Why Do Men Who Don’t Want Anything Serious End Up with Girlfriends?

I’m 31, fit, intelligent, attractive, and I’ve done enough work on myself to know that I’m happy, and that I’m ready for a relationship. Here’s my pattern: I’ll have a great first date with a guy. There’ll be great connection, flirting, maybe a kiss, texts for the next few days, and a second date. But then, he’ll say, ‘I’m not looking for anything serious.’ And I’ve gone both ways – I’ve slept with them (because let’s face it, it’s not just men who love sex!) or I’ve decided to not see them again. If I sleep with them, we’ll maybe have sex a few more times before it fizzles out. If I tell them I’m not looking for just sex, they’ll say they respect my decision, and I never hear from them again.

My real problem is this: three, maybe four times now, I’ve ditched the ‘I’m not looking for anything serious’ guy, only to find out a few weeks later that he’s seeing someone. Even tonight – the man who made me feel like a piece of meat not three weeks ago ‘met someone last weekend’ and has all of a sudden decided he wants a relationship. I feel like Good Luck Chuck!

You say not to sleep with a guy until he’s your boyfriend, but you also say men look for sex and find love. So what’s a girl to do? Is it really just a matter of them not being the right guy for me? I know we repeat patterns until we learn the lesson, but I’m not sure what my lesson is, nor how many more times I can stand to learn it…

Thank you for being you, and I hope you can answer my question.

Ashleigh

Really great question, Ashleigh.

I can understand why it seems complicated but it’s actually pretty simple. Here goes:

People don’t know what they want.

People don’t know what they want.

It’s not just a “man” thing, either.

I met a woman who informed me after a one-night stand she wasn’t looking for anything serious.

Two weeks later, she was my girlfriend.

Was she lying to me the first time around?

Not at all. If anything, she was lying to herself.

Think about it: one usually says “I’m not looking for anything serious” after a bad breakup, a series of dating failures, or some sort of personal loss. It’s a warning shot to the person you’re dating that you’re a good person but you don’t have much to give right now.

And it’s true. I would guess that anyone who declares, upfront, that he/she is in “me first” mode should be taken at his/her word.

But that just goes to show the limitations of one’s word.

If you tell a man “I love you,” that doesn’t mean you vow to love him forever.

If you tell a man “I love you,” that doesn’t mean you vow to love him forever.

It’s merely a statement of how you feel at that moment.

The men who wanted casual sex DID want casual sex, until they met someone who knocked their socks off and made them want to eat their own words.

That doesn’t mean you’ve done anything wrong.

That doesn’t mean they’ve done anything wrong.

That doesn’t contradict my “men look for sex and find love” statement either.

The four guys who slept with you and committed to other women WERE looking for sex…and when they found someone who they really connected with, they opted for love.

Your lesson, Ashleigh, is twofold:

a. Don’t take anything too literally. Everyone’s feelings are subject to change.

b. Don’t take anything too personally. For all you’re focused on a handful of guys who wanted to have sex with you but not commit to you, I’ll bet you can come up with a bigger handful of men who wanted to be your boyfriend, but YOU weren’t interested in them.

Join our conversation (382 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.

Comments:

  1. 1
    Clare

    Ashleigh,

     

    It’s all about finding that happy medium between guys you want to be in a relationship with and guys who want to be in a relationship with you. As I read your post, I found myself thinking – I wonder if she is deliberately not seeing the signs that these guys are not potential boyfriend material because she really likes them? That is a really easy trap to fall into. I’ve done it myself a bunch of times in the past. If you really like a guy, feel a great connection with him, and he says a few of the right things… you string these things together in your mind to make a potential boyfriend. And ignoring the unanswered texts, the plans that he flakes on, and just generally the fact that he’s not trying to win you over.

     

    I’m not trying to sound like a know-it-all, but I’ve learned that it’s really easy to tell whether a guy wants a relationship with you (ok, this may be culturally specific, but I’m pretty sure the concept can be scaled to the U.S. and other countries): if he makes an effort to spend time with you regularly and consistently and integrates you gradually more and more into his life. So, in the very early stages of dating, all you really have is his efforts to spend time with you. Does he do this consistently? Because if he’s flaky in any way or if you’re unsure, I would say hold off on sleeping with him, or adjust your expectations accordingly.

     

    Then, later on, if he continues to spend time with you, does he integrate himself into your life and you into his life? Do you visit each others’ houses? Do you meet each others’ friends and family? Do you gradually increase the frequency of time spent together? Do you make plans for future activities?

     

    To me, these are all really basic signs of someone who wants a relationship with you. If a guy is not doing these things (and in the early stages, it’s, as I say, making an effort to spend time with you consistently) then, either he doesn’t want a relationship, or he doesn’t want a relationship with you. Recognising these signs is pretty easy. I posit that most people in Ashleigh’s shoes are aware of what’s going on on some level, they just don’t want to see the signs. You have to get real with yourself. Once you are able to face reality and not take it so personally, your task becomes much simpler: choose from the guys who also want a relationship with you. You might not get everything you want in a guy this way but, if you choose right, you will land up with a kind, consistent, attractive boyfriend.

     

    Oh, a further hint: A guy who wants a relationship with you talks about relationship stuff. He talks about wanting a relationship, a girlfriend, settling down, etc. He talks about wanting someone to do stuff with, someone to fall in love with, someone to make moments with, because he’s not afraid of creating those expectations in you. Guys who do not want to be your boyfriend will be cagey and aloof about all things relationship.

     

     

    1. 1.1
      Emily, the original

      Clare,

      Your task becomes much simpler: choose from the guys who also want a relationship with you. You might not get everything you want in a guy this way but, if you choose right, you will land up with a kind, consistent, attractive boyfriend.

      This sums it up in a nutshell. If she picks from the guys who want a relationship with her, she’ll have a boyfriend. But there’s no guarantee of kind or attractive.

      1. 1.1.1
        Josh

        I have definitely experienced this myself as a guy and I think it is just part of the dating process. The people who we want to date often don’t want to date us and the people who want to date us we don’t want to date. It’s a mismatch between what you want and what you can get in the dating market.

        I think that people, in general, are selling themselves short by not focusing enough on self-improvement. There are people who have everything going for them but they are 20-30 pounds overweight and this is the one thing that is holding them back. I know myself I have a lot of attractive qualities but if I improved my social skills and widen my social circle my dating options would improve quite a bit.

        Many people fail to maximize their dating options because they refuse to work on their weak areas.

      2. 1.1.2
        Clare

        Well, kindness is not as rare as all that. And attractiveness is subjective.

        1. Emily, the original

          You mentioned kindness and attractive packaged in someone who wants a relationship. Not an impossible find but certainly not easy.

        2. Clare

          Aaaaaaahhh, Emily… it makes me terribly sad to hear you talk like this. This is defeatist talk!

           

          It might simply be about knowing where to look because what you say has not been my experience at all. I can think of half a dozen guys who meet that description just in my circle … which is not that big.

           

          I’ve found that it is amazing the kinds of people who come out of the woodwork when you decide to only surround yourself with kind people. It’s a big part of the reason why I stopped clubbing and hanging around in groups of people where there was a lot of gossiping and backbiting. There’s a lot to be said for raising the tone of one’s world – it tends to draw in other good, kind people.

        3. Adrian

          Hi Clare, I wonder if it’s a culture thing?

          I just read the hot ex boyfriend post and it seems from the comments that most Americans women believe that hot guys are bad by default.

           

          I believe it’s a kind of self-defense mechanism, a way of protecting their self-esteem in case he rejects them because of their looks (Aesop’s fable of Sour Grapes). And if he goes on a few dates and dumps them it has to be because he is flawed it can’t possibly be because she is not as great of a catch as she thinks she is… Again it goes back to protecting her self-esteem because getting rejected by a very attractive guy signals that her level of attraction is not that great.

          …   …   …

          Also most science agrees that attractiveness is NOT subjective… A beautiful person is recognized as a beautiful person by everyone; their features are universal…

          What is subjective is an individual’s attractions towards that beautiful person.

           

          Another thing I’ve learned from this site is that women have a tendency to slowly build attraction/lust towards a guy they are dating and it peeks once they fall in love with him.

          So a guy who is say a 6 in looks to everyone (including her when they first start dating) after she falls hard for him becomes a 8 in her eyes and she brags about him being so hot and so sexy… Well to everyone else he is still a 6 so they will just rationalize this by saying “attractiveness is subjective” or “beauty is in the eye of the beholder.”

        4. Clare

          Hi Adrian,

           

          You raise some interesting points, and although I partly agree with you, I also partly disagree.

           

          1) About self-esteem and hot guys. I think I would disagree with you that many girls think they are all that and a bag of chips and that’s why they rationalise away a guy rejecting them by saying he is flawed. I think you have the wrong idea about women. It’s not that most girls think they are *so* attractive and so if a guy rejects her it must mean there is something wrong with him… On the contrary, I think most girls fear that there is something wrong with her. Women’s self-esteem is still not nearly as high as it should be. Many (if not most) women fear they are not pretty enough, interesting enough, nice enough, intelligent enough, you name it enough, on some level, however slight. When a hot guy rejects them, it seems to confirm this fear somewhere deep down. She reasons that if she had been more like that girl over there, he would have chosen her. So while a girl moaning about the hot guy rejecting her is a defence mechanism, it is her fragile and vulnerable sense of self that she is protecting, not some inflated ego. Those of us who have moved on from these kinds of behaviors (staying hung up on the hot guy and moaning about the fact that he rejected us) realize that it is an inefficient waste of our time which would be better spent on another guy, but it’s difficult to shake that deep down insecurity completely. I can speak for myself and say that I know I am attractive, but by no means the most attractive girl in my city, and that I will not be hot enough for some of the hot guys. That is ok. It does not move me to criticise those guys, nor do I begrudge the girls who are hot enough in any way. I’m simply becoming happier and happier with just being me as time goes by.

           

          So, I think you can cut girls some slack here. Few if any of the women I have ever met have the kind of unshakable self-esteem you are referring to.

           

          2) About attractiveness. “Also most science agrees that attractiveness is NOT subjective… A beautiful person is recognized as a beautiful person by everyone; their features are universal…”

          I’m afraid I have to disagree with you. Attractiveness is viewed differently in different cultures and across different time periods in history, to begin with. For every guy I know who likes blondes, I can think of one who prefers brunettes. To take an example from my own culture: Zulu culture prefers chubby, even overweight, women. White culture prefers women who are slender. But even this is not universal. I know of guys who prefer chubbier women, those who like women who are model-thin, and those who like women of average size. I have friends who prefer blue and green eyes, and others who like brown and hazel eyes. Nineteenth century England liked women to be ghostly pale. Nowadays we think women with a caramel tan are beautiful. I could go on, but you get the picture, I’m sure. My girlfriends and I have often remarked on the fact that we found very different guys attractive and how lucky that is since we are rarely attracted to one another’s boyfriends.

           

          If you are referring to scientific phenomena such as the Golden Ratio, and those who, in the current cultural context, most people find attractive (like Charlize Theron, for instance), then I would say you have a point. But even here, I think there is a subjective element to it. Symmetry is supposed to be one of this biggest markers of an attractive face. But I personally find people with quirks and asymmetries more appealing in many cases. Straight, “Hollywood” teeth are supposed to be attractive, but I, and other people I know, find teeth which have character and are not all in a perfect line to be very appealing. So no, it’s not universal, far from it.

           

          I also think that the attraction we feel for someone can vary as you discussed and is not necessarily based on their looks. But when it comes to relationships, isn’t it the attraction we feel, and not some arbitrary notion of universal attractiveness, that counts? Why would we care if all our friends and family regarded our partner as a 6 if, to us, they were a 9?

        5. Emily, the original

          Hi Clare,
          Thanks for the kind message.
          It might simply be about knowing where to look because what you say has not been my experience at all. I can think of half a dozen guys who meet that description just in my circle … which is not that big.
          I don’t have what you’d call a social circle. I’ve moved recently, but before I did I had joined some meetups and had a a group of what I now know to be friendly acquaintances who I thought were better friends. Anyway, there were all women. How are old you? I’m in my 40s. Right now I can think of 3 single men I know, none of whom are appealing. One slightly sketchy. The other two living at home too long. Severe social awkwardness, etc.

          Maybe it’s this move that has done a number on me as I’ve watched so many people disappear who I thought I’d keep in touch with, but what I believe now is that only one quality matters in any kind of relationship: showing up. In terms of men: Does he keep calling? Does he want a relationship? Is he willing to invest his time and energy? Nothing else really matters. If the men who do this for you (I’m using a generalized you) happen to be men you are compatible with, you’re doing well. If, on top of that, you’re actually also attracted to them, you’ve hit it out of the park.

        6. Clare

          Emily,

          I’m 34, and the friends in my social circle vary from late twenties to late thirties.

          I would agree with you about losing touch with people you thought were better friends and about men who keep showing up. People are incredibly, mind-bogglingly flaky. Having been raised to be consistent and polite, I have been absolutely horrified as I have gone through life at the sheer thoughtlessness of people, much of it without any good reason. All I can say is that if you are a person who treats people better than this, then such people are not a good fit, and we need to get good at identifying the people whose standards of behavior fall short of what we would want in a friend or a partner.

          For my partner, I have differing standards for people depending on their degree of closeness to me. For people in my inner circle (my partner, my immediate family, and my closest friends) I require a high degree of loyalty, support, contact, and care, because this is what I give. For people who fall in my general circle, my standards drop to “harmless, pleasant to be around, see them sometimes.” Basically, much of what these people do is water off a duck’s back to me.

          Again, I can only say, as far as men who consistently show up and also demonstrate compatibility, the only way forward is to keep searching and ruling out the ones who don’t meet your standards. There is no quick fix. You can become a lot more skilled at doing this, though. And I think keeping a group around you of people with high character is an excellent move. If you consistently require and give a high quality of interactions with others, and a high degree of consistency and respect, this signals to men around you that this is what you expect. They unconsciously get the message that this is the only thing that will “fly” with you, and it does help to weed out many of the men who are not up to par.

        7. Emily, the original

          Hi Clare,
          I would agree with you about losing touch with people you thought were better friends and about men who keep showing up.
          Ironically, I heard from two old friends this week. One I hadn’t talked to in a year. I am genuinely fond of both of them, but I have gotten to the point where I make minimal effort. And I don’t expect anything. I did just make a new friend in my new town and she has been great and invited me to several things. So, I guess there are people out there who want to make less shallow connections. I guess time will tell.
          Again, I can only say, as far as men who consistently show up and also demonstrate compatibility, the only way forward is to keep searching and ruling out the ones who don’t meet your standards.
          I guess I just never thought that would be the first thing I’d look for in a man: keeps showing up. Not — Is he hot? Not — do I like him? But — does he keep calling?!

    2. 1.2
      Adrian

      Hi Clare,

      What you say makes since but I fear that Ashleigh already knows this that is why she admitted to be a fan of Evan’s work.

      Evan drills the concept of courtship into women as a way to measure a guys interest in her.

      So with all that being said it leads me to the conclusion that no one wants to admit… maybe Ashleigh is not that attractive or at the very least these guys don’t find her attractive.

      I am not an online dating nor a tinder user so I do not understand the mentality of people who message or swipe on people whom they don’t really find attractive but apparently it happens a lot.

      Either way give Ashleigh a few months and I’m sure she’ll have a boyfriend that is attracted to her and who values her because it seems that getting dates with guys that she finds attractive doesn’t seem to be a problem for her; if she keeps at this rate she will find a great guy soon.

  2. 2
    Stacy

    I agree with Evan although I will be wary of the man who seems to insist and be vocal about the fact that he is ‘not looking for something serious’ while dating you.

  3. 3
    Adrian

    Hi  Jeremy,

    Also since you  talk a lot about the meta-goal of validation people what are your thoughts on what “S” spoke about with slow attraction; how do you think  a validation type person would respond to it?

    S said, ” There are different levels.  Some start at a really high level of attraction from the outset, some start at lower levels and have a slow build.  I’m liking the slow build lately.  🙂”

     

    Slowly building attraction seems to be the healthiest way to fall in love and even agree to have sex. However, my definition of slow build does not mean that she views him as unattractive. In fact she see him as “attractive” she just feels no “attraction” for him; what is building is her lust for him as well as her appreciation of his overall personality.

    Do other women agree with this definition of slow build?

    I read YAG’s comment about guys needing to be weary of women with great sexual experience and it got me to thinking…

    Could it be that the guys (myself included) who get so hurt when we discover that a woman we love committed to previous hotter guys quickly or  things that we were told that she wouldn’t allow us to do sexually or we were told that we had to wait the hot guy was allowed to do and allowed to do quickly…

    Could it be because it feels as if she is not validating the worth of our looks and our sex appeal?

    If so, then could a guy think the woman who is slowly building attraction towards him, mistake her slow developing sexual feelings for her not wanting him at all???

    Because as a validation person he needs immediate (or at the very least some kind of) indication from her that she thinks he’s sexy?

     

    Most women don’t do this… I remember when Evan told women to smile and say yes so the guy could know she was into him the women agreed without question but when he told them to be a bit physical to let the man know she desired him sexually she just wanted to wait a while before sex there was a lot of push back.

    The criticism was that as far as anything physically they wanted to move at their own pace (remember this is all before sex) and the “right” guy would wait and a “quality” guy would respect her for making him wait.

    Now I am wondering if the guys whom women labeled as “right” and “quality” were just guys who did not have the meta-goal of validation. Or maybe she was +2 or more SMV compared to his so she held more power over his actions and he was okay waiting as long as he got to be with her.

     

    Either way what advice would you have for a validation person dating a woman that is the slow build attraction type?

    1. 3.1
      Emily, the original

      Adrian,
      Could it be because it feels as if she is not validating the worth of our looks and our sex appeal?
      Because as a validation person he needs immediate (or at the very least some kind of) indication from her that she thinks he’s sexy?
       You mentioned this on your post to me yesterday. I have a question for the men. Is a woman having sex with you the only way she can validate that she thinks you are hot? (I’m not being sarcastic.) You are aware that a woman can agree to sex with a man she is not super into, the same way a man can have sex with a woman he’s not super into?

    2. 3.2
      Jeremy

      The world is a complex place, Adrian, and although sexual meta-goals are important, we can’t forget comfort and arousal – comfort deactivates the sexual brakes, arousal activates our sexual accelerator.  Some people have sticky brakes – they need comfort before they can perceive their own arousal.  This is the “slow build” – the guy establishing his character and trust before the woman can appreciate him in terms of arousal. And frankly, this works well from most men’s perspective as well, as men tend to value what they work for more than what is given for free.

       

      However, there is another possible etiology for the “slow build” – a conflation of sexual goals with relationship ones.  A woman might find one type of man sexually arousing, but realize that such a man makes a poor long-term husband.  So she might seek out the one set of priorities at an early age, then another set at a later age.  This is what you need to watch out for, the lane-changer.  Because in this case, it isn’t that the woman needs comfort before she can feel arousal, it’s that she has come to believe that her own arousal is less important than her comfort.  So she finds the relationship-guy and is legitimately excited about him…….until he gives her what she wants.  And then once she has what she has always wanted, she no longer wants it, and she comes to re-discover what her sexual meta-goals are and aren’t.  And if you think this situation is rare, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.

       

      I know this doesn’t answer your question about what happens when the man’s meta-goal is validation – here I am talking about women, which isn’t what you asked.  A man whose goal is validation needs a woman who genuinely likes him for who he is, not what he does (and so many women will not understand the difference!).  He needs a woman who is attracted to him, not to the lifestyle he provides (and so many women believe that the two are inextricably linked).  The woman in paragraph 1 who simply needs comfort to realize arousal can be a good bet for such a man.  The woman in paragraph 2 who conflates attraction with arousal – bad bet.  How will the guy know which one she is?  Well, I’ll tell you how he WON’T know – by asking her.  Because most women will legitimately not know their root motivations (any more than most men will).  But the hint is history.  Because a woman who needs comfort before she feels arousal…..generally will display that in her history.  Whereas a woman who has a history of becoming easily aroused except by you….not a good bet.

       

      And I say this knowing that it will raise the ire of all the women here.  That they will argue (as they have before) that so often a woman will wait with a guy she really likes BECAUSE she likes him, because she is afraid that having sex too quickly will chase him away.   And there is merit to this argument….as long as it is consistent, and doesn’t apply only to him! Because exceptions to long-standing behavior patterns are rarely stable.  A man who has abused other women is not a safe bet for a new woman.  A man who has cheated on past partners is not a safe bet for a new partner.  And a woman who has always been attracted to one type of man is not a safe bet for a man who is a different type.

      1. 3.2.1
        Emily, the original

        Jeremy,

        A woman might find one type of man sexually arousing, but realize that such a man makes a poor long-term husband.  So she might seek out the one set of priorities at an early age, then another set at a later age.  This is what you need to watch out for, the lane-changer.

        A big percentage of people are lane changers. It’s life. People look for different qualities in a long-term partner.  I have a guy friend who told me he married his wife because she was a good person and a good mother. Another told me his wife helped him get financially stable. Neither are unhappy, and neither went out looking for “sexually exciting.” Sexually appealing, yes, in a combination of other qualities. Both were self-admitted himbos in their younger years (male bimbos).

        1. Jeremy

          Emily, there’s nothing wrong with being a lane-changer per se, as long as you stay in your lane once married.  People who sought out exciting short-term partners and chose a different sort of partner to marry aren’t necessarily bad spouses – they may be excellent – but there are 2 dangers.  The first is that they will once again change lanes once they’ve undergone hedonic adaptation.  And the second is that they won’t change lanes again, but they won’t be able to give their partner the validation he/she needs if validation is that person’s goal.  Feeling fond and tender toward one’s husband is fine and good, but what if he needs you to feel more than that?  Some people don’t care about that, others do.  Adrian was asking from the perspective of someone who does.

        2. Emily, the original

          Emily,

          there’s nothing wrong with being a lane-changer per se, as long as you stay in your lane once married. 

          I was also thinking that some people tried a different lane when they were in younger and didn’t like the lane they in!   🙂

           they won’t be able to give their partner the validation he/she needs if validation is that person’s goal.  Feeling fond and tender toward one’s husband is fine and good, but what if he needs you to feel more than that?  

          I mentioned that most people want to marry someone they find appealing. A visceral attraction, however, is largely based on hormone/pheromones and is a physiological response that people have little control over (you can’t will yourself to feel that way), and it dies down over time.

      2. 3.2.2
        Adrian

        Hi Jeremy,

        Just out of curiosity

        How does age AND length of single hood affect all your hypotheses on dating, relationships, and sex?

         

        How would a woman in her 20’s act toward giving a man validation versus a woman in say her late 40’s?

         

        What about the woman who has been single for 7-10 years how would she react towards giving in a relationship verses the woman who has been single for only a 7-10 months?

         

        Could a woman in her 60’s who just got married for the first time be a lane changer?

         

         

        1. Jeremy

          I think that as people get older their tolerance for bullshit goes down.  They are less willing to put up with the things they don’t want to put up with.  And their knowledge of themselves generally improves in terms of what they want out of life, since most of the major factors that contribute to lane-changing (such as kids) are no longer relevant.

           

          How would a woman in her 20s act toward giving a man validation versus a woman in her late 40s?  Depends on her attachment mechanism and her love language IMHO.  If she is avoidant, she is not likely to want to give any validation because she believes deep down that none should be necessary.  She would perceive it as bullshit.  But a woman with an anxious attachment mechanism would perceive it as natural, given that she needs it as well.  That’s how the attachment plays into this.  But love languages also play into it because the way in which the person demonstrates affection/validation will vary, and even though the woman in question might be willing to give it, the way in which she finds it natural to give may not be the way the guy needs to perceive it.

        2. KK

          YAG,

          You’ve completely missed the point I was trying to make.

          Until you can view women as actual human beings with thoughts, opinions, emotions, beliefs, fears, regrets, desires, hopes and dreams that are just as valuable as yours, you’ll never get it.

          Trying to label all women as either good girls or special snowflakes or sluts isn’t serving you now and it never has.

        3. Jeremy

          @KK, agreed.  And in addition, it is also important to remember that not all men think alike, not all men are worried about N numbers or man cards, and that different men view sex, love, and validation very differently.  Back in the day, not only did I never have sex after 2-3 dates, I never would have agreed to it if a date had offered.  You don’t even know the person at that point!  But then, that is only important to some people.

        4. KK

          Jeremy,

          “And in addition, it is also important to remember that not all men think alike, not all men are worried about N numbers or man cards, and that different men view sex, love, and validation very differently.”

          Yes, thank goodness!

      3. 3.2.3
        Yet Another Guy

        @Jeremy

        That they will argue (as they have before) that so often a woman will wait with a guy she really likes BECAUSE she likes him, because she is afraid that having sex too quickly will chase him away.   And there is merit to this argument….as long as it is consistent, and doesn’t apply only to him!

        Oh my, you are asking for it.  Women appear to be unable to wrap their heads around this one.  A guy who is made to wait never feels special when he knows that a woman does not make all men wait.  He feels like a chump.

        1. GoWiththeFlow

          Jeremy & YAG,

          The woman isn’t trying to make the man feel special by making him wait for sex.  She’s trying to avoid him eliminating her as a serious relationship contender because of the male sexual double standard.  “Awesome!  I got her to sleep with me in week three.  The slut!”

        2. Theodora

          My guess is that women who argue that men shouldn’t question their past and double standard (alpha fu*ks, beta bux) understand very well the arguments, they just pretend not to understand because they don’t like the implications of those arguments.

          The most difficult implication to swallow is that women who practice(d) alpha fu*cks, beta bux are not exactly marriage material, at least compared to their more consistent and responsible peers who are not lane-changers.

          When I say “not exactly marriage material”, I’m talking about the traditional steps leading to marriage, which involved, from the man’s part, courtship, marriage proposal with a wedding ring, and finally protection and providership. This male behavior belonged to a time when an unspoken social contract between men and women established an exchange of protection and providership for female (what a dreaded word!) chastity.

          This reality is very inconvenient for many women who want the benefits of both modernity/women’s lib (sexual access to men more desirable than what they can normally get for commitment, what we call alpha fuc*s, who knows, maybe one of them will bite) but also the traditional male display of comforting qualities, protection and providership from betas. Which means that men should keep their part of the old unspoken social contract, but women are liberated from theirs.

          Confronted with this uncomfortable (to say the least) implication of their actions, many women choose to blame and accuse the man who doesn’t like his role in their double standard (insecure and entitled, a chauvinist pig who slut-shames), to obfuscate (people change, we all grow and mature, I’m a different person now – even if it’s true, what are exactly the advantages for the man who acts according to the old rules? Just more demands, conditions and effort for less rewards than the previous men in her life. In other words, a fool’s errand) or simply to pretend not to understand what all the fuss is about, even if I guess that deep inside she understands very well, as I said.

          What I said doesn’t apply to 2 categories of women:

          a) Women who are consistent and don’t change lanes in their sexual and romantic behavior

          and

          b) women who don’t expect any man to keep his part of the old unspoken social contract (courtship, protection, providership) when she is not able to keep hers.

           

        3. Jeremy

          @GWTF, we’ve had this discussion so often on this blog.  It sort of boggles my mind that the two sides can’t seem to validate each other.  So I offer this as an olive branch.  I GET what you are saying.  What Emily has said, and so many of the other women.  I GET that there are sexual double standards out there, that women believe that men won’t value them if they hop into bed too quickly, that sometimes by waiting with a man they are trying to keep him.  That sometimes they have a ONS because they are feeling insecure, or bored, or horny, or any other reason they might have, which from their perspective says nothing about why they might have sex with their future husband.  Can women not understand that the future husband won’t necessarily see it that way, and that from his perspective, seeing it the way he does is not wrong?  That while she might think that with the others it was sex but with him it’s commitment, his perception is the price he has to pay that others did not?

           

          Think about the difference in the way so many men and women perceive “love.”  Why some men are so reluctant to say “I love you.”  For women, when they say ILY, they are just expressing emotion.  But if we are honest, when they want a man to say it back, what they want to hear is an implication of what the man will DO for that love.  Will he commit?  Will he marry?  Will he provide?  When I hear “I love you,” my honest first reaction is “what does she want?”  That’s why I’d rather hear “you’re awesome.”  It’s the exchange model of sexuality – the woman is the gatekeeper of sex, which she gives in exchange for the man’s efforts.  His efforts are the price he pays.  He knows that, so does she.  That’s why he offers those efforts, and that’s why she holds out for them.  So from a purely economical perspective, what SHOULD happen if she offers her sexuality to others free of their efforts?

           

          It boggles my mind how so many people believe their history is, or should be, irrelevant.  Our history is who we are.  We can’t escape it, nor can we completely extricate ourselves from it.  So we must be careful when we craft it.

        4. SparklingEmerald

          Thanks for this GWTF —The woman isn’t trying to make the man feel special by making him wait for sex.  She’s trying to avoid him eliminating her as a serious relationship contender because of the male sexual double standard.  “Awesome!  I got her to sleep with me in week three.  The slut!”

          It’s also called learning from your mistakes.  Men on this blog constantly lecture us not to “date out of our league”, but men on this blog have also told us that we women have it so easy, because if a man asks us out we KNOW he likes us.   In reality, we know, no such thing.

          In our early dating days, when we are all starry eyed and romantic, we initially assume that any guy who asks us out really DOES like us, and don’t assume he thinks we are really beneath him, and just wants to have his fun, and be done.  Many male commenters on this blog are very well aware of this, yet the scolding goes to the WOMEN who believe that if a man asks a woman out, that he likes her.  And to the woman for not knowing that he is “out of her league”, and just wants to “date down” for easy booty.  Chance even admitted he’ll screw a woman, if she’s attractive enough, even if he finds her personality “insufferable”.  So how is a woman initially supposed to know her “league” and if a guy really likes her, or just wants to screw her ?

          So a woman who wants a relationship, finds a guy who she really likes.  He asks her out and she ASSUMES he likes and wants a relationship, so she sleeps with him, let’s say on date 5, which happens to be their one week anniversary.  Date 6 is breakfast at IHOP, he drops her off  and say’s “I’ll call you”.  A week later she get’s a “Hi” text.  She eagerly texts him back, he invites her back to his place to “Netflix and Chill”  They Netflix and “Chill” which we all know is code for sex.  Then he starts the slow fade.  She chases him a bit.  He then sends her the “I’m not looking for anything serious” text, and she is heartbroken.

          She REALLY like him.  She REALLY thought he liked her, because after all, he asked her out, she mistakenly thought that since sex meant something to her, it meant something to him.

          She gets over her heartbreak, she is counseled by friends, bloggers, and anyone she tells her sad tale to, not to judge all men by this last guy, to get back out there and not give up. So she tries again.

          So she tries again with another guy she really likes.  Not only does he have his fun and is done, but he gossips, and maybe even exaggerates the entire affair.  He tells others, perhaps in her social circle, that she is beneath him, that he was just looking for a booty call, and she should have known that, and now she is the “crazy” girl chasing after him.  (probably an exaggeration, she texted him once, then called him, then got all pouty when he told her he wasn’t looking for anything serious)

          After having her heart broken again, she decides on her own or she gets advised to wait until AFTER a commitment (boyfriend/girlfriend) before sleeping with a guy.

          So she meets another guy she really likes. He asks her out, but now, she is not sure if he likes her, or if he thinks she is “beneath” him as far as SMV.  She begins to doubt her own attractiveness, her own worth as a woman.  She doesn’t want to be used sexually and discarded, once again, but she doesn’t want to be alone forever.

          She makes out like crazy on their first date, but uses body language to keep it from going further.  He asks her out for the following day.  She is ELATED, but still not sure if he really likes her, or just want to have a bit of fun and be done . . .

          What is she supposed to do ?  Is she now obligated to screw him on or before date 5 ? He may even know that she slept with that other guy one week after their first date, because while he is not in her social circle, they have a few friends in common. Or is the deadline now one week ?  Is she now obliged to some “F— first, ask questions later” equal opportunity dictate, because of the other 2 guys who hurt her ? Remember, she really this guy, and she is finding it very hard to resist his advances, but she doesn’t want to get hurt again. And she starts to question if he is out of her league.  She begins to wonder, if considers himself above her and just want to have his fun.  Perhaps he heard the gossip, which got exaggerated along the way, as the story of her sexual affair gets passed around the circle.  Maybe he just heard that she’s an easy lay, and he is now just getting in line to demand his fair share of her booty.

          Really, what is she supposed to do ?

           

           

           

        5. Yet Another Guy

          @Jeremy

          His efforts are the price he pays.  He knows that, so does she.  That’s why he offers those efforts, and that’s why she holds out for them.  So from a purely economical perspective, what SHOULD happen if she offers her sexuality to others free of their efforts?

          Once again, you succinctly put into words what a lot of us have struggled to explain.  The fact that women fail to recognize this reality is one of the big reasons why so many of them are unable to secure a quality man.  Men do not control access to sex.  We have to work for it, which, in business terms, makes sex a cost center for men whereas it is a revenue center for women.  Men are willing to work harder for something that has real value.  Discovering that a woman has a sexual double standard lowers, if not completely destroys her value to many men; therefore, making a man wait when she does not make all men wait is often a recipe for heartbreak.  The cold hard truth is that a man who wants to commit to a woman will commit to her if she sleeps with him on the first on the thirtieth date.  She just rings his bell, and the difference is usually felt on the first date. A guy who is going to think that she is a slut is going to think she is a slut because she is just another lay to him.  The fact that women somehow believe that they can make a guy commit in more than just words just by holding out is ludicrous. Holding out is a “does he want more than easy sex” filter at best.

          I have lost count of the number of times I have had to talk a friend down from the ledge while he was in drunken stupor after discovering that the special snowflake who made him wait is not so special after all.  If you want to talk about slut shaming, the s-word and the word “fool” pretty much dominate the discussion.  As Adrian mentioned, even if you she does not share this information with him, it gets around, and he will eventually hear it.

          Ladies, a man who gets upset when he discovers that you have a sexual double standard is not insecure.  He is a man, and all men derive a large part of who they are from their sexual prowess because we have to compete for what are effectively breeding rights.  It is instinctual behavior, so you will never socialize it out of the male population.  Making one man wait when you do not make all men wait is like saying that he is less sexually desirable.  No man wants to feel like he is less sexually desirable. It does not matter how you look at it, and you will never be able to convince him otherwise because that is the way he will see it.  Deep down inside, no man wants to be chosen because he is a kind provider. That is why the derogatory label “beta provider” exists in the manosphere.

        6. Gala

          @SparklingEmerald:

          I think Evan has pretty much describes on this blog how to avoid such situations. Don’t sleep with a guy who isn’t your boyfriend. I would add to that: but if you must have sex, pick someone who will not talk. Easy peasy. Could be a person totally not in your circle (not hard to find in large cities. If you are a banker screw a teacher and vice versa) or could be a married man. The latter WILL keep their mouth shut.

        7. Yet Another Guy

          @Gala

          Don’t sleep with a guy who isn’t your boyfriend. I would add to that: but if you must have sex, pick someone who will not talk.

          That is like finding a unicorn because all men talk.  A man may not talk when he is in a relationship with you, but he will do it after you split, often spilling the gory details about your sexual preferences.  A married man is no guarantee either.  Married men often boast about their sexual conquests outside of their marriages with other men, especially with other married men who are in sexually frustrating marriages.

          Once again, men derive a huge part of their self-worth from their sexual prowess, as we have to compete for what are effectively breeding rights.  Failure to grasp this fundamental male trait is a recipe for failure with men.

        8. Jeremy

          @Gala, agreed.  Isn’t it just simple logic?  It just involves some forward thinking.

           

          @YAG, where I disagree with this comment is in the assertion that some men won’t lose interest in a woman just because she has sex early.  Any woman can tell you stories of when that wasn’t true for her, and I’ve seen research to corroborate it.  Some men don’t think that way, some do.  My point wasn’t that having sex on the first date won’t affect the chance of a relationship (it might), it was that they should avoid double standards or else be aware of how those may be seen.  It is totally up to the woman whether or not to care about how a double standard might be seen….but she should not be surprised by how many men will see it.  Because the things that men fear in relationships are not the same as the things women fear.

        9. Yet Another Guy

          @Jeremy

          I was merely pointing out the fact that the time delta between when a man and woman meet and when they have sex is not a good indicator of man’s desire to commit. I lost count of the number of times that I agreed to be exclusive just to have sex when I was younger.  A man will do or say whatever it takes to get into a woman’s pants if he sexually desires her enough.  A man pretty much knows if there is commitment potential on the first date. Access to sex is not what drives a man to commit in earnest to a woman.

          I will agree that some men expect a woman to be chaste, but they are small in number compared to the general male population.  What gets most men wrapped around the axle is when they are made to wait because a woman is interested in more than sex only to discover that she has casual sex with other men with no such time limit.   Once again, I have lost count of the number of times I have had to talk a friend down from the ledge when he discovered that his special snowflake was not so special.  Men expect equal or better treatment when it comes to access to sex because it is something for which men have to compete.

        10. Gala

          @YAG:

          No, not all men talk. Married men with a lot of money to lose in a divorce are very discreet. That is, grown men. Also if a guy is from a different social class he can talk all he wants. Over the years, I’ve had a few encoubters like that in between serious relationships. A man from the lower socio economic class who you fuck once or twice and never see them again is the way to go. There’s plenty of fish in the sea. Also, it is counter intuitive to me, why would a man think that a guy who woman sleeps with faster is more sexually desirable? To me at least this is completely the opposite. This would likely be a guy i think is good for nothing other than his dick and i don’t care about him and about what he thinks of me nor do i want to keep seeing him. And you would like to trade places with THAT guy? Pssst

        11. SparklingEmerald

          Gala

          @SparklingEmerald:

          I think Evan has pretty much describes on this blog how to avoid such situations. Don’t sleep with a guy who isn’t your boyfriend.

          ****************

          Gala – I think you missed the point of my post.  Of course EMK says no sex unless he’s your boyfriend.  According to YAG, and apparently other guys like him, if you have EVER learned that the hard way, you can’t “change lanes”.  If after being hurt a time or too, buy a guy you THOUGHT wanted a relationship, but he didn’t verbally promise that, it is to late to “change lanes” to protect your own heart.  Nope, you’ve just got to suck it up, and sleep with ANY guy you think MIGHT like you based on his actions, even if he hasn’t officially claimed you as his.

          According to YAG, men report to each other on who’s a slut to be used and dumped, then she is marked forever.  So instead of saying she learned from experience, and won’t ever mistakenly sleep with a guy she HOPES is her boyfriend, she now waits until he makes an official declaration.

          If the guy you hope will be your boyfriend is one to gossip sexually, and he knows that the last guy you slept with (thinking it would go somewhere, but it didn’t), he will spit that up in your face if you ask tell him you really like him, but you want to see where this is going before sleeping with him.  He will tell you he is insulted that you are waiting for an official relationship, when his big mouth buddy, heard from his big mouth buddy, who heard if from his big mouth buddy that you “Fill in the blank with the now exaggerated tale of your sexual escapade”.

          Much of the sexual gossip men spread is exaggerated or sometimes downright false.  The exaggeration is usually the result of it being 2nd, 3rd or 4th hand news.  Sometimes men make up malicious lies about a woman who REFUSES to sleep with them as a form of revenge.

          Guys, however, are absolutely entitle to change lanes.  They can propose to a girl after 6 months, then she dumps him.  He can swear that he’ll never marry again.  No “diamond ring at or before 6 months” precedent has been set for the guy.  He has learned his lesson.

          But if a girl gets her heart broken by a guy she THOUGHT was going somewhere, according to the YAGS of the world, she has no right to learn from that mistake, and from that point forward she is not allowed to wait and see if a REAL relationship develops.  She is now obligated to sexually service ALL men she dates on the exact timeline and not expect, hope or think a relationship might come from it.

          I am so glad I am married to a good man*, and done with this bullshit.

          *Good man – He’s not “beta”, he’s not father material or a “provider”, as we are both senior citizens both capable of taking care of ourselves, and well beyond child bearing years.  And yes, he turns me on, but sex is not the focus of our relationship.  We are just a couple of “old folks” who enjoy each other in and out of bed, with a few marriages/LTRs behind us.  And those marriages/LTRS are right where they belong, BEHIND us.

          We are together because we like and LOVE each other, not because our past relationship history meets some checklist.

           

        12. Yet Another Guy

          @Gala

          Also, it is counter intuitive to me, why would a man think that a guy who woman sleeps with faster is more sexually desirable? To me at least this is completely the opposite. This would likely be a guy i think is good for nothing other than his dick and i don’t care about him and about what he thinks of me nor do i want to keep seeing him.

          That is because men and women have different views on the topic.  I can assure you that no higher quality guy feels special because you made him wait when you had NSA sex with a lower quality man, as it lowers his ranking within the male social hierarchy.  Most men will balk at the idea if they know about a woman’s lane changing behavior before hand or dump her after they discover that she is not the special snowflake that they assumed her to be .

          If you have NSA casual sex with a lower quality man, do not be surprised if higher quality man is not interested in making an investment in you.  You are thinking that he is so special to you that you want to make him wait until you are certain that he is really into you.  However, that is not how he perceives the situation.  He is sees it as being penalized because his primary goal is to conquer you as a sexual partner, not become your boyfriend (that is a distant secondary goal because men look for sex and find love).  He sees it as having to make an investment for something that another man obtained for free.  It has nothing to do with maturity.  That is just a red herring women tell themselves to escape the hard reality that it is primal instinct-driven male behavior that cannot be shamed or socialized out of the male population.

          Once again, men have to compete with each other for what are effectively breeding rights with a woman.  Sex is ridiculously easy for the average woman to obtain compared to the average man.  Men have to make an investment of some kind if they want sex from a woman with an equal or higher SMV.  That is why men date down.  It lowers the investment that they have to make in order to get laid.  I seriously feel sorry for you if you cannot wrap your head around this reality.

          One last thing, if you believe that having NSA casual sex outside of your socioeconomic class is some kind of firewall against disclosure, I have swamp land in Florida that I can sell to you.  A lower class man is more likely to post his sexual exploits with you on the Internet, as he considers you to be a trophy sexual conquest.  By having NSA sex with him, you have elevated his ranking within the male hierarchy, and he is going to let the world know about the encounter.

        13. Yet Another Guy

          @SparklingEmerald

          I never said that changing lanes permanently is not allowed.  What I said is that guys do not like when a women has NSA sex with some guys while making a guy in whom she is interested wait.  We talking about an ongoing pattern of behavior.  It is amazing how many women on online dating sites engage in this pattern of behavior on a regular basis.  The online dating community is not as spread out as women believe, and men talk because they are attempting to protect themselves from opportunists, emotional basket cases, and other undesirable women.  This is not second hand information and men usually have photos to prove it.  I received a bunch of nude photos from a woman I met this week, and I am talking about sexually explicit nude photos where she was using a toy.  I am not naive enough to believe that I am the first man to receive these photos.

        14. Gala

          @SparklingEmerald:

          why would you listen to what YAG has to say on this topic? Lol. What he says is absurd. Of course it is inevitable that you would sleep with some man faster than with the other. Nobody in their right mind, save internet trolls, would imagine otherwise. I also think that any normal man should realize that in this day and age most women have had NSA sex. If they are that dumb or that much in denial, i feel sorry for them. And you know what, most men did have NSA sex too. Anybody who’s claiming that once you have NSA sex with one person you “owe” it to every guy out there needs to have their head examined…

          moving on….

          @YAG

          You make me lol. Lower class men are the way to go. What are they gonna post on Facebook? They don’t know who i am beyond the first name (which may not even be real). I don’t maintain relationships with them,  don’t give out my real email or phone and don’t share social media accounts, and i never see them twice. You don’t seem to grasp how easy it is for a woman to get laid discretely. Oh, and there’s never been a nude photo of me taken or shared. Women who do that are, in my opinion, trashy, and the fact you’re seeing such women reflects poorly on your own quality…

        15. Yet Another Guy

          @Gala

          I feel sorry for you because you are in denial.  You believe that you are above all of it.  You have no idea as to how this information spreads on the Internet. I will give you a hint. It is not Facebook.  There are tons of photos and videos shared everyday that were taken surreptitiously.

          Additionally, I can assure you that it is not ridiculously difficult to obtain a woman’s last name from just her first name.  I do it on a regular basis because I do not meet a woman from online unless I know her last name.  Sure there are women who stump me from time to time, but no one’s information is safe if enough data points are collected.  So unless you are using an alias and withholding all identifying information from you lower class lover, I can assure you than one of these men will eventually identify you.  That is a certainty that you can take to the bank.  Given enough encounters, you will make a mistake.

          As far as to only lower quality women sending nudes, you could not be more clueless.  This woman was a successful anesthesiologist (yes, I identified who she was before I met her).  Some women get off on sharing photos.  They enjoy the validation.

        16. Yet Another Guy

          @Gala

          One more thing, you seem to be fixated with past behavior.  None of us have been saints.  What we are discussing is an ongoing pattern of behavior. The concept that a guy should be made to wait when he is special to you while you literally continue to just fuck guys who mean nothing to you is so foreign to the average man as to be absurd.  You seem to be unable to grasp that a man will not invest in something that another man was able to obtain for free.  We are not talking about a three weeks versus four or five weeks thing.  It is a woman hooks up with men who mean nothing to her while making those who do wait thing.  No man with options is knowingly going to make that investment, and you are delusional if you think one will.  Your investment value to him will approach zero once he knows that you hook up with men who mean nothing to you.  The fact that you cannot grasp this simple reality tells me that you are clueless about men.   You do not have to take my word on this subject.  Put one hundred men in a room and ask them if they would wait to have sex with a woman because she thought that he was special when they knew that she was hooking up with men who meant nothing to her.   They would laugh you out the room.

        17. GoWiththeFlow

          Jeremy,

          Oh I totally understand the “why should I buy the cow when some other guy got the milk for free” line of thinking men engage in.  Trust me, I and my women friends have spent lifetimes navigating our way around it so we are very familiar with it.  We can sometimes even figure out which guys subconsciously believe this even when they profess to be non-judgemental and egalitarian.

          That’s why when this topic came up on a previous blog post, I said I was stunned by what Adrian, YAG, and some of the other men reported.  That women were letting it all hang out and divulging details of their sexual histories very early into interactions/relationships with men.

          I offered that with the way things are, women should be discreet.  They should also assert their privacy rights to their own information.  When I first start dating a man, all he needs to know is that I’m not a virgin.  I wouldn’t hand a new love interest all of my financial information, including ATM PIN numbers, and how much I owe on my mortgage.  And most people would be aghast if someone asked a new romantic partner for that info.  So why would I give a detailed sexual and relationship history to someone who is still new to me?  And why would anyone feel entitled to that info?  Back on that old blog post, it was Tom10 who said if a woman is asked about her history she should humorously deflect, deflect, deflect.  That advice is golden.

          But back to the question of men being emotionally invested in whether a woman has had sex on a faster timetable with previous partners than she has with him.  Is this something that is serving modern men well?  YAG is reportedly having to talk down guys who went out and got drunk after learning that their girlfriend or wife, before they ever met them, had sex with a guy on date #2 when they were made to wait for date #6.  And now everything that went on between this couple, the shared experiences, the emotional support, the friendship, the sex, is meaningless because she has morphed into a “not-so-special snowflake slut” and he is a “fool.”   HELLO!  Isn’t this downspiraling thought pattern and behavior completely maladaptive?  How does this benefit the men here?

          If men are happy that in the modern world they can have sexual relationships with women without betrothal or marriage, on a variety of timetables and in different ways, without judgement, then they are going to have to accept that women will as well and learn not to judge them for it.

          As for the whole changing lanes theory, as Sparkling Emerald has said, women change who they date and how they date largely by negative conditioning.  No woman hits her 29th birthday and says, “Okay those sexy bad boys are so much fun!  Too bad I’m going to have to give it all up to settle down with boring baby-daddy man.”

          Bad boys are called bad because, in general, they are miserable human beings.  They can be anywhere on the spectrum from jerk to felonious criminal.  Some are physically abusive, many are emotionally abusive.  Young women many times leave these entanglements with battered self-esteem and a heart full of pain.  (And I know some women who have been financially ripped off on top of that) So yeah, when they’re ready to try for love again, they may “change lanes” and that’s a good thing.  It’s healthy and a sign of positive growth and personal change.  They are upgrading, not settling.

        18. Gala

          @YAG

          Rest assured that i know all about how information spreads on the internet. After all that is a part of what i do for a living. Which is why i never give out any identifying information on myself at all. Why would i?? I am not going to be friends with them. And even if i did, i have been blessed with a ridiculously common Jane Smith type first/last name combination and live in the city of 10 million people. If i want to fuck someone discretely, i will most absolutely do that and nobody will ever find that out. You think you are so smart and have it all figured out, but you are not, i can promise you that. Also, sorry sweetie but most of these guys have better things to do than to stalk over the internet their last night one night stand whose name they barely remember  using deep search routines lol. True crazies like that are rare indeed.

          And i don’t think you understand my point on trashy women. Sending out your nude photos IS what makes you trashy. Trashy and dumb. Even if you’re a doctor. Why would any guy associate with such a person beyond one night stand is beyond me.

        19. Gala

          @YAG:
          “It is a woman hooks up with men who mean nothing to her while making those who do wait thing.  No man with options is knowingly going to make that investment, and you are delusional if you think one will.  Your investment value to him will approach zero once he knows that you hook up with men who mean nothing to you.  The fact that you cannot grasp this simple reality tells me that you are clueless about men.”

          Are you really that dense? I understand that “reality” very well. Which is precisely why i am advising the ladies to scratch their itch, if they must, i a discrete manner, as per my post above. And of course one should never ever volunteer or discuss past encounters. So this is a straw man argument.
          I also think that men who are so hung up on this whole sex are in denial and are simply setting themselves up for being played. But hey it’s their business, i can’t change men. All we can do is serve up what they’re all looking for, right? And “just our company and sexuality” it ain’t, is it Jeremy?

        20. Adrian

          Hi Gala,

          Not to jump into this debate between YAG and yourself but I just wanted to comment on one thing you said…

          And of course one should never ever volunteer or discuss past encounters

          Personally I disagree with this. I think a woman should be able to be with a man who will NOT judge her for the things that she did before she even knew her current guy existed.

          Our pasts make us who we are, all the good or bad are just pieces of the whole (not saying a woman having sex sooner with a previous guy than her current guy is bad) . If a woman’s current guy can only see one thing she did in her past and ignore all the other great qualities she has then she should dump him.

          Also don’t forget Evan’s advice on time. How a guy reacts to what you tell a him about yourself in the first week will be different than how a guy reacts to what you tell him about yourself at the end of the first year when he is emotionally invested.

        21. Yet Another Guy

          @Gala

          What I do not get is the whole give it away to a guy who means nothing to a woman while making another guy in whom she is interested wait nonsense.  If we want to talk about counterintuitive and illogical, this one takes the cake.  This dichotomy is one of those things that make men believe that all women are at least a little bit crazy.  I can assure you that guys have no such set of rules of engagement because they do not control access to sex.  Sure guys have NSA sex, but they will also sleep with a woman in whom they are seriously interested on the first date. Guys do not forgo sex to protect their hearts.  That is a very important difference that some women who contribute to this blog appear to be unable to grasp.   When you make a man wait, he assumes that you are not easy, which increases your value to him because he assumes that all men have to make an investment.  When he discovers that that is not true, the s-word and the word “fool” come out.

          Repeat, no guy wants to invest in something that another man obtained for free.  It is a simple truth.  It has nothing to do with being insecure.  It is primal.  It is part of the male competition for what are effectively breeding rights when stripped to its core, and when you make a man wait when you do not make all men wait, it makes him feel like he is a lesser man.   He does not see it as the other guys meant nothing to do you.  He sees it as he was unable to compete on that level, and most men are competitive.  Nothing you do will change his mind, and while his anger may subside, your relationship will never be the same.  That is something that you and the ladies who foolishly believe that a man will wait for a woman who has NSA sex with guys in whom she is not interested can take to the bank.

        22. Jeremy

          GWTF you ask whether men’s attitude on this subject is working for their benefit.  That is a good question.  I’ll tell you what I believe IS to men’s benefit – not marrying women who are not terribly attracted to them but believe they would make good husbands/fathers.  Such men hope for a loving wife, while their wives hope for a help-meet. Such a situation will not work out well, and is COMMON.  Read KK’s story.

           

          You wrote,No woman hits her 29th birthday and says, “Okay those sexy bad boys are so much fun!  Too bad I’m going to have to give it all up to settle down with boring baby-daddy man.”  With respect, do you really believe this?  This happens all the time, though without the hyperbole.  Women do indeed learn by negative feedback, yet that negative feedback is necessary to overcome what their minds otherwise believe is attractive.  Learning to eat broccoli when what you want is pie, because pie is not good for you.  Does it serve broccoli to realize that the person consuming it doesn’t like it as much as she likes pie?  No, because broccoli is an object, to be acted upon by a person.  Yet if it was a person, if it had feelings and wanted to be loved, if there were severe consequences to the broccoli of the person choosing it deciding in the end that it wants to eat what it likes instead of what is good for it….then yes, it serves the broccoli to know. 

        23. Jeremy

          Gala, “ And “just our company and sexuality” it ain’t, is it Jeremy?”  No.  Not for either gender, Gala.

        24. Tom10

          @ Jeremy
          “I’ll tell you what I believe IS to men’s benefit – not marrying women who are not terribly attracted to them but believe they would make good husbands/fathers.  Such men hope for a loving wife, while their wives hope for a help-meet. Such a situation will not work out well, and is COMMON.”
           
          I dunno Jeremy, I think you and YAG are setting an impossible dating environment for women to operate in; when they chase high-chemistry guys and get burned they’re at fault for trying to date out of their league, yet when they then try to compromise on chemistry in exchange for commitment they’re not doing those guys any favor at all? They just can’t win!
           
          Let’s state the dynamic of how dating works which none of us want to admit but most of us know to be mostly/often true: men have to date “down” for nsa sex and women have to date “down” for commitment.
           
          No-one likes to admit this because it can often involve painful objective self-reflection and acceptance of our true place in the world.
           
          “Yet if it was a person, if it had feelings and wanted to be loved, if there were severe consequences to the broccoli of the person choosing it deciding in the end that it wants to eat what it likes instead of what is good for it….then yes, it serves the broccoli to know”
           
          No woman forces men (or women) to chase hot-chemistry therefore it’s their (mens’) own fault if/when they subsequently get burned with a sex-less marriage once the woman loses interest once all her needs have been fulfilled.
           
          And I’ve no doubt that many of the low-chemistry guys (broccoli men) rejected lower chemistry women themselves to hold out for their hotty. Broccoli men are free to date broccoli women if they want.
           
          GWTF wrote:No woman hits her 29th birthday and says, “Okay those sexy bad boys are so much fun!  Too bad I’m going to have to give it all up to settle down with boring baby-daddy man.” 
           
          To which you replied:
           
          “With respect, do you really believe this?”
           
          I agree with you that many women hit their 29th birthdays and start to change their dating behavior and how they evaluate men, especially if they want a family. But I think they’re simply being sensible; otherwise there’s a reasonable possibility that they’ll hit their 39th birthday going from relationship to relationship and/or still single and commenting here.
           
          Many men do the same thing…although often only after their 35th birthday (think Evan/YAG etc.): we can simply afford to hold on for a few extra years because of biology and dating dynamics.

        25. Gala

          @YAG:

          What I do not get is the whole give it away to a guy who means nothing to a woman while making another guy in whom she is interested wait nonsense.  If we want to talk about counterintuitive and illogical, this one takes the cake.

          Nope, not at all. You really don’t get it but allow me to explain. Sometimes a woman just wants to have sex. May be she’s feeling down, may be she’s feeling adventurous, may be she has recently broken up with a boyfriend and she’s mad at him, may be she’s hasn’t had one in 4 months or so. So may be she is going on dates with guys but nobody is boyfriend material, or may be she’s taking a hiatus from dating altogether, the bottomline is she wants to just have sex and sans committed partner this is going to be an NSA situation.

          In such situation, having a discreet one-time encounter is her best option. She’s not “giving away” anything. She’s getting what she wants. Why wouldn’t she just hook up with the last guy she went on a date, you ask? Why of course because you guys are judgmental as fuck.  The reason she doesn’t do that, is because she may actually like him, and care about what he’d think about her, and because she knows he’s likely to have lower opinion of her if she sleeps with him “too soon” … well she doesn’t. She is going to bid herself up by not sleeping with him “too soon”. You see now, by being judgmental and insecure about women’s sexual behavior, you guys are the ones who are creating this issue in the first place. Look in the mirror.

          Repeat, no guy wants to invest in something that another man obtained for free.  It is a simple truth.  It has nothing to do with being insecure.

          Just because you keep repeating it, doesn’t make it the reality. We get it, you don’t want to do it, but you’re gonna have to – whether you like it or not. Because unless a woman is totally stupid and volunteers this info, or “shits where she eats”, i.e. sleeps around in a close circle, you will simply never know, and even if you did, if you wanted to get sex from this particular woman, you’d have to jump though the hoops designed for you, even if another person didn’t have to.

          One of my clients sell their (identical) products through an obscure dealer network at completely different prices to different clients. Client A may be getting a product at 30-50% higher price compared to Client B. Do you think that Client A likes this situation? For one, they probably don’t know what others are paying. For two, even if they knew, there’s nothing they could do if they wanted the product. The manufacturer doesn’t owe it to them to sell it at the same price. So, what I am getting at, sex is not a commodity with perfect price transparency. This is the reality whether you and your buddies like it or not.

        26. Jeremy

          Hi Tom, nice to see you back.  You wrote, No woman forces men to chase hot-chemistry therefore it’s their (mens’) own fault if/when they subsequently get burned with a sex-less marriage once the woman loses interest once all her needs have been fulfilled.

           

          So I disagree with you here.  I would agree with your statement if the women made it clear before they married these men that they weren’t terribly interested.  If the pre-marital sex life was drab and infrequent, for example.  But how often is that the case?  In order for it to be men’s fault, the men would have to KNOW that the woman wasn’t interested in him.  He usually doesn’t, in spite of the women on this site’s inability to comprehend this.  Men have been taught all their lives that their efforts will result in female interest – and it does.  It’s just that that interest is usually short-lived after marriage.

           

          Only the woman in this example knows, deep down, how she feels – and therefore the fault of the situation is hers.  In the same way as when a woman chases a high-chemistry man for sex, he tells her that he likes her and then ghosts her – that is his fault because he pretended to feel something that he didn’t.

        27. Emily, the original

          Hi Tom,

          Let’s state the dynamic of how dating works which none of us want to admit but most of us know to be mostly/often true: men have to date “down” for nsa sex and women have to date “down” for commitment.

          Yes. And I’ve no doubt that many of the low-chemistry guys (broccoli men) rejected lower chemistry women themselves to hold out for their hotty. 

          Or they marry the lower chemistry woman but resent her.  I agree with you that many women hit their 29th birthdays and start to change their dating behavior and how they evaluate men, especially if they want a family.

          What other choice does she have? Hold out for a higher chemistry man who may never show up or not want her? 

        28. Tron Swanson

          Gala,

          The solution–though most men aren’t willing to do it–is to simply refuse to jump through hoops at all. That way, we never get taken advantage of, in terms of being forced to make a disproportionate amount of effort.

        29. Yet Another Guy

          @Tom

          Let’s state the dynamic of how dating works which none of us want to admit but most of us know to be mostly/often true: men have to date “down” for nsa sex and women have to date “down” for commitment.

          I do not believe that women date down for commitment.  It is more a case of men dating down for sex that gives a woman a false sense of having a higher SMV than she really possesses.  Women rarely date down from their actual SMV because most women do not have to date down for commitment.  Sure, some will do it for a well-heeled and kind, but less attractive man; however, it is more often the case that a woman settles for a guy with an equal SMV that she overlooked while she was still desirable as a casual sex partner to guys with higher SMVs.

          Maybe not all, but a lot women feel like they are settling after they have had sex with a man with a higher SMV.  That is what Jeremy is driving at with his pie versus broccoli comments.  I also know for fact that what Jeremy has stated about a woman pining for the higher SMV man with whom she had sex after she obtains what she desires from the man she married is true.  I routinely had sex with women with lower SMVs when I was younger who ended up marrying guys with equal SMVs.  I had several of these women ask me if I wanted to be their discrete sex partner on the side after they married and had children because their husbands were not doing it from them in the bedroom.  They did not want to get divorced because their husbands were good fathers and providers. Sadly, I did take a couple of these women up on their offer.  That is a large part of why I did not get around to marrying until age 37.  Sex was plentiful, so why buy the cow when the milk was free and plentiful?  I am absolutely certain that my marriage was my penance for this behavior.  I definitely do not feel good about my past behavior; however, it takes two to tango.

           

        30. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          I do not believe that women date down for commitment. 

          Yes, they sometimes do. If this weren’t true, the theme of so many comments on this post wouldn’t exist — that a woman supposedly gets bored with the family man once she has the family and the house. The family man is doing so much for her in the beginning — he’s trying to win her over because she has a higher SMV.

        31. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          Yes, they sometimes do. If this weren’t true, the theme of so many comments on this post wouldn’t exist — that a woman supposedly gets bored with the family man once she has the family and the house. The family man is doing so much for her in the beginning — he’s trying to win her over because she has a higher SMV.

          Au contraire!  That also happens when a woman marries a man with an equal SMV.  A woman can get an over inflated sense of her SMV when guys like me date down for sex.  As kooky as the manosphere can be at times, there is a more than a grain of truth to alpha fux/beta bux.  It is not the extreme example that the manosphere uses, but women do, in fact, become lulled into the belief that they possess a higher SMV than is warranted by their looks by their sexual experiences in their twenties. If a woman is going to make herself available to man with a higher SMV, odds are that he is going to take advantage of her.  Like I mentioned in my earlier post, I had several women come back to me after they married a man with an equal SMV.  These women were never more than sex to me.  They were truly loved by their husbands.  I knew several of these men.  That is why I only said “yes” to a couple of the offers.  I did not know their husbands.

        32. Tom10

          Hi Tom
           
          Hi Jeremy,
           
          Thanks – I’ve been trying to wean myself away but it’s difficult!
           
          “I would agree with your statement if the women made it clear before they married these men that they weren’t terribly interested.  If the pre-marital sex life was drab and infrequent, for example.  But how often is that the case?  In order for it to be men’s fault, the men would have to KNOW that the woman wasn’t interested in him”.
           
          I suppose this is just one of these age-old things that will always exist as long as men and women exist. This is like the discussion about when men have nsa sex with women they’ve no interest in: women will often argue that men have an obligation to be upfront about their lack of interest men will often argue that they’re grown women who have bodily autonomy with the capacity to make their own decisions. Why would he handicap his own interests? Altruism?
           
          I tend to side with the latter argument, therefore, for the sake of consistency I think grown men have the ability to choose who to marry and it’s their responsibility to accurately gauge a woman’s interest/ambivalence.
           
          Why would women handicap their own interests and declare their true level of interest? Altruism?


          “Only the woman in this example knows, deep down, how she feels – and therefore the fault of the situation is hers” 
           
          I honestly don’t get this. With every. single. woman. I’ve ever dated I’ve always just known straightaway which party was more interested: sometimes it was her, sometimes it was me. Very rarely it can be equal.
           
           Does everyone else not experience that? Being the more interested party is a higher-risk.
           
          Hey Emily 🙂
           
          “What other choice does she have? Hold out for a higher chemistry man who may never show up or not want her? “
           
          Agreed: I have no problem with women doing this, or “lane-changing” to quote others. I think both genders do it throughout their dating lives as their circumstances and motivations change.
           
          As Jeremy noted it can become an issue if/when one party wants to then change back again later in life, but it’s on every individual to weigh up these risks when dating.
           
          @ Yet Another Guy
          “I do not believe that women date down for commitment.”
           
          I think you’re an exception to this general dynamic YAG as you decided to date down for sex and commitment, which is unusual. Indeed you actively run away from higher chemistry women. I totally get that btw; when one is used to always being in control it can feel awful to face giving up that power. It’s safer for our self-esteem not to take the risk to avoid getting burned.
           
           
          However, it’s my opinion that a significant percentage, if not the majority, of men need to be dating up to feel in love and truly commit. That’s why you’ve had to talk so many men down off a ledge when they discovered their snow-flakes slept with other men faster than him: it can be a knife to the heart to discover one’s actual position in the dating hierarchy. None of us wants to be the chump so it’s unbearably painful to discover that, well actually, we just might be.

        33. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          As kooky as the manosphere can be at times, there is a more than a grain of truth to alpha fux/beta bux. 

          Yep. The alpha proves elusive so she marries a less attractive beta.

        34. Emily, the original

          Hi Tom, where have you been?  🙂 Agreed: I have no problem with women doing this, or “lane-changing” to quote others. I think both genders do it throughout their dating lives as their circumstances and motivations change.

          I think it can be hard if you naturally have a little dirty birdy in you to stay in the “good” lane.  🙂 However, it’s my opinion that a significant percentage, if not the majority, of men need to be dating up to feel in love and truly commit. That’s why you’ve had to talk so many men down off a ledge when they discovered their snow-flakes slept with other men faster than him: it can be a knife to the heart to discover one’s actual position in the dating hierarchy. None of us wants to be the chump so it’s unbearably painful to discover that, well actually, we just might be.

          You worded it much better than I did.

        35. Tom10

          @ Emily, the original
          “I think it can be hard if you naturally have a little dirty birdy in you to stay in the “good” lane.” 
           
          Ha ha; we’re like two peas in a pod 😉

        36. GoWiththeFlow

          Tom10,

          Good to see you again!  I mention you in  a comment and–POOF!–you appear!  I love it when the universe does this.

          Regarding lane changing and whom people partner up with and marry, you’re right:  People choose with their best interests in mind, it’s not an act of altruism.

          Another thing that is true:  Changing lanes is not necessarily a negative thing.  Either for the lane changer or their post lane change partner.  If a woman figures out, after a painful entanglement, that gorgeous, emotionally intense, but unemployed bikers with cocaine habits don’t make good relationship partners then good for her!  The world is all the better for it.  And she may be in a position to really appreciate her next boyfriend, the accountant who always calls if he will be late and has a two drink limit on weekday nights.

          Jeremy,

          I think YAG’s story better illustrates the hazards of marrying someone where a certain chemistry threshold isn’t met than KK’s.  She was dealing with someone with a personality disorder who cannot love.  YAG had a marginal level of attraction to his wife at the outset of his marriage and it ended up failing.  He implies that his wife stopped wanting to have sex with him, and I can believe it.  What woman want gets exited at the thought of sleeping with a man who doesn’t desire her?  Yet he continues to purposefully pursue only women he’s less than truly attracted to because he doesn’t like feeling he’s giving up his power in a relationship.

          As far as my theoretical 29 year old lane changing woman goes, the point I wanted to make is that lane changing is not typically a negative thing.  It can lead to a person making decisions that bring them and their partners a lot of happiness.  This is no different that a 35 year old man who wants to settle down and have a family figuring out that the hot but dumb or hot but crazy women he is drawn to aren’t good long term partners.  People applaud this and say it is a sign of maturity.  Yet a woman does it, and her motives are suspect.

          As a parent, I lived through my son having hot but crazy girlfriends.  One in particular was rather alarming.  Just a helpful hint here:  Crazy girlfriends tend to have crazy mothers as well.  It’s a package deal.  Anyway, when they broke up I literally almost threw a party.  So when his next girlfriend was a little less attractive, but even keeled, smart, and kind, I was relieved and took it as a sign that my son was growing into an adult.

          Trust me, Jeremy, if your precious baby girl ever gets involved with a hot bad boy, you won’t have a good nights sleep until they split.  And when her next boyfriend after that is kind, stable, and treats her well, you will offer up a sacrifice of thanksgiving to the gods.  You won’t view her lane changing as a bad thing.

        37. Emily, the original

          Hi Tom10,

          “I think it can be hard if you naturally have a little dirty birdy in you to stay in the “good” lane.”  Ha ha; we’re like two peas in a pod 

          I was thinking more about the topic on this post about when a woman has sex with a man in relation to when she had sex with previous partners … I remember that I and at least 2 girlfriends (when we were in our 20s) each had a guy who had (for lack of a better term) dickmatized us. There was absolutely nothing else going on with these guys in terms of a relationship (usually that part of it was awful), but they had set a standard or demonstrated for us “what all the songs were about” … you get where I’m going with this. Do men have a similar type of experience with one woman from their pasts? I’m not only referring to her physical appearance. I’m talking about a woman who, well, turned you out in a way no other women had (as I always imagined Angelina Jolie did for Brad Pitt!). If so, how does that affect your expectations with a new sex partner/girlfriend?

        38. Yet Another Guy

          @GWtF

          Yet he continues to purposefully pursue only women he’s less than truly attracted to because he doesn’t like feeling he’s giving up his power in a relationship.

          I wanted to thank you for this part of your post because it is insightful.  I never thought of it as a power thing, more of an avoidance of discomfort thing.

        39. Tom10

          @ GoWiththeFlow
          “Regarding lane changing and whom people partner up with and marry, you’re right:  People choose with their best interests in mind, it’s not an act of altruism.”
           
          Exactly.
           
          I’ll admit I have a tendency to view all/most human behaviors through a cynical prism as being ultimately motivated by self-interest. However, the flip-side of this perspective is I don’t get upset or annoyed when I observe people behaving in a selfish manner as I realize that they’re simply following their nature. It’s when people act out of their own best self-interest that is unnatural and fascinating to understand.
           
          @ Emily, the original
          “I remember that I and at least 2 girlfriends (when we were in our 20s) each had a guy who had (for lack of a better term) dickmatized us.”
           
          Such saucy language Emily! 😉
           
          “Do men have a similar type of experience with one woman from their pasts?”
           
          I don’t think it happens as often the other way around due to the aforementioned gender dynamics (men will date down for nsa sex more than women will), however, yep I’m sure it happens to most men at some point. I was, um, vagimatized once; however, unfortunately she went back to her ex. after a few dates 🙁
           
          @ Yet Another Guy
          “I never thought of it as a power thing, more of an avoidance of discomfort thing.”
           
          I’ve been working on a theory lately that power, (romantic) love, risk and emotional pain are all difference facets of the same concept and ultimately inseparable.
           
          To be in love one must forfeit power; one must hand their emotional well-being into the hands of someone else at the risk of great personal pain.
           
          That’s why so many people become emotionally unavailable; they get burned once and then protect themselves from potential pain. The price of this is love I guess.
           
          So one can be in control or in love but not both.
           
          Today’s thought for the day 🙂

        40. Jeremy

          Tom, it’s funny how we have such different outlooks regarding human motivation.  When I was younger I was told that I was too optimistic about human motivation, always seeing the selfless and the good in everyone when I should be seeing the selfish.  Funnily enough, one of my most vocal critics in this regard was my first serious girlfriend who criticized me that I saw her in too good of a light – and she ended up proving that to me through a series of betrayals and self-destructive behavior.  Yet through that all I still saw the good in her along with the selfish, which was what made dealing with her behavior so difficult.  But I digress.

           

          You wrote, “That’s why so many people become emotionally unavailable; they get burned once and then protect themselves from potential pain. The price of this is love I guess.”  This happens mostly in childhood, according to research on attachment.  Again, I can speak to it first-hand.  My parents were well-meaning people, but not very interested in parenthood.  Their affections and attention toward me and my siblings were unreliable at best, so we all learned that we can’t rely on anyone but ourselves; that it is ok to give help, but needing to receive it makes us weak.  That was an unfortunate lesson to learn, because it also makes receiving love difficult, given that love is developed by allowing others to give and giving in return.  I was born anxious by temperament and avoidant by upbringing – learned to protect myself from pain by detaching, yet unable to detach fully. So I understand both perspectives too well.

           

          And for all that this is a protective mechanism, it is toxic.  Because you are right – in order to feel love, one must sacrifice self-reliance and make one’s self vulnerable.  When we perceive our own independence as our crowning characteristic, we are shooting ourselves in the foot.

        41. Emily, the original

          Tom10,

          I don’t think it happens as often the other way around due to the aforementioned gender dynamics (men will date down for nsa sex more than women will),

          Well, it doesn’t have to be within a nsa situation. Could be with a girlfriend.

           I was, um, vagimatized once; however, unfortunately she went back to her ex. after a few dates 🙁

          Sorry to hear that. What did she do to … vagimatize you? I DON’T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT WHAT SHE LOOKED LIKE. What did she bring to the table? You don’t have to get graphic, but what made her stand out? For example, the guy I referred to was very aggressive and had no fear. That dickmatized me.

          That’s why so many people become emotionally unavailable; they get burned once and then protect themselves from potential pain. The price of this is love I guess.

          This is very true, particularly if it is someone who as YAG described completely floors you and makes you feel a loss of control.

        42. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          This is very true, particularly if it is someone who as YAG described completely floors you and makes you feel a loss of control.

          I was thinking about the male equivalent of the mindset that women adopt of not sleeping with a man until he commits after getting burned by a man with a higher SMV.  Pretty much all experienced, sane men have an N.  An N is the maximum number of dates on which a man is willing to go with a woman who he sexually desires without having sex.  Pursuing a woman beyond this point without having sex requires her to be a special exception because he has learned through experience that it is usually wasted effort, as the probability that he will have sex drops after his N has been reached.

          Why do men adopt an N?  Well, Ladies, I am certain that either you or one of your friends strung a nice guy along because he gave you/her what the guy who was banging you/her was unwilling to provide.  We are not talking about an orbiter.   We talking about a guy with whom a woman actually goes on dates, but the best outcome for which he can hope is a make-out session.  After the sting of being used subsides, a guy learns from this mistake and sets about establishing an N.

          The big difference here is that women at least get sex when they get used by the lucky man, usually sex that they enjoy.  The unlucky man in this scenario has to go home and masturbate after a date for which he planned and paid, usually a nice date that the man who was seeing bedroom action never offered.

        43. Emily, the original

          YAG,
          I was thinking about the male equivalent of the mindset that women adopt of not sleeping with a man until he commits after getting burned by a man with a higher SMV. 
          It’s not always a man with a higher SMV. It’s just a man we have higher chemistry with.

          The big difference here is that women at least get sex when they get used by the lucky man, usually sex that they enjoy.  The unlucky man in this scenario has to go home and masturbate after a date for which he planned and paid, usually a nice date that the man who was seeing bedroom action never offered.
          I suppose this happens but I haven’t heard a lot of women talk about it. If a woman is getting really great sex with a  man she wants more from, she’s focusing on that, not on another guy for dates. What does happen more often is a woman will have a nsa sex partner and also a guy friend who hopes she will want him eventually. On another post, we talked about this topic extensively. The woman shouldn’t use the male friend for emotional support if she knows he wants more but he should also walk if he isn’t getting what he wants.

        44. Shaukat

          I honestly don’t get this. With every. single. woman. I’ve ever dated I’ve always just known straightaway which party was more interested: sometimes it was her, sometimes it was me. Very rarely it can be equal.
           
           Does everyone else not experience that? Being the more interested party is a higher-risk.

          Yes. Maybe not right away, but certainly by the second date and in between dates. It remains the most emotionally draining part of dating for me; meeting someone, feeling an intense emotional connection, and then realizing that they’re about to slip away because interest isn’t fully mutual. Btw, when you realize this do you ever stay to try and build attraction, or just premptively terminate?

        45. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          What does happen more often is a woman will have a nsa sex partner and also a guy friend who hopes she will want him eventually. On another post, we talked about this topic extensively. The woman shouldn’t use the male friend for emotional support if she knows he wants more but he should also walk if he isn’t getting what he wants.

          The guy in this scenario is not an orbiter.  He is a guy in whom she is interested in being more than platonic friends, but with whom she does not feel an urgent need to get physical because she is already getting sex from a guy with whom she has higher sexual chemistry (a.k.a., a guy with a higher SMV in her eyes).  She is putting the second guy through the ringer testing him to see if he will stick around and and shit testing him to see if he will eventually stand his ground while giving it away to a guy with whom she has more chemistry.  It happened to me and just about every one of my friends when we were in our early twenties.

          Women can make mistakes with nice guys too when they are younger.  These are the kinds of mistakes that women make in love that make men say, “Fuck it, I do not care about what she wants. I am getting mine!”  It is what drives young men to the manosphere and men like me become self-absorbed bodybuilders who are dogs to women.  A sane man will only allow himself to get burned one time.  After which, he will be focused on satisfying his own needs; hence, the establishment of an N.   For much of my twenties, my N was 3.  It dropped to 2 in the my thirties.  I refused to go beyond my N without getting physical the entire time.  I can tell you that several women where stunned when I walked away after reaching my N.   My reply was always that they clearly did not find me to be sexually desirable enough; otherwise, they would have had sex with me, which is the basically truth, and what Jeremy is driving at in his posts.  No guy wants to be chosen because he is a kind provider.  All guys want to know and be told that they are sexually desirable.  Men need sex to feel loved.

        46. Yet Another Guy

          @Tom

          However, it’s my opinion that a significant percentage, if not the majority, of men need to be dating up to feel in love and truly commit. That’s why you’ve had to talk so many men down off a ledge when they discovered their snow-flakes slept with other men faster than him: it can be a knife to the heart to discover one’s actual position in the dating hierarchy. None of us wants to be the chump so it’s unbearably painful to discover that, well actually, we just might be.

          I can assure you that that has never been the case.  All my friends have always been acutely aware of where they land within the male social hierarchy and have chosen women accordingly.  What is more the case is that women tend to date up way more than men, especially when they are younger.  Dating up is made possible for women because men are dogs.

          As far as to my ex, I chose her for qualities other than her looks.  I dated my fair share of Barbie bimbos before I met her.  She was the first woman I met who earned what I earned.  She was well-educated, driven, confident, and did not assume that I would pickup the tab for everything.  I immediately felt a partnership with her.  I chose her because most of my prior relationships were chemical romances that burned white hot and extinguished almost as fast as they caught fire.  I have yet to see a lasting relationship that was built on lust.

        47. KK

          YAG,

          The mistake you are making here is in your assumption that all women are the same. A woman who truly values commitment is not going to have two sets of rules, as you claim. When I first started dating, I got dumped all the time. Lol. But it wasn’t a mystery to me. I knew exactly why. Didn’t make it sting any less. My first serious relationship lasted two years. We never had sex. When we broke up, the first thing he did was find the easiest, trashiest girl he could to have sex with for a few weeks. You think that didn’t hurt me? Then, a few months later, I started seeing someone else who turned out to be an idiot, and he had told my ex boyfriend we were having sex, a lie which he believed, and he completely lost it. So, I understand what you’ve said about guys feeling devastated when they find out (or think they find out) something about someone they viewed as special. But it’s still the same old double standard.

        48. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          The guy in this scenario is not an orbiter.  He is a guy in whom she is interested in being more than platonic friends, but with whom she does not feel an urgent need to get physical because she is already getting sex from a guy with whom she has higher sexual chemistry (a.k.a., a guy with a higher SMV in her eyes). 

          I have never done this. I have never gone on more than one date with someone I had low sexual interest in. And if the woman in this scenario is going on date after date with a man and not having sex with him, she’s not interested. It’s not a matter of not feeling an urgent need. Its’ a matter of not caring if it ever happens. She also knows that there’s no way the sex will compare to her high chemistry man.

        49. Yet Another Guy

          @KK

          So, I understand what you’ve said about guys feeling devastated when they find out (or think they find out) something about someone they viewed as special. But it’s still the same old double standard.

          This is an opinion around which I cannot wrap my headContrary to what most women believe on this site, not all men believe that a woman is a slut if she has sex with him on the first date.  They may question if they are a special exception, but I do not know a single guy who slut-shamed a woman in whom he was seriously interested for sleeping with him early in the dating process, even on the first date.  Guys rarely share these details about women they care about while they are dating.

          It is not a double standard that pushes men over the edge.  It is the discovery that a woman who a guy assumed was very selective when it comes to sexual partners is not so selective after all.  Whether women want to admit it or not, men need to feel and be told that they are sexually desirable because men find love through sex, which makes their sexual prowess a huge part of who they are as a man.  While the guy who received an immediate green light to NSA sex may not have meant much more to you than roll in the hay, a guy who is interested in you who is made to wait translates that behavioral pattern to the other man was more sexually desirable.  It does not matter what you think or say.  His mind cannot be changed because men have had to compete with each other for what are effectively breeding rights from the time that they were teenagers.

          Most men cannot wrap their heads around the female sexual access equation: hookup_for_NSA_sex = horny_bored_lonely + no_ long_term_interest + sexually_desirable.   Guys do not operate this way.  A guy will never say, I really like her, but I want to make her wait to see if she is interested in more than sex.  A guy would lose his man card if he thought that way. 🙂 A guy wants to sleep with every woman he pursues.  The shorter the time delta between the time he meets her and the time they roll in the hay, the better he feels about himself and the subsequent relationship.

          By the way, a man does indeed feel like a woman who makes all men wait is a special snowflake, but that is because having sex with her is a huge boost to his self-esteem.    It makes him feel very sexually attractive.  To discover otherwise is a huge blow to his self-esteem, a blow that is often hard enough to make a man become temporarily mentally unstable.  That is when the s-word and the word “fool” come out.  If a man is in this state, you can be assured that he has taken a hit to his core.

        50. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          I have never done this. I have never gone on more than one date with someone I had low sexual interest in. And if the woman in this scenario is going on date after date with a man and not having sex with him, she’s not interested. It’s not a matter of not feeling an urgent need. Its’ a matter of not caring if it ever happens. She also knows that there’s no way the sex will compare to her high chemistry man.

          I commend you for not stringing a man along, but a lot of women do it because the guy with whom they are having sex does not give them what they need emotionally.  He is in it for himself.  He never takes her anywhere other than the bedroom (in modern terms, they are a Netflix and chill couple with emphasis on chill). She wants a man who will treat her like a lady, but she is addicted to the sex.  I have seen this scenario play out so many times that I cringe when I see it coming with a man I know.  That is why all men need to adopt an N when it comes the maximum number of dates on which they will go without having sex.   If she is not feeling it by that date, assume that it is never going to happen or if it eventually does occur, the sex is not going to be any good because passion on her side is weak at best.   If a guy dates beyond his N without having sex, he can pretty much be assured that he is in kind provider, not highly desirable sex partner territory.

        51. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          I commend you for not stringing a man along, but a lot of women do it because the guy with whom they are having sex does not give them what they need emotionally.  He is in it for himself.  He never takes her anywhere other than the bedroom (in modern terms, they are a Netflix and chill couple with emphasis on chill). She wants a man who will treat her like a lady, but she is addicted to the sex.

          Yes, I know exactly what kind of situation you are describing and have been in one of those myself.  This man completely turned me out, so I had no interest in dating anyone else. I knew there was no way another man could compete. And a woman can often get a lot of her emotional needs met by her friends.

          That is why all men need to adopt an N when it comes the maximum number of dates on which they will go without having sex.   If she is not feeling it by that date, assume that it is never going to happen or if it eventually does occur, the sex is not going to be any good because passion on her side is weak at best.   

          I don’t think that’s a bad strategy to adopt, provided the number of dates is reasonable. If you’ve gone out twice in one month with weeks in between dates and no communication between dates, a woman would have every right to say no. But if you’ve gone out 4 or 5 times in a month, you’re consistently seeing each other and in contact between dates … it’s probably time. (I’m throwing out arbitrary numbers as examples.)

        52. KK

          Emily,

          Indeed, that would be a great strategy if everyone had the same beliefs about sex and love and relationships. But that’s not the case. Some people see sex as a simple indulgence, no more meaningful than a slice of cake. Other people see sex as something that should be enjoyed in the context of a serious relationship. That doesn’t mean that they aren’t physically attracted to whoever they’re dating. So, if Yag has a number, he’s only going to be able to choose between the women who fall into the first group, which is fine, as long as he’s enjoying the results.

        53. Emily, the original

          Hi KK,

          I should have been clearer. I meant women who were looking for relationships and wanted to date someone and get to know him before having sex. From my perspective (and I’m one person), I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect a man to court a woman and pay for dates for months on end with no sex. Provided things were progressing and they were in more and more contact and spending more and more time together and they agreed to be exclusive (if an exclusive relationship was her goal and he as also interested in that).

        54. Tom10

          @ Jeremy
          “Because you are right – in order to feel love, one must sacrifice self-reliance and make one’s self vulnerable.  When we perceive our own independence as our crowning characteristic, we are shooting ourselves in the foot”
           
          All characteristics anathema to the “alpha” mindset.
           
          Now I understand your comments in previous threads where you tried to parse the dichotomy created by the qualities women should be attracted to versus what they actually are attracted to.
           
          @ Emily, the original
          “What did she do to … vagimatize you? I DON’T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT WHAT SHE LOOKED LIKE”
           
          Lol Emily, I must really really go on a lot about looks to have my response advancely warned in such a manner!!
           
          Gosh, trying to answer such question without referencing “looks” or “leagues” is an extremely complex endeavour!
           
          But I’ll give it my best shot. (Note, unfortunately some of the following points will invalidate some of my longstanding beliefs in sexual egalitarianism and make reference to “primal” gender differences that I strive to reject).
           
          – She was smarter than me. Women being a step ahead of me rather than me being a step ahead of them always plays tricks with my mind.
          – She had just come out of a long-term relationship (maybe I interpreted this as proven relationship material?) when we met and hooked-up.  Then the next morning she worried that I thought she might be a sl*t. In fact I thought the opposite; she made me feel a million dollars. I felt the sensation diametrically opposed to that described by YAG when men find out their “snow-flake” has slept with other guys sooner than him. Instead of chopping off my balls she made them as big as boulders. Haha.
          – She was, ahem, “ungroomed” downstairs yet always well-groomed on the next few dates, which made me think that she didn’t set out to meet a guy but got such a “lady-boner” when she met me that she just couldn’t resist.
          – On the way home the next day we stopped in a shop and, without even thinking, she paid for my few things before I had a chance to do so. I always remember that for some reason. It’s an unusual thing for a woman to do.
           
          I think those are the reasons she “vagimatized” me. She somehow simultaneously triggered “primal” instincts and quieted possible risk.
           
          See Emily – no mention of looks at all! 😉
           
          @ Shaukat
          “when you realize this do you ever stay to try and build attraction, or just premptively terminate?”
           
          I always terminate as I know there’s always other equally attractive women for whom I won’t need to “build” attraction: so why wait to try and build attraction with this one?
           
          The only reason to try and build attraction would be to date a significantly more attractive woman than normal. However, like YAG, I prefer when women are attracted to me for who I am, not for the efforts I make. Therefore I’ll take my attractive woman who is very attracted to me over a super-attractive woman who is “meh” about me.
           
          What do you in this situation Shaukat?
           
          @ Yet Another Guy
          “I can assure you that that has never been the case.  All my friends have always been acutely aware of where they land within the male social hierarchy and have chosen women accordingly.  What is more the case is that women tend to date up way more than men, especially when they are younger.  Dating up is made possible for women because men are dogs”
           
          Well as much as our male egos like to think dating dynamics wholly revolve around male sexuality the reality is that it takes two to tango. Men can’t just unilaterally decide to be dogs; they need female compliance in order to do so. “Dating up” is made possible because men are dogs and because women are now free from stigma and financial dependence therefore they can prioritize chemistry.
           
          You can’t have it both ways; if women are dating “up” for nsa sex then, by definition, they’re dating “down” when they compromise on chemistry in exchange for commitment.
           
          “Pretty much all experienced, sane men have an N.  An N is the maximum number of dates on which a man is willing to go with a woman who he sexually desires without having sex.  Pursuing a woman beyond this point without having sex requires her to be a special exception because he has learned through experience that it is usually wasted effort, as the probability that he will have sex drops after his N has been reached.”
           
          Agreed.
           
          Funny thing is most women have an N as well.
           
          A female N is the maximum amount of time a woman is willing to date a man she desires without commitment. Beyond her N sensible women will force the guy to sh*t or get off the pot.
           
          Therefore, most womens’ N is about 6 weeks/3 months for exclusivity and about 3 years for engagement/marriage.
           
          Spending time with a man beyond her N (assuming commitment is her objective) is generally a poor idea, as he would’ve likely already done so if he was interested enough if he actually wanted to.

        55. Yet Another Guy

          @Tom

          “Dating up” is made possible because men are dogs and because women are now free from stigma and financial dependence therefore they can prioritize chemistry.

          The assumption here is a logical fallacy.  Higher SMV does not automatically translate to higher chemistry.  SMV is more about status/ranking than chemistry.  The women I have dated with whom I have had the highest chemistry were not the ones with the highest SMVs.   What trips my trigger is a woman who is fun, flirty, and focused on me.  She projects a lot of feminine energy, is impeccably groomed (hair styled for her face as well as being waxed with a nice manicure and pedicure), applies just enough makeup to accent her features, and wears clothes that flatter her figure (whatever shape it may be).  Women who possess these attributes are irresistible to me, and they are usually not the most physically beautiful women in the room; however, they are often the most feminine women in the room.

        56. Jeremy

          Tom, I never told women what they “should” be attracted to.  Not ever.  I parsed the difference between comfort and arousal, and the difference between a sexual goal versus a relationship one.  I suggested to MEN to be careful of women who are not attracted to them but want what they provide.  But telling a woman what she “should” find attractive is an exercise in futility and narcissism.

           

          As to whether what I wrote is antithetical to an alpha mindset, yes it is.  Marriage is antithetical to an alpha mindset, when it comes down to it.  Rollo’s living example of alpha is an Australian narcissistic teenager who can think of no one but himself and who is unable to comprehend why anyone else’s desires but his own should matter to him.  Is that mindset attractive to a certain type of woman?  Yes.  Is it how I would want my son to behave?  No – for his own benefit, not just the benefit of women.

           

          In my manospherian years I learned that women respond better to men with an alpha mindset – men who prioritize their own desires over those of others, including the women themselves.  But even knowing that, I could not respect myself when I acted that way.  It comes down to what our core values are, how we believe we should be and act in the world, what should matter and what should matter less.  Once we understand how any given behavior will be seen by others and by ourselves, I guess it is up to each of us to make a rational decision of which behaviors to choose based on what matters to us.

        57. Emily, the original

          Hi Tom10,

          Now I understand your comments in previous threads where you tried to parse the dichotomy created by the qualities women should be attracted to versus what they actually are attracted to.

          Yes. There’s what you want  intellectually, emotionally and sexually. 3 different things.

          Lol Emily, I must really really go on a lot about looks to have my response advancely warned in such a manner!!

          Yes, you do. (no offense)

          I appreciate you telling me your story. For some reason, I can’t seem to paste it in this comment section. Yes, she wasn’t prepared if she was full tumbleweed on your first encounter. 🙂 I guess what I’m asking is … what did she DO? Here’ s an example. I was really attracted to this guy and pretty much decided the minute I met him I wanted to hook up. (This was years ago.) That happens very, very rarely, but  a high level of attraction does not guarantee great sex. I went over to his house, and as he opened the front door, I made to go into the living room. He said, “Why don’t you come in here?” He was referring to his bedroom. I thought to myself: Thank goodness! We aren’t going to sit and make bullshit conversation for the next 3 hours. He knew what he wanted and it didn’t make him nervous. That one move set the tone for everything else, and that, dear youngster, was how he dickmatized me.  

        58. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          In my manospherian years I learned that women respond better to men with an alpha mindset – men who prioritize their own desires over those of others, including the women themselves. 

          What women respond to is the confidence, whether it’s real or not. Watch Robert Redford in any movie. I’m not talking about his appearance but his manner. He doesn’t grovel. He’s self-contained. It’s very sexy as opposed to Tom Cruise who comes off as “like me, like me, like me.”    (I’m using famous people as examples because I don’t know you and, of course, we don’t know any of the same people.)

        59. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          She projects a lot of feminine energy, is impeccably groomed (hair styled for her face as well as being waxed with a nice manicure and pedicure), applies just enough makeup to accent her features, and wears clothes that flatter her figure (whatever shape it may be). 

          I’m not trying to be gross, but if you demand that she is waxed, I’m assuming you have the common courtesy to do the same for her.

        60. Y

          @Emily, the original

          I’m not trying to be gross, but if you demand that she is waxed, I’m assuming you have the common courtesy to do the same for her.

          I am talking about her legs as well, but I do manscape. 🙂

        61. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          I am talking about her legs as well, but I do manscape. 

          Fair enough. I was thinking of a male friend who wanted his women to be … shall we say, sans hair, but from what I could tell had hair sticking out off the back of his shirt … so it was on his back, and I thought, Dude, c’mon ….

        62. Shaukat

          What do you do in this scenario Shaukat?

          When the emotional intensity is strong on my end I’ve tried to build attraction, but after the last attempt I think I’m done with that. Even if they stay for a bit, it’s always temporary. However, I’ve never done it because I felt I couldn’t find an equally attractive woman later-it was always about the connection. This is where I agree with YAG:

          The assumption here is a logical fallacy.  Higher SMV does not automatically translate to higher chemistry.  SMV is more about status/ranking than chemistry.

    3. 3.3
      S.

      how do you think  a validation type person would respond to it?

      I must have missed this.  What’s a validation-type person? And do they only want to be validated sexually? I know it might be primary, but would other methods of validation help that person as well?

      However, my definition of slow build does not mean that she views him as unattractive. In fact she see him as “attractive” she just feels no “attraction” for him; what is building is her lust for him as well as her appreciation of his overall personality.

      I was thinking of one person in particular when I wrote that. I didn’t find him unattractive.  And I did feel attraction, just lower than usual when we first met.

      Another important point for the guy I remember: his personality and the chemistry between us was pretty awesome.  So he was attractive.  Attractive does not always equal = good looks.  At least Western culture good looks. Yes, how a person looks is part of it, but for me, that’s just equal to other parts.  Humor, intelligence, rapport, kindness, are all equal to looks in attraction for me.

      If so, then could a guy think the woman who is slowly building attraction towards him, mistake her slow developing sexual feelings for her not wanting him at all???

      This guy never thought that as far as I knew.  His confidence and charisma was off the charts.  A true extrovert. And with no trace of arrogance which is rare. In a crowd, people gravitated to him.  I don’t think he ever worried about that with me, but I’m not shy about showing when I am attracted to someone.  That is part of what made him attractive. 🙂 The confidence and how settled he was in his own skin. So no.  As long as the woman shows it and the guy has his own inner confidence, no he won’t think she doesn’t want him at all.

      Could it be that the guys (myself included) who get so hurt when we discover that a woman we love committed to previous hotter guys quickly or  things that we were told that she wouldn’t allow us to do sexually or we were told that we had to wait the hot guy was allowed to do and allowed to do quickly…

      This is a very interesting question!  As I said previously, this guy with the slow build was difficult to get over. But I did. 🙂  He really was a wonderful person, just not for me.   There are so many factors in how to proceed next.  He set the bar high, so it was difficult for me to think of committing to someone who had different great qualities quicker.  But I don’t think we can compare relationship partners this way.  As I said, this guy became hotter than a firecracker to me.  But hot or not, he’s not for me.  What does it matter what I did or didn’t do with him? He broke up with me.  That cuts his hotness down to nil.

      Why would a future guy even care about this? I don’t tell people about my exes.  And this is one reason why. You guys are getting all your heads about a man who didn’t want your current woman. Who gives a crap about him at this point? As long as your current partner shows she loves you right now and meets your needs, the past is the past.  Let it go.

      Either way what advice would you have for a validation person dating a woman that is the slow build attraction type?

      Again, I don’t know what validation-type means. But after writing this comment, I do have to say there are some inner validation points no woman can meet.  A man has to meet that and come to that on his own. Yes, he should feel cared about and desired by his intimate partner.  But that shouldn’t be the only place his sexual worth and esteem comes from. I think inner confidence is at the root here.  Without that at the core, no amount of sex or validation by a woman will be enough.

      1. 3.3.1
        Adrian

        Hi S,

        The commenter Jeremy has written literally chapters of work dedicated to the subject of what he calls meta-goals. They are suppose to be the “true” reasons and motivations for our actions in dating relationships as well as our sexual relationships.

        He says that there are 4 main meta-goals that a person can fall into and validations is just one. From reading his definitions I seem to identify as a validation type.

         

         

        You were speaking about one guy in particular but I was speaking about women who do a slow build in general when it comes to their attraction for men. What I was doing was piecing together various (but highly often repeated) common themes among the male and female commentors. Mainly that men complain when women don’t she any strong interest during his courting of her and for women it is usually some version of it takes time for them to fall in love, become comfortable, start seeing the guy as sexy, etc or what you call a slow build.

        These same general complaint by both sexes are repeated in the bedroom (another debate on this blog that re-appeared on 3 different post)

        Now there are women who are outliers like Emily who only want the strong intense attraction from the start but on average most women say they are okay dating a guy who is at least average looking but it takes them time to sexually build strong attraction for a guy they just started dating; because so many guys didn’t understand this I was wondering if it was because they were validation types or was it just us men saying that “hey if she really thought I was attractive she would earnestly give me some signs that she does.”

         

         

        The statement about a guy finding out about what a woman allowed another guy from the past to do also goes back to a debate the men and women had that span across 4 different post on this blog.

        The reason I usually mainly ask Jeremy about these subjects is because he is usually on the spear head of each of these debates.

         

        On last statement about validation. The reason that I love it so much is because it seems like for once as a man I can be okay with my feelings without the shame that is usually the price of men being open about needing to feel desired and wanted by a woman.

        Unlike neediness and the anxious attachment style, validation is recognizing that a man can be mentally and emotionally healthy but still need for his girlfriend or wife to show that she openly desires him, something that many women believe they are doing but are not or don’t know how to do.

        1. S.

          Okay. I kind of get it.  Not really, but I appreciate you explaining your sense of the ‘validation type.’  I am one of those slow burn women which is why I answered the question.  But even then, something about the guy has to attract me at the start.  For me, that’s not always looks, though I’m usually am fine with his looks.  I don’t date traditionally or even non-traditionally handsome men.  But there is some chemistry there. I have tried to date men whom I have zero attraction at the start and that will never burn, never.

          Mainly that men complain when women don’t she any strong interest during his courting of her and for women it is usually some version of it takes time for them to fall in love, become comfortable, start seeing the guy as sexy, etc or what you call a slow build.

          Please define strong interest.  Maybe women are missing the boat here.  But also remember women are advised not to chase, let the man be the man, and to wait until he’s her boyfriend before sex if she can’t emotionally handle casual sex.  So with all that in mind, how should she show strong interest?

          One last statement about validation. The reason that I love it so much is because it seems like for once as a man I can be okay with my feelings without the shame that is usually the price of men being open about needing to feel desired and wanted by a woman

          I disagree on one point but only slightly. I’m not saying this is absolutely true, but a thought.  And emotionally healthy man of of course should have his girlfriend or wife desire him.  I said that in my comment.  But his entire esteem or sexual worth shouldn’t rest with her.  He should have some of that inherently before they even meet.   It’s a lot for any partner, Adrian, to hold another person’s sexual worth in their hands.  And also, her sexual worth shouldn’t rest with him, either.  Sure, how they desire one another is important, but there should be a healthy core around that at the outset.

          On last statement about validation. The reason that I love it so much is because it seems like for once as a man I can be okay with my feelings without the shame that is usually the price of men being open about needing to feel desired and wanted by a woman

          Again, I’m really missing the boat here.  I’m not sure why men are ashamed of needing to feel desired by a woman.  Most men are so upfront about how important sex is to them.  So I’m missing how they feel ashamed about something that is so discussed, especially in this very forum.

          I have definitely dated men in real life who have been ashamed of this.  So I did extend myself a lot–sexually–to try to alleviate this.  I can’t alleviate it. For these men, whom I really cared about, there was a core lack of self-esteem that I couldn’t help or fix with my body.  And believe me, I tried! Enthusiastically. 🙂

          That may not be you.  I don’t know you, just speaking from my experience.

        2. Jeremy

          Adrian, for all that I might have written “chapters,” it appears there is still a misunderstanding.  You wrote, “They [meta-goals] are suppose to be the “true” reasons and motivations for our actions in dating relationships as well as our sexual relationships.”  No.  They are the reasons we desire SEX.  Not relationships.  In fact, so many of the problems people have occur when they conflate their sexual goals with their relationship goals.

           

          You wrote, “He says that there are 4 main meta-goals that a person can fall into and validations is just one.” No, I said that there are as many possible nuances of meta-goals as there are people, but that certain ones tend to be common (validation, novelty, pleasure, emotional connection, relationship, children), while others less common (eg. domination, submission, escape/oblivion, etc).

           

          And having said that, yes I do believe that men who seek validation from a partner have a harder time with a partner whom they perceive was more attracted to someone else than to them.

           

          S, you wrote, “Most men are so upfront about how important sex is to them.  So I’m missing how they feel ashamed about something that is so discussed, especially in this very forum.”  There is a big difference between a man discussing the importance of sex versus his discussing his own emotional vulnerability.  One is expected in society, the other not.  One does not make him seem needy to women, the other often does.  It all comes back to the concept of “confidence” – what women believe it signifies about a man and what it actually signifies about a man.  Women believe that a man’s confidence signifies his internal worth….but a man might be confident because he’s just too stupid not to be.  The reasons a man might be confident have nothing to do with what women believe confidence should mean about him.  Yet women are caught in a quagmire where they often can not be attracted to a man who does not display confidence, rational or not.  It’s one of nature’s ironies.

        3. S.

          Hi Jeremy,

          Thanks for further clarifying about meta goals.

          There is a big difference between a man discussing the importance of sex versus his discussing his own emotional vulnerability.

          Fair enough. For me, there isn’t that big a difference. If I can write it here, I can certainly tell my partner.  But I do understand how men aren’t socialized to show vulnerability.

          I don’t see vulnerability as weakness.  I need to see vulnerability in a man to connect with him.  That’s why I was previously attracted so strongly to the so-called ‘beta’ men. Their showing vulnerability enabled me to show them mine.

          It all comes back to the concept of “confidence” – what women believe it signifies about a man and what it actually signifies about a man. 

          I agree with this statement and am curious what men think confidence means.

          Women believe that a man’s confidence signifies his internal worth….

          I never said that. I said for the men I dated, their lack of confidence did reflect how they felt about themselves. But that’s not necessarily true for all men.  Generally confident men do seem to think well of themselves.  Whether they should think well of themselves is subjective.

          I think you’re making an assumption here that confident men don’t necessarily have qualities they should be confident about? Who knows?  I could say really sexy women don’t have qualities they should be sexy about.  It’s what attracts.  Ultimately, people have to get to know people.  There isn’t any way to know who a person really is unless you spend time with them.

          Yet women are caught in a quagmire where they often can not be attracted to a man who does not display confidence, rational or not.  It’s one of nature’s ironies.

          It’s not one of life’s ironies to me.  I’m often attracted to men with less confidence.  It’s only a single factor, not the only thing that attracts me. Other women differ.  I’m speaking as an outlier! Proud of being an outlier.  The thing about the men without confidence (and usually this is mostly about women, in their jobs they are usually confident) whom I have loved dearly isn’t that my attraction to them.  It was that they had a problem with themselves.  Didn’t matter how many firecrackers they set off in me, if they don’t feel good with being who they are, the relationship is doomed to fail.

          So please don’t paint all women with the same brush.  Women can be attracted to men with little confidence regardihng women, but like being attracted to a hot guy who treats a woman badly, it’s rarely a relationship that can move forward.

          It is possible that a guy with little confidence around women actually feels great about himself.  Cool. But he’d have to eventually show that.  We are women.  Evan advises us to let him take the lead.  He has to eventually . . . lead.

        4. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          Yet women are caught in a quagmire where they often can not be attracted to a man who does not display confidence, rational or not.  It’s one of nature’s ironies.

          Confidence signals masculinity, whether that confidence is real or not. Just as men are hard-wired to look for women who are young and fertile, women are hard-wired to look for men who can “tcb,” take care of business, “protect and provide,” as Steve Harvey says, for her, for the children, etc. I am not specifically referring to his ability to provide financially but to inspire a feeling in her that she could trust him in his ability to take care of situations.

          And having said that, yes I do believe that men who seek validation from a partner have a harder time with a partner whom they perceive was more attracted to someone else than to them.

          Suffice it to say that most people, men and women, will have someone in their past they were more attracted to. Which doesn’t mean a hill of beans if a woman, for example, isn’t with that man anymore. It seems like something to worry about that you have no control over.

        5. Adrian

          Hi Jeremy,

          Go back and read S’s comments in our discussion, she seems to believe that if a man is confident he would not need validation from a woman and men who need validation needs that woman to be his source of self worth and self esteem (doesn’t that sound like so many debates we’ve had on this site about that very subject). However, mainly she is speaking about her specific slow build example while I was trying to focus on the general attitudes on the subject based upon numerous comments by hundreds of men and women written on this blog throughout the years about the subject.

          In other words bogging her down with a long thorough explanation of another commentator’s hypnosis would have been wasteful and time consuming; especially since that was not the core of our discussion.

          Since meta-goals were invented, promoted, and explained by you and you alone I was trying to make something that is very complex into something that is simple for a person who didn’t understand it.

          With the exception of the few regulars who have had the chance to read all your explanations on various post about the subject most people new to the subject wouldn’t understand it.

          I also intentionally only focused on 4 instead of more possible goals and I intentionally expanded it to include relationships instead of just sex (because I believe our sexual goals affect how we choose relationships); especially since the context of my conversation with her was about relationships not sex.

          I guess basically what I am saying is… as much as I enjoy your convoluted hypotheses on human motivation sometimes Jeremy it’s okay to paraphase.

           

          …   …   …

          On another note I am curious…

          If you and your wife would have met at 40 and she would have already had children do you think you would have never ran into your sexual marital problems?

          Assuming she didn’t want any more children then her meta-goals would have been met so sexually you two would have no need to disagree.

           

        6. Jeremy

          Hi Emily.  I don’t doubt for a second that the etiology of confidence as an arousal factor stemmed from the notion that the confident man can take care of business.  That’s what women are attracted to – the TCB, not the confidence.  This is as opposed to men’s attraction to large breasts, for example.  Men may have evolved attraction to large breasts as a method of choosing fertile partners, but if a man discovers that a particular large-breasted woman is infertile (or frankly, if her breasts are fake), he won’t lose attraction to her necessarily – the breasts themselves are the attractant, not a heuristic.  Whereas a woman who was attracted to a confident man because of what she thought his confidence signified about him will definitely lose attraction to him once she discovers that the qualities she thought he had don’t exist.  His confidence, in that regard, is a false flag.

           

          And S, I certainly didn’t mean to paint all women with one broad brush.  I’ve written before that some women need more comfort and others need more arousal.  Confidence is an arousal quality.  Some women are turned off by too much arousal, especially when comfort is lacking.  But here’s the thing, just because someone is non-confident does not necessarily mean he has issues with himself, and just because someone is confident doesn’t mean he doesn’t.  It is a lousy heuristic because all it means is literally that the person’s brain is wired with rose-tinted glasses to have self-directed optimism, founded or not.

        7. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          particular large-breasted woman is infertile (or frankly, if her breasts are fake), he won’t lose attraction to her necessarily – the breasts themselves are the attractant, not a heuristic.  

          They could. I’ve heard some men say they don’t like fake breasts. Or she may be wearing a lot of padding and when he discovers that, he could lose attraction. A man may not lose attraction for a woman who is infertile but he may be very disappointed and it may take the wind out of the sails of his interest.

          Yes, I agree that a woman may lose attraction for a man if she finds out his confidence is not real but the flip side of that is that she may never be attracted to the guy who displays no confidence! A woman wants to feel that if a man says, “I’ll take care of it,” he will and he’ll do it well. Not fumble it so badly she should just take care of it herself. For example, I used to work for a man who said he would take care of something and there was about a 10% chance he would. Everyone thought he was an imbecile. Then I got a new boss. He helped me more in about a week than the previous boss had in years. I wanted to sit in his lap! And I hadn’t previously paid all the much attention to him but he became attractive to me once I say that side of him. He was not flashy or arrogant. Quite humble and unassuming. Just a man of his word.

        8. Marika

          Hi Adrian

          I know you asked me a question on here within the last couple of weeks, but I can’t find it. I was offline travelling for a bit. Yes, there are still countries with minimal phone reception!..

          That experience was valuable and I’m going to spend less time online and definitely less time on these comments.

          But in general my advice would be (such as it is coming from no expert), don’t second guess yourself too much, recognize that life is all about learning experiences, most of us have no idea what we’re doing out there & are just bumbling through trying to figure out the opposite sex. Also that most of us commenters are single (and some are quite jaded from bad experiences). So don’t take everything said as gospel. And be mindful of that when deciding what advice you follow.

          Also recognise that not everyone is the same or wants the same things.

          You can’t figure it all out without giving things a try & learning from mistakes. And try to enjoy the ride!

  4. 4
    Angel

    Evan always said Believes the Negatives…. so in this case Ashleigh should believes when the guy says he’s not looking for anything serious and cut him off if she wants a serious relationship (which seems she does)

    But Evan said Men look for sex and find love. So how could that guy will ever find a way to love her and want to be her boyfriend if they don’t have sex?

    Which Ashleigh shouldn’t do, because Evan said don’t sleep with a man unless he’s your boyfriend….

    Maybe it’s just me, but it’s really confusing…….. I wonder what’s Ashleigh (and other women in same situation) gotta do then?

     

    1. 4.1
      Clare

      Angel,

       

      It’s not that hard. While men may look for sex and find love, love takes time to grow. They might be looking more for sex in the beginning, but the point is to choose men who are also looking for a relationship which can develop into love. Both men and women look for this. While it may be difficult for a man to love you if he has not had sex with you, he should at least be willing to offer you the security of a relationship in order to sleep with you.

       

      And like I said – I also feel like it’s really easy to tell the guys who want more than just sex – are they interested in you as a person? Do they consistently want to spend time with you, even if it’s without sex? Do they make an effort as far as dates are concerned? What are they saying with their words? Pay attention, keep your eyes open when it comes to these things. If a woman sleeps with a guy who is behaving in a nonchalant fashion towards her, and then complains that he doesn’t want to be her boyfriend, she has only herself to blame, in my opinion.

      1. 4.1.1
        S.

        Is it really difficult for a man to love a woman he hasn’t slept with? I certainly have fallen for men I haven’t slept with. Maybe not all the way in, but pretty close.  For me, now, what completes it, is if he loves me back. If he doesn’t I won’t fall all the way in.

        Sex doesn’t factor at all if I’ll love a man.  Not at all.  Doesn’t mean I’m not attracted to him, but the best sex in the world won’t make me love him.  The chemicals will wear off like Advil after four hours.  Other factors have to be in play.  That said with a man I love the sex isn’ t bad.  ‘Cause I love him.

        I think people are so worried that sex will be bad. I haven’t had bad sex with a person I love.  Just . . . haven’t.  I could see if you start to fall out of love an other things affect the relationship.  But I love the guy.  Just being in his presence is fulfilling, especially in the beginning.

        Men don’t feel that? If not, I’m sorry for them.  Because that feeling of just wanting to be in your beloved’s presence, sex or not, is wonderful.  Sure, it’s not lasting.  But it really does mean you really are falling for that person.

        Of course, compatibility and the test of time, and a whole other slew of factors complete the love process.   And they are important.  But I can certainly love without sex.  Absolutely.

  5. 5
    Gala

    I feel for the OP. I have been in her shoes a couple of times. It makes you feel like shit because the natural conclusion is that YOU were not good enough for them to want a relationship with you, but that OTHER woman was. It makes you wonder what thif fuck does she have that you don’t – a golden vagina? I don’t know. A couple of times these guys attempted to come back to me after their “relationship” didn’t work out. Ny response to that has always been “drop dead”. If you didn’t want me the first time around, you are dead to me.

    1. 5.1
      AndyK

      This is pretty much the same argument you were against when talking to YAG etc elsewhere in this thread regarding “lane changing” only reversed. A man that is all of a sudden ready for a committed relationship with woman number 2 can illicit the same feeling in woman number 1 as man number 2 might get when a woman is all of a sudden waiting with sex, especially if recently having had causal sex with man number 1. I’m not saying that either situation is inherently wrong or that any party is inherently responsible but in both cases it should be possible to see that it might have an effect on your self esteem and affect your future interactions.

  6. 6
    LW

    To be honest, if someone tells me they only want something casual and don’t want anything serious, I don’t really care if they get into a serious relationship the next week – because they probably have an Avoidant attachment style, and will be distant and aloof within their relationships. Often they are unwilling to commit and will have one foot out the door the whole time, so it’s not worth the heartache even if they agree to be your girlfriend/boyfriend. There might be some exceptions to this, but I’ve found that Avoidant people usually gives themselves away by the way they speak early on in a relationship.

    1. 6.1
      Yet Another Guy

      @LW

      You are making the assumption that guys usually date with a relationship in mind.  Most men do not date with a relationship as the goal.  That does not necessarily mean that a man is an avoidant.  It just means that most guys look for sex and find love.  It is how the male mind works.

  7. 7
    Yet Another Guy

    @Evan

    The men who wanted casual sex DID want casual sex, until they met someone who knocked their socks off and made them want to eat their own words.

    What you have written aligns what I have written numerous times about the difference between men and women when it comes to dating goals.  It is the reason why it is easy for women to date while separated, but no so much so for separated men.  The average guy is not looking long-term when he asks a woman out.  He is just looking for a woman with whom he can have fun and possibly get laid.  For a large percentage of the male population, a relationship is more of a side effect of finding a woman who uniquely adds value to a man’s life than a desired outcome.  Every so often, a woman comes along that a man wants to conquer sexually who ends up ringing his bell.  There is something that is truly magical about her.  Conversation is effortless.  She says all of the right things, moves in all of the right ways, and makes him feel incredibly special in and out of bed.  Before a man knows it, he is off of the market.

    1. 7.1
      Androgynous/Just Saying/xxxxxx

      I get what you are saying YAG, but if this is happening consistently with the LW, then it comes down to something about her and/or her choices. She is more likely than not, “batting outside of her league”. As a man, you would know that men are not aas picky when it come to dating and sex, but are when it comes to serious relationships. Or LW is doing something to put the men off  – maybe coming off to them as being too clingly or too high maintenance or too arrogant or whatever.  It would raise alarm bells for me if I were to get blown off by four men consecutively, only for them to go into relationships with the next woman they meet.

    2. 7.2
      Androgynous/Just Saying/xxxxxx

      This leads to something which I am interested to have other’s opinions on. Getting feedback. There was a ladyy writing to another dating advice blog about her getting blown off constantly, and suggesting that maybe she should get back to the men she dated briefly to ask them for their feedback.

      The dating advice she got was that she shouldn’t do it not because it will come off as being desperate or creepy (which is how a man would be perceived if he did this), but that she wouldn’t get the answers anyway – either the men won’t know, or they won’t have the heart to tell her the truth, expecting her to be upset, hurt  and even enraged by their revelations.  The question to you guys out there : what would your reaction be if a woman you dated briefly asked why you blew her off,  in a way that is purely for her self improvement and education.

      1. 7.2.1
        Adrian

        Hi Androgynous/Just Saying/xxxxxx

        You said, “The dating advice she got was that she shouldn’t do it not because it will come off as being desperate or creepy (which is how a man would be perceived if he did this), but that she wouldn’t get the answers anyway – they won’t have the heart to tell her the truth, expecting her to be upset, hurt  and even enraged by their revelations.

         

         

        This is and has always been me. I never have the heart to tell women why I reject their advances, reject their invitations to go out, or reject them after a first date (I actually get approached a lot… all my dates and girlfriends have been with women who asked me out first).

        After joining this site and hearing the pleas, concerns, and frustrations of hundreds of women I have fought my instincts like crazy to just do a slow fade or to just cut a women off if I am not interested in her.

        Though if she does a cold approach then it is easy to just play dumb not taking her hints that she wants me to ask her out; enjoy the pleasant conversation, wish her a good day and walk away.

         

        No one wants to hear that you are not that attractive, or that you look too old, or that you are fat, or that I don’t want to date you because you have children, or I don’t want to share my financial future with someone who only has a high school diploma, or… or… or….

        You get the point.

         

         

        I won’t reveal what I specifically say to avoid telling women the truth but it works 100% of the time because it is a legitimate sounding reason, she feels good because she believes that circumstance and not some flaw she has is why we can’t go out.

        Unfortunately what almost always happens is about 95% of them always contact me a year or so later if they are still single; where at that point I have to lie and say that I have a girlfriend, then chit chat with them for a little bit, make them laugh and then end the call.

         

         

        I know 99% of women are not going to believe this but… Not only do men NOT like hurting women’s self-esteem we ALSO DON’T like sounding shallow!!!

        YES Shocker!!!  We know it sounds shallow to reject you for your face or because of your body especially when you are displaying all the attributes of a great girlfriend.

         

         

        Here is a hint, if a guy gives you a direct specific answer then the reason is not about you and he is being honest. For example, not being interested in a long distance relationship, or after just getting out of a several year relationship not wanting to get into a serious relationship, etc…

        When a guy is honest I think women know it and when a guy gives a broad generic answer I think women know it…. But you know who else knows your flaws… your girlfriends and they are a way better source than some guy who only met you once or twice for a few hours on a date if you want some in-depth personal critique.

        If it is just superficial reasons why guys always say no to dates then I honestly think every woman knows her physical flaws and limitations; and contrary to what some guys on here say I believe that most women honestly know when they are trying to date out of their league

         

        1. Nissa

          I’d have to disagree…I think most women have no idea that the man is saying, I’m out of your league. They generally believe that he must just not want a relationship. That’s why it would be better if men would be honest. If she’s fat, she can lose weight. If she’s unattractive, she can use makeup or get surgery. If she has no education…you see where I’m headed with this. When people have no idea of why they are being rejected, they don’t figure it out on their own, because they don’t think it’s a problem, so they don’t fix it. Yes, it will hurt their feelings to know the truth, but at least then they can fix it.

        2. Emily, the original

          Nissa,

          If she’s fat, she can lose weight. If she’s unattractive, she can use makeup or get surgery. If she has no education…you see where I’m headed with this. When people have no idea of why they are being rejected, they don’t figure it out on their own, because they don’t think it’s a problem, so they don’t fix it. Yes, it will hurt their feelings to know the truth, but at least then they can fix it.

          Why you take one person’s opinion and decide you needed to “fix” something? I agree with Adrian — women are very aware of their physical flaws. Also, what’s a flaw to one person isn’t to another. With the internet, every person can find his or her niche. IT’s out there. There’ll be someone who will like you.

      2. 7.2.2
        D_M

        Androgynous/Just Saying/xxx,

        I think your assessment of the situation is spot on, along with the proposed solution. I have always wondered why women don’t ask the men why they didn’t marry them or broke the relationship off. Some men won’t have the heart, but others more than likely will. No one except that person will be able to provide you with the real reason why things didn’t work out. It’s probably going to be an uncomfortable conversation to hear. Be up front and let the guys know there will be tears, but you really want to know the specifics. I have had the conversation in the past, so I am in having the conversation camp.

         

        1. Stacy

          @D_M

          It’s human nature (at least for most people). 9 times out of 10, they will not tell you the truth (ESPECIALLY if it has something to do with physical attraction). Why do you think fading out or disappearing is so common? Because people want to avoid the discomfort of discussion, and especially if they don’t have any investment in you.

          So if you ask, you will more often than not hear a bunch of bullshyt in order to not hurt your feelings.  I consider myself as bold as they come but even I would hesitate on giving someone the pure, unadulterated truth in this regard. And to be honest, I think it comes off as a little pathetic. A man blows me off and I am sending him a text or trying to call him to basically ask, ‘why don’t you like me.’? What could I have done better so that you could like me?

          Let’s also not forget that the reason he did not like you is from his perspective. It’s not necessarily the perspective of someone else. In fact, the reason he blew you off could be a reason someone else takes to you.

          So my philosophy is, always be self aware and pursue self improvement without being overly concerned about someone else’s opinion.  As long as you treat other people well…of course, there are things we can learn about relationships and be ‘better’ at certain things, but gain that insight from friends, family, research and yourself.

  8. 8
    Theodora

    I think by the end of the day it doesn’t matter if a man who tells you “I’m not ready for a serious relationship” will remain a bachelor for life or he will marry another woman the next day. If what you want is a serious relationships, the logical answer is a hard “next.

     

    1. 8.1
      Emily, the original

      Theodora,

      I think by the end of the day it doesn’t matter if a man who tells you “I’m not ready for a serious relationship” will remain a bachelor for life or he will marry another woman the next day.

      Yep. The reasons why don’t matter. All that matters is what he is doing and if he’s not doing it with you … time to move on.

    2. 8.2
      Androgynous/Just Saying/xxxxxx

      That may be so, and this is certainly the attitude of most women when they encounter an instance or two of this. But if this happens consistently, it is very disheartening and most women would want to know if it is them and if it is, what they can do about it.

  9. 9
    Adrian

    Hi S,

    Like I just told Jeremy I kind of did not want to get distracted from our main topic (slow building attraction and sexual desire) with talking about validation and meta-goals.

    You said, “Please define strong interest.  Maybe women are missing the boat here.  But also remember women are advised not to chase, let the man be the man, and to wait until he’s her boyfriend before sex if she can’t emotionally handle casual sex.  So with all that in mind, how should she show strong interest?

    Evan actually did both a blog post and a podcast on what he considers some ways for women to show “strong interest” and there was a LOT of push back from women on it. The general mentality I got from women reading the comments on all those posts were that women feel like if a man feels that she is worth it and really wants her he will be okay with whatever she does or doesn’t do and allow her to move at her own pace for as long as she feels she needs to; her wants matter more than his (though they didn’t see it that way)… anything else and they see it as men thinking their wants matter more than her comfort and safety… Like I said it turned into a full blown debate.

    Personally I only used the word strong because in the body language book “The Ultimate book of body language” by Allan Pease it shows that scientifically women are naturally 10x better at ready subtle body and facial cues than men.

    But unfortunately since they are so good at reading subtle gestures they assume men are as well. So most women give out subtle hints that they like a guy or flirt subtly but the majority of men never notices them; that’s why I say she has to be a little more blunt with her attraction (women like men fear rejection so that is why most don’t like being open with it, letting men lead is just an excuse to not have to make the first move and risk rejection).

     

     

    You said, ” And emotionally healthy man of of course should have his girlfriend or wife desire him.  I said that in my comment.  But his entire esteem or sexual worth shouldn’t rest with her.  He should have some of that inherently before they even meet.   It’s a lot for any partner, Adrian, to hold another person’s sexual worth in their hands.” 

    I agree with this 100%. However, since it is the second time you have mentioned it to me in the comments I assume that you think that is where I am coming from when I bring up validation and it is not. That is why I said that a validation person is different from a emotionally needy or anxious attachment style type person.

    I know that you said that you show men you desire them  but I and many guys like me inside as well as outside of the comments on this blog know of many women who do not let their long time boyfriends or husbands know that she thinks he is sexy (When YAG and Jeremy brough this up there was a lot of backlash from many of the female commentors and they to quickly accused the men of having low self esteems for wanting this).

    Woman acknowledge and praise their men for their kindness, loyalty, intelligence, support, family skills, etc… And it is not wrong to do so but it’s rarer for women to not only openly praise but to brag about their guys sex appeal.

    Bad boys sure, some hot guy she briefly dated from her past sure, some hollywood hunk sure, even some random guy she saw on the street sure, but not her husband.  Long time wives and girlfriends just lets their men know that he is a good provider, father, husband, and friend… but not that he is sexy in her eyes.

    I can see your and most women’s viewpoint;  if she is acknowledging he is a great partner already than him wanting more can be viewed as needy or lacking a sense of self worth and self esteem. But as Jeremy say his original definition of validation is specifically dealing with sex and in this case a woman’s acknowledging her man’s sex appeal (I just extended the definition to include relationships because I think they go hand and hand).

    Another thing that many guys have said that most women brush off is that giving him regular sex is not the same as showing she sees him as sexy or desirable. For many women if she is willing to have sex with a guy when he ask then that should be enough; she is already showing that she thinks he is sexy in her mind by having sex with him. But guys want to feel sexy in the eyes of their women not just be happy that she did not turn him down for sex.

     

     

    This actually reminds me of a story that I had forgotten until this post. I was at a business party a few years ago and I was the 3 wheel between two older women talking. One women commented that the other’s husband was sexy (though I personally think she was talking more about his attributes as a husband then his looks) and the 1st women actually laughed out loud; wondering how could her husband be seen as sexy.

    Later that night in a one-on-one I talked to her about it thinking she down played the comment because she thought maybe the other woman was attracted to take her husband but no. She told me that she actually couldn’t see her husband of 30 years as sexy, she loved him, was attracted to him but she didn’t think he was sexy like what you see in movies or read in romance novels.

    I just remember feeling sorry for her husband-I mean she actually laughed at the thought of him being sex. I know know that most women see a man as being attractive as something different as seeing a man being sexy.

    I think this is how most women look at their long-term partners whereas most men even after being married to the same women for years will still say they find her sexy, her sexiness is part of her attraction.

    Men women have affairs with and fantasy men are described by women as sexy, hot, and gorgeous. However, husbands are described as good, kind, stable, and dependable.

     

    You said, “something about the guy has to attract me at the start.  For me, that’s not always looks

    As far as attraction being solely based on looks, I asked Emily a question about leagues in the last comment on  the “Hot ex boyfriend” post… I would love to hear your answers as well.

    1. 9.1
      Emily, the original

      Adrian,

      Men women have affairs with and fantasy men are described by women as sexy, hot, and gorgeous. However, husbands are described as good, kind, stable, and dependable.

      I am not a man so I don’t know, but how many men do you know who are describing their wives of 30 years as “hot” and “sexy”?

      1. 9.1.1
        Adrian

        Hi Emily,

        Lots!

        Assuming we are talking about still happily married couples.

         

        Men when asked, “Do you still find your wife attractive? Yes! She is is sexy/the sexiest/she is still the only woman that can do for me sexually, etc, etc, etc”

         

        Women when asked, “Do you still find your husband attractive? Yes……….”

         

        I actually researched this subject for a different reason earlier this year that is why I am able to speak with such confidence on a subject for once (^_^).

         

        Women don’t tell their long-time boyfriends or husbands that they are sexy. And even in new relationships if the guy is noticeably very attractive women don’t tell him that he is sexy.

        They just assume he knows she thinks he is desirable and therefore thinks he does not need to hear it from the girl he loves…(o_O)

        …   …   …

         

        Oh and the reason that many men find out about their girls hot ex and how fast she went with him or the things she allowed him to do that the husband or current boyfriend can’t… usually gets revealed when people date within close or even wide social circles.

        Basically they always find out about it from a friend or a friend of a friend from what I have been able to uncover with research. I think it is just the fact that many female commentors didn’t believe that it happens is what caused a lot of the irritation from the male commentors… and believe it or not it actually happens a lot when people date with at least 3-4 degrees of separation between acquaintances.

        What I haven’t been able to figure out is the motivation behind that 3rd or 4th party person telling the new guy how fast she allowed the hot to have sex or try some kind of sexual act.

        I can’t see a desire to break them up as always being the motivation.

         

        … … … …

        … …

        Did you answer my alpha widow inspired league question yet?

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          Hey, man, appreciate your posts, but do me a favor: Please work on your spacing. It’s hard to read your stuff.

        2. Emily, the original

          Hi there Adrian,  (I TAKE IT YOU ARE DONE WITH YOUR SCHOOL WORK)   🙂

          Men when asked, “Do you still find your wife attractive? Yes! She is is sexy/the sexiest/she is still the only woman that can do for me sexually, etc, etc, etc”

          Were you not here for the “I think I’m hot but my boyfriend doesn’t” post? I guess I could believe that SOME men after 30 years of marriage will say their wives are sexy but “the sexiest” or “the only woman that can do for me sexually” …. c’mon. That sounds like lines invented by a romance novelist that a woman would love to hear but no man ever says. I can’t imagine men saying that. I can’t imagine women saying that about their husbands.

        3. Amanda

          I am disturbed by this: “how fast she went with him or the things she allowed him to do that the husband or current boyfriend can’t”.

          Goodness me! How entitled! She’s not a see-saw at the park. Current boyfriend isn’t owed a particular repertoire. He has options if he isn’t happy with the relationship but it’s absurd to argue precedent. The men in her life don’t have the right to even up the tally of her sexual acts so that all of them are treated fairly, according to their own criteria.

          If my social circle was discussing this stuff, I would find a new one. Yuck.

        4. Jeremy

          I see your point, Amanda, but please consider that there’s another side to the argument.  Certainly no man is owed anything sexually simply because a woman did something with someone else at some time.  But it isn’t about what is owed, and it’s not about entitlement.  It’s about vetting a potential partner to see whether or not she actually is attracted to you.

           

          Most women would argue that this is ridiculous – most women believe (falsely) that if they are with a man, they must be attracted to him.  That if they are having sex with him, that’s all the validation he should need.  But it isn’t.  Because so often women marry men for their relationship potential and compromise on chemistry, even though they dated men in the past with much higher chemistry.  And they believe that by doing so they are being mature and making good long-term decisions.  But once we have what we want, do we still desire it?  The woman who marries a man because she wants kids and security and a good partner….will not necessarily still want those things once she has already had them.  And at that point she returns to baseline – whom does she find attractive and who not – and if what she found attractive about her husband was these things, she will no longer remember why she was attracted to him in the first place.  This is as common as dirt.

           

          I see it so often.  Here’s an article that featured on my news feed this morning.  https://ca.yahoo.com/style/mom-sometimes-wants-leave-husband-heres-doesnt-184025066.html  This is a woman who publicly admits to thinking about leaving her husband, spends paragraphs describing what is wrong in her relationship, and when she describes why she doesn’t leave the marriage her main reason is her kids.  The best thing she can say about her husband is that he is the “most decent man I’ve ever known.”  Wow.  What a compliment.  How she must love him….because he is decent.

           

          Marriage is a huge commitment, especially for men who stand to lose more after divorce – emotionally and financially.  Men need to vet women to see if they are actually attracted to them, or if they are attracted to the life they envision with them.  Big difference!  A woman might choose to move more slowly with one man vs another for a variety of reasons…..but one big possible one is that she simply isn’t as attracted to him as she was to others.  He would be a fool to ignore that possibliity.  There is too much at stake.

        5. KK

          Jeremy,

          I agree mostly with what you wrote and thats it’s a common issue. You said, “He would be a fool to ignore that possibliity”. IME, not only do most men ignore this possibility, I believe a large percentage of men KNOW in advance that (when there’s an imbalance) their girlfriend, fiance, spouse is not as excited about them as they are about her and bulldoze ahead anyway. 

        6. Emily, the original

          Hi KK,

          I believe a large percentage of men KNOW in advance that (when there’s an imbalance) their girlfriend, fiance, spouse is not as excited about them as they are about her and bulldoze ahead anyway. 

          I agree. Just like a rich guy who marries a woman 30 years his junior. He must know she married him for money, but I’m not sure he cares.

        7. Jeremy

          Hi KK.  You know, I’m not sure they do know.  There is so much societal conditioning that we men receive, telling us that the key to finding love and marriage is through our providership.  We don’t see much of that in our early years, but then in our late 20s and up we do see it.  Women who would never before be interested suddenly are very interested, and often very sexual.  I’ve seen some women size up a man’s providership ability and get very physically turned on.  And so the men who experience this often think, “ok, I guess this is what everyone was talking about, the world makes sense.”  And then later, when their wives lose sexual interest in them they think that something is wrong with the world rather than something wrong with what they’ve been taught.

           

          I really do believe that Donald Trump thinks that his wife is turned on by him.  I think he’d be shocked to learn that she wasn’t.

        8. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,
          There is so much societal conditioning that we men receive, telling us that the key to finding love and marriage is through our providership.  We don’t see much of that in our early years, but then in our late 20s and up we do see it.
          Ok, but men know that it’s the providership that these women are getting turned on by. That’s clear.

          I really do believe that Donald Trump thinks that his wife is turned on by him.  I think he’d be shocked to learn that she wasn’t.
          This I believe as he is a man without any self-awareness but surely other older men would know a woman who looks like Melania isn’t hanging around because she’s turned on by him.

        9. KK

          Hi there Emily & Jeremy : )

          Jeremy,

          I don’t know what Donald Trump’s perspective is about his (current) marriage. It’s very possible that you’re right. I also think it’s possible that he knows Melania isn’t physically attracted to him at all and doesn’t care. Who knows. But I’d be willing to bet that I know Melania’s perspective. It wouldn’t surprise me if he put forth a lot of effort in the beginning in an attempt to ‘win her’ over… and that she finally gave in, developed an attachment, but never felt any chemistry. Nor would it surprise me that she feels very conflicted (if he treats her very well) and cares for him but doesn’t really look forward to sex.

          Anyway, I was just trying to offer a female perspective. Mine, anyway, because I’ve experienced this myself. From my perspective, it isn’t the women in these relationships that change the rules, it’s the men.

          He’s perfectly okay with pursuing someone out of his league, getting her, knowing full well she isn’t gaga about him like he is for her. The newness wears off, and he puts in less effort, which kills the relationship, because that was the only thing holding it together in the first place.

        10. Emily, the original

          KK,

          I also think it’s possible that he knows Melania isn’t physically attracted to him at all and doesn’t care. 

          I can’t imagine Trump inspiring desire in any woman, but even if he did, he’d open his mouth and kill it by speaking.

          Jeremy:

          Because so often women marry men for their relationship potential and compromise on chemistry, even though they dated men in the past with much higher chemistry.  

          Both probably dated people with whom the chemistry was stronger. Didn’t you say you had a previous girlfriend with whom the chemistry was stronger than your wife but the relationship was not good? I think that’s fairly common. Trump notwithstanding, it’s not that a woman gives up a man she has high chemistry with but a bad relationship to marry a man she has low chemistry with but a good relationship. It’s that the woman may chose slightly less chemistry for a better match. I’m sure they are a lot of men who have done the same. You keep bringing this theme up. Everyone compromises.

        11. Jeremy

          Emily, slightly less chemistry but better relationship potential is a good thing.  It’s what Evan advocates in most of his posts.  Significantly less chemistry and significant better relationship potential, though, is another.  I keep bringing up this theme because it is so very common and so hardly ever discussed outside of the manosphere (where it is discussed all the time).  And when something is hardly mentioned, most people believe it lacks importance or prevalence.

           

          KK wrote, “He’s fine pursuing someone he knows is out of his league, getting her, knowing she isn’t gaga about him like he is for her, then the newness wears off and he stops putting in the effort which kills the relationship because that’s the only thing that was holding it together.”  You know, the Alain De Botton video is making me smile here, crazy people dating crazy people.  Men date to marry, women marry to date.  Men put in the effort in courtship thinking that once the woman grows to love him he can stop putting in the effort (which is, after all, so very effortful).  Women perceive that once he stops putting in the effort, he no longer perceives her worth so she stops perceiving his.  It is a never-ending series of hoops that men need to jump through to qualify for a woman’s love….unless that man is so attractive that he doesn’t need to.  Expectations are a funny thing.  A female commenter wrote yesterday that men seem to want a mommy, a maid, and a sex-goddess.  She’s wrong.  The mommy and the maid are women’s projection in most cases.  If only each gender understood what the other actually wanted…

        12. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          “He’s fine pursuing someone he knows is out of his league, getting her, knowing she isn’t gaga about him like he is for her, then the newness wears off and he stops putting in the effort which kills the relationship because that’s the only thing that was holding it together.”  

          Attraction is a funny thing. Some of the female posters including me have written on this and previous posts that it’s not entirely based on  appearance. Not one man has written that, so I will use the male definition. If a man is worried a woman will lose attraction for him, he shouldn’t marry a woman who is significantly more attractive than he is. Most people marry someone who is very similar to who they are in terms of appearance, education and social status. It doesn’t matter if one has a master’s and one only a bachelor’s or if one went to a better college. By definition, they are both educated professionals. Thus, they are similar.

          A monkey wrench is thrown into the system if a man has a lot of money. If he wants to use that to attain a partner who is much more attractive then he is, that’s fine, but then he can’t turn around and be surprised she is not dying to do him several years into the relationship. The fact is, she was never dying to do him.

          It is a never-ending series of hoops that men need to jump through to qualify for a woman’s love….unless that man is so attractive that he doesn’t need to

          Again, marry a woman similar in attractiveness and continue to put forth the effort into the relationship (as she should also do). If a woman is very attracted to the man (in male terms, let’s say he is significantly more attractive), she may put up with him doing less but only for a short time. And if she has a shred of self-esteem and he’s not doing much in terms of putting effort into a relationship, I doubt a marriage will even take place. It’ll be a steamy, short-term situation and then she’ll move on.

        13. Jeremy

          Emily, I agree with you in theory, but again, how many people conflate their sexual meta-goals with their relationship goals? I have no argument with you or KK or Gala that men who stop putting effort into relationships often cause those relationships to tank.  But that is distinct from when the things that the man does are the ONLY reason the woman is attracted to him.  Does she like him for who he is, or what he does – that is the question I ask over and over because it is so very important.

           

          Look at KK’s story (which I might be mis-interpreting) – a man marries a woman who is out of his league, looks-wise.  The only reason she was attracted to him was the effort he was putting into the relationship.  He stops putting in effort, her attraction vanishes. How must that feel for him?  How would she feel if the situation were reversed and she was the one who always felt that she had to jump through hoops to receive love?  Men don’t expect women to plan and pay and court and make bold moves and buy them diamonds.  They just want the pleasure of their company and sexuality.  Imagine if women felt the same.  Imagine if women loved men for who they are and not for what they do…then we could truly take money out of the SMV equation.

        14. KK

          Jeremy,

          You interpreted what I said correctly. And I agree with you that it (that type of relationship) is heartbreaking. But it goes both ways. Not only does it suck for him when he realizes that his lack of desire to continuously ‘jump through hoops’ to keep her happy results in her having zero desire for him… it also sucks for her to realize that this man she thought was over the moon in love with her forever was actually never truly in love with her. She was just the object of his infatuation. Both people have unwittingly made a huge mistake. And while dating and first married, he was able to experience complete bliss to have the object of his affections, while she never got to experience that. This is just one example of people (a couple) both having good intentions, but it ends terribly, regardless.

          Like you stated in another comment, women sometimes think they have matured when they give up on chemistry to have something better; something substantial, that will stand the test of time. But that’s a fatal flaw. But it’s a very common one because of girl’s conditioning to be nice, to give people a chance, to not be superficial. So when she meets a guy she’s not all that excited about, she thinks she’s being a decent human being by giving him a chance. When the date leaves her feeling a bit disappointed because there were no sparks, her friends will tell her how lucky she is that he brought her flowers and took her to that new trendy upscale restaurant. And on and on it goes…

          Anyway, true maturity, in my opinion, is being very clear about what you need to be happy, what you’re willing to give, what you’re willing to accept, and your deal breakers. So basically, what Evan preaches… Above average compatibility AND chemistry…. And if one is higher than the other, it’s best if it’s the compatibility. I’ll add one caveat… You better make damn sure you’re on the same page. Just because someone thinks they’ve found the perfect combination of compatibility / chemistry for them, their bf / gf might be having a completely different experience of the relationship.

        15. Gala

          Hey Jeremy:

          They just want the pleasure of their company and sexuality.  

          This isn’t the first time i am hearing some variation of this, that men “only” want so little – your company and your sexuality, whereas women demand this and that, and it follows men are these simple creatures and women are calculating and shallow. But that is just not true. I would posit that men don’t like us, women, “for us”. They like the “us” that takes a lot of work, and “jumping through hoops” to present to them! You guys don’t like us “for us”, you like us for what we twist ourselves into to attract a mate. Here’s a mental experiment for you: if all heterosexual men just poof and disappeared one day from the planet, not a single woman would shave her legs, dye her hair, wear a bra or run on a treadmill like ever again.  We’d be sitting around in our natural state eating carrot cake and ice cream, listening to the music that we love and watching chic flicks and grooming our cats while our homes would be uninterruptedly immaculately clean. If you landed in that world you would literally find NO woman that you would “like for who she is”, because women there would not be twisting themselves into anything to cater to you either emotionally or to your aesthetic tastes. So no, men don’t like women for who we are. Women have just been super successful in convincing men that what men see is what women are really like – by themselves. No, we are not. This is just the end product we present to you. And we want, rightfully so, some appreciation.

        16. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

           Look at KK’s story (which I might be mis-interpreting) – a man marries a woman who is out of his league, looks-wise.  The only reason she was attracted to him was the effort he was putting into the relationship.  He stops putting in effort, her attraction vanishes. How must that feel for him?  

          You mean to tell me, in this scenario, the man has no idea the reasons for her interest in him? I find that hard to believe. He should know he “out-efforted” the other men and that’s why he won her, otherwise she wouldn’t been interested, as she wasn’t sexually all that attracted.

          How would she feel if the situation were reversed and she was the one who always felt that she had to jump through hoops to receive love?  Men don’t expect women to plan and pay and court and make bold moves and buy them diamonds.  

          I certainly don’t think a man has to buy a woman diamonds, but a man doing the “tcbing” — taking care of business — creates attraction in women. It’s masculine. It’s decisive. It’s pro-active. Taking a woman out, knowing how to get there, getting the car, opening the door, etc., make a woman feel taken care of. We can argue about whether it’s fair, but isn’t this site about what’s effective? And, keep in mind, none of this has to be elaborate or expensive.

          On the flip side, I have asked you and Adrian repeatedly what a woman can do to show appreciation and attraction OTHER THAN HAVING SEX.

          Imagine if women loved men for who they are and not for what they do…then we could truly take money out of the SMV equation.

          How do you think women feel about their entire SMV being based on their appearance? That’s just as shallow as a man’s SMV being based on money.

        17. Emily, the original

          Gala,

          if all heterosexual men just poof and disappeared one day from the planet, not a single woman would shave her legs, dye her hair, wear a bra or run on a treadmill like ever again.  We’d be sitting around in our natural state eating carrot cake and ice cream, listening to the music that we love and watching chic flicks and grooming our cats while our homes would be uninterruptedly immaculately clean.

          OMG, where is such a place? I’d like to buy a ticket! Can you imagine the fun we’d have! Sitting around drinking wine and watching Channing Tatum movies all day long!  Maybe just fly in some men once a week for a few hours.  🙂

        18. Jeremy

          Gala, that is fair, and I agree with your thought experiment – but who would be surprised by that?  Do any men pretend that looks don’t matter to them?   Now turn it around, but instead of ridding the planet of men, leave men on the planet but tell them that women no longer desire them for their providership.  What will you see?  You’ll see men dropping out of school, avoiding university, not getting high-paying jobs and status – because why should they?  Whereas women are largely motivated by lifestyle and children, men are largely motivated by women!  And then women will turn around and ask where all the quality men have gone, because in spite of what they said, providership matters to them quite a bit.

           

          KK, I very much agree with your final paragraph, but there is one thing you wrote that I very much disagree with.  In a situation where the man was attracted to the woman while she was only attracted to his efforts, the disappointment is not at all equal.  And this is something that I really, REALLY wish that women would understand.  Marrying a guy you don’t really like and allowing him to have sex with you is not doing him a favor!   And I say this in spite of knowing the difference in SMV between the two people.  The woman did NOT do him a favor by allowing him to marry the object of his affections, when that object of his affections did not really like him!  Nor is that woman suffering equally because the man lessens his efforts from a constant effort to please into a more reasonable status-quo, similar to what might exist if their relative SMVs had been similar from the get-go.  I reached a point in my own marriage where I realized I had been doing too much.  I had allowed my wife to become accustomed to ridiculous amounts of self-effacement from me, ridiculous efforts.  And when I slowly scaled them back, she wondered what was wrong instead of understanding how wrong and unbalanced the status quo had been.  There is a big gap between this and doing nothing.  A spectrum, with many shades of grey.  But the notion of the high-SMV woman doing the poor schlub she married a favor just by being with him….yeah, that notion needs to end, right quick.

           

        19. Jeremy

          Emily, “How do you think women feel about their entire SMV being based on their appearance? That’s just as shallow as a man’s SMV being based on money.”  I hoped someone would ask me that.  I’d imagine it feels much the same.  One difference, though.  Women can weed out men who are only interested in their appearance.  After all, such men rarely commit, and certainly would not marry.  But how can a man know that a woman is only interested in what he does?  He can’t until well after he has given her everything she wanted.

        20. Emily, the original

          Jeremy, 

          because in spite of what they said, providership matters to them quite a bit.

          It HAS to matter to them, Jeremy. Should a woman pick a man to have a family with who makes minimum wage? That’s biology. Women look for a man who can provide.

        21. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          A woman can only pick from the men who want a relationship with her. What is she to do if she’s not overly attracted to any of them? Or what if there is just one offer and she feels “meh” about it but she wants a family?Are there not men who are faced with similar choices? I bet there are.

        22. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

           Women can weed out men who are only interested in their appearance.  After all, such men rarely commit, and certainly would not marry. 

          I doubt all men are lucky enough to marry their dream girl in terms of appearance. You act as if it’s only women who are compromising on attraction. I doubt that’s true.

          But how can a man know that a woman is only interested in what he does?  He can’t until well after he has given her everything she wanted.

          Unless a woman is head over heels (or at least completely infatuated), a man WILL ALWAYS HAVE TO “DO SOMETHING” TO LAND HER. And even then, most women will opt out despite her interest if he is not making any effort. If a man really wants to know what women want him if he does nothing, then he should sit back and DO NOTHING. See what women chase him. I can almost guarantee he won’t like his options but he’ll get a great lesson in what it is to be a woman.

        23. Version_Two

          Amanda, I’m disturbed that you cannot see the male point of view on this at all. Most men need sex to feel love and appreciated. So in effect you are telling him that you don’t love and appreciate him as much as you have former lovers by having less passionate sex with him.

        24. KK

          Emily,

          “Or what if there is just one offer and she feels “meh” about it but she wants a family?Are there not men who are faced with similar choices? I bet there are.”

          Yes. Go back and read any of YAG’s comments where he talks about the relationship dynamics with his ex-wife.

           

        25. KK

          Jeremy,

          Marrying a guy you don’t really like and allowing him to have sex with you is not doing him a favor!”

          I get that… now! My 24 year old self did not. And to be honest, I did feel that way except I did LIKE him. Or even more accurately, I liked who he pretended to be. I just wasn’t very physically attracted to him.

          In these situations, the onus isn’t completely on the woman. Men need to understand that they cannot chase after a woman that’s way out of their league, put her on a pedestal, and hope that she’ll eventually be as sexually attracted to him as he is to her. Because she won’t. And she will feel like she’s doing him a favor.

        26. Emily, the original

          KK,

          Yes. Go back and read any of YAG’s comments where he talks about the relationship dynamics with his ex-wife.

          Exactly. I think most people at some point, having gotten burned by chemistry, swing way too far the other direction and go for compatibility only. That’s also not good. But even those people who marry someone they are wildly attracted to are making compromises. You don’t everything. Unless you’re Elizabeth Taylor and married enough men to get all good qualities spread out in a lifetime over 7 husbands.  🙂

        27. Emily, the original

          Version two,

          Amanda, I’m disturbed that you cannot see the male point of view on this at all. Most men need sex to feel love and appreciated. So in effect you are telling him that you don’t love and appreciate him as much as you have former lovers by having less passionate sex with him.

          Amanda wasn’t saying she as having less passionate sex with the current boyfriend. Where did she write that?

        28. Version_Two

          Emily, Amanda has only made one comment on this thread that I can see. It is above this one.

        29. Emily, the original

          Version two,
          Here’s Amanda’s comment in its entirety. (The bolded part is the part of Adrian’s post Amanda was referring to.)
          Amanda wrote: I am disturbed by this:
          “how fast she went with him or the things she allowed him to do that the husband or current boyfriend can’t”.
          Goodness me! How entitled! She’s not a see-saw at the park. Current boyfriend isn’t owed a particular repertoire. He has options if he isn’t happy with the relationship but it’s absurd to argue precedent. The men in her life don’t have the right to even up the tally of her sexual acts so that all of them are treated fairly, according to their own criteria.
          If my social circle was discussing this stuff, I would find a new one. Yuck.
          Here is your comment:
          Amanda, I’m disturbed that you cannot see the male point of view on this at all. Most men need sex to feel love and appreciated. So in effect you are telling him that you don’t love and appreciate him as much as you have former lovers by having less passionate sex with him.
          There’s nothing in her comment that mentions having less passionate sex. She’s talking about a current boyfriend finding out she had sex sooner with a previous partner or allowed him to do different things. This was the subject of a long discussion on another post.The men wrote that the a woman having sex sooner with someone else meant she was more attracted to that man. They used time as a barometer of sexual interest. Some of the women agreed. Some did not, saying she may be just as interested in the second boyfriend but want to build a relationship with him as as opposed to just hooking up. I wrote that people have sex for a variety of reasons and a woman hooking up quickly with a man does not mean (though it could) that she was highly attracted to him. It could mean that he was just there and presented himself as an option and she thought … why not? But, if I remember correctly, all the women thought what she did with a previous partner and when was not the current partner’s business, which is what Amanda is saying.

        30. GoWiththeFlow

          Emily, Jeremy, and KK,

          The Trump aspect of the thread literally made me LOL because the Trump marriage was the first thing I though of when Emily brought up that a rich guy who marries a woman 30 years younger than him must know it’s about his money.  I appreciate you were all non-PC and went there 😉  It reminded me of a recent opinion piece at National Review Online where the writer made the case that Trump’s behavior wasn’t that of an alpha male, but a beta male faking alpha by being aggressive and outrageous.  In it he says that Trump’s blindness to his wife’s “blasé” public acknowledgement that she married him for his money was part of his “faux-alpha” condition.

          Jeremy,  I appreciate that you are giving the male perspective here, and as such it will be one sided.  What’s interesting is that over the years, I have heard almost the exact same complaints from women friends who were frustrated in their marriages.  They have to keep jumping through hoops or their man won’t demonstrate love for them.  Nothing is ever good enough.  They aren’t allowed to have bad days, to make mistakes, or fail at anything.  The expectations are unreasonable and impossible to meet.

          Marriage and relationships are hard because we expect so much out of our partners and marriage these days.  We want a soul mate, a best friend, a wonderful parent for the kids, and an always hot sexy lover who’s raring to go when we are.  Add onto that the three bedroom house with the home office, den, and swimming pool, the fully funded retirement and kids college accounts.  And perfect health–we are always shocked when that doesn’t happen.  This creates huge expectations and the commensurate burdens that go along with it.  Maybe a good first step is for both partners to expect a little less?

        31. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow,

          Trump’s behavior wasn’t that of an alpha male, but a beta male faking alpha by being aggressive and outrageous.  In it he says that Trump’s blindness to his wife’s “blasé” public acknowledgement that she married him for his money was part of his “faux-alpha” condition.

          That’s an interesting perspective. It’s pretty obvious she doesn’t have much use for him.

          Marriage and relationships are hard because we expect so much out of our partners and marriage these days.  We want a soul mate, a best friend, a wonderful parent for the kids, and an always hot sexy lover who’s raring to go when we are. 

          Just from some of the women my age who I’ve talked to about this, I think the expectations for the soul mate/hot lover may be even higher if the the woman doesn’t want kids or doesn’t want any more. These are women who can also provide for themselves financially.

        32. Version_Two

          Emily,

          Allowing the others to have sex sooner or do others things are the very signs of the sex being more passionate! – from a male point of view.

          My point with Amanda statement is what she views as male sexual entitlement is actually the men wanting to feel as much if not more attractive, loved and appreciated as these other guys that came before.

          Don’t you see how in your other thread ALL of the men said that having sex sooner meant the woman was more attracted to them? You can argue that point from a women’s point of view on a thread, but it isn’t going to help much if you don’t understand men’s feelings about this in a real relationship.

        33. Emily, the original

          Version Two,
          Allowing the others to have sex sooner or do others things are the very signs of the sex being more passionate! – from a male point of view.
          Thus, they needed a female point of view. A woman says yes to sex for the same variety of reasons a man does. And a woman saying yes to a one-nighter does not necessarily mean she thinks the guy is super hot, which is what some men think. Maybe she thinks he’s already done the approach so I won’t have to, it’s been a while, the other guy who I do think is super hot isn’t paying me any attention … You get where I’m going with this.
          You can argue that point from a women’s point of view on a thread, but it isn’t going to help much if you don’t understand men’s feelings about this in a real relationship.
          That’s exactly the point .They were talking about short-term hookups versus a relationship. A woman may want to wait a while if she’s trying to develop a relationship. And I don’t mean months on end but a few dates.

        34. Jeremy

          @GWTF, Hey, no one can look at all sides all the time 😉  Yes, my comment was one-sided and yes, it can certainly go the other way, and we can argue about which happens the majority of the time but it isn’t really relevant.

           

          Should the first step be to lower our expectations?  Maybe.  But honestly, I think the better first step is to create 2 lists.  The first list – what are we doing every day for our partner.  The second – what do we believe our partner WANTS from us every day.  Then compare the lists.  And if there is a significant difference (as there is likely to be), consider WHY that difference exists.  Is it because the gap between the lists is unfeasible (unlikely) or is it because of resentment and power issues (very likely) or laziness (very likely) or less important things getting in the way (very likely).  And if so, correct the first list, and show the lists to your partner to verify that they are correct.  I kid you not, taking the time to periodically do this would solve so many issues.

        35. Version_Two

          Emily,

           

          I don’t understand where you are going with this. I do understand that women might have many reasons for having sex.

          But what you, Amanda and many other women either don’t understand or don’t care about is that most men feel attractive, appreciated and loved through sex. And that when she sleeps sooner or has more variety of sex with another man, men will implicitly feel like they are less attractive, appreciated and loved than that other man.

        36. Emily, the original

          Version,

          that most men feel attractive, appreciated and loved through sex. And that when she sleeps sooner 

          Yes, I’m sure all women who have one-night stands are trying to convey their love and appreciation to the sex partner they met minutes earlier.

        37. Amanda

          Yes, thank you, Emily TO, for addressing those points – now I don’t have to.

          I’m not taking issue with men believing a woman is fast and dirty with those she desires/values/respects/loves the most. It’s a simplistic view, as Emily and other women have explained. It doesn’t mean I don’t get the concept, or that I don’t think men have a right to be careful, or that I don’t care.

          My hackles go up at the language that is used and the side issues that creep in when this subject is discussed at length. Things she “allowed” a former lover to do that the current lover “isn’t allowed” to do, for example. The dynamic here seems to be between the two men – former and current – and she’s merely a vessel who only properly and passionately takes care of her mate when she “surrenders” to certain things and allows him to win that competition. Such language makes me suspicious that it’s not about the man needing reassurance that he is his lover’s top choice against carnal criteria. Rather, it sounds more like the man wants to prove his status to the pack. If that is the case, it is not a healthy culture for the women involved.

          The other issue is this highly icky idea of men passing notes to one another about the when and the what, as though it is legitimate behaviour toward a meaningful end. Either one-upmanship, as discussed, or else canny scientific research which may save a man from the desperate fate of a woman who perhaps has learned that she’s not a big fan of something she’s tried in bed in the past.

          I’m all for having a good, hard look at your relationship and asking yourself and your partner some insightful questions. I’m inclined to think this intelligence has more integrity and validity when it comes from within the relationship rather than from Jim-Bob who’s been talking to Betty-Sue about your lover’s historical exploits. And no-one needs to point out to me that this blog is about what is the case, rather that what should be the case.

        38. Emily, the original

          Amanda,
          You wrote about these issues much more clearly than I did. 🙂   I agree with all your points.
          The dynamic here seems to be between the two men – former and current – and she’s merely a vessel who only properly and passionately takes care of her mate when she “surrenders” to certain things and allows him to win that competition. Such language makes me suspicious that it’s not about the man needing reassurance that he is his lover’s top choice against carnal criteria. Rather, it sounds more like the man wants to prove his status to the pack. If that is the case, it is not a healthy culture for the women involved.
          Yes. First of all, it’s not realistic for anyone, man or woman, to demand proof that they are their lover’s “top choice.” If each person has been with other people, chances are high it’s not “the best” they’ve ever had. It’s certainly reasonable to assure the other person your’re having a great time, but “top choice”?  And the male status issue is disturbing. My first thought would be to find a man who doesn’t care about his status, but I have yet to see him exist outside of the movies.
          The other issue is this highly icky idea of men passing notes to one another about the when and the what, as though it is legitimate behaviour toward a meaningful end. 
          Yes. Sounds like high school.

        39. Version_Two

          Emily, Yes, Yes you are right! I know you are being sarcastic. But from a man’s point of view there is no stronger validation of him as a person than a women having sex with him.

        40. SparklingEmerald

          Amanda – What you said about the apparent male competition about who does what to who, and when.

          It is not only icky, but it smacks of latent homosexuality to me.

        41. Emily, the original

          Version Two,

          I know you are being sarcastic.

          Yes, I was.   🙂

          But from a man’s point of view there is no stronger validation of him as a person than a women having sex with him.

          I don’t want to be responsible for validating someone.

        42. Emily, the original

          Sparking Emerald,
          What you said about the apparent male competition about who does what to who, and when. It is not only icky, but it smacks of latent homosexuality to me.
          I was thinking the same thing when I read that comment. It’s almost like the former partners and current partner are all the in the room together with the woman and not really interested in her. They are more interested in each other and in “out-sexing” each other (doing what they think is a better job). Yuck.

        43. Version_Two

          I don’t want to be responsible for validating someone.

          Emily

          Then don’t, although that is besides the point.

          My only point is that men want and need sex to feel loved. I’m hoping to save some poor guys out there from feeling the very emotional pain I felt in my long term relationship knowing my ex happily did things with former loves that she wouldn’t do with me. I’m also giving my male viewpoint on sex hoping it might help you and other women in the future.

      2. 9.1.2
        Gala

        Jeremy:

        Men put in the effort in courtship thinking that once the woman grows to love him he can stop putting in the effort

        You’re correct. The problem is, when men stop putting in any effort, they expect that women will still continue to put in the effort! They expect the women to do all sorts of emotional and non-emotional labor and look thin and give blow jobs enthusiastically for the rest of their lives together. It’s like “i’ve put a ring on your finger, my job here is done, now you bust your chops for 20 years”. This lopsided expectation IS what has women frustrated, and ultimately lands people in the divorce court.

        1. Jeremy

          @Gala, I totally agree, but would add the caveat “lopsided expectation IS what has had women and men frustrated, and ultimately lands people in divorce court.”  A selfish man will expect his wife to do emotional and non-emotional labor, look thin and give enthusiastic blowjobs while he lets himself go and just goes to work.  If that’s what he wants, he needs to give as well as he gets, but to give her what SHE wants, not what he wants.

           

          A selfish woman will expect her husband to put her needs above his in all aspects of life, accept his position as last and least of her priorities, and believe that compromise means rejecting him politely and teaching him that her priorities are the ones that he should have too.  If she wants to be high on his list of priorities, his priorities should matter to her.

           

          It’s funny, back when I was having marital troubles, I once asked my wife about her priorities as we lay in bed.  “Where do I fall on your list,” I asked.  “You are one of my highest priorities of course,” she replied (and meant it).  “Do you realize,” I asked, “that when I came home tonight you were busy with the kids.  Then when they went to bed you called your mom.  Then you checked your facebook and email.  Then you watched a show while I massaged your shoulders and asked about your day, trying to connect with you.  Then when I went to bed, you waited half an hour before you came up.  And that is a typical day for us.  What do you think that should show me about what your priorities are?  Do you realize the disconnect between what you think and what you do?”  It was the wrong approach, and was not received well.  But the logic was unmistakable.

        2. Nissa

          Jeremy, however ill it was received, I think that was exactly the right approach. When there is a contrast between words and behavior, they won’t get it unless we juxtapose those things in such a way that the lack of consistency is immediately apparent. The anger that it generates should be directed at themselves, though often it is not.

    2. 9.2
      S.

      I have to find that old post of Evan’s.  I agree that sometime I think I’m being so overt and the guy I’m interested in later on when we’re dating is like, “Nah, didn’t get it.”  But later on, I have no issue with showing my interest.  It really feels like putting yourself out there, but I guess it must be done.  I’ll look for that article.

      know that you said that you show men you desire them  but I and many guys like me inside as well as outside of the comments on this blog know of many women who do not let their long time boyfriends or husbands know that she thinks he is sexy

      Wow. That’s so sad! I can only think she thinks if she’s with him long term she thinks he already knows he’s sexy? I can’t fathom it. And it’s fun to tell men how they turn you on.  😉 Those women are missing out!

      If I mention something twice, it’s just to stay on track. Navigating these comment threads is a bit tricky.  Also in my experience validation people can be low self esteem people. I see intellectually it’s possible they are not always.  But in my personal experience, they have been one and the same.  I don’t use the term ‘needy’ or anxious.  That’s not what I mean.   I just mean a person who doesn’t think well of themselves at a core level.  They can be avoidants.  They can be distant.  But somewhere inside they don’t really like themselves entirely.  I see you see validation as something different.  I think there is a normal need for some affection and compliments from your partner.  Maybe that’s what you mean.  Needing affection sometimes and occasional complements differs from being a validation person to me.  The difference:  the non-validation person will be fine in a relationship if they don’t get those things often.  I need them too.  But I don’t need much.  I know I’m sexy.  It’s nice if my man says so.  But I know it inside. I don’t need to hear it or have it shown every day. I would like that.  But I’d be okay without it.

      I imagine couples who go through childbirth, cancer, surgeries, long-term unemployment.  It’s not that him being sexy isn’t important but those surviving those things is so tremendous.

      But I agree with you, she should still tell him he’s sexy.  A guy who stays with me through difficulties–it’s such a turn on when we make it through.  I remember kissing this guy on the kitchen table when I had a fever. I got so hot from all three  (the fever, the kissing, and how well he was taking care of me) that I almost passed out.  Head too hot.  LOL.  So sometimes sexytimes have to wait until we are through the crisis. 😀 That’s my approach now, but I don’t know what it would be after 30 years.  I’d probably still try to hop on that table when I’m near 80. 🙂

      What’s your question about looks and leagues?  Do you mind asking them here since the comments do get a bit unwieldy?

    3. 9.3
      Lor

      Emily, The Original

      You and most women seem to be saying two different things and I wonder if it is intentional or not. Perhaps this is why you can not see the males point of view or just do not care about our point of view???

      All the women on this blog (including yourself) have said repeatedly that you can NOT have sex with or even kiss a guy unless there is some kind of attraction,

      But then you say that just because a man finds out that a woman made him court her for weeks or months (while repeatedly being told no and shot down) before she made love to him even though she allowed a previous guy(s) to have sex after only 1 or 2 dates that the current man is wrong for feeling like she sees him as inferior to the previous guy?

      If women need attraction to have sex with a guy and she has sex with guy 1 quickly while she made guy 2 wait, work (court), and prove (empress her) then logic tells men that YES he is the loser that she settled for while the other guy is the man she wants.

       

      Emily, the Original “How do you think women feel about their entire SMV being based on their appearance? That’s just as shallow as a man’s SMV being based on money.”

       

      This is not true at all! Just read the book Dataclysm or the book The Honest Truth About Dishonesty. Men base women’s SMV on their looks BUT women base men’s SMV on their looks, personality, status, wealth, education, height, etc… If he is lacking in even one of those she will downgrade his SMV rating.

      The author Helen Fisher said the same thing in her book about human mating. A woman just has to past a man’s look test, a man has to pass a women’s looks PLUS other tests…

      So if a women has sex with guy 1 faster than guy 2 then yes she thinks guy 2 has little or less value.

       

      Honestly any guy who sticks around after finding that out is a loser. Only a fool would continue to put in effort to court a woman who sees him as the inferior choice.

      1. 9.3.1
        Emily, the original

        LOR,

        All the women on this blog (including yourself) have said repeatedly that you can NOT have sex with or even kiss a guy unless there is some kind of attraction,

        Nope, never said that. I wrote that women, like men, have sex for a variety of reasons. Some have nothing to do with attraction. Men shouldn’t assume that because a woman sleeps with him quickly that that is a barometer of her sexual interest. Sometimes there’s just an opportunity and you say, why not? Sometimes the guy you were hoping would talk to you doesn’t … and another guy approaches you, etc.

    4. 9.4
      Lor

      GoWithTheFlow “The woman isn’t trying to make the man feel special by making him wait for sex.  She’s trying to avoid him eliminating her as a serious relationship contender because of the male sexual double standard.  “Awesome!  I got her to sleep with me in week three.  The slut!”

       

      So you are saying that ALL men (regardless if they have mothers, sisters and daughters) will see a woman as a slut if she has sex with him early… OK… So women prejudge all men negatively from the start- Now you, Emily, and Amanda’s comments make sense.

       

      She had sex with guy 1 within that 1-3 week period but as Jeremy says guy 2 has to jump through hoops to possibly get sex by week 8. And when she says that she is doing it because she has been hurt in the past he is suppose to say, “okay” with a smile. Because it is fair that he has to be prejudged and profiled like a caricature of a male stereotype because of something a man who he doesn’t even know exist did.

      Women demand that men court, pay, plan and risk all the rejection by approaching first, attempting to kiss first, having to say I love you first, and even asking for sex first ALL while still jumping through hoops to entertain and impress her (taking all the responsibility for planning the dates).

      Basically you are saying that all women see any man who tries to date them a person of bad character and he actually has to start from negative NOT zero with her! He first has to prove to her that he respects women and doesn’t just want to use her for sex, THEN he has to work on winning her APPROVAL to GIVE her sexual pleasure-because you know, women get pleasure from sex too not just men.

      1. 9.4.1
        GoWiththeFlow

        Wow Lor,

        Honestly at same point early on you totally lost me because you made too many leaps of logic.  But to try and illustrate a woman’s perspective we can start here.

        1). Google sexual double standard and then madonna-whore complex.  Yes many men do judge women for sleeping with them at a point they consider “too early” and the woman’s mate value goes way down after that to the point that she can kiss a long term relationship with him goodbye.  In one blog post, Evan described it as women giving men what they want and ask for and then having it held against them.

        2). The language the men commenters have used on this thread supports point #1.  The man who finds out his partner had sex on a quicker timeline with a previous partner is pissed off because now he values her less than he did before.  Her value in his eyes is directly proportional to the longest amount of time she “made” him or any other man wait.  And if he isn’t the “winner” of this pseudo-competition amongst the men with the quickest timeline, then he overpaid.  Great job dehumanizing women down to commodities to be bought and sold guys!

        3).  So women are meaner and shallower because they consider a man’s intelligence, socio-economic status, and dad potential when choosing potential mates?  Where women only have to pass men’s appearance threshold?  As a highly educated person with a high paying job in a specialized field, I can tell you that what I did to earn my education and career and how I do my job and manage my money and life says volumes about my personality, character, and values.  The shape of my nose, the color of my eyes, and my body type says more about what my parents look like than how good of a person I am.  Complain all you want about about how women decide who to be with.  Just know that a man’s personality and character are an inherent part of the vetting equation whereas a woman’s aren’t.  Only her looks are, which is somewhat out of her control.

        4). The length of time between when a woman meets a man and when she sleeps with him doesn’t correlate with how sexually attractive she finds him.  Because many other things factor into  the why, when, and where a woman sleeps with a man, not just her attraction to him.

        So guys please, do yourselves and us women a favor and please examine why some of you are so emotionally invested in and have your sense of masculinity so tied to a woman’s sexual timeline history.  Because this really sucks for us and I’m not seeing where it serves you well, either.

        1. Jeremy

          GWTF, you wrote, “Great job dehumanizing women down to commodities to be bought and sold guys!  

           

          GWTF, have you ever read the book “Cheap Sex” by Mark Regnerus?  If not, I’d recommend it.  Because while I understand what you are writing, you are missing (IMO) some of the picture.  My cousin is a male substitute teacher, 39 years old.  He can’t get a date, even from his 39 year old female substitute teacher colleagues.  He would date them, but they wouldn’t date him.  Apparently there is something he is missing that they feel he would need to qualify for their company and sexuality.  Which is kind of confusing, because he feels they have what he would need to qualify for HIS company and sexuality.  So why are his company and sexuality worth less than theirs?  Why does HE (and not they) need to bring something extra to the table?  The question is rhetorical – we both know the answer, and it is not nuanced or complex.  And who, BTW, is commodifying whom in this example, and how common is that commodification?

           

          Relationships are so much more than transactions – they are about love, friendship, commitment, building a life together.  If we only consider the economical aspect we are missing the forest for the trees.  But if we only consider the emotions without the economics, we are also missing the bigger picture because we generally do not choose to build love, commitment and life with a partner who doesn’t meet the criteria of what we want/need.

           

          Women are the gatekeepers of sex.  Men’s efforts and commitment are the price they pay.  Men commodify women for their sexuality, women commodify men for their providership – and in addition to that commodification, we build relationships where, once built, that commodification’s importance should shrink to obscurity.

           

          I’ve written before about how this sucks, but I don’t see it changing.  When my cousin’s female colleagues agree to date him because they perceive his companionship and sexuality as being as valuable as their own I’ll believe in”egalitarianism”.

           

        2. Adrian

          Hi GoWiTheFlow and Jeremy

          GoWithTheFlow said, “Because this really sucks for us and I’m not seeing where it serves you well, either.

          I agree with this COMPLETELY!

          This mentality does not serve us men well at all! Unlike YAG my sample size of men who this has happened to is so small (only 3 guys and all were in their early 20’s back in college) so I can not clearly say if we men react to this because of low self-esteems or because of something “Primal” as YAG says…

          …   …   …

          Jeremy said, “So why are his company and sexuality worth less than theirs?  Why does HE (and not they) need to bring something extra to the table?

          This actually reminds me of something the commenter Chance said in the assortative mating based on career status conversation you and GoWithTheFlow had.

          He stated that a male elementary teacher would see a female brain surgeon and not consider her in his professional league or as an equal and therefore have reservations about approaching her for dating, but a female elementary teacher would see a male brain surgeon and expect him to approach her for dating because to her they are in the same professional league and educated equals…

          What are your thoughts on this?

          At the time I did not agree but now reading about your cousin as well as a few other female comments I’ve read on various other post I now have some doubts about him being wrong.

        3. Jeremy

          Adrian, I think that Chance was correct for most people, and incorrect for some.  Put it this way – I’d be shocked if the number of female doctors married to male teachers was anywhere near the number of male doctors married to female teachers.  Because while Assortive Mating is the norm, it is a fairly useless descriptor because it only takes into account education level and background.  Unless we also include the effects of income, the true dynamic is not described.

        4. Adrian

          Hi Jeremy

          You said, “Because while Assortive Mating is the norm, it is a fairly useless descriptor because it only takes into account education level and background.  Unless we also include the effects of income, the true dynamic is not described.

           

          Could you explain what you meant here more please? I don’t quite understand what you mean; especially in relation to explaining how a woman with a lower status job and income can see herself on the same level as a man with a higher status job and income just because they both are college graduates… assuming that both their looks are around the same SMV rating.

           

  10. 10
    D_M

    Stacy,

    I agree with some of what you said. I lopped off briefly and blew off from Androgynous/Just Saying/xxxxxx’s post. I speculated that the Q & A probably wouldn’t be useful in situations under three months and responded without including a referenced time spent together. I internalized the question without the impersonal parts of the post, because I never did briefly or blew off. I am viewing briefly as being under three months. Part of the missing component for me is the online dating world. I am not part of that scene, so I am not familiar with churn and burn. Blow off is straight disrespect and a lack of decency. Anyone that is subjected to that behavior should cut all ties with the offending party.

  11. 11
    Jan

    This article appears to contradict previous articles about ‘ignore the positives, believe the negatives’. Isn’t the risk here Evan that we, as woman, end up waiting for these guys to commit to us and in the process waste time?

     

     

  12. 12
    Jeremy

    Emily, you wrote, “Women look for a man who can provide.” I’ve never argued with this.  What I and other men have a problem with is women’s schizophrenic approach to providership as an attractant.  And not just providership, but a general conflation of “things I want” versus “things I find arousing.”

     

    Yesterday I was riding the subway and saw a poster about sexual consent.  It read, “consent is sexy.” I shook my head. Consent is NECESSARY.  Consent is the line between sex and rape.  But consent is NOT sexy.  Women don’t say – “oh, he stopped before he kissed me and asked for permission, that’s so hot!”  The reason the poster writers chose to use the word “sexy” is because they figure that the best way to get what they want (consent) is to tell men that consent is the way to get what men want (sex).  And it isn’t.  Imagine if men actually believed this sign.  Imagine if men started employing consent as a strategy to woo women.  It would lead to amazing disappointment for them, because while women DO want men to obtain their consent, doing so is NOT sexy.

     

    The same is true about providership.  Women want men who provide.  They have good reason for wanting this, especially if they want children.  So they tell men that providership is sexy.  They choose husbands based largely upon it.  They entice those men with promises of sex.  But once they’ve secured the providership, they no longer find it sexy.  For all of Rollo Tomassi’s narcissism, he’s bang on with this – “A woman’s attraction to Beta is proportional to her need for beta provisioning at the given time.”  Men have no problem with women being attracted to provisioning, and we have no problem with them not being attracted to it.  What we have a problem with is the lane-changing.  Again, in KK’s story, she interpreted the husband’s cessation of efforts as a lack of love.  But if effort = love, where was her love for him?  And if he perceived that love was uni-directional in the relationship, is it any wonder that he eventually stopped wanting to jump through hoops?

     

    You asked how a woman can show appreciation, other than having sex.  Here’s the answer plain and simple:  You need to know 2 things: 1) What qualities he perceives as masculine, 2) His love language.  #1 tells you what he wants to be appreciated for.  If he wants to be appreciated for his body, there’s no point praising him for taking out the garbage.  #2 tells you HOW to appreciate him.  If his love language is acts of service, there’s no point in telling him you love him with your words.  You need to give him an act of service that HE wants, not that you want – no point thanking him by taking his pants to the dry-cleaners if his preferred act of service is breakfast in bed.  I wrote in another comment that it is a good strategy to make a list of the things you do for your partner and then compare it with a list of what you think your partner wants.  How many women’s first list would include “I cook and clean for him” ?  How many of their second lists would include those things?

    1. 12.1
      Emily, the original

      Jeremy,

      What I and other men have a problem with is women’s schizophrenic approach to providership as an attractant. 

      We’ve had this conversation many times. We’re going around in circles.

      Consent is the line between sex and rape.  But consent is NOT sexy.  Women don’t say – “oh, he stopped before he kissed me and asked for permission, that’s so hot!” 

      Very true. If you’re asking me personally, I don’t find “providership” sexy. I couldn’t give two shits what a man can provide so long as he makes a decent living and can support himself so I am no paying for him. (And he doesn’t have to pay for me.) But I don’t want children, so my opinion isn’t really part of this argument. Frankly, if it were up to me, I’d go back to a time in my early 20s where I was hanging out with my friends and men were something on the side. I had more fun then, but society has structured itself around romantic relationships so …

      You asked how a woman can show appreciation, other than having sex.  Here’s the answer plain and simple:  You need to know 2 things: 1) What qualities he perceives as masculine, 2) His love language.  #1 tells you what he wants to be appreciated for.  If he wants to be appreciated for his body, there’s no point praising him for taking out the garbage.  #2 tells you HOW to appreciate him.  

      I’m getting tired just reading this. Doesn’t the woman get to decide what she appreciates in her partner? Just as he gets to decide what to appreciate in her? “Ah, dear, this is what you should respect in me …” Huh? Huh? Huh?

      1. 12.1.1
        Jeremy

        “Doesn’t the woman get to decide what she appreciates in her partner?”  Of course she does….and of course she doesn’t.  Of course she gets to decide whether or not she wants to be with him based on the criteria that matter to her, not him.  And of course the criteria that matter to her might not be what the guy needs to be appreciated for, in which case he is not getting what he needs out of the relationship in spite of her getting what she needs.  So she can either learn to appreciate BOTH the qualities she likes and the ones he needs her to like, or she can decide not to – in which case the couple is not compatible (and the same is true for him, BTW).   Ideally the two sets should be Venn diagrams with a high degree of overlap anyway, and so should not be at all exhausting.

        1. Emily, the original

          Jeremy, 

          So she can either learn to appreciate BOTH the qualities she likes and the ones he needs her to like, or she can decide not to – in which case the couple is not compatible (and the same is true for him, BTW).  

          And what if he prides himself on something she doesn’t think he does well? For example, a male coworker would drop everything to help his elderly mother and father. He saw this as a good quality. I saw at as him having no boundaries, as he was frequently told by his mother she was having an emergency. He’d rush over to her house, only to find out she needed a lightbulb changed. (I’m not making this up.) It started to look like he was in desperate need of his parents’ approval, which is not a quality that inspires respect. (Of course, he didn’t need my respect, but I did wonder if this drive his wife up the wall.)

        2. Jeremy

          Not compatible. If he changed his priorities to better match yours, you’d have even less respect for him, no? There are women out there who would admire a guy like that even if others wouldn’t.

        3. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          If he changed his priorities to better match yours, you’d have even less respect for him, no? There are women out there who would admire a guy like that even if others wouldn’t.

          I don’t see it as a matter of changing priorities to match mine. I’d see it as him understanding that the mother was taking advantage of his time and he needed to set boundaries up for how much he was willing to do. Trust me: Most women would get annoyed if he left whatever they were doing together and rushed over to his mother’s, only to be told she needed a lightbulb changed. But that decision would be up to him. Family encroachment is a common theme. I had another coworker tell me partners had told him he was too involved with his family of origin. But of two people who liked that much family involvement would be better matched.

    2. 12.2
      KK

      Jeremy,

      “What we have a problem with is the lane-changing.  Again, in KK’s story, she interpreted the husband’s cessation of efforts as a lack of love.  But if effort = love, where was her love for him?  And if he perceived that love was uni-directional in the relationship, is it any wonder that he eventually stopped wanting to jump through hoops?”

      I never changed lanes. The relationship started out with him pursuing me and me being unsure if I wanted to be pursued by him. I’m sure the other ladies can relate to being pursued by very interested men that they’ve turned down cold… The overly eager guy, the follow me around like a lost puppy dog guy, etc…. Huge turnoffs. I think we can all agree.

      That’s not what I experienced with my ex. Yes, he pursued heavily, but he was pretty clever in his approach. I didn’t perceive him to be some random loser chasing tail. I thought he was sincere and that his words and actions were genuine. He was very average looking (to me). He was older, successful, confident, and charismatic, and he made me feel like I was the only woman in the world. His enthusiasm for me was never a turn off because I perceived him to be a high quality man with good character. Those are very attractive qualities (to me). But he never “rang my bell” as YAG would say.

      What I know now, hindsight being 20/20 and all, is that he NEVER loved me and that the high quality, high character facade was very cleverly crafted. So while he was pursuing a relationship with me, in order to satisfy his own ego, I eventually developed very real feelings for him. I fell in love and remained faithful, even though I wasn’t waiting with baited breath to tear his clothes off and seduce him. I was satisfied with making love. There were never any issues regarding our sex life (for me). I was content the majority of the time and quite happy the rest of the time.

      He’s the one who changed lanes. Yes, I saw his effort = his love for me. And in time, I reciprocated. (5 or 6 months into our relationship, and ongoing). My efforts = my love for him didn’t waver until many years into a broken marriage, where I eventually checked out.

      1. 12.2.1
        Jeremy

        Unfortunately, lane-changing is not restricted to one gender, as you discovered.  A narcissist plays with people like a child plays with toys, to be discarded when no longer fascinating.  And my gender has its share of narcissists.  For all that I comment on the foibles of women, I could write books about the common foibles of men.

        1. KK

          “A narcissist plays with people like a child plays with toys, to be discarded when no longer fascinating.”

          Yes, and unfortunately, I now know more about personality disorders than I ever wanted to.

      2. 12.2.2
        Emily, the original

        KK,
        Those are very attractive qualities (to me). But he never “rang my bell” as YAG would say.
        Ha! There’s a disco song called “Ring My Bell”
        So while he was pursuing a relationship with me, in order to satisfy his own ego, I eventually developed very real feelings for him. I fell in love and remained faithful, even though I wasn’t waiting with baited breath to tear his clothes off and seduce him.
        And aren’t we told that the level of attraction isn’t necessary for a happy, long-term relationship. I’m sure you didn’t announce to him, “Hey, by the way, I value your character, but you don’t give me a lady boner.”

        1. KK

          “Ha! There’s a disco song called ‘Ring My Bell’ “.

          Lol. Yes. Good song : )

          “I’m sure you didn’t announce to him, “Hey, by the way, I value your character, but you don’t give me a lady boner.”

          No, not like that, but I did bring up the subject several times before we ever tied the night. I’m an open book with the people in my life and I didn’t want any misunderstandings between us.

          So much for that approach.

        2. KK

          *tied the knot*

          (I hate my phone😂)

        3. Emily, the original

          KK,
          I’m an open book with the people in my life and I didn’t want any misunderstandings between us. So much for that approach.
          So you told him you weren’t super attracted to him?
          How did he react?

        4. KK

          Emily,

          He was completely unphased. Said I shouldn’t let it bother me. He loved me enough for the both of us, yada, yada.

        5. Emily, the original

          KK,

          He loved me enough for the both of us, 

          Well, he maybe he thought that at the time.

          What is your opinion about a man “ringing your bell” now? Is it necessary for  a relationship and how do you define it (or know when you feel it)?

          I’m taking over the interviewer’s hat from Adran!

           

        6. KK

          “What is your opinion about a man “ringing your bell” now? Is it necessary for  a relationship and how do you define it (or know when you feel it)?”

          Emily,

          For me, chemistry is necessary for a serious relationship. I’ll go out with anyone that’s kind and cute and I’ll enjoy their company, but I won’t let it go to the next level or have sex. For me to consider something serious, there has to be chemistry. I won’t make that mistake again.

          Now, how to define it??? Lol. That’s a tough one! How do you define chemistry, Emily? I guess it’s just that undeniable attraction / connection you feel with someone. That you somehow “get” each other. That giddy feeling when you see their name pop up on your phone and it brings pleasure and excitement just to hear their voice. Btw, it doesn’t happen often. I’ve only met 2 “ring my bell” types since my divorce.

        7. Emily, the original

          KK,

          That giddy feeling when you see their name pop up on your phone and it brings pleasure and excitement just to hear their voice. Btw, it doesn’t happen often. I’ve only met 2 “ring my bell” types since my divorce.

          That’s how I would describe chemistry, too. A giddy feeling. A nervous energy, almost a high being around the person. I don’t feel it often, either.

    3. 12.3
      Nissa

      Jeremy, thank you for your comment:  You need to know 2 things: 1) What qualities he perceives as masculine, 2) His love language.  #1 tells you what he wants to be appreciated for.  If he wants to be appreciated for his body, there’s no point praising him for taking out the garbage.  #2 tells you HOW to appreciate him.  If his love language is acts of service, there’s no point in telling him you love him with your words.  You need to give him an act of service that HE wants, not that you want.

      As someone who waits not X number of dates, but literally months, until we are exclusive and I know that I consider this a ‘forever’ match: this is exactly what I do, and why men are still willing to date me without sex. Though I would have said it slightly differently, that I find out what they care about, and then show that I care about that too, deliberately using their love language to mirror back to them their own excitement. It’s why they still feel that they are getting appreciation, respect, admiration, and pleasure from my company, even without the sex. I think they even like it better than being with someone who would have sex with them, because they can get sex from many women, but appreciation from very few. What’s funny is that I can really only manage this with men I am ‘into’. When I don’t like them, or like them only a little, it fizzles out quickly. It’s my genuine enjoyment of them that brings the pleasure.

  13. 13
    Jeremy

    @Sparkling Emerald,  I can’t comment about “men like YAG” since he and I tend to fall on opposite ends of the spectrum on many relationship issues.  I can tell you that a quality guy would understand the situation you describe – of a partner being honest with him and telling him about past mistakes and what she learned from them, and how she hopes not to make those same mistakes.  That is not the lane change that most guys have the problem with.  The lane change is on the other end, when that partner loses interest because she is no longer interested in what she used to be.  At that point the guy needs to evaluate the present of his relationship, and the past can be very helpful in putting that in context.  Is something wrong in the relationship that can be fixed, or was she never really all that into him?  That’s the question he needs to consider, and simply asking her won’t always be instructive.  Men like YAG have had to deal with that question, as have men like me.  As have many women.

  14. 14
    Adrian

    Sigh… Jeremy and Emily

    See… this is why I was being so vague in my explanation to S barely touched on the sex with the ex subject reference; all it does is open up a can of worms and that is what I was trying to avoid.

    Jeremy said, “Men need to vet women to see if they are actually attracted to them, or if they are attracted to the life they envision with them.

    How does a successful man do this? If I meet an attractive factory worker while at the mall should I avoid going on a second date with her once I find out she is in a lower socioeconomic class?

    What about the woman who has 2 masters degrees or her doctorate but she only makes about $60,000 a year (about $130,000 less than my current annual); do I pretend to be poorer? Do I avoid picking her up in my luxury car or bring her to my neighborhood or my high rise with a view of the city because it will give away my level of wealth & status? Am I confined to only dating women that make as much as I do or more?

    I guess I’m just struggling to see how a man can “vet” a woman to determine if she is attracted to him or his wealth if he and her are physically around the same SMV ratings.

    Most women will dump a man once they know he lied to them so pretending to be less than I am doesn’t seem smart and unlike most women I have no problem dating someone in a lower socioeconomic class-but after reading the comments I am now afraid that it won’t really be me that she is attracted to.

    …   …   …

    On a separate note Emily you spoke about joining meetups since I’m new to this state, but I’m confused everything I read about them either make them out to be a place to make friends (or acquaintances as you say) or a place to meet people for dating… which is it?

    I don’t want to date where I make friends in case it doesn’t workout. How do you separate the meetups for dating with the meetups for just making friends?

    What are your thoughts on singles parties? I know this is weird to say since it is a “singles” party but I don’t want to go alone…

    And finally I remembered a few weeks back you said that when you rejected a guy he accused you of being gay; that just happened to me and it also happened a few times to me in the past as well. Why do you think people assume that you are homosexual just because you are not interested in them?

    1. 14.1
      Emily, the original

      Adrian,

      Jeremy said, “Men need to vet women to see if they are actually attracted to them, or if they are attracted to the life they envision with them.

      You can’t. Let’s face it: You don’t know the other person’s motivation. Even in a NSA sex situation, a woman could be hooking up with a man to make someone else jealous. Who knows? It could have nothing to do with him. But most people, in looking for a long-term situation, will access a variety of factors. I don’t mean to be flippant, but that’s just how it works. There’s no reason be so hung up on it. You can’t do anything about it.
      On a separate note Emily you spoke about joining meetups since I’m new to this state, but I’m confused everything I read about them either make them out to be a place to make friends (or acquaintances as you say) or a place to meet people for dating… which is it?
      For women, for the most part, meetups are about making friends because there are so many more single women at them and the few men at the handful I’ve been to were either a lot older or not appealing. So for you, they would be a gold mine. If you date someone from one and it doesn’t work out, don’t go back to the meetup.
      What are your thoughts on singles parties? I know this is weird to say since it is a “singles” party but I don’t want to go alone…
      You always, always, always, need a cruising dude. Women need cruising chicks.
      And finally I remembered a few weeks back you said that when you rejected a guy he accused you of being gay; that just happened to me and it also happened a few times to me in the past as well. Why do you think people assume that you are homosexual just because you are not interested in them?
      Hmmm … I’m not remembering the incident you are referring to although people have told me they thought I was gay before. Maybe it helps them save face after a rejection. I think people think I am because I don’t ramble on about my personal life. But I will tell you, after some people at work told me they thought I was gay (and were waiting for me to correct them), I said I didn’t care because there was no one there I was trying to impress. (I got a kick out of that.)

    2. 14.2
      GoWiththeFlow

      Hey Adrian,

      I know your question wasn’t addressed to me, but I think I can give you some helpful tips.  A high SES guy vetting a woman for if she really is into him as a person, is similar to a beautiful woman having to figure out if a man appreciates her inner person and not just the package it’s wrapped in.  And no I never had that problem 😉 But my mom and sis were great beauties in their day, and I learned a lot from them.

      First, do they know your details?  Can they tell you what your favorite color, food, and music are?  When they buy you a gift do they generally get it right?  Would they know if you prefer a week at the beach or at a ski resort?  If someone learns the details about you it means they are interested in your life and in getting to know you.  That may not totally eliminate everyone who wants to marry a lifestyle but it will get rid of the most obvious ones.

      Second, what do they talk about?  Do their future plans and dreams require more money than they make?  Do they say they want a country club membership and a vacation house on a lake, but they have a poorly paying job with no plans to improve their own financial prospects?  If they want to be a stay at home mom after kids arrive do they say they would be happy to live in a smaller house, buy second hand furniture and clothes, and not eat out to be able to afford this?  You get the idea.

      I don’t think you can insta-test for this on a first or second date by say borrowing your friend’s 10 year old pick up truck instead of taking your beamer, so be who you are upfront.  You should be able to be proud of your successes in life, including the financial ones, and your future wife should be proud of your successes too.

  15. 15
    Jeremy

    Re-reading some of my last posts, I realize I’ve been too negative.  I can see people reading the posts and saying – “this guy keeps talking about sex as though having sex on a timeline is some sort of assurance of love or value, and it ISN’T!”  I get it.  So instead of my customary posts where I try to give an opinion, this time I’ll ask for yours.  How can a woman assure a man that she loves HIM, and not his providership?  How can she be sure in her own mind that this is the case?

     

    A caveat – please don’t respond that she does so just by being with him – that is false.

    1. 15.1
      Theodora

      Ironically, the woman who sent nude photos to YAG is more likely to fall in love with him for himself than a woman who makes him “prove himself” by courting her, while she is ready to sleep randomly with married men and men from lower socio-economic classes to scratch an itch, because those men are less likely to talk about their sexual encounters. The former is also dozens of times less trashy than the latter.

      Sending nude photos means that she considers him sexually exciting, so he has not been placed in the “beta provider” category. This is just one step away from considering him exciting as a person and possibly developing feelings for him.

      If I was a man and I also felt attracted to her, I would follow the PUA advice and start a casual relationship with her while testing other qualities for a potential girlfriend – generosity, sense of fairness, making me her prority. Because she is more likely to love me for myself than a woman who makes me wait, pay for dates, “prove myself” while she didn’t have the same standards for other men in her life.

      1. 15.1.1
        KK

        I disagree, Theodora.

        Women who sleep with married men and women who send nudes have a lot in common; poor judgement. Many would also conclude they have poor character as well.

        1. GoWiththeFlow

          KK,

          I second you!  This isn’t about the capacity to love, it’s about people who get a thrill from engaging in risky behavior.

        2. Nissa

          KK, I third you.

    2. 15.2
      Kenley

      Jeremy,

      Isn’t the big issue for so many women that they actually won’t “settle” for the type of men you describe?  Isn’t that why so many women aren’t getting married?  Isn’t that why you the 39-year old guy you described can’t get a date?  As women achieve more and more financial independence, providership does have the same pull as it used to have.

      Having said all that, why must a woman separate a man from his providership because that providership is probably a big part of who he is and how he behaves.  How can she realistically separate the two?  Conversely, I don’t think that people can be separated from their looks.  Life is different for good looking people.  In my mind, it’s unrealistic to try to decompose people and declare that you like them for just one part and not the other.  The sum total of our parts makes us who we are.  What’s wrong with acknowledging that we love the whole person?  Or perhaps I am missing something.

      1. 15.2.1
        Emily, the original

        Jeremy,

        Having said all that, why must a woman separate a man from his providership because that providership is probably a big part of who he is and how he behaves.

        You’re contradicting yourself. You wrote numerous times that it would be nice if a woman could appreciate a man for who he is and not for what he can provide. That’s exactly what happens as women gain more financial success and a larger number of them don’t want children.

    3. 15.3
      Gala

      Hey Jeremy: regarding your 39 yo cousin, my bet is he lacks the charisma. Being a teacher should not at all stop him from getting dates. It is true he doesn’t have the money and can lead with the promise of “providership”, but this is the chance to shine and win them over with his magnificent personality, charms and looks!

    4. 15.4
      D_M

      Jeremy,

      I think KK post,

      “Anyway, true maturity, in my opinion, is being very clear about what you need to be happy, what you’re willing to give, what you’re willing to accept, and your deal breakers. So basically, what Evan preaches… Above average compatibility AND chemistry…. And if one is higher than the other, it’s best if it’s the compatibility. I’ll add one caveat… You better make damn sure you’re on the same page. Just because someone thinks they’ve found the perfect combination of compatibility / chemistry for them, their bf / gf might be having a completely different experience of the relationship.”

      in combination with your post at 12 does a good job of trying to address the issue.

      “You need to know 2 things: 1) What qualities he perceives as masculine, 2) His love language.  #1 tells you what he wants to be appreciated for.  If he wants to be appreciated for his body, there’s no point praising him for taking out the garbage.  #2 tells you HOW to appreciate him.  If his love language is acts of service, there’s no point in telling him you love him with your words.  You need to give him an act of service that HE wants, not that you want – no point thanking him by taking his pants to the dry-cleaners if his preferred act of service is breakfast in bed.  I wrote in another comment that it is a good strategy to make a list of the things you do for your partner and then compare it with a list of what you think your partner wants.”

      Although it’s no guarantee, the adult conversation needs to be had with your partner, along with the introspection associated with KK’s post. I don’t think your preceding comments were all that negative. It underscores the fact they we all hold varying views on different aspects of the dating game, which makes it interesting and confusing at the same time.

    5. 15.5
      KK

      “How can a woman assure a man that she loves HIM, and not his providership?”

      She can’t, Jeremy.

      No one can assure anyone of anything. You either choose to trust someone or you choose not to.

      That would be like asking: How can a man assure a woman he’s not a pervert or a pedophile? That might sound over the top crazy to you, but I know lots of divorced women who refuse to bring men around their children; who refuse to remarry until after their children are grown and gone. The logic of course is that no one in their right mind would want to marry a weirdo, but IF she does despite her best efforts to make sure he’s a decent person, only she will suffer.

      “How can she be sure in her own mind that this is the case?”

      Most women are well aware of what they want or what they’re willing to accept in this regard. From not caring at all to wanting someone that’s financially independent to wanting to be provided for. Just depends on the woman.

       

      1. 15.5.1
        Jeremy

        As someone who was in this situation, I hoped you’d have some retrospective insight into it.  Because there ARE ways a woman could provide some assurance.  I just haven’t heard any here yet.

         

        Here’s one idea:  Be the one to bring up the subject of a pre-nup.  In other words, don’t wait for the guy to bring it up and then be unwilling or willing with reservations.  SHE should be the one to bring it up.  What do you think that would tell the man about her?  She is putting her money where her mouth is, in the same way that a man does so when he agrees to marry a woman.

         

        Tell me, if your ex had asked you to sign a pre-nup, what would your reaction then have been, given that your feelings for him were largely predicated on his efforts toward you? What do you think his reaction might have been if you had been the one to broach the subject?

        1. KK

          “As someone who was in this situation, I hoped you’d have some retrospective insight into it.  Because there ARE ways a woman could provide some assurance.  I just haven’t heard any here yet.”

          Gosh, Jeremy, I feel like I’ve let you down! But I’m telling you honestly, from my own perspective, I really don’t know how one goes about finding a sure thing. If you figure it out, let me know. 🙂 That said, if I were involved with someone that asked me for reassurance, regardless of the topic, I would try to provide some if I could and let them know if I couldn’t. I don’t see how any mere mortal is supposed to be a mind reader and assure their bf / gf of anything voluntarily, without being told it’s a concern.

          Also, I don’t consider myself the poster girl for mismatched marriage chemistry. That isn’t what destroyed my marriage. It simply gave me pause in the beginning, seriously considering if we would both be truly happy long term. If anything, regrettably, I’m the poster girl for marrying a narcissistic sociopath with a double life. I’m certainly not proud of that; it’s actually quite embarrassing, but that’s the reason my marriage failed.

          “Tell me, if your ex had asked you to sign a pre-nup, what would your reaction then have been, given that your feelings for him were largely predicated on his efforts toward you?”

          I would have been hurt. I would have thought he didn’t love me. (Darn! It’s a shame he didn’t. Would’ve never married him).

          “What do you think his reaction might have been if you had been the one to broach the subject?”

          I really don’t know. He may have been all for it! He might have thought is was a shit test. It’s also possible he would’ve balked.

           

           

           

           

        2. Gala

          Be the one to bring up the subject of a pre-nup.  In other words, don’t wait for the guy to bring it up and then be unwilling or willing with reservations. 

          It’s not the prenup, it is what’s IN the prenup that’s important, Jeremy. Any woman would be nuts to marry without one these days. With that said, depending on the arrangement that is being contemplated, she could either use it to protect her own assets and income, or assure spousal support and asset redistribution in the event of a divorce. Would such a proposal make a man feel appreciated, or did you mean a prenup where she promises to walk away barefoot with a carry on bag if the things don’t work out?

        3. D_M

          Jeremy,

          I’m here laughing at the potential comedy and fireworks that a pre-nup discussing could cause on this blog!!!! What would the vesting schedule look like? Is a percentage based on kids? How much weight each spouse gains? Do we account for illness? Should we include a spousal duties section? What about the deteriorating sexual market value factor? Should that be assessed by an independent neutral third party? Should the vesting curve be linear, exponential, or a combination of both?

          I am being a bit silly, but find the discussion rather humorous. I did a quick google search on what is not typically allowed in pre-nups. It varies by state, but some of the big hitters are child support and alimony waivers.

        4. Jeremy

          KK, I didn’t mean to be presumptuous, but realize I was.  My apologies.  I didn’t mean to put you on the spot or to judge.

           

          Gala, it would eliminate alimony completely.  I realize that many areas don’t allow such clauses (Canada certainly doesn’t).  Yet it’s funny to me how that can be interpreted to mean “barefoot with a bag” given that all the marital assets are divided 50/50.  Some countries have done away with alimony completely, realizing that once a couple separates, one ex should have no further obligations to the other.

           

          DM, I’m not a lawyer (obviously), so I don’t know many of the details involved.  The couple would work those out themselves.  But her willingness to even broach the subject would be a huge indicator of what she isn’t after.

        5. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          Here’s one idea:  Be the one to bring up the subject of a pre-nup. 

          I don’t have any problem with a pre-nup as long as the man signs a legally binding document that he won’t chuck the wife over for someone younger and/or more attractive. That way both parties can be reassured they are together for reasons that aren’t shallow.

        6. Gala

          Jeremy:

          it would eliminate alimony completely.

          Fair enough if both spouses intend to pursue competitive careers and/or are independently wealthy. But would you expect your spouse to give up her earnings potential in order to have four kids AND volunteer to give up potential alimony?

    6. 15.6
      GoWiththeFlow

      Jeremy,

      I don’t think there is any one grand gesture or conversation a woman can have to assure a man that she loves him and not his providership.  Because Tom10, above, was right:  You can’t neatly separate the role of providership (for men) and looks (for women) out neatly from the whole ball of wax of why someone is attracted to and loves someone else.  For instance, a woman can love a man’s intellect and drive, and that is what led him to be successful.  And I imagine a lot men would want their partner to admire that in them.

      I think what a man has to do is to assess a woman’s attitudes and values by carefully listening to her words and watching her behavior.  I think it was Maya Angelou who said “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”

      Using your prenup example, if I was dating a very wealthy man (not ever likely IRL) I would expect that a prenup would be part of any marriage.  I know one man in a miserable second marriage who’s wife had an excuse to cancel multiple appointments with the prenup attorney, including the coup de gras, when she became violently car sick when he was driving them to the last scheduled appointment.  He married her anyway without the signed prenup.  That’s a red flag parade right there, fellas.

      For myself, if I married at this stage in my life, I would expect it to be to a man who is divorced or a widower who has children.  If the subject came up in conversation, I would share with him that I would understand and expect that he may be paying big bucks for college tuition.  I would be happy to pitch in some money, too, because I value higher ed and his children would be part of my family.  If he died before I did, I would make sure his children got the belongings and assets he wanted him to have.  I wouldn’t say, “No I’m the wife and the next closet of kin so it’s all mine.”

      A man can also pay attention to the little life vignettes a woman shares about her day.  In my job, I have come across two men that are on the Forbes 400 list.  Both older men and billionaires.  One of these men is a total a$$hole.  Physically, he’s average for an older man.  But his attitudes, behavior and how he treated people was ugly.  There are four of us women who interacted a lot with him.  We all joked that his billions couldn’t compensate for who he is as a person and we had no idea how his young girlfriend (also a piece of work) could stand to have sex with him.  I said if I were her I’d have to be drunk.  One of the other women said she’d need to be unconscious.  After another day at work with this guy, I told the women that I decided that I would need the unconscious option as well.  I think if your girlfriend shares something like the above scenario with you, that’s a realize demonstration that personality and character do matter to her more than money.

      On the #MeToo blog entry, another woman and I asked if there was a shortcut to weed out men who indulge in casual racism, which seems to be on the rise these days.  This is important for me because my two younger kids are racial and ethnic minorities.  Evan basically said there’s no shortcut here to figuring this out before I may wind up investing time and feelings into a man.  I just have to pay attention to what he says and does, and if it happens cut him loose immediately.  I think it’s much the same for men.  There’s no quick and dirty way to sue this out.  You have to give it time to let the woman reveal who she is.  Then be prepared to walk away if red flags start going up.

      1. 15.6.1
        Theodora

        If women can’t separate providership, intellect and drive from the man and men can’t separate looks from the woman because this is part of who they are and what they are attracted to, I don’t understand what is strange about the older successful rich man – young beautiful woman pairings like the one you mentioned. It’s only natural that they both maximized their options and went for the best they could get in terms of what their sex is attracted to. If the problem is their character, well, then it’s even more understable for a kind, successful, driven old rich man to go for a kind young beautiful woman.

        1. GoWiththeFlow

          Theo,

          These pairings aren’t strange at all.  In fact it’s quite common and predictable.  The pure transactional basis of the relationship is what’s notable.  The beauty and the money are preconditions for the “love.”  If either disappears, so does the marriage.  Extremely wealthy men have trade in timetables for wives.  Turning in the old and getting a newer, younger model every 10-15 years.  And if there is an extreme downturn in the finances, the woman is out of there.  Thus the old saying, “When it comes to matters of the heart, rich men and beautiful women rarely hear the truth.”

        2. Adrian

          Hi GoWithTheFlow,

          We haven’t talked in a while how have you been? Have you finally gotten use to your new city?

          How was your trip to New Zealand? I am leaving for my vacation to Australia next month.

          …   …   …

          From your conversation with Theo and Jeremy I get that the best way for a man to know that a woman is not only with him for his wealth is to date/marry a women with equal or higher income & status (though according to most of the male commentors it is rare for a women to date men who have significantly less education, status, and income).

          Nevertheless, now I am curious, so in your opinion what should a woman do to make sure that a guy is not with her only for her looks, body, or sex?

           

      2. 15.6.2
        Theodora

        Sure. Then if women in general can’t separate the providership and drive from the man and men in general can’t separate the looks from the woman, because this is part of who they are and what they are attracted to, most relationships have a transactional component, and the line where the transaction ends and where the matters of the heart begin is not very clear. So, it’s only natural for a man to think “if both the woman my age and the younger, prettier woman see my providership and drive as part of who I am anyway, let’s see how young and hot I can go, possibly without compromising on character”. And for a woman to think the same, but replacing providership and drive with looks and young&hot with providership&drive.

        So, what was the fuss on the thread where a couple of men said they were more attracted to younger women because they have better looks and softer skin? This is just part of who these women are. Besides, both the younger woman with softer skin and the older woman weigh his providership qualities anyway, so he can as well go for what he finds more attractive.

        1. GoWiththeFlow

          Theo,

          Again you miss the point in your rush to get a dig in at women.

          In the example I gave, the successful man may have a hard time sussing out the motivations of a woman, because he derives validation from receiving admiration of both his success and the personal qualities that led to it.

          Now how you got from the subject of how a man can know it’s the totality of him and not just his providership that a woman is attracted to, to a long ago comment thread about where two older men went on ad nauseum about attractiveness of older vs. younger women’s skin is beyond me.  Guess it’s that score a point against the women thing you like to engage in.

      3. 15.6.3
        Chance

        A woman can show that she doesn’t love a man for his providership by being a life partner sans the legal/financial entanglements that marriage represents.  In fact, this is what most post-20s women do in the monitory of cases where it would cost them to be married to their partners.  In these cases, finances are kept separate and each partner takes care of her/himself from a financial standpoint.  To me, this represents the purest form of love because each partner has nothing to financially gain from the actual legal structure of the arrangement, but it doesn’t prevent them from helping each other out in times of need.

  16. 16
    Yet Another Guy

    When Should a Woman Have Sex With a Man?

    When Should a Woman Have Sex With a Man?

    Men are sexual hypocrites. They push women for sex, then blame them for having sex. They’re particularly stuck on the idea that if a woman hops into bed with them quickly then she must have done this with lots of other men as well. This lowers her value in his eyes. After all, if everyone can have her, she can’t be all that special, can she?

    On the other hand, I also know from personal experience that if a guy is crazy about a girl, and they move really fast, all the rules go out the window. In fact, this is the way MOST of my relationships have started. But then, I’ve always been determined not to be hypocritical when a woman has the same lack of morals I do. I love women with loose morals.
       
    The sex question is a popular one because it comes up in every dating situation. However, there’s no set timetable or finite number of dates that will let you know when it’s time to give it up. I know one woman who was told by an “expert” to wait 10 dates before sleeping with the man she was dating. The guy dumped her her after 7. … That’s what you get for playing by a made-up set of rules. Sex isn’t something you “allow” him to do. It’s something that you share and create together. Turn sex into a reward for good behavior and time put-in and you’re missing the entire point.

    As a woman, your job is not to come up with an arbitrary number of dates, like the U.S. coming up with a pull out date for our soldiers in Iraq. Your sole responsibility before having sex is to figure out if he’s interested in YOU or in SEX.

    I repeat: Your sole responsibility before having sex is to figure out if he’s interested in YOU or in SEX.

    If you don’t know the answer, don’t have sex. If you think you know the answer, then have sex. And if you can’t handle the emotional consequences of making an occasional mistake, you probably shouldn’t sleep with anyone until you’re in a committed relationship.

    This has been my personal policy for the past three years – no committed relationship, no sex – and it’s worked very well for me.

    YAG’s comments:

    This blog entry highlights what I have been writing about it not mattering when a woman has sex with a man whose bell she has rang.  The rules do in fact go out the window.  He is going to commit to her even if they have sex on the first date because a guy who is going to commit his heart to a woman pretty much knows it on the first date, and if he does not, he is more than likely the wrong guy.  A guy who has to be convinced that a woman is the correct one for him is just not that into her.  A guy who feels it will go “all in” long before she gets around to it.  The problem is that most women label a man who is really into them as clingy and/or needy.  That is where they make a huge mistake.  That assumption destroys an opportunity for a woman to be with a man who will truly love her because a man who goes “all in” first will have to endure being vulnerable until she catches up, and men absolutely detest being vulnerable, as vulnerability is seen as weakness. Put in this situation, a man will usually do one of two things; namely, seek assurance that you are into him (i.e., the clingy/needing thing) or run away as fast as possible.  There is really not much in the way of male behavior that lies in between these two extremes because men are not used to dealing with emotions other than joy, anger/rage, and indifference.  If a woman goes “all in” first, she will almost assuredly never get a wholehearted commitment from a man.

    Ladies, one thing that you need to keep in mind is that the only woman from whom most men receive emotional support before they are in a committed relationship are their mothers, and most men are unable to allow themselves to be vulnerable enough to seek emotional support from a woman other than their mothers until they marry.  One of the reasons why an older divorced man often seeks pen pals on dating sites is because he needs emotional support and his mother is no longer with us.  I know that I have been guilty of this behavior.  If I had a dollar for every older woman who has the “not seeking a pen pal” on her profile, I would be able to take a nice vacation.

     

    1. 16.1
      D_M

      YAG,

      A number of posters, along with Evan, has consistently reminded folks that people exist on a spectrum. Your above post doesn’t leave a whole lot of room for any of that. Maybe the guy is cautiously optimistic, but knows full well that time adds clarity. Sure, vulnerability can be perceived as a weakness, but to say that it is detestable by most men, seems like a stretch. That’s where the having boundaries thing comes in. Be adaptable, but not overrun by your new objection of affection.

      Who goes all in first doesn’t necessarily determine whether a commitment is secured or not. The relationship vulnerability dynamics is never equal. As for the whole mother thing, I am not even sure what to do with that. Maybe it’s in the context of a guy that never really dated before he got married or has a small family. It could also be a generational thing, but with sisters, cousins, and extended family acquaintances, only mama seems odd to me.

      1. 16.1.1
        Yet Another Guy

        @D_M

        You need to research the subject of male vulnerability.  Men generally have a very difficult time being vulnerable.  A man who is vulnerable is not operating from a position of strength, and men are taught to never show weakness because weakness is not a masculine trait.  I am not making this stuff up.  It is common knowledge among men.

        Being emotionally vulnerable is terrifying to most men because we are not equipped to handle it.  All of our training from the time that we were little boys has been to suppress all emotions except joy, anger/rage, and indifference.  Bernie Zilbergeld does a very job of explaining the process by which we convert innocent little boys into emotionally unavailable men because that is what society demands of men in his book entitled “The New Male Sexuality.” Emotional unavailability in men is by societal design.  It is necessary because we raise our sons to be expendable.  How in the world would we otherwise be able to train 18-year-old boys to charge into a hail of bullets or get men to work dangerous jobs?  Men are taught to suppress their emotions and that training starts when a boy is between 5 and 8 years old.  A 5-year-old boy will cry and express his emotions in front of his friends.  By the time a boy reaches 8 years old, he has already decided that he will do his best to never express emotions other than joy, rage/anger, and indifference for fear of ridicule from his friends and chastising from his father.

        Here is a link to an article that discusses why men run away when put in a position where they are vulnerable:

        Why Men Leave The Minute They Become Vulnerable

        Here is a to link another article that discusses men, intimacy, and emotional vulnerability in relationships:

        https://pairedlife.com/gender-sexuality/Men-Intimacy-and-Emotional-Vulnerability

        One last thing,  I have a bunch of sisters who are very nice, but they would never be able to replace my mother.  A man’s mother is the only woman he knows who excepts him unconditionally.  A son can mess up unbelievably and a mother will never turn her back on him.  A man’s mother has known him since he was an emotional little boy (i.e., before he underwent emotional unavailability training).  A man will often seek emotional support from a woman he does not know because she means nothing to him; therefore, he has nothing to lose.  A man must be careful when seeking emotional support from sisters because sisters are judgemental and what they say can cut.  There are things I would tell a woman who is a total stranger that I would never discuss with my sisters.

        1. D_M

          YAG,

          Thanks for the articles and the additional expansion of your perspective.

        2. GoWiththeFlow

          YAG,

          We get it.  You have a difficult time with emotions, power dynamics, and being vulnerable in a relationship.  But your insistence that this is just how it is for all men is not true.  While the average man may not be as comfortable with emotions and vulnerability as the average women is, there is a lot of variance around the mean amongst men.

      2. 16.1.2
        Yet Another Guy

        @GWtF

        If the problem was not common, there would not be articles written about it.  Most men are uncomfortable with emotions and extremely uncomfortable with being vulnerable.  Yet, few would ever tell you about these problems because they do not want to be seen as weak or lacking control.  Bernie Zilbergeld’s book does a very good job at explaining these problems as well as covering all aspects of male sexuality.  It is must read for men and woman.

        https://www.amazon.com/New-Male-Sexuality-Revised/product-reviews/0553380427/ref=cm_cr_getr_d_paging_btm_next_3?ie=UTF8&reviewerType=all_reviews&pageNumber=3

  17. 17
    Jeremy

    Thanks to all who responded.  I’ve been going through some stressful times lately (nothing to do with marriage) and I think that some of that has come out in my writing lately, taking me back to angrier times in my past.  So I wanted to offer something that is more balanced and hopefully helpful.

     

    A hoop is only a hoop when it is not reciprocated.  If my wife expects back massages every night, that could be perceived as a hoop for me to jump through, or it could be perceived as a pleasure.  The difference is in the reciprocation.  The reciprocation doesn’t have to be equal in kind or quantity, but it must be there.  How can a man know (or at least suspect) that a woman isn’t only interested in his efforts?  If she reciprocates with her efforts in a way that he can perceive her love.  And this works for both genders.

     

    Of course, it is always possible that a person is only acting in a loving way in order to get something, and might stop acting that way once they get what they want.  It behooves a person to be careful and to look at history and to take one’s time before marriage.  But other than that one must be optimistic and trust that our partner’s motivations are genuine  – because the alternative is the destruction and dissolution of marriage in general.

  18. 18
    Jeremy

    GoWithTheFlow, I was thinking about the exchange we had recently about changing lanes.  I don’t want to continually rehash the same topic, but based on your responses I think there might be a misunderstanding.  In each of your replies you gave the example of a woman who learned by negative example what sort of men she should not date, and comes to understand the type she should marry.  She eschews the drug addict and marries the accountant.  And so the conclusion is that “changing lanes,” in this sense, is a good thing.  Where we part ways is not at this point, but in the future of the scenario.  Remember when we discussed the “Happily ever after fallacy,” as I called it?  The notion that because things are good now, they will continue to be good in the future?

     

    Consider the most common complaints that married women make about their husbands – in my circle it is either that they see their husband as more of a child than a partner, or that they are bored by the routine.  How many of the women who now see their husband as a child married him because he was fun, exciting, and was his own man (as Emily would say)?  How many who now see their husband as boring married him because he was reliable?  How many of them now view negatively the very qualities that attracted them in the first place because they didn’t understand that what they would want in the future is different than what they want in the present?  Answer – many, many of them.  GWTF, this is the lane-changing I am talking about, which is in stark contrast to what the manosphere discusses – it’s not about Alpha f-cks beta bucks, it’s about affective forecasting.

     

    Remember when we discussed personality archetypes?  The Guardian woman often marries the Explorer or Idealist man because he is confident and exciting, and makes him the center of her universe….until she has kids and re-prioritizes, as all Guardians predictably do.  She is the one who will see her husband as a child, while he wonders where the woman he married went.  The Explorer woman often marries a Guardian or Rational man because she believes the time has come for her to settle down, and she chooses her husband for his reliability, which is so different from that of the other men she has dated.  She is the one who will come to see her husband as boring.  It is predictable as clockwork!  It isn’t that one personality archetype should necessarily choose a certain type, but rather they should understand that each mixing will have its unique challenges due to what the individuals are likely to want in the future.

     

    I care nothing at all how quickly a woman has sex with me vs another man.  I certainly have no “N rule” as YAG describes.  The history of a woman with a very dopaminergic past tells me about her personality type, which in turn tells me about what I believe she is likely to want in the future – and I must use that to determine how likely that is to be me.

    1. 18.1
      Emily, the original

      Jeremy,

      How many of the women who now see their husband as a child married him because he was fun, exciting, and was his own man (as Emily would say)?  How many who now see their husband as boring married him because he was reliable?  How many of them now view negatively the very qualities that attracted them in the first place because they didn’t understand that what they would want in the future is different than what they want in the present?

      Everybody has to marry a partner who is reliable. The “exciting” partner most people had at some point in their lives was unpredictable and unreliable and if they did commit, it didn’t last long or was a train wreck. The people who “intoxicate” us are usually not good, long-term prospects. It’s not just women who go for practical when looking for long-term. I have written this before, but I had one guy friend tell me he married his wife because she is a good person and a good mother. Another said his wife helped him get financially stable. A third said his fiancee was reasonably attractive and kind. Do these reasons sound “exciting” to you? MEN DO IT, TOO.

      1. 18.1.1
        Jeremy

        Emily, “The people who intoxicate us are usually not good long-term prospects.”  While this may be true, it isn’t the point.  The point is the reverse – the person who loved BEING intoxicated is not a good long-term prospect to the stable partner.

        1. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          The point is the reverse – the person who loved BEING intoxicated is not a good long-term prospect to the stable partner.

          Yes, agreed. If a man is really worried about marrying a lane-changer, he should pick a woman who has ONLY HAD long-term relationships. Maybe a boyfriend in high school and in college. Someone who likes the consistency of a longterm relationship and has never had any interest in casual situations. Now, this is a woman who will need to feel COMFORT (to borrow your word) before having sex with a partner, but this is not a woman who will have hooked up quickly with other men … so that will not be an issue. A man, however, will have to work a bit at getting to know her. (You wanted a non-lane changer. Nothing comes for free.) She would make ALL men wait. She is a bad prospect for a male lane-changer, as he will find her too sexually conservative.

        2. Jeremy

          Totally agree, Emily.

    2. 18.2
      GoWiththeFlow

      Jeremy,

      Yes, we were definitely talking about different things.  I think when there is a lack of connection and desire later on into a marriage or LTR the reasons are multifactorial.  Could it be sexual meta-goals have changed?  Sure, that can contribute to it.  But it could also be familiarity killing desire.  Or maybe one or both partners can’t adapt to the others’ quirks and resentment builds up.  And sometimes, people just change, even radically so.  I’ve seen two marriages break up due to religion.  In one marriage, one partner embraced a fundamentalist form of their religion.  In the other, the couple were both religious when they married, then one became a non-believer.

      I think we try to find a unifying reason for such big questions because it gives us comfort to think there are singular solutions.  It may break, but we can fix it!  I think YAG with his N-count, and rules about about not dating grandmothers, or not dating someone he’s too attracted too engages in this type of thinking.  It’s very linear thinking.  This woman didn’t sleep with me by date #5 because she was never attracted to me and was only stringing me along.

      I think KK and some of the other women are saying the same thing.  That men and women exhibit a variety of attitudes and behavior.  And when two people get together there are a multitude of ways these individual differences can come out.  There just aren’t any simple equations to explain behavior sometimes.

      1. 18.2.1
        Jeremy

        Certainly the etiology of such situations can be multi-factorial.  And certainly simple, one-size fits all solutions don’t often work.  But that doesn’t mean that there aren’t solutions, or that the solutions can’t be simple.  It just means that both the diagnosis and the solution must be tailored to the problem.

         

        To give a bit of an intellectual leap here, the brilliance of Behavioral Economics (my favourite discipline) is the notion that the mistakes that people make often tend to be systematic rather than random.  The biases that lead to human error can be described and applied – we are not all that different!  When Amir and Levin describe the value of Attachment Theory, they mention that before the theory, every therapist had to re-invent the wheel with each new patient because the problems that people described were seen as so individual, so different.  And with the advent of Attachment Theory they realized that so often it was the same problem with varying details.

         

        I agree with you that there are many possible reasons for marital dissolution or loss of sexual desire.  You named a few and we are both aware of others.  Yet if we consider the common complaints, the common situations, we can see that the medical reasons and the severe lifestyle changes (changing religion) are the exceptions, not the rule.  We don’t like to think about the “rule” because we love the idea that we are all so individual.  But what binds us is more powerful than what distinguishes us, and sometimes our behavior is indeed predictable and understandable.  That is what I’ve spent my life puzzling out.

      2. 18.2.2
        Yet Another Guy

        @GWtF

        I think YAG with his N-count, and rules about about not dating grandmothers, or not dating someone he’s too attracted too engages in this type of thinking.  It’s very linear thinking.  This woman didn’t sleep with me by date #5 because she was never attracted to me and was only stringing me along.

        My dating rules were born through experience of what works for me.  Some of the rules came about via making the same mistake more than once, so they were not one-off experiences.

        While it may seem odd, the grandmothers rule works for me. I  do not want to be with a woman who is in a more advanced place family-wise.  It is not a good fit for me.  I desire to be with a woman who is experiencing things for the first time when I am experiencing them.

        My N-count rule was born via repeated experience when I was in my early to mid-twenties.  It is disheartening to date a woman for weeks or months on end without getting physical only to discover than she leaped into bed with the next guy (as Adrian mentioned, that information does get around a social circle).  My N-count rule  is basically a “she is not that into me” bound.  I can accept that a woman is not that into me.  What I cannot accept is sticking around while she figures out if she is into me.  In my world, true sexual desire is either there from the start or it is not, and if is, it is difficult to put off getting naked for an extended period of time.   My experience has proven that truism.

        Now, the one rule where I can find fault is not dating women to whom I am I am too attracted.  This rule is a self-protection mechanism.  I lose control of me, and I do not like losing control of me.  I made a conscious decision in at age twenty-seven to never again allow a woman to devastate me.  It has never stopped me from sleeping with women to whom I am very attracted.  I just refuse to open up emotionally with these women because I hate not being in control of me (or giving up my power as you say).

        1. Emily, the original

          YAG,

           I just refuse to open up emotionally with these women because I hate not being in control of me (or giving up my power as you say).

          You’re cutting out the best part.   🙂     Just let go and jump over the cliff ….

        2. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          You’re cutting out the best part.    Just let go and jump over the cliff ….

          And smash your head on the rocks below! 🙂

        3. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          And smash your head on the rocks below! 🙂

          But the fun you’ll have on the way down.  🙂

        4. GoWiththeFlow

          YAG,

          Well, you believe in what works for you.  Just like women who say they need a potential mate to have a college degree is what they believe works for men.  So next time the subject comes up where women are told they are being too picky because they have requirements or rules, you will jump in and defend them, right?

          You have to make decisions for yourself and live with how it all shakes out.  Just like the women who want a husband with a masters degree or a six footer.  Just be cognizant that it limits your pool of options.  And I don’t think you will be any less thrilled when you meet your first grandchild if your girlfriend or wife already was a grandmother when you met.  She will probably be thrilled, too.  I wasn’t any less thrilled when my 2nd and 3rd child arrived than I was with my first because they weren’t the first.

          As far as a N number goes, no one said any man should wait months for a woman to decide if she wants to have sex.  It’s interesting that you use that timeframe as an example of why you need an N when your N was set at 2.

        5. Yet Another Guy

          @GWtF

          It’s interesting that you use that timeframe as an example of why you need an N when your N was set at 2.

          I set it that low because I was only interested in dating women who really wanted to have sex with me.  I was not looking to hookup, but I was also not looking long term.

          Now, what is odd is that I have two women who I have been seeing casually for months.  I have not moved toward having sex with either women.  Yet, I have also not friend-zoned either one, and it does not appear that they have friend-zoned me.  They are not lovers or platonic friends.  They exist somewhere in between the two ends of the spectrum.  I currently have an FWB if I just want sex, so that takes a little bit of the edge off of dating, and then there is the younger women who I met the other night with whom I have the primal thing going on.  I cannot seem to find a woman who meets all of my desires.  I believe that you are correct in that I am being too selective.  However, the thing is that I would rather be alone than settle.  I survived a decade in an intimate contact-free zone.  There is no loneliness that remotely compares to that experience.

        6. Kenley

          A guy on a dating site had a link to a great article that basically indicated that if you aren’t saying “fuck yes” to a person you are really saying “no.”  So, I think that you are really saying no to those ladies — what’s the point in hanging on to them if you aren’t saying “fuck yes”?

          However, I agree with you about not settling.  But, you don’t seem to want to go out with women who really excite you either.  So, I’m not certain of who you are holding out for…

        7. Emily, the original

          Kenley, 
          His name is Mark Manson. 
          htps://markmanson.net/fuck-yes
          “She said she’s not interested, but she still flirts with me, so what do I need to do to get her?” “Well, I know she likes me, but she didn’t call me back last weekend, what should I do?” “He treats me well when he’s around, but he’s hardly around. What does that mean?”
          Most dating advice exists to “solve” this grey area for people. Say this line. Text her this. Call him this many times. Wear that.
          Much of it gets exceedingly analytical, to the point where some men and women actually spend more time analyzing behaviors than actually, you know, behaving.
          Frustration with this grey area also drives many people to unnecessary manipulation, drama and game-playing — like “forgetting” a jacket at her place so she’ll have to call you again, or “making” him wait until he’s taken you on three dates before you’ll sleep with him.
          These things may seem clever and exciting to some people who are stuck or frustrated. But this dating advice misses the point. If you’re in the grey area to begin with, you’ve already lost.

        8. Evan Marc Katz

          Manson’s blog post, while popular, is limited. I certainly wasn’t “fuck yes” on my wife when I first met her. The couple we had dinner with last night, now married 20 years, was not “fuck yes” either. It’s simplistic advice, appealing to people who prefer black and white to grey.

        9. Shaukat

          It’s simplistic advice, appealing to people who prefer black and white to grey.

          Sorry Evan, but I think you’re wrong on this one. Have you read Manson’s original article on this issue? The reason he formulated his ‘Fuck Yes’ thesis was to point out that the ‘grey zone’ area of dating, where one person is ambivalent and the truly interested party has to resort to overly analytical behavior and games in order to try and convince the other to give them a shot is a lose-lose scenario for both parties. He makes it a point to highlight the fact that this does not mean that chemistry has to be overwhelming and that ‘fuck yes’ does not mean love at first sight. You may not have been ‘fuck yes’ about your wife initially, but she never had to convince you to see her right? From Manson’s original piece:

          ‘Fuck Yes or No doesn’t necessarily mean you have to be falling in knee-wobbling love at first sight. It doesn’t even mean you have be completely convinced that someone is right for you. You can be “Fuck Yes” about getting to know someone better. You can be “Fuck Yes” about seeing someone again because you think there’s something there. You can be “Fuck Yes” about giving things a few months to pan out and see if you can fix the problems in the relationship. You can be “Fuck Yes” about trying to fix things in an unhappy relationship because you can see future potential.’

           

          Fuck Yes or No

           

        10. Evan Marc Katz

          Fine. Then it doesn’t really sound like “fuck yes” to me. More like “fuck maybe,” which isn’t nearly as strong a title.

        11. Yet Another Guy

          Well, I spent the afternoon with one of the women that I have been dating casually.  I brought up the subject of us, and she pretty much laid things on the table.  She used a term that I have not yet seen used on a relationship-oriented site.  She said that she wanted to be able to “label” me, as in “he’s mine.”  I guess that is the female equivalent of man “claiming” a woman. It was an interesting conversation to say the least.   She is a good woman, a CPA and partner in her firm, not a grandmother, and very close in age. I was humbled by her desire to be able to refer to me as hers. I never looked at things that way. The online dating sites can give one a distorted view of the world.  A man can be led to believe that a woman is dating multiple men with no intention whatsoever of choosing one because there is an endless stream of suitors; hence, a guy must always remain in motion.

        12. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          Well, I spent the afternoon with one of the women that I have been dating casually.  I brought up the subject of us, and she pretty much laid things on the table.  She used a term that I have not yet seen used on a relationship-oriented site.  She said that she wanted to be able to “label” me, as in “he’s mine.”  

          I don’t get this wanting to date so many different people. Explain it to me. Isn’t it exhausting? I guess I would understand having the sex-only partner (and that means sex only, as in you meet up for 45 minutes a week and then go home) while you continued to meet other women you may want to date more seriously, but why have two you are casually seeing when you met one the other night you really liked? How do you get excited enough about the casual ones (who obviously don’t interest you enough to be moved out of that category) to even want to bother?

        13. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          How do you get excited enough about the casual ones (who obviously don’t interest you enough to be moved out of that category) to even want to bother?

          It is about maintaining what is referred to in the manosphere as “frame.”  Like stumbling upon an online dating screening process via trial and error that remarkably resembles Evan’s 2/2/2 rule,  frame is just a new term for something that I have known about since I was a much younger man.  Frame is about remaining masculine and desirable in a woman’s eyes.  Frame is a very “alpha” thing.  One thing that I have learned over the years is that maintaining at least a small amount of emotional distance in the relationships that I have with women allows me to maintain frame.  As crazy as it sounds, the combination of attraction + comfort + passion + emotional distance is like crack to a lot of women.  The first three components are basically seduction.  Seduction when combined with emotional distance drives a lot of women to want to possess a man. Their minds go into overdrive thinking of ways to close the emotional distance. Maintaining frame is much easier to do if I am dating multiple women at the same time. A man cannot afford to get wrapped up emotionally in one woman when he has to tend to the emotional needs of several women. Yes, it can be exhausting at times, but it beats losing frame.  A man who cannot maintain frame becomes sexually undesirable to all, but the least competitive women.

        14. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          Maintaining frame is much easier to do if I am dating multiple women at the same time. A man cannot afford to get wrapped up emotionally in one woman when he has to tend to the emotional needs of several women. Yes, it can be exhausting at times, but it beats losing frame.  A man who cannot maintain frame becomes sexually undesirable to all, but the least competitive women.

          Actually, you probably spend more time coming up with these theories than you do dating. This is all very, very dark.

          A man who cannot maintain frame becomes sexually undesirable to all, but the least competitive women.

          Get some hobbies. Make some friends. Then you’ll have something else to focus your emotional energy on besides the women you are dating.  That will help you “maintain frame” because you’ll have other emotional outlets, which everyone should develop. And I don’t know about other women, but if I find out that a man I really like is dating multiple women, I walk. It’s certainly his prerogative to do so as long as he’s honest about it, but I’m not waiting in line. I’ve competed only once, decades ago, and by the time I landed the guy, I realized that the competition with the other woman was more interesting than the man himself.

        15. Tron Swanson

          I’ve never heard of Mark Manson, but I agree 100%. In my own experience, I’ve found that interest/enthusiasm is either there or it isn’t, and there isn’t anything I can do to change that. Trying to “get” ambivalent women to like me has always, always proven to be a bad choice.

          My rule: if she’s having sex with me, she’s interested. If she isn’t, she isn’t. I’ve never been in a situation where having to wait proved to be a good sign. I’ve been around a lot of women, during my life, and I’ve seen how they behave around guys they’re genuinely enthusiastic about. I’ve been on both sides of this dynamic: sometimes, I’ve been the guy that the woman put off, and other times, I’ve been the guy she jumped right into bed with, while she held other, more emotionally-invested guys at arm’s length. Obviously, my rule won’t always be accurate, but I view it as the male version of women’s “If he’s really interested, he’ll ask you out,” which isn’t always accurate, either. Both are generalizations that help people avoid wasted time and emotional stress.

        16. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          Get some hobbies. Make some friends. Then you’ll have something else to focus your emotional energy on besides the women you are dating.  That will help you “maintain frame” because you’ll have other emotional outlets, which everyone should develop.

          I have several active hobbies.  The emotional energy expended in my hobbies does carry over to women.  Women are baffling to most men, and they are all different.

          I am assuming that you do not use online dating services because most people on online dating sites are usually dating more than one person.  I never assume that a woman is dating me exclusively until the subject is broached.  That is a fool’s errand.

           

        17. Yet Another Guy

          @Tron Swanson

          My rule: if she’s having sex with me, she’s interested. If she isn’t, she isn’t. I’ve never been in a situation where having to wait proved to be a good sign.

          Bingo!  If a woman truly sexually desires a man, the rules go out the window.

        18. Evan Marc Katz

          I have great respect for any woman who ever made me wait. Just because most people impose no limits doesn’t mean we should disrespect those who do. You want a “high value” woman? Choose one who has the guts to tell you that she doesn’t sleep with men who are still looking at other women on Tinder.

        19. Emily, the original

          Tron,

          My rule: if she’s having sex with me, she’s interested. 

          Sex is the same for women as it is for men in this regard. Sometimes it means interest. Sometimes it doesn’t. Have you never agreed to a hook up simply because the opportunity was in front of you despite the fact that you felt “meh” about the person? Have you never looked back on a sexual encounter(s) and wondered … what was I thinking?

        20. Emily, the original

          YAG,
            Women are baffling to most men, and they are all different.
          Men are baffling to most men. They sometimes seem like a different species.
            I never assume that a woman is dating me exclusively until the subject is broached.  That is a fool’s errand.
          I didn’t say you should assume anything. You just seem to get off on messing with women. This one I will have sex with but maintain optimal emotional distance, this one will provide ego validation, this one I will date but only permit high-school level physical interactions so she is kept at arm’s length and is always trying to get at me …. Yuck.

        21. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the origingal

          I didn’t say you should assume anything. You just seem to get off on messing with women. This one I will have sex with but maintain optimal emotional distance, this one will provide ego validation, this one I will date but only permit high-school level physical interactions so she is kept at arm’s length and is always trying to get at me

          That is not how I see it, Emily.   I see it as I meet women, enjoy their company for an evening, and move on most of the time.   I have sex with tiny proper subset of the women I date by my choice.  Every so often. a woman comes along who I want to see more than one time, so I will add her back into my date queue for further exploration.  The two women who I have been dating for a while fall into this category.   Like I said, they are not lovers, but are also not platonic friends.  I have not had sex with either these women.  I had assumed that they were dating other people and were okay with getting together from time to time.  I now know that one of these women wants more than that from me, so I have to make a decision.

          Unlike you, I am not okay with a straight sex situation.  I have an FWB, but I am getting ready to end that situation.  I would rather take care of my owns needs than have an FWB.  It is a lot less hassle, and I know that I am not going to contract anything.   I underwent vasectomy back when my children were little, so I am not huge fan of wearing a condom.  Having an FWB means wearing a condom every time.

        22. Emily, the original

          YAG,
          Like I said, they are not lovers, but are also not platonic friends.  I have not had sex with either these women.  I had assumed that they were dating other people and were okay with getting together from time to time. 
          But you are having physical contact of some kind? Otherwise they wouldn’t be “platonic” friends. I had have several “platonic” male friends and hung out with a few. There was nothing beyond a friendly hug, and that was fine with me.
          Unlike you, I am not okay with a straight sex situation. 
          You want what I call “the bullshit in between.” You don’t really want a serious relationship but you don’t like just a physical one because a woman showing you warmth and compassion makes the experience better for you. Only you want it on your terms and then you want her to go away. I had a male friend who did that. He had a rotation of old and new ones. He deeply hurt several of them. I wanted to put out an all-points female bulletin. It never made any sense to me, as this guy looked like Mr. Magoo, but .. what do I know? For me, personally, it’s either just sex or we are trying to get to know each other to see if there’s a potential for something real. But that’s me. 

        23. Tron Swanson

          Evan,

          I’m guessing that our definitions of “high-value women” are radically different. I wouldn’t want your version of one, and I’m sure that you wouldn’t want my version of one. At any rate, in my experience, the longer you have to wait for sex, the less it’s worth it. As YAG said, the rules should go out the window. If the woman can control her attraction to me, well, it isn’t that strong of an attraction.

          Emily,

          I’ve never had sex with a woman that I wasn’t attracted to. And I’ve never regretted any of my sexual encounters. Maybe women regret the sex they had, but I regret the sex I didn’t have.

        24. Evan Marc Katz

          “If the woman can control her attraction to me, well, it isn’t that strong of an attraction.” If that’s not the most asinine definition of what makes for a healthy partnership, I don’t know what is.

        25. Emily, the original

          Emily,
          I’ve never had sex with a woman that I wasn’t attracted to. And I’ve never regretted any of my sexual encounters. Maybe women regret the sex they had, but I regret the sex I didn’t have.
          You should have heard the conversations I had with my college girlfriends. There were definitely encounters each one of us was happy to forget. We didn’t so much regret them in some kind of moral way, but they were unmemorable and with men we weren’t terribly interested in. I regret some of the sex I didn’t have, too, but only with people I was really into. I don’t regret the instances where I turned down or did not move on offers from people in whom I had a mid-level interest or lower.

        26. Emily, the original

          Sorry. That comment was meant for Tron. I accidentally posted it to myself.

          TRON,I’ve never had sex with a woman that I wasn’t attracted to. And I’ve never regretted any of my sexual encounters. Maybe women regret the sex they had, but I regret the sex I didn’t have.You should have heard the conversations I had with my college girlfriends. There were definitely encounters each one of us was happy to forget. We didn’t so much regret them in some kind of moral way, but they were unmemorable and with men we weren’t terribly interested in. I regret some of the sex I didn’t have, too, but only with people I was really into. I don’t regret the instances where I turned down or did not move on offers from people in whom I had a mid-level interest or lower.

        27. Tron Swanson

          Evan,

          I’ve seen and experienced the difference between genuine, passionate, uncontrollable interest, and “well maybe” or “good enough” sorta-interest. I’m never going back to settling for less. That said, I’m not interested in partnerships, healthy or otherwise.

          Emily,

          I’ve had far too many conversations with women in which they told me about sex that they regretted. It’s something I simply can’t relate to, since, as a man, my problem is more “not enough sexual possibilities” than “so many sexual possibilities, I made the wrong choices a few times”.

        28. Evan Marc Katz

          Seems to me, Tron, that between you and me, you’re consistently settling for less on what life, love, and women have to offer.

        29. Emily, the original

          Tron,

          my problem is more “not enough sexual possibilities” than “so many sexual possibilities, I made the wrong choices a few times”.

          Not so many I made the wrong choice. I made the choice of whatever was in front of me at the time. And the choice, at the time (it’s not true all the time) wasn’t great or wasn’t bad but not super appealing. I don’t regret the experiences, but there are many that I have no reason to remember. I don’t include them in the “canon.”

        30. Yet Another Guy

          @Tron Swanson

          I’ve had far too many conversations with women in which they told me about sex that they regretted. It’s something I simply can’t relate to, since, as a man, my problem is more “not enough sexual possibilities” than “so many sexual possibilities, I made the wrong choices a few times”.

          I am assuming that you are under forty because I routinely find myself passing on sex.  I do not know if the passion stars aligned this past weekend, but I met two new women who are significantly my junior in addition to having a date with one of my regular women.  I already wrote about the first woman who is seven years my junior who I met on Friday.  That was a raw, primal encounter that could have easy turned into a raw, primal sexual encounter. She has already hinted that that is where things are headed in the near future.   However, what blew me away was the woman I met on Saturday evening who is ten years my junior.  I was on the fence with this one because I had already dates scheduled for Friday and Sunday with different women (plus, ten years is pushing it).  I met this one at a local bar and grill for a glass of wine.   From the moment our eyes met, I knew that I was in trouble.  We wound up at my place that evening, and I have never brought a woman that I met on an online dating site back to my place on the first date. I just found myself powerless when it came to deferring her request to take her to my place.  I am so into this woman that I would shutter all of my profiles and flush my date queue if she wanted to be an item.  Even though she is not a Barbie or even a ultra-feminine women, she has that OMG factor.  The chemistry is that high. However, I fear that this one may have been a one-off high passion event.

           

        31. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          I am assuming that you are under forty because I routinely find myself passing on sex.  I do not know if the passion stars aligned this past weekend, but I met two new women who are significantly my junior in addition to having a date with one of my regular women.

          That’s funny. I have two friends (both middle-aged) on match. One has had plenty of dates but has yet to meet anyone appealing. The other is dating a man who really likes her. I don’t know how mutual that feeling is.

        32. Tron Swanson

          YAG,

          I’m in my late thirties. And I have indeed passed up sex, at times, but only when the women involved were unattractive. I’ve never passed up sex with women I’m attracted to.

          Evan,

          I’m an extremely cautious/risk-averse person, and I think that some goals aren’t worth the effort…so, yes, there are definitely areas where I’m choosing to settle for less. I’m more than okay with it; I view it as wise management of my time and energy, because it enables me to focus on the things I really care about. But, when I choose to actually make an effort and try to get sex, I won’t be settling for less.

  19. 19
    KK

    Emily,

    “I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect a man to court a woman and pay for dates for months on end with no sex”.

    Really? To me, this sounds like some sort of exchange rate.

    1. 19.1
      Emily, the original

      KK,

      Really? To me, this sounds like some sort of exchange rate.

      That’s not how I meant it. I was remembering another post in which the men were saying they were exhausted by having to plan and pay for dates, only to have the woman disappear and say by about date 3 that she wasn’t feeling it. That’s certainly the chance you take, anyone takes, in dating. And I certainly think it’s advantageous for a woman to wait as this site recommends to determine if the man is willing to commit.

      However, I also know how rare it is to be dating someone you really like. Didn’t you write that you had felt chemistry with two men since your divorce? I’m assuming you’ve accepted other dates with men you didn’t feel that way about? I could be wrong, but if women waited to feel that way about a date, she’d never date! However, if you were dating one of those two higher chemistry men, and weeks had passed by and he was calling every day and your interactions were progressing and you were seeing each other every weekend, I think you’d find it difficult to not have sex. I’m not talking about date 1 or 2 or even 3, necessarily , but I think the more attracted you are to someone who seems to be making a concerted effort to court you, the more you’ll be tempted have sex with that person. If you’re not tempted, and several weeks have gone by, you’re not that interested. So on that point I agree with YAG.

      1. 19.1.1
        Yet Another Guy

        @Emily, the original

        If you’re not tempted, and several weeks have gone by, you’re not that interested. So on that point I agree with YAG.

        Bravo! You get it, Emily.  An N-count is a basically a “she is not that into me” bound.  I am sorry ladies, but I have dated enough women in my lifetime (my sample size is significant) to know that when a woman truly sexually desires a man, it is damn near impossible for her to keep her panties on for an extended period of time.   Any woman who can keep her panties on for an extended period of time is dating a guy for whom she has low sexual desire.  He is being sought for his kind provider  (a.k.a. “beta provider” in manosphere terms) attributes.  No man wants to be chosen because he is a kind provider.  He will never feel loved that way.

        1. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          Any woman who can keep her panties on for an extended period of time is dating a guy for whom she has low sexual desire. 

          I agree with you, but, again, I don’t mean dates 1, 2 or even 3. It could mean a good month of dating and becoming exclusive.

        2. Nissa

          Nope, not true. I kept my panties on in every relationship, including one in which my ex and I had sex every time we saw each other, I think for the first two years we were together. And again with my husband, for whom my sexual desire did not fade throughout the 14 years we were together. By the end I was the one begging, not him. I get that it’s outside your experience, but my N=1 says exactly the opposite of yours. Yes, I was tempted in both instances, but my desire for an actual relationship with an emotional connection trumps sexual desire every time. Mostly because I know that once the high wears off, the feelings are terrible and the high wasn’t worth it.

        3. Emily, the original

          Nissa,

          I kept my panties on in every relationship, including one in which my ex and I had sex every time we saw each other, I think for the first two years we were together

          Yeah, but how long did you keep them on?

          It’s called sociosexuality. Some people are very restricted. Others are in the middle. Some are unrestricted. YAG appears to be quite unrestricted. So my advice for him remains the same. He won’t be compatible with a woman who is restricted and makes him wait. For me, I don’t want sex to mean nothing, but I don’t want it to mean everything.

        4. Nissa

          Emily, the think the fastest was 5 months, and that was with the man I married. The one before him was 9 months I think. This was a long time ago. And no one since I got divorced.

        5. Nissa

          My point is, I was tempted. I was attracted to them. Any man thinking my ‘keeping my panties on’ meant that I ‘wasn’t that into him’ would be dead wrong. And frankly, none of them were good providers when I met them – one was a bag boy, the man I married was a security guard, one had just gotten out of the navy…you see my point. I did not have ‘low sexual desire’ for any of them. I had desire strong enough to last through the entire relationships, for all of them. In spite of that, I refrained from sex, for the reason that sex was never my priority – a loving connection of mutual appreciation was my goal. Orgasms are nice but are beside the point – one does not require the other. I don’t need a boyfriend for that in the same way that I need a boyfriend for a loving connection with another human being. So exploring whether or not I have a loving connection with that person is the priority activity, and sex only blurs those lines. Therefore it is far more prudent to leave sex out completely, and focus on the attributes I value – confidence, conflict skills, passion for his own life, and how much effort he is willing to make, to make the relationship happen (during which time, my job is to remain appreciative, to admire and respect him, to say yes to every request I can, and be flexible whenever I can). None of that equals low sexual desire, it is in spite of those desires that one chooses the wiser course. And before YAG asks, no, I was not having sex with other guys during that time, I was abstinent. My years at a Christian school served me well in that way, lol. It is not a function of the man in question, it is a function of my personal principal.

          This does not mean that sex means nothing, or everything. It’s an interaction with a high degree of intimacy, but I can have intimacy with someone I met 15 minutes ago (and often do). It’s that I know I feel crappy when I share a higher level of intimacy with my beautiful soul, with my body with someone, and they don’t esteem my gift. When I have appreciation for my gift, I am happy to give it. When there is little or no appreciation, then I don’t. It’s the knowledge that my gift is seen as meaningless or interchangeable with another that demeans the gift. So lower levels of intimacy I am happy to give, higher levels I won’t give without reciprocity of the man’s time, attention, and appreciation. And if a man walks away because of that, that’s just not a match for me then. Of course it hurts, but doing otherwise has never served me.

        6. Emily, the original

          Nissa,

          Emily, the think the fastest was 5 months, and that was with the man I married. The one before him was 9 months I think. This was a long time ago. And no one since I got divorced.

          Ok. Then you’re on the higher-end of the restricted sociosexual scale and I’m sure there are men who are compatible with that. Personally, I would never wait 5 months. I wouldn’t want to but I’d also worry about how the sex would be.What if it’s bad or mediocre but you’ve become emotionally invested?

        7. Adrian

          Hi Emily and Nissa,

          Nissa said, “As someone who waits not X number of dates, but literally months, until we are exclusive and why men are still willing to date me without sex“.

          Could you speak about this more; specifically what you did to have these men happily without sex for so long? Because it seems amazing to me that a guy (I am assuming whom has many other options) would stick around for more than 3 months with no sex at all (vaginal, oral, etc) and remain not only faithful but happy.

          I knew of low quality guys who have done this but that was because they knew they would not be able to get another woman as attractive or young guys who all had friends in the same social circle so they knew that if they cheated they would be caught.

          But it is hard for me to understand the motivations behind a high quality guy that can get other women to stick around in a sexless relationship for so long; especially if he doesn’t know if the sex will be good or bad once you finally do have it.

          …   …   …

          Emily

          WHOA!!!  I’m on a roll with you this week, that’s two for two; things that we have talked about in the past that “I” don’t think you understood my point now you are starting to.

          You said, “but I’d also worry about how the sex would be.What if it’s bad or mediocre but you’ve become emotionally invested?

          OMG! THANK YOU!

          Now to be fair you never said it would be wrong to leave a person if the sex was just so bad but my point was always that if after courting and building trust and comfort with a woman for months to just leave her because the sex is terrible… The woman and everyone she tells would not understand or even try to see your feelings or needs, they would just judge the man as having a debase sexually motivated character.

          That’s my only fear about Evan and other’s advice to women to make a man wait; a few weeks or even a month and a half is cool but many women try to follow the advice they read about which tells them to have a guy wait at least 90 days (3 months) or longer.

          But for me I feel that I would be trapped in that relationship with a person who is possibly terrible in bed however I spent months showing her that I wanted her more than just for sex.

          Oh and Emily… I WIN AGAIN!!!  (>’-‘)> \(^_^)/ ~(^_^)~ <(‘-‘<)

        8. Emily, the original

          Adrian,
           The woman and everyone she tells would not understand or even try to see your feelings or needs, they would just judge the man as having a debase sexually motivated character.
          Who cares what she tells people? Be honest with her. Tell her you don’t want to see her anymore. Don’t ghost. But you have no obligation to other people. And being considered sexually debase could get you more dates!?  🙂
          A few weeks or even a month and a half is cool but many women try to follow the advice they read about which tells them to have a guy wait at least 90 days (3 months) or longer.
          If a woman is looking for a relationship, then wanting to wait a few weeks or a month is reasonable. The relationship needs to be progressing to daily contact, regularly seeing each other and professions of exclusivity. I wouldn’t want to seriously date a man who wanted to wait longer than that, but that’s me. If someone made me wait 3 months into seriously dating (not 3 months of casual dating) … it had better the best I ever had!   🙂   (I’m pulling your leg a bit but you see what I mean.)
          Oh and Emily… I WIN AGAIN!!!  (>’-‘)> \(^_^)/ ~(^_^)~ <(‘-‘<)
          I’m not disagreeing with you about this topic, so I’m confused what you mean by you’re winning, but, OK, you win. You’re such a pleasant person, I’ll let you win every time.  🙂

        9. Nissa

          Adrian, there is no way for me to discuss this in a way that sounds humble, but it’s not a brag, I promise. Evan has said many times that men stick around because of how they feel. That’s what I do – in a non sexual way, I make them feel good. I listen. I try to find points of agreement. I ask them about what they want and why they want it. A lot of men don’t get the chance to express what they want, or need, or why they are doing what they are doing. It’s something they often don’t get from other men (although the men in my circles do).  I try to find things about them to admire or respect, because I need that in order to have a relationship with them. I can almost always find something. I make effort to appreciate them, by saying: thank you, I enjoyed this, I had fun, I love this about you, you made me laugh when you __, I so get what you mean when you say __, I’m impressed that you __, that’s amazing that you can __, you are the best ___.  I follow up my words with smiling and  looking them right in the eye. I give them what they want – intimacy, understanding, unconditional love in a non sexual way. Most men think that they want sex, because sex will give them intimacy, acceptance, connection. I just go directly to those things, so they don’t need the sex. It’s the same thing with money or power. People pursue those things not for the sake of those things, but what it brings them.

          The men who are interested in casual figure out right away that I’m the marrying kind and ghost. So it’s not like I get every guy, but the ones that do make it past date four tend to be a better match, because they like what I’m offering. Also, a lot of the guys that I wished would ask me out, didn’t. When I was younger, I chased those guys and ended up wondering why I was doing all the work. I don’t do that anymore, but it still hurts when the guy I like doesn’t call (or just offers to be a booty call – I get a lot of that).

          The other reason that this works is because when I identify things that are dealbreakers for me (he wants to have kids, doesn’t want to get married, he is out of integrity in some way), I don’t agree to more dates. If I can’t accept them, then I recognize that they have qualities I don’t want, and I don’t want to waste time for either of us. I think this is different from what other women do. Women tend to think that they should give guys another chance. I don’t. I think that they are most honest when I first meet them, and anticipate that he won’t change. If I can’t accept it, there’s no point in dating that guy (for me, anyway). I think I’m a little more honest with myself than a lot of women, in regard to what I will and won’t tolerate. Bad hair, fashion challenged, blurts out random things? I can handle that. Drinks excessively, lacks compassion,  has no moral code? Next.

      2. 19.1.2
        KK

        Emily,

        “However, if you were dating one of those two higher chemistry men, and weeks had passed by and he was calling every day and your interactions were progressing and you were seeing each other every weekend, I think you’d find it difficult to not have sex. I’m not talking about date 1 or 2 or even 3, necessarily , but I think the more attracted you are to someone who seems to be making a concerted effort to court you, the more you’ll be tempted have sex with that person. If you’re not tempted, and several weeks have gone by, you’re not that interested. So on that point I agree with YAG.”

        Being tempted doesn’t mean follow through. That’s what I was trying to convey earlier when I said that not everyone has the same views on sex, love, and relationships. If we all shared the same values, it would be much easier to define which actions mean what. But we don’t.

        So all YAG is doing is fishing from the pool of women that are okay with casual sex. It isn’t a formula for determining who’s genuinely interesed. You’ve said yourself that women who have casual sex will do so for any number of reasons. So… if he goes out with someone x number of times and she doesn’t agree to have sex yet, it doesn’t mean she isn’t interested. It could be she just isn’t comfortable with casual sex. So YAG dumps her and she moves on to someone better for her, while YAG continues to involve himself only with women who engage in casual sex. And with all his experience he claims to have with women, he only has experience with women who engage in casual sex. Therefore, he knows absolutely nothing about women who refuse to engage in casual sex.

        1. Yet Another Guy

          @KK

          with all his experience he claims to have with women, he only has experience with women who engage in casual sex.

          From what I can ascertain, the majority of women are okay with sex sans commitment if it is the right guy.  If have known women over the years that made guys wait for six months or longer who gave it up to a guy they really wanted within a handful of dates.  Sure, there are women who never have sex sans commitment, but they appear to be as rare as hen’s teeth in the late forty-something to late fifty-something group.  A lot of the women in this group put off dating for the most part until their children were grown and are now looking to make up for lost time with respect to sex.  Plus, there are a lot of men in this age group who are suffering from sexual dysfunction and refuse to do something about it.  I have literally had women lean over and ask me if I would take them home or pull some other stunt to go back to my place such as saying that were too tipsy to drive after a couple of glasses of wine over a several hour period.   All of these encounters happened on the first date.  I was in such a state of utter disbelief after I re-entered the dating pool that I called one of my married friends and told him that I believed that I was no longer in Kansas. 🙂   These kinds of encounters rarely occurred before I married unless a lot of alcohol was involved.  These women were tipsy at best, and they were all degree-holding professionals.

        2. Emily, the original

          KK,

          So all YAG is doing is fishing from the pool of women that are okay with casual sex.
          Again, I’m not talking about casual sex. I wrote that the couple has dated for several weeks, they talk every day and spend every weekend together. To me, that’s not casual. If that’s going on and you don’ feel tempted, you’re not into him. I was just talking to a friend who wanted to get to know a guy before she had sex. She started to date a guy and wanted to wait 2 months. “But we didn’t make it two months,” she said. Because she dug him.

        3. Adrian

          HA!!!

          HA..! HA..! HA..!  FINALLY!!!

          Emily the original professional said, “I was just talking to a friend who wanted to get to know a guy before she had sex. She started to date a guy and wanted to wait 2 months.

           

          Emily my friend since we have been talking to each other you have always denied that women actually make men wait more than a two or three weeks for sex. Regardless of the countless male commenters who have said that it has happened to them or the innumerable female commenters who have said that they have done made men wait 3-6 months before having sex.

          It just feels so GOOD to finally hear you say it (even if your friend did not make it).

          So technically…  I WIN Emily!!! I WIN!!! (^_^)

          …   …   …

          On a serious note I think that what every guy on here-with the exception of possibly the sage of wisdom Tom”The Great”10-is saying is that for us guys we can not tell the difference between a woman who is waiting for months because she wants to protect her heart and a woman who is waiting for months because she is just not really that into us.

          I think the disconnect between you, YAG and I is because you two don’t believe that women who actually like a man and who are actually sexually attracted to a man will wait for months to have sex with him (though KK the lovely is trying to tell you that she and other women like her have done it). You and your circle have never seen it so you of course will never probably believe it.

          …   …  …

          P.S… I WIN!!!  \(^_^)/  <(‘-‘<) (>’-‘)>  ~(^_^)~

        4. Emily, the original

          Adrian,
          Emily my friend since we have been talking to each other you have always denied that women actually make men wait more than a two or three weeks for sex. Regardless of the countless male commenters who have said that it has happened to them or the innumerable female commenters who have said that they have done made men wait 3-6 months before having sex.
          I will cede this victory, Mr. Adrian, but I don’t remember saying that. I am surprised that, as you wrote here, a man would wait 3 to 6 months. A few weeks? No, that doesn’t surprise me. 3 to 6 months sounds like a really long time. Why you a man wait around that? I’m a woman and I wouldn’t wait that long.
          It just feels so GOOD to finally hear you say it (even if your friend did not make it).
          My friend is a good girl.   🙂
          And per YAG’s comment … I have a friend who married her high-school sweetheart. She’s almost 40 and has only been with one man. I have another who married her college boyfriend and has been with him and her high-school boyfriend. Yes, there are women out there who are more sexually conservative.

      3. 19.1.3
        Nissa

        Emily TO, You made me lol, saying “what if the sex is bad”. To me, sex is like pizza. Even if it’s bad, it’s still pretty good. Once you’ve spent time getting to know someone and care about them, that makes all the difference. You no longer worry about your wiggly bits or being awkward, because you’ve already passed that, so being comfortable with each other, and having already made the choice to accept that person as they are. It will make me sound a bit slutty, but at that point, I’m going to be pleased just to get to explore the naked man in front of me. It’s taking knowing him to a whole new level – the sounds he makes, the shifts of his body as passion takes over, the smell of him, the feel of him under my hands. Not that I couldn’t feel that right away with someone, because I could.

        But I have discovered that men reveal themselves slowly, and so instead of fighting that by insisting that they abide by my timeline, I accept theirs and proceed accordingly.  The ones that only want sex get frustrated and go away, as do the ones that don’t really know what they want. The ones that like me for me, realize that sex isn’t on the menu and stick around for the other stuff. And men do want the other stuff. If that wasn’t true they would just hire prostitutes and never marry.  But since most men date and get into relationships, it’s clear there’s something else the men want in addition to sex. For me, that something else is far more elusive and vital than sex. After all, you can have good sex with someone whose name you can barely remember, but real connection tends to remain bright in our memories.

        1. Emily, the original

          Hi Nissa,

          To me, sex is like pizza. Even if it’s bad, it’s still pretty good.

          Oh, my, I couldn’t disagree more!   🙂

          Once you’ve spent time getting to know someone and care about them, that makes all the difference.

          The emotional connection will of course be better but that says nothing of the sexual connection. Those are two different things. You can have very mediocre sex with someone you care about. Or not. There’s no way to know until you get down to business.

           But since most men date and get into relationships, it’s clear there’s something else the men want in addition to sex. For me, that something else is far more elusive and vital than sex.

          Yes, a strong emotional connection is hard to find … but so is earth-moving sex and sex with someone you are dying to go to bed with.

        2. Clare

          Emily,

           

          I tend to agree with you here. I won’t go into detail, but I have had bad sex. Even with someone I really liked! In a few cases, my lack of enjoyment in the sex was enough to kill the relationship.

          Conversely, I have found that I am able to put up with a lot if the sex in a relationship is wonderful. I tend to think of it as fuel that keeps me going. I get a high from great sex that sustains my mood into the following day, and it builds up “brownie points” in the relationship which make me a bit more patient and forgiving about things – not blind, but certainly more patient. Maybe that is just me.

          But a relationship where the sex is bad (again, I won’t go into detail, but there certainly is such a thing) is not one I can stay in. I have broken up with guys before, not necessarily where bad sex was the sole reason, but it was a major reason.

          I too would honestly battle to wait to sleep with a guy I really liked. Waiting a couple of weeks is generally standard for me, but more than a month would be difficult. By two months I’d be climbing the walls. However, I’m also not afraid of sleeping with a guy too soon as I used to be in my twenties. The physical danger is the only thing I’m afraid of. But as long as I take precaution, use protection and feel safe with a guy, it’s not something I feel anxious about. I always give myself a pep talk before I decide whether or not to sleep with a guy and I honestly ask myself if I can enjoy the experience for what it is and if I will be ok emotionally if things don’t pan out with this guy. If yes, I go ahead. If no, then I don’t. I have kind of got to the stage in my life where I know my worth, and I know if a guy decides not to pursue things, that he will be missing out. Either that or we are not compatible, in which case it wouldn’t have mattered if I’d waited till he was my boyfriend. I also know that with the right guy, you won’t have to convince him to stick around after sex. But anyway, the point is, sex doesn’t have the power to hurt me the way it once did.

        3. Emily, the original

          Hi Clare,

          I tend to agree with you here. I won’t go into detail, but I have had bad sex. Even with someone I really liked! In a few cases, my lack of enjoyment in the sex was enough to kill the relationship.

          For me, there has to be  a certain level of heat during the first time together. Of course, it’s going to be awkward. Everyone expects that, but the first time sets the tone for the sex in the future. You can always improve it, but only by some many levels. If it starts out bad or very mediocre, that’s not a good sign.

          Conversely, I have found that I am able to put up with a lot if the sex in a relationship is wonderful. 

          Yes

          I too would honestly battle to wait to sleep with a guy I really liked. Waiting a couple of weeks is generally standard for me, but more than a month would be difficult. By two months I’d be climbing the walls.

          Yes, a month is good.  A month of solid dating that naturally escalates in terms of time spent together and communication in between dates. Two months is too long.

          However, I’m also not afraid of sleeping with a guy too soon as I used to be in my twenties. … I always give myself a pep talk before I decide whether or not to sleep with a guy and I honestly ask myself if I can enjoy the experience for what it is and if I will be ok emotionally if things don’t pan out with this guy. If yes, I go ahead. If no, then I don’t.

          I definitely have done things too quickly and then regretted it. I wished I’d waited for another week or 2. I’m thinking about this one guy I was dating. I planned to wait another couple of weeks, but when he kissed me, I knew I was through!

          I have kind of got to the stage in my life where I know my worth, and I know if a guy decides not to pursue things, that he will be missing out. Either that or we are not compatible, in which case it wouldn’t have mattered if I’d waited till he was my boyfriend. I also know that with the right guy, you won’t have to convince him to stick around after sex. But anyway, the point is, sex doesn’t have the power to hurt me the way it once did.

          Sounds like a great place to be! I’m working on it. Self-acceptance takes a long time.

  20. 20
    Adrian

    Hi Jeremy,

    You said, “In my manospherian years I learned that women respond better to men with an alpha mindset – men who prioritize their own desires over those of others, including the women themselves.”

    Could you explain this for me please???

    It seems to go against everything that all the women on her as well as in the real world say about what they want in a man, a relationship, and they even say those type of guys are “disgusting.”

    I thought being a confident man: taking charge of dates and courting, having a plan, and being emotionally & mentally strong and supportive, etc.. was Alpha

    NOT the selfishness part

    But as you have said that seems to work, even professor Dan Ariely has said that “there is a difference between what women say they want and what they really want.”

    It’s confusing to me… What do women respond to in men?  Why are they saying they want type of guy but having sex on dates 1-3 with the opposite of what they say they want?

    1. 20.1
      Emily, the original

      Adrian,

      I thought being a confident man: taking charge of dates and courting, having a plan, and being emotionally & mentally strong and supportive, etc.. was Alpha

      Yes, that’s what women respond to. I wrote about it to Jeremy a few posts up. It’s also the self-containment. The not groveling.

    2. 20.2
      Jeremy

      Adrian,

      Why are they saying they want type of guy but having sex on dates 1-3 with the opposite of what they say they want?”  Haven’t I written enough on that topic?  🙂  It’s because they often don’t know on a conscious level what they react to.  And because while their arousal centers react positively to it, their comfort centers react negatively to it.  So which does the woman react to, comfort or arousal?  Depends on the woman and the situation – and she may react one way consciously and another way subconsciously.

       

      I thought being a confident man: taking charge of dates and courting, having a plan, and being emotionally & mentally strong and supportive, etc.. was Alpha, NOT the selfishness part”  Confidence is a heuristic.  It is taken to represent quality, because quality is not easy to ascertain (unlike beauty).  A man who walks around surrounded by a bevvy of beautiful women is pre-selected by those women in the eyes of other women.  They view that he must have some quality, or else why do all those other women dig him?  But when a man is not surrounded by women, women need another heuristic to ascertain his quality.  His confidence – the way he carries himself – pre-selects him in the eyes of women in the same way that the bevvy of beautiful women does, even though the fact of his confidence might be due to anything from competence to intense stupidity.  Taking charge of dates is the same type of self-preselecting behavior – getting a woman to believe you have what it takes to take care of business (a la Emily) by demonstrating a taking care of business.  But that isn’t alpha behavior.  Courting a woman is the epitome of Beta behavior.  It is giving women the comfort they need and subsuming the man’s internal desires for her benefit.  Courting makes women feel comfortable, but in and of itself does not make them aroused.

       

      Ask Tom what behavior makes them aroused.

      1. 20.2.1
        Emily, the original

        Jeremy,

        Courting makes women feel comfortable, but in and of itself does not make them aroused.

        Acutally, a man approaching you, getting your number, calling, planing the date, making a move, etc.   That all can be arousing. A man who can display he has a semblance of game (not a slick player but a man who can demonstrate he knows how to lead — I feel like I’m writing in the 1950s!) can be arousing.

        1. S.

          What she said. 🙂  Being treated well and courtly is hotter than all get out.  Yum!

        2. Nissa

          What you said, Emily TO. It’s a display of confidence, action based, and is therefore a masculine behavior. Passively waiting for a woman to approach you is a feminine behavior and therefore unattractive on both a mental and subliminal level.

        3. Jeremy

          Acutally, a man approaching you, getting your number, calling, planing the date, making a move, etc.   That all can be arousing.”   I agree that a man approaching and making a move CAN be arousing, as long as the man is a man you want to approach and the context is a context where you want to be approached.  When the man or the context are not desired from the get-go, his approaching is street harassment.  Were this not true, if the action in and of itself was the attractant, street harassment would be considered attractive by women due to its inherent boldness.

           

          The action is masculine and attractive when the man and the context are attractive to the woman.  If either the man or the context are not attractive, his actions will not be attractive, but rather actively repulsive.  Therefore it is not the actions that are attractive, but rather the context that is, and the actions are augmentative to that context.

           

          Why is that important?  Because if you tell a man to go out and approach women, make lots of moves, he must realize he will be rejected far more often than he will succeed, and that many women will be more repulsed than attracted by his boldness – because boldness is only attractive when the man is, at least to some extent.

        4. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,
             I agree that a man approaching and making a move CAN be arousing, as long as the man is a man you want to approach and the context is a context where you want to be approached.  When the man or the context are not desired from the get-go, his approaching is street harassment.  Were this not true, if the action in and of itself was the attractant, street harassment would be considered attractive by women due to its inherent boldness.
          Street harassment is totally different. A group of men catcalling a woman who is by herself is much different than a man approaching a woman on his own. The former is a creepy power dynamic; the latter takes courage. Yes, to a certain extent the man who approaches has to be appealing to the woman, but this isn’t just true of women. Men want to be approached by women they find appealing. It’s human nature.
          Because if you tell a man to go out and approach women, make lots of moves, he must realize he will be rejected far more often than he will succeed, and that many women will be more repulsed than attracted by his boldness – because boldness is only attractive when the man is, at least to some extent.
          I would advise him to read the approach signals but we’ve discussed this issue before and didn’t agree on it. I think that most women will be at least marginally polite to a man who starts up a conversation with her at, for example, a grocery store. If she is, however, all business and not giving all that much back, it’s time to move on.
          By all means, do not approach a woman who is giving off “don’t talk to me vibes” or who is listening to her headphones.

        5. Nissa

          Jeremy, it’s still attractive. I have been approached by many men in whom I had no interest at all, but was charmed by their approach. For example, I recently turned down a younger man, a ‘ranchero’ type (from Mexico, a cowboy type, usually about 5’6″, boots, a cowboy hat, sometimes with gold lined teeth) who approached me to dance. After our dance, he informed me that he was married, had two kids, and wanted my phone number. Since he barely spoke English, he sweetly informed me that he could teach me Spanish. I just laughed and thought, points for going after what he wants!! Gotta give him credit. He also mentioned that “I never met a white lady like you before”. I just smiled and said, “Yeah, meeting me is a new experience for a lot of people”. He wasn’t pushy, violating or graphic – those things would have offended. He just asked for what he wanted in a respectful way, and that made it appealing.

          It’s often not the behavior or the word, but the intention behind it. Watch Joe Biden and he puts his hands on everybody, but there’s no malice in it. Others not so much.

        6. KK

          Jeremy said, “…because boldness is only attractive when the man is, at least to some extent.”

          Agreed.

          Emily said, “A man who can display he has a semblance of game (not a slick player but a man who can demonstrate he knows how to lead — I feel like I’m writing in the 1950s!) can be arousing”.

          Agreed. Emphasis on the “CAN BE”.

          Nissa said, “Passively waiting for a woman to approach you is a feminine behavior and therefore unattractive on both a mental and subliminal level”.

          Agreed.

          S. said, “If a man I find ‘arousing for other reasons’ makes no attempt to court me or treat me as I deserve, the ‘arousal’ goes down”.

          Agreed.

          Looking at Adrian’s questions, I think he’s asking what qualities women find attractive in men. He wants to know why women SAY they want attractive, kind, compassionate, but they will sometimes overlook guys that appear to have those qualities and either lust after or jump into bed with guys that might be attractive, but they’re also selfish, inconsiderate, users. That’s what (I think) he’s asking; not what “actions” do you find attractive in a guy you already find attractive but what attracted you to him in the first place.

           

           

        7. Jeremy

          KK,  Agreed.  🙂

        8. Adrian

          Hi KK,

          How have you been? We have not talked in what seems like forever…

          You said, “He wants to know why women SAY they want attractive, kind, compassionate, but they will sometimes overlook guys that appear to have those qualities and either lust after or jump into bed with guys that might be attractive, but they’re also selfish, inconsiderate, users.

          You are correct.

          Honestly KK I don’t know where we would be without you here on this site. (^_^)

        9. KK

          I’m doing well, Adrian. : ) How are you?

          Your question about why women say one thing and do the opposite applies equally to men. Because, like Jeremy has said, most people don’t really know what they want.

          So Adrian, what would your dream girl look like, sound like, act like? What does she do for a living, for fun, what does she want out of life? How does she treat you?

          Okay… So just for fun, let’s say your ideal woman (in your head) is a flirtatious, busty little blonde that hangs on your every word. Then you go out tomorrow night and you meet a tall, slender, gorgeous brunette. She’s not what you’re typically attracted to but there’s something “special” about her. You can just feel it. So the two of you spend the rest of the night talking, laughing, and flirting. At this point you don’t know much about her, so you fill in the blanks by projecting your idealized dream girl onto her, which makes her seem perfect for you. Then as you continue to see her, and actually start to see who she really is, you realize she has some faults. They might even be pretty serious. Maybe she’s really not a very kind person or maybe you sense she’s manipulate or whatever. So the person who took your breath away when you first met is starting to look less appealing and now you’re conflicted because of the way she made you feeeellll. Eventually, you break it off and your friends let you know they never liked her for the exact same reasons you started to feel unsure about her.

          And that’s what people do. Men date bitches, not because they want to deal with a bitch, but because the woman they feel the most chemistry with just happens to be a bitch. And women date assholes. Same reasons.

      2. 20.2.2
        Mrs Happy

        Men being masculine and strong makes us aroused.

      3. 20.2.3
        Jeremy

        S,, “Being treated well and courtly is hotter than all get out.”  No it isn’t.  I really wish that the women here would understand why men everywhere realize that this is not good advice for them.  Being treated well and courtly BY A MAN WHOM YOU ALREADY FIND AROUSING FOR OTHER REASONS is hotter than all get out.  Being treated courtly by a man you don’t find somewhat arousing is not hot, it’s creepy.  If simply treating a woman courtly made her aroused, we would not see memes about Nice Guys and harassment.  Treating a woman well and courtly activates her comfort zone, not her arousal zone.  A woman might need that comfort in order to perceive her own arousal since she might have strong sexual brakes that need deactivation, and so she might perceive courting as hot, but trust me, if she did not find the guy hot for other reasons, the courting would not be hot.

         

        Mrs. Happy “ men being masculine and strong makes us aroused.”  Women use the word “masculine” to mean whatever they want it to.  When a woman wants a confident man, she takes confidence to be masculine.  When she wants a man who changes diapers she says that changing diapers is masculine.  What she means is that “men who do what women want and act how women want are masculine, but only if they act that way of their own volition.  If women have to tell them to act that way, they are pushovers.”

         

        Emily, yes, confidence is arousing and courting is comforting. But Rollo on the manosphere is quite correct in parsing the etiology of this sort of “confidence.”  It arises from a personality that prioritizes its own desires well above those of others.  Selfishness, in other words.  The man who takes what he wants, goes after who he wants fearlessly is perceived as confident.  But why WOULDN’T a man go after what he wants?  Maybe he is afraid.  Or maybe he has thought about the situation, realizes that there are other perspectives, and realizes that he must modulate his behavior to consider others.  Oops, not confident.  Not masculine.  Until masculine means being a partner or a parent.

        1. S.

          Jeremy, I wasn’t exactly giving advice to all men. I was saying what turns me on.  Two women responded to your comment.  Why do you say that we are wrong?  We know what turns us on, honestly.

          You may have theories about comfort vs. arousal, but I know what turns me on and it’s how a man treats me.  I always was attracted to the ‘nice’ guys since I was eleven years old.  I wish men would stop perpetuating the myth that that is not true.

          I actually feel more ‘comfort’ with men that I have zero attraction to.  They are friends and make no attempt to court me.

          BY A MAN WHOM YOU ALREADY FIND AROUSING FOR OTHER REASONS

          If a man I  find ‘arousing for other reasons’ makes no attempt to court me or treat me as I deserve, the ‘arousal’ goes down.   It may take time, but it does.  Whereas a man who I never noticed ever, had no arousal for, who shows me kindness consistently I may start to have that spark for him.  This happens to me quite often.

          This is not advice, simply my experience.  Now, there are some people men I’ll never be attracted to.  Just won’t.   It’s not some sort of guarantee that courtship = attraction.   But it can happen.  But there are no guarantees for anything.

          So trust me, I know what is going on my body.  I may not show it to a guy because I don’t know is going on for him, but I’m pretty upfront with myself when I’m attracted to a man.  It’s pretty unmistakable.  🙂

        2. S.

          Also we have to remember the definition of courtship.  Emily defined it as, “a man approaching you, getting your number, calling, planing the date, making a move, etc. ”

          This is not comfortable, nor should it be.  There is a lot of uncertainty and discomfort in the early stages.   Just because a guy does this stuff doesn’t mean he actually likes you.   He may not know yet.  You don’t know how much you like him yet.  There is a lot of push/pull, not knowing, a lot of discomfort in the early courtship stages.  And that needs to be there.   (I personally don’t always love the uncertainty but it does create attraction.)

          As a woman, I’m not sitting back thinking,”He doing all these things, now I can sit back comfortably and be bored since he’s wrapped around my little finger.” Hell no! I have no idea what this man really wants or who he even really is yet.   So no, this doesn’t inspire comfort.  This uncertainty helps create arousal in both parties.  But that uncertainty isn’t about being selfish or unkind. A man can treat a woman very, very well and still leave some uncertