comments is that she wants a more traditional relationship, but for whatever reason she labeled it egalitarian.

        If she stands by what she stated, (sorry Stacy) but the guys are right on this one.

        1. Stacy2

          “Egalitarian relationships are those in which partners equally share all benefits, burdens, and responsibilities”

          Of course.

          The main issue in any relationship when it comes to “benefits, burdens and responsibilities” is going to be financial. To me personally this means on the practical level that both have to work and cover their own costs and contribute equally to the joint costs. In other words, I don’t need to be subsidized but I will likewise not subsidize another person. Who does the dishes and the laundry and other chores does not personally concern me – housekeeper does it, problem solved. This in my mind is an egalitarian relationship.

          “Courtship” in my mind has nothing to do with money. It’s a role game played by two people. Just because in the real world our employers view us gender neutral (or try to anyway), doesn’t mean that in love we should view each other gender neutral. Equal doesn’t mean identical. There’s nothing hypocritical about it, and most dare I say normal men enjoy playing their role in a relationship and dating. For example, I always offer to split a bill (unless I know my date is just filly rich in which case just forget it), but no one ever took me up on it, like not once in my life (but of course once in a relationship, the costs are split..). The guys who are bitching about this order of things exist in some far corners of the internet and claim to run some “game” which I can surmise is fishing for damaged women with equally low self-esteem who would sleep with them. They shall have that.

           

           

           

        2. KK

          Stacy,

          Just so you know, I totally get where you’re coming from here. I’ve never (knowingly) encountered guys like these in real life. I’ve never had issues with men not wanting to court me.

          That said, I think where the confusion comes in is when you say you want to be courted and in an egalitarian relationship because those two things are in complete opposition. And yes, I read everything that you just wrote. Courtship is a traditional notion. So maybe you want a more traditional relationship from the get go (traditional courting) that eventually morphs into an egalitarian relationship after exclusivity?

          An egalitarian relationship from the get go would not include courting. It would be more like what you do when you’re out with your girlfriends. You plan and invite as often as they do. You meet up with each other or take turns driving, you split expenses or take turns.

          It wouldn’t include one person making romantic gestures or picking you up and taking you home, bringing you flowers or cards or poems and you accepting those things and not reciprocating.

      4. 28.1.4
        AAORK

        @McLovin – “Truth be told, a lot of the reason I come to this blog is to assuage my own guilt over the gauntlet I run women through. I feel bad about how easily they are gamed onto my program, so I come here to see the kind of astounding female entitlement that is only on display from behind the safety and relative anonymity of the internet.

        McLovin, you snatched that quote right out of my head. In the past, I too had felt guilt from so easily gaming women like Stacy and Misty who share such a persistent cognitive dissonance of the world around them (it is a damn warm blanket, apparently). Reading the comments here are great therapy for guys like us. I used to engage here much more (always with the intent to educate and inform) but realized that most here aren’t interested in solving problems, only complaining about them. And totally agree that the comments from these two women are the most disgusting/offensive I’ve seen here. BTW, congrats on the mission accomplished. I can relate. 🙂

         

         

        1. misty

          LOL. You and your lot are not gaming on us. Don’t flatter yourself. HAHAHAHAHA!

    2. 28.2
      Misty

      It reality chivalry had more to do with a code of honor and service to one’s family, clan and society than putting women on pedestal.

      but since red pill types don’t read much beyond women bashing blogs, no one is the wiser.

  28. 29
    Stacy2

    McLovin

    “Your type is, without question, the easiest to game, Stacy.”

    I doubt you have any idea what my type is, because you have probably never encountered my type in real life. Your only type are easy women who do not require any effort, work or commitment from your part. My type is sooo out of your league.

  29. 30
    Stacy2

    @KK

    I think you are majorly confused.

     

    Think about the different roles we play in our lives. I am an employee, a manager, a daughter, a girlfriend, a citizen, a customer, and simply a woman.

    As an employee i want my performance to be evaluated with no gender consideration.

    As  a daughter i want my parents to love me unconditionally regardless of my work performance evaluation.

    As a citizen i want equal protection under the law regardless of anything

    As a customer, i want the same treatment as anybody else who can afford the service.

