Men Look for Sex and Find Love. Women Look for Love and Find Sex.

Men Look for Sex and Find Love. Women Look for Love and Find Sex.
Hi Evan,

I’ve been online dating for a while now, and I’ve started to notice a trend with a lot of the men who have contacted me. By way of background, I just ended a three month relationship with a man whom I met online because he did not want to be exclusive. He claimed that he didn’t want to date other people but he was hurt several times in the past by cheating girlfriends and didn’t want me to go thru the hurt again. For my part, I realize I’m at fault for waiting three months before asking for some type of commitment.

Hindsight has pointed out that on his profile he listed he wanted a “casual relationship” as opposite to my listing of wanting a “serious relationship”. So now I’m back on the online dating scene and I’m paying better attention to what guys are saying they are looking for in their profile. Several guys put in their profile that they are looking for “friends” only, one guy even put that he’s too busy for a relationship right now.

Is this a case of semantics? Are these guys really just wanting to take it slow and be friends first? If they are really just looking for friends, why don’t they go on a free site like MySpace, Facebook, or Friendster? If it’s just a clever way to find booty calls, why don’t they go on Adultfriendfinder or Craigslist? If I want a bona fide relationship, should I just ignore these men when they contact me? Has looking for a relationship on a dating website become taboo?

Thanks for your insight,

Laura

Brace yourself for a shocking revelation!

Men very often don’t know what they want.

Just because he has fun with you doesn’t mean he wants you as his girlfriend

This shouldn’t come as a surprise to you. You could probably tell from our actions. But it’s true. Most men can tell a story about how they weren’t looking for anything serious and then fell in love. And most men can tell a story about how they were looking for love, but discovered they had a lot of fun being single. (Most women could probably say the same.)

Therefore, you have to take any information in an online dating profile with a grain of salt. It’s not that he DOESN’T mean what he wrote; it just means he meant it AT THAT MOMENT. This is in accordance with the way we act on a date as well. Just because we think you’re attractive and we show you a good time doesn’t mean we’re actually INTERESTED. It just means we’re being “in the moment”. Unfortunately, most women aren’t familiar with this concept until it’s much too late. That’s why half of my questions are versions of: “He sleeps with me, but-“, “He says he loves me, but-“, “We had an amazing date, but-“. One of the most important – and frustrating – concepts that women need to get about men is that most things have NO meaning, beyond what’s being conveyed in the moment. Just because he wants a serious relationship doesn’t mean he wants one with YOU. Just because he has fun with you doesn’t mean he wants you as his girlfriend. Just because he thinks you’re sexy doesn’t mean he wants to commit to only you. Each time you think this is the case, you’re setting yourself up for heartbreak.

And so we go back to Laura’s insightful question – what does it all MEAN?

Well, I can only speak for myself here by pretending to be a guy dating online (I know, it’s a reach. Bear with me).

So let’s say I’m serious about falling in love. I go onto a dating site and list that I’m looking for marriage or a relationship. So, week after week, I date a lot of attractive women, none of whom feel like they will be my future wife. Which leaves me a number of questions that I’d like you to consider:

  • 1) Am I supposed to NEVER hook up with them? No kissing, no foreplay, no sex with anyone that I don’t think I want to marry? Do you think the standard should be: heavy petting is only in exclusive relationships, or not at all?
  • 2) If I DO hook up, but have no intention of committing to an individual woman, does that make me a bad guy?
  • 3) How should I notify a woman that I am not serious about her before we start a physical relationship? What’s better? A written warning? Or perhaps a canned speech that while I find my date attractive and will gladly sleep with her for a few weeks, I’m actively continuing to pursue other women in the meantime? How’s that gonna go over?
  • 4) Finally, if I do, in fact, want to hook up from time to time, does that, in any way, mean that I’m NOT looking for a serious relationship?

These are real considerations that go through the heads of real guys who want real relationships. But just because a man aspires to love doesn’t mean he’s above the lust and passion that comes from short-term flings.

So how are men supposed to navigate this space with any integrity?

Men look for sex and find love. Women look for love and find sex.

That’s right. We can’t. We’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t.

You may feel that: “I just want a guy to be honest with me. Believe me, I sometimes want to have sex, too, but I just want to know where I stand. I don’t want to get hurt. He should be man enough to tell me the truth.”

Men look for sex and find love women look for love and find sexSorry. We’ve got a different truth.

The truth is that we’re attracted to you in this moment.

The truth is that we’re not sure if we want a relationship with you.

The truth is that if we tell you that we don’t know what’s going to happen in the morning, nothing will ever happen.

So we say nothing. And hope that you don’t get too attached.

Why don’t we go to Adultfriendfinder for easy, no-strings-attached sex? Because it’s kind of skeezy. Because there’s no challenge and no human connection. Because we actually want someone that we can talk to, vent to, and hang out with.

So understand, Laura: while it might work for YOU if commitment-confused men restricted themselves exclusively to the “adult” personals, it doesn’t actually work for MEN.

Men look for sex and find love. Women look for love and find sex.

The exceptions don’t disprove the rule.

If you find this confusing and want to learn how to navigate this emotional minefield, I am here to help. There ARE good men out there. There are relationship-oriented men out there. And often the difference between the players and the committers is YOU. The right woman at the right time can make a man want to stop playing. I know. It happened to me.

So if you’re done spinning your wheels on the wrong men and want to get an edge with the right men, click here to learn more.

Warmest wishes,

Your friend,

Evan

225
105

Join 7 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 (390 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.

Comments:

  1. 271
    Paragon

    @ 271

    Men, are not wired differently, per se(after all, male monogamy evolved out of strategies in monopolizing the reproduction of an individual female).

    *Promiscuous* males, however, *are* wired differently, and for evolutionary reasons, physically attractive males will tend to be overwhelmingly promiscuous(exceptions do not disprove the rule).

    Still, I think it should be pointed out, that the *vast* majority of males are not promiscuous, even if only because they lack the options.

    But, many women who are fixated on the top %10-20 of the most attractive males who *have* those options, are apparently blind to this false generalization(I have met very few western women who either had the intuitive faculty, or the integrity, to acknowledge that *most* males aren’t prmiscuous).

    What western women need to reconcile(something that women in developing world populations already know) – is that LTRs are – and always have been – about ‘settling'(trading off male physical attractiveness for commitment).

    Are there attractive exceptions?

    Yeah, sure – but even so, these exceptions tend to commit to the most attractive women.

    And since females are *vastly* more selective, these guys are prohibitively rare(and thus have more attractive women to choose from) – meaning that even for an attractive woman, the odds of pairing off long term with a reciprocally attractive male is anything but certain.

    Thus, the average western woman with astronomically high standards has two realistic options – either lower their standards and ‘settle’, or keep riding the carousel, hoping they luck out(but expect otherwise).

  2. 272
    Paragon

    @ 270

    It isn’t that simple actually.

    Getting sex is *not* easy for the average guy(unlike the average woman, or the ~ top percentile of males).

    And since all guys want sex(that’s right, not just the attractive ones – what a shocker!), most need any advantage they can get.

    And if that means manipulating women, then the ends justify the means to many a sexually deprived male.

    Trust me, if guys could generally get sex as easily as women, they would *not* bother with deceptions.

  3. 273
    Jadafisk

    If women were fixated on the top 10-20% of men to the exclusion of most others, WOMEN would never get laid. If that top 20% percent of men dates 9s and 10s, toys with 8s occasionally, he will only end up in bed with a 6 when drunk out of his mind. If human attractiveness has a natural bell curve distribution, then a member of the male top 10-20% would have to take 4 mid-range women to bed with him every time he made one of these missteps, and then he’d have to go to AA, because he’d have to be that drunk way too often to function normally. The pregnant/child-toting female 1s-4s we see every day would be statistically impossible – they’d still be in a line as long as the Great Wall of China holding a number well into their infertile years, untouched by the hand of a man, waiting for a 9 to slip on a banana peel naked and land on top of them, because that’s their only shot. Why are some folks wed to a manifestly false vision of dystopia? Most people who socially function will aspire to a point or two higher than themselves and will deign two lower. That’s it. That’s why 90% of middle aged adults have been married at least once. That’s how people keep getting made at anywhere near replacement rate, because people actually do stay in their lane, for the most part.

  4. 274
    Paragon

    See the freakanomics data for online dating posted on another topic.

    Females do indeed fixate on the top %10-20 of the most attractive males, in the *general case*.

    But that doesn’t mean that only 9 or 10 males are the only ones wo are getting laid – it just means that the odds of a lower ranking male finding a receptive female is that much more remote.

    Also, you seem to forget that considering a higher male optimal mating rate, we also come to an inescapable conclusion: that not only should the most attractive males mate with the most attractive females(duh), but also a significant proportion of average females as well(given the higher male mating rate).

    Which, of course, renders less available ‘average’ females to be mated with average guys – necessitating an imbalance that progresses down the attractiveness scale(rendering a sexually asymmetric mating dynamic).

    This is why it is so easy to observe that even relatively unattractive females are still much more successful than
    unattractive males at disassortative mating(ie. such as with fat women being able to commonly mate with non-fat men, etc).

    The other thing to remember is that even if human variance follow a normal distribution, the way that attractiveness is
    subjectively deemed will not be assessed symmetrically, between the sexes.

    But rather, it will be sexually dimorphic, out of necessity for the way sexual evolution works.

    So, the thing about attractiveness rankings is that the male population will be ‘ranked'(by females) in such a way that it is
    are bottom heavy in distribution, while females will be ‘ranked’ such that they are top heavy(meaning there are more female 7’s than male 7’s, by virtue of the fact that there is a higher probability of a female attracting a statistical subset of male 7’s, than of a male attracting a statistical subset of female 7’s).

    Also marriage rates have *zero* correspondance with who is actually mating with whom, so it says *absolutely nothing* about sex(as many a married man can attest).

    Lastly, female selectivity is a dynamic that changes over time(consider selection runaway in female choice), given chance and opportunity and the rate of information efficiency.

    Thus, what held for previous generations will not hold for current generations, much less future ones.

    It occurs that your bad and unjustified inferences follow from an ignorance of how sexual evolution acts upon human
    behaviors.

  5. 275
    Jadafisk

    “Also, you seem to forget that considering a higher male optimal mating rate, we also come to an inescapable conclusion: that not only should the most attractive males mate with the most attractive females(duh), but also a significant proportion of average females as well(given the higher male mating rate).”

    I accounted for that factor, but I do assume that given the opportunity to have sex with highly attractive women – to monopolize their attentions, no less, that highly attractive men would humor mediocre women (the world’s 4-6s) too seldom to become a realistic goal for them that they’d pursue single-mindedly. That’s… untrue? As far as attractiveness, you have to take into account that American men don’t actually put a lot of effort into looking virile or aesthetically appealing. If women just skated on nature’s bounty, their ratings would be lower as well.

    If people marry, I assume that they’ve been in a sexual relationship before and definitely have the opportunity to bear offspring, seeing as that’s become marriage’s primary role in our society for many – as an official, state registered intent to mate. Average guys are having sex, having children and having relationships with somebody, because when you ask them about it, they keep saying so, putting pictures of kids on their desks, and filling all of the Applebee’s on Valentine’s. Also, according to studies, married men have sex almost twice as much as single men, and only 1% of them attest to being in the famous sexless marriage. The dissatisfaction with married sex life comes from the comparison to life as a monogamous live-in couple, not as a completely free range single.

    http://www.ablongman.com/html/henslintour/henslinchapter/hs2.gif

  6. 276
    Joan

    Wow…if it’s true that men just say what they feel at the moment and can’t be expected to mean it the next day or the next week, how can any woman trust them? It’s almost like giving them a free pass. I couldn’t imagine telling someone something and then later on saying “Oh, I meant it at the time, but I don’t now…Oh well, that’s just how I am”. It just seems too convenient.

  7. 277
    Paragon

    “I accounted for that factor, but I do assume that given the opportunity to have sex with highly attractive women – to monopolize their attentions, no less, that highly attractive men would humor mediocre women (the world’s 4-6s) too seldom to become a realistic goal for them that they’d pursue single-mindedly. That’s… untrue?”

    I think it is reasonable to conclude as untrue.

    Females have no qualms about waiting on choice males(‘queuing up’), if they have some expectation of success(and conventional wisdom holds that even medoicre females can land hot-guys for a hook-up, so that expectation is non-controversial).

    Males, on the other hand, are much higher sexed(given optimal health, and sufficient opportunity), manifest through the higher mating rate that sexual evolution has accorded them.

    “If people marry, I assume that they’ve been in a sexual relationship before and definitely have the opportunity to bear offspring, seeing as that’s become marriage’s primary role in our society for many – as an official, state registered intent to mate.”

    I think it might be interesting for you to parse some statistics on the differences between the fertility of married women vs
    non-married women.

    Still, even if one assumes a certain arbitrary mating rate for married couples, it really doesn’t say anything about whether or not a married women is, in fact, mating far more, with extramarital parterns(ie. extrapair mating).

    Which, is, I am sorry to say, something we *should* expect, given female opportunity to do so, as in evolutionary terms –
    marriage is a longterm strategy, which have a lower correspondence with mating rates compared with short-term strategies(ie. casual sex – inclusive of infidelity).

    ” Average guys are having sex, having children and having relationships with somebody, because when you ask them about it, they keep saying so, putting pictures of kids on their desks, and filling all of the Applebee’s on Valentine’s. ”

    Yes, some average guys do have sex, while some don’t(or only with prostitutes), but this isn’t compelling evidence for one case or the other.

    “Also, according to studies, married men have sex almost twice as much as single men, and only 1% of them attest to being in the famous sexless marriage.”

    Yes, I should have clarified that marriage rates themselves say nothing if they fail to break down marriages netween the sexes(where the data shows an increasing trend for females to marry more frequently than males – which necessitates that increasingly more males are being shut out of marriage).

    And more importantly, no marriage statistic can ever show and how matings are distributed throught the male population – which is relevant to my main argument that the mating prospects of average males are significantly diminished, compared to the most attractive males.

    However, the statistics are interesting, and I thank you for posting the link.

    But, I can’t help but consider that males in particular have a established reputation for self-reporting outcomes which convey high status in such studies, while understating(or neglecting) the reverse.

  8. 278
    Jadafisk

    Doesn’t the divorce rate mean that people who would have been locked out of the marriage game have additional chances due to churn? Divorcees tend to prefer each other to never marrieds, but not to the point where they’re all remarrying each other, especially due to preferences for youth, childlessness and financial solvency expressed among them which make never marrieds preferable for many.

    Yes, highly attractive people have more opportunities to mate – that’s an uncontroversial contention if I’ve ever heard one – but the existence of an exclusive monopoly on mating opportunities by a minority of men is what I contest wholeheartedly. Highly attractive men don’t care one whit what unattractive women are doing on Saturday, and those women are going to go and have families, rather than just sit on the shelf. If there are actually more female 8-10s than male ones, that means that those guys would be that much less inclined to bother with average women, even if they covered a whole lot of ground. There are only so many hours in the day.

    Women tend to get fixated on past relationships with awesome guys, rather than brief hookups where you barely know the guy and his awesomeness is less clear and laid out for comparison to other candidates. Do you believe male top 20% guys are actually investing time and attention into average women, dating them for months at a time, or hooking up with them? Dating enough of them to make a dent would be statistically impossible, so you contend that women are obsessed with the prospect of a relationship with exceedingly good looking, high status men who they slept with once or twice?

    “I’m sorry, Bob, I can’t marry you – I’m going to go wait until the Lakers come back to town and petition for Rick Fox’s affections. He remembers me, I just know it!”

    The American male has a median of 7 different female partners. The American woman has a median of 4 male partners. Lying and sex workers can probably account for the disparity. Note that these are median rates.

    “But, I can’t help but consider that males in particular have a established reputation for self-reporting outcomes which convey high status in such studies, while understating(or neglecting) the reverse.”

    I totally understand that, but that’s all we have when it comes to recording this. There are precious few studies on self-reported fatherhood, which would be a more solid indicator of evolutionarily successful mating behavior.

    Every study ever published on the matter says that married men cheat more than married women. The assumption that women are cheating up a storm would be one based on no findable fact. Even when you go to Adult Friend Finder or CL, you see WAY more married men searching for extramarital partners than the reverse. Married men are prostitutes’ bread and butter, as well because of the secrecy and convenience they can offer. There would have to be a concerted effort on the part of married women to cheat effectively, efficiently and clandestinely, lie about it everywhere, leave no trace, and leave hook up partners who could potentially testify to the prevalence of this phenomenon entirely in the dark about it, despite sharing residences with their spouses and being primarily responsible for household management and childcare, making anything but the most brief absences suspicious and problematic. (“You were supposed to pick Jenny up from school and she was left waiting for 2 hours! Where were you?”) It would mean that married women would have to prefer anonymous hookups/casual sex to the exclusion of long standing affairs that would threaten to expose the big secret they’re collectively keeping from everyone.

  9. 279
    Paragon

    “Doesn’t the divorce rate mean that people who would have been locked out of the marriage game have additional chances due to churn? Divorcees tend to prefer each other to never marrieds, but not to the point where they’re all remarrying each other, especially due to preferences for youth, childlessness and financial solvency expressed among them which make never marrieds preferable for many.”

    My only point is that the number of males who *never* marry are increasing, out of proportion with females – you are free to draw your own conclusions, but I don’t think it’s the average guy, who represents the contrary element here.

    ” Highly attractive men don’t care one whit what unattractive women are doing on Saturday, and those women are going to go and have families, rather than just sit on the shelf.”

    Yes, increasingly single-parent families.

    And even those who end up marrying some average guy, I expect that – in the general case – women continue probing opportunities to trade up to a better guy(inclusive of infidelity).

    So, do men, the difference, of course, is that an average female has *vastly* more opportunities to do so.

    Again, you are free to draw your own conclusions.

    “Women tend to get fixated on past relationships with awesome guys, rather than brief hookups where you barely know the guy and his awesomeness is less clear and laid out for comparison to other candidates. ”

    Yeah, right.

    Oxytocin is a potent neuromodulator that correlates with sexual arousal and orgasm, and helps facilitate pair-bonding in females.

    Hence, why it so to observe females who become hopelessly attached to their hook-ups.

    Of course, males are more immune for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that any male physically attractive enough to succeed at short-term mating is so relatively scarce, and higher sexed, than any single female partner – that they are simply better inured to forming an exclusive bond with any single one.

    An interesting side note, is that promiscuous females are also at risk for developing a kind of “oxytocin-exahaustion syndrome” induced by a penchant for casual sex.

    ” Both depressed mothers and their babies have increased amounts of Cortisol in their blood and the high Cortisol levels make the infants vulnerable to overreacting to stress later in life.”

    This raises the further possibility that female who indulge in casual sex – with stressful outcomes – are contributing to the likelihood of social/behavioral pathology in their progeny.

    “The American male has a median of 7 different female partners. The American woman has a median of 4 male partners. Lying and sex workers can probably account for the disparity. Note that these are median rates.”

    Again, these kinds of surveys have already been established as unreliable, due to an acknowledged tendency for males to over report/embellish/fabricate, and for females to under report.

    “Every study ever published on the matter says that married men cheat more than married women.”

    Again, it is appeals to male vanity, and embellishes their social status to inflate such numbers(in confidence), while

    females have *evolved* to be discrete, with respect to strategic pluralism(ie. strategically reaping long term benefits from one mate – while reaping short term – sexual – benefits from another, concurrently).

    ” Even when you go to Adult Friend Finder or CL, you see WAY more married men searching for extramarital partners than the reverse.”

    Yes, which says nothing about their *success rate*, which I expect is *very* low, again, for all but a small pool of ‘choice’
    males.

    “There would have to be a concerted effort on the part of married women to cheat effectively, efficiently and clandestinely, lie about it everywhere, leave no trace, and leave hook up partners who could potentially testify to the prevalence of this phenomenon entirely in the dark about it, despite sharing residences with their spouses and being primarily responsible for household management and childcare, making anything but the most brief absences suspicious and problematic.”

    Does not follow – who is to say the onus is on women at all?

    They can cheat with impunity, and the choice for the male(if he is average – and thus deprived of options) is merely to
    choose his brand of poison.

    What you fail to grasp is that, males are *not* empowered by advertising themselves as cuckolds, especially where they have no effective form of redress.

    So, we should full expect that many suffer in anonymous silence.

    “It would mean that married women would have to prefer anonymous hookups/casual sex to the exclusion of long standing affairs that would threaten to expose the big secret they’re collectively keeping from everyone.”

    Again, you are over estimating female liability – discretion is more out of a concern for the male party, so there is always
    an element of moral hazard from the female position.

  10. 280
    M

    Totally disagree with post 1: My top goal is pleasant companionship; sex is distant compared to that. These stereotypes of men drive me nuts.

  11. 281
    Paragon

    “If there are actually more female 8-10s than male ones, that means that those guys would be that much less inclined to bother with average women, even if they covered a whole lot of ground. There are only so many hours in the day.”

    This might help resolve your dilemma:

    “in both male and female demand, sex and looks are complements; all else equal, the better someone looks, the more you want sex with them. In male sex supply, sex and looks seem unrelated; how much sex a man offers has little to do with his looks.

    In female sex supply, however, it seems that sex and looks are substitutes; the better she looks the less sex she offers.”

    http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/08/sex-looks-are-supply-substitutes.html

  12. 282
    SS

    @Jadafisk 282
    Don’t really have much to add to this thread, but I had to give you a shout out for mentioning Rick Fox! Ha ha ha… I probably would have held out for his affections and passed up a good guy too… when I was like, 14!  LOL

  13. 283
    Brooke

    I’m a woman and there’s nothing like having sex immediately with a man with whom you are crazy sexually attracted to.  It’s just wildly uninhibited and doesn’t need any justification. The probability of getting hurt is likely if it continues, you grow to really like them and it ends abruptly, but that’s life.  There’s no guarantee if you wait weeks or months until you sleep with a guy, that he’s not going to high tail it out of your life if that’s all he’s looking for anyway.  There is no fool proof way of protecting yourself from getting hurt when one person likes the other more or decides to end it for no apparent reason.  We have to stop knocking ourselves out trying to figure it out or taking the blame.  Sometimes there is no explanation except, men get scared or they don’t want to commit or just don’t like responsibility or they’ve had someone else all along, want to have their cake and eat it too.  Men and women, relationships, sex it’s been this way from the beginning of time and will be this way forever.

  14. 284
    Katarina Phang

    I agree with Brooke, everything she said completely.  There is no rule when it comes to sex, really.  It’s about chemistry, compatibility, timing…not when to have sex.

    Sex has always been and will always be a part of our dating ritual, live with it.  It’s basic human instinct.  Do it if you want to and don’t when you don’t.  As simple as that.  Resistance is futile.

  15. 285
    Paragon

    There are clear and obvious patterns here – the most attractive guys are  high risk for promiscuity(and thus, a bad bet for a LTR, esp for all but a *very* few of the most attractive women who are his peers).

    There is an evolutionary explanation for this, if anyone wants me to get into it(even though I’ve already touched on it in numerous posts).  

    But all else being equal, males will be more willing to cultivate a LTR with their attractiveness peers, even before any sexual contact occurs.

    Bottom line:  women who are unwilling(or unable) to reconcile the disconnect between their casual sex/LTR league, and lower their standards accordingly are maladapted to LTR’s, regardless of how else they might want to justify it.

  16. 286
    Katarina Phang

    In the spirit of this very thread, a guy I’ve been casually dating the last two months finally said it last night, “I love you, you know.”  I told him that pretty much after a few dates ’cause “I was in the moment” and wasn’t expecting a response and always said it each time we were together.

    I didn’t expect it.  He’s 8 years younger, a full time student: not in a place to have a relationship.  I’m not even his type -he has matter-fact-ly said it to me) as I’m the first Asian woman he ever dated.  He usually dated white women. I was actually stunned though I knew through his action (especially when we made love) how much he was into me.

    So there you have it.  It’s not when you have sex (we had it on the first date as well), it’s what you do after sex that will make a difference.  If he digs you in the first place, sex will expand the connection you already have. 

    This, however, doesn’t mean we are relationship material or we’ll become a couple anytime soon.  We’ll just take one day at a time and enjoy what we have at the moment.  If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

    1. 286.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      Katarina – congratulations on your successful relationship. Good for you. It doesn’t actually disprove anything I suggested, however. If anything, it reinforces it. Men pursue sex and, after a few months of dating, discover that they’re in love. You seem to be able to handle having sex without commitment or saying I love you first without hearing it back. Since many women are not, my advice is for them.

  17. 287
    Katarina Phang

    Evan, I didn’t disagree with you , and in fact, like you said, affirmed what you said.

  18. 288
    jen

    This is the reality, you nailed it. And from a woman’s point of view it’s heartbreaking. This is the materialistic oriented reality we live in right now. This has nothing to do with love. I wonder if men even know what love is. I read articles from dramaticly changed individuals after a near death experience, after they realized what life is really about. Non of them said, its about looking for sex (or money). If the world would be such a wonderful peacful place, I would say, ok that’s just normal. But it’s not. It’s time for men to wake up, and for women to stop tolerating so much crap.

  19. 289
    Paragon

    @ Jen

    “I read articles from dramaticly changed individuals after a near death experience, after they realized what life is really
    about. Non of them said, its about looking for sex (or money).”

    Because any such explicit statement(however honest) would be deemed as boorish, and received unsympathetically(although I will maintain that the implications are there, if one reads between the lines).

    “If the world would be such a wonderful peacful place, I would say, ok that’s just normal. But it’s not. It’s time for men to wake up, and for women to stop tolerating so much crap.”

    This ‘crap’ as you put it is a consequence of the fact that males and females really *do* have conflicting reproductive
    agendas, courtesy of sexual evolution(females have lower reproductive potential, and thus compensate qualitatively by being more selective – conflicting with the high-rate, reproductive strategies of males).

    This manifests as women who are vastly more ‘picky’ than men, and consequently, results in a high proportion of sexually ‘starved’ males.

    So, to use an analogy, it should come as no surpise that acquiring sustenence is the singular priority of a starving individual(as incredulous as this may seem to someone well satiated).

    “I wonder if men even know what love is.”

    Consider Maslow’s hierarchy – it hard to be high-minded, when you are starving.

    Interestingly, women see to be no more ‘noble’ in their perceptions of love, given a seeming preponderance of female short-term sexual ‘chemistry’ junkies/apologists(who make this fleeting chemical window, an intractable condition of ‘love’).

  20. 290
    Gin

    My takeaway from this thread (and this blog in general) is that sex is really just a required bodily function and just something fun that people do, like watching a movie or having a nice dinner. And since it has no meaning attached to it, it can easily be done with friends and strangers. So I guess my question at this point is, why does anyone want to get married? Marriage is not required for raising children anymore and it’s certainly no guarantee of fidelity. And since sex doesn’t mean anything or make a relationship special, then why even care about fidelity? So what if they do it with you today and your brother/sister tomorrow?  It’s just sex, just like it’s simply a movie or dinner. So it seems to me that EVERY sexual relationship is a “friends with benefits” relationship, even if you’re married. Personally, I always thought it was the sex that made a relationship different/better/special from just a friendship or roommate situation, but clearly I was wrong.

  21. 291
    Locutus

    DrSweetness (#227)
    Yeah, because men are all selfish and women are just angels. 
    Oh these “poor young women who have had their hearts ripped to shreds by casual sex”.  Wahhh wahhhh.  Open your eyes, I’ve encountered women who were bigger jerks and more selfish than the worst men I know.  You apparently have very chauvinistic views against men and are very IGNORANT of people in general.
    Crawl out of the cave you live in and actually take a look around at people today before you comment.  You sound like a cracker jack.
    My own mom would tell you right off in a heartbeat. 

  22. 292
    Sylvia

    See, the problem isn’t necessarily some intrinsic scientific difference between men and women.  We’re socialized this way!  Think of all the Disney film cliches we grew up with, which probably have many grains of truth in how society perceives gender roles – the men are the explorers and the women are the good little wifeys.  Well, this lady says it could go both ways – especially when it comes to how women like their excursions too (well-kept not-so secret).

    I know I went into the world of relationships thinking that way, about looking for love in a guy.  I believed in true love and loyalty and that a guy could love a woman so much that he won’t stare at, never mind approach, another woman (after all it’s expected of women to only have eyes for their guy – why is the reverse laughed at?).  Once upon a time, I believed in one-woman guys.  Thank goodness my cheating husband has managed to beat that misperception out of me!  Hahahaha.  :-(

    It seems to be widely accepted that guys will look at other girls, but almost no one talks about girls looking at other guys.  Why?  Because it would ruin the fantasy.  It would go against the expectations for the girls. Frankly – because the cheating men couldn’t stand it if their women had the same pass as they give themselves.  Who has the power?

    Oh sure, I’m still with my husband …for now.  If he said I could look at or sleep with other guys, I would do it and thank him for it.  See, looking and prowling around has a price.  I might live with him, have sex with him, raise his son, even be a good friend …but I’m not in love with him anymore.  That’s the price for him making it clear I’m not the apple of his eye (well, that’s inaccurate …our mutual friends ratted on him).  That’s the price of him making a vow and a commitment and then doing the most anti-relationship thing I can think of.  He lost his “special” in my eyes.

    If/when I am ever single again, will I look for another relationship? Haha, hell no!  I will not fall in love with a man who does not treat me like his one and only.  Being in love with someone is supposed to be special.  Sure I’ll go have fun with a guy, get turned on by him, but play the game? give him my heart? just so he can moon after someone else?  Yeah right!  Keep dreaming and cake-eating!!!

     Ladies, your heart is worth more than that.

  23. 293
    Michael

    The title of this thread reminds me of a saying my female friend has ‘Men fall in love with the beauty of a woman, women find the men they fall in love with beautiful’. I think both are simply sayings society/women have invented to perpetuate the myth of females being ‘deep’ and men being ‘shallow’.

    I know no shortage of men whose hearts have been broken by women who don’t want a relationship with them after a few dates or months or even years. The myth that all men want is sex and all men fall in love with is beauty is just that.

    I think Evan is DEAD WRONG about men pursuing sex ans accidentally falling in love. Men might *more often* pursue or accept casual sex (though from my vantage point as a single man in NYC this is patently untrue) but all/most of the ones I know are either in or want committed relationships.

    Discounting men’s emotional depth/needs might help explain away some of women’s own disappointments but it doesn’t help a plugged nickle in helping women OR men who are looking for more find it. It just helps to discount and devalue men’s feelings. 

  24. 294
    TR

    “Why don’t we go to Adultfriendfinder for easy, no-strings-attached sex? Because it’s kind of skeezy. Because there’s no challenge and no human connection. Because we actually want someone that we can talk to, vent to, and hang out with.”
    In other words, “We want all of the benefits a girlfriend would provide with none of the responsibility. We want to get laid and have fun and not have to deal with you and your problems beyond that, ladies. But we look down on women who act the same way we do — they’re skeezy.”
     
    “So how are men supposed to navigate this space with any integrity?
    That’s right. We can’t.”
    Wrong. Men can… act with integrity, that is. Women can, too. The way to navigate anything with integrity is to have integrity in the first place. You choose your standards and your actions, and through them, you choose the kind of person you are.
     
    Better advice to the women looking for something serious: Leave the “I’m not looking for anything serious” guys alone or get the hell out when they tell you that. Let Mr. I-Don’t-Know-What-I-Want figure it by himself.

  25. 295
    Wende

    Sure, most of us have been hurt & dont care to be again.  However, I do not understand this attitude from a lot of women…..implying that men ‘hurt’ them b/c they slept with them & then didnt call or it didnt end up in a relationship.  Well, what happened to self responsibility?  I learned a long time ago that I am responsible for ME….if I am only looking for a ltr & do not know where I stand w-a man the I chose to NOt sleep with him….(even if I really want to) if I feel that I may put myself at risk of being hurt, getting too many feelings involved, etc.! Come on ladies….if you sleep with a man w- no committment, be prepared for any outcome/consequenses!  If you dont care how it ends up or really want to sleep with him…go for it.  Lets face it….life is a roll of the dice in a lot of ways.  There is always a chance of being hurt.  A man not being sure of how he feels about things & not giving a ‘disclosure’ that he probably will not want more with you before he sleeps with you is Ridiculous…!  Quite frankly, I often dont know either…!!  I actually understand & agree with the article.  I am a 40 yo now single woman w-a high power, demanding career….I take responsibility for my actions.  I am talking to a man that I dated 20 years ago….I have no intention of sleeping with him for sometime…I will see where it goes & if I want more with him (its not all about if a man wants a ltr w-me…how bout making sure he is someone that I want to be with) see if his actions & words are consistant…go from there.  I certainly would love to sleep with him….but I am not going to set myself up to have potentially more feelings then him, etc. until I see more! 

  26. 296
    starthrower68

    TR #299, what you say resonates with me.  I know Evan says that guys have double standards and that’s fine.  I’m certainly not interested in trying to change men.  However, I don’t have to respect double standards, and I don’t know that a romantic relationship is important enough to me to do so.  It probably means I will grow old alone but we pay a price for taking a stand, no?
    I also agree that we can act with integrity if we choose. Just today some guy e-mailed me on a website asking how I felt about being someone’s mistress (I’m guessing his).  I had to appreciate the candor displayed but I’m not going to be anybody’s mistress.  I didn’t beat him up over asking.  I just said not interested.  Life moves on.

  27. 297
    hespeler

    Wende 300,
     
    Great post.  Guys have plenty of problems that we infect on women but one of our pet peeves is women not taking responsibility for their actions.  Guys have something to lose when entering a relationship too.  We don’t live forever either.  No one wants their time wasted but you takes your chances…
     
    Again great post.

  28. 298
    Michelle

    I have the answer to this dilemma for the ladies.  Don’t have sex right away.  It’s that simple.  If you want to know whether or not a man is serious about you, hold off on having sex with him.  A guy who is not sincerely interested in you will not last more then four dates with no sex.  The power really is in your hands ladies.  You don’t have to have to be some selfish mans emotional victim.  When you’re sharing something sincere with a good man who really cares about you, he will keep seeing you even if you want to wait to bring sex into the relationship.  Date the guy for at least 8 weeks before you do anything more then kiss.  It’s likely that you’ll weed out someone who is just out to play.  A guy who really likes you and is connecting with you as a person will be more then willing to stick around and get to know you.  Please ladies, don’t be some asshole’s sacrificial lamb.  Don’t play some stupid game.  And please don’t buy into the argument made in this article that this is just the way men are and if you want to avoid getting taken advantage of you have to find the answers in Evans dating workshop.  You don’t need a workshop to figure this one out.  Don’t give yourself away to someone when you don’t know what their intentions are.  You’re in control.  Wait to have sex.  If he’s waiting with you and still investing getting to know you, then you have something worth exploring.  And also, if something inside of you is unsure or confused about where you stand with someone then there’s your answer.  He’s not serious about you.  A guy who is really serious about you will make sure that you know that.  He won’t keep you on shaky ambiguous ground so that he came make an easy exit.  He’ll make you feel as safe as possible, and he’ll show you with his actions that he’s serious.  Wait for that guy.

  29. 299
    hunter

    michelle,
     
    havent’ you heard??..women don’t need to hear this..there are herds of women not having sex…mabe, only the few that write to this blog do have sex…

  30. 300
    Dice

    @297 Sylvia
     
    Ah so you need the guy to be in love with you before you can love him? Sounds a lot like an ego tripping adventure..
    That must be real love? hmm

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>