    As a woman, i want to be pursued by men and not the other way around – that doesn’t mean that i want any “special treatment” vs these same men when we are both employees, customers or citizens, nor does it mean that i do not view myself as no “equal” to them.

    Because equal people can play different roles.  And there’s a particular role i want to play in romantic relationships, with equal men.
    An egalitarian relationship from the get go would not include courting. It would be more like what you do when you’re out with your girlfriends. You plan and invite as often as they do. You meet up with each other or take turns driving, you split expenses or take turns.
    It wouldn’t include one person making romantic gestures or picking you up and taking you home, bringing you flowers or cards or poems and you accepting those things and not reciprocating.”
    Well, define the “get go” please.

    Lets break it down to phases. Dating -> Relationship.

    When i am dating a man, i am not in a relationship with him yet, not in any relationship egalitarian or otherwise. I am not exclusive with him, i am not sleeping with him, i am not asking him out. When i am dating a man, i am figuring out whether I want to be in a relationship with him, and he is figuring out the same thing about me. At this stage I would never pursue a man, i would from time to time suggest activities but only if he is actively pursuing me and it sort of progressing. I would pay for some things but not in an aggressive way. More like “you get dinner i get movie tickets” kind of thing. In my experience, most men would be turned off by an aggressive offer to pay. They need room to feel like, you know, men. So I give it to them.

    Assuming dating went well, we may enter into a relationship, and that relationship, in my case will be egalitarian from the get go, because such would be our mutual preference, hopefully. A this stage – of course i would call as often as they do, and suggest doing things, and pay my half (unless again income is super heavily skewed one way or the other) – for such activities as taking vacations together, renting summer houses, etc.

     

    1. 30.1
      KK

      Stacy,

      The only thing I’m confused about is your original contradictory statement. There really isn’t a need for you to break anything down for me. There isn’t a need for you to continue talking about your career. No one asked. The subject we went off on was dating, courting, relationships. You’re not willing to admit that what you said is a contradiction in and of itself, regardless of your professional life or other areas of your personal life. That’s why more than one person pointed it out to you. Granted, the guys were very rude about it and it was completely out of line, but even as I attempted to do the same in a nonaggresive or ugly way, you start out by insulting me. Impressive…

      1. 30.1.1
        Stacy2

        I don’t think i insulted you.  Your most recent post was one big contradiction which is what i tried to explain to you (and please don’t take it as an insult). But you can’t say “relationship that morphs into egalitarian after exclusivity”, it’s an oxymoron because before exclusivity a relationship doesn’t exist so the entire premise doesn’t make sense. So clearly, there’s a need to break things down for you.

        “You’re not willing to admit that what you said is a contradiction in and of itself, regardless of your professional life or other areas of your personal life. That’s why more than one person pointed it out to you”

        What i personally  said wasn’t contradictory at all, not one bit so of course i am not “willing to admit it” – and i actually demonstrated that via reduction to absurdity which i can repeat if you or any of your MGTOW friends would like.

        If you wish to somehow mix the unmixable and extend a principle of equal legal rights into the area of dating and personal romantic relationships (which is absurd), but if you wish to do it, you have to accept that each person has completely gender neutral role. So yes, women will ask men out, buy them flowers, pay for first dates, and in the bedroom such man should be the bottom half the time. Capisce? If you want to take “equality” further, you have to take it all the way. Or, according to you and your friends you’d be a hypocrite.

        Ponder on this guys. So long.

         

         

        1. KK

          ” i can repeat if you or any of your MGTOW friends would like”.

          Not insulting at all Stacy. Any more contradictions for me?

    2. 30.2
      Jimmy Carl Black

      You have just defined everything that is wrong with modern romance. You want equal treatment in every aspect of your life except romance. That is so unbelievably fucked up I can’t even begin to explain it. It’s one thing to think something (we all have thoughts we know are wrong, but we can’t help our internal impulses), it’s another thing to actually say it out loud and justify it.

      You are either treated equally or you’re not. You don’t get to pick and choose. The price of true equality is… wait for it… TRUE EQUALITY. Grow up!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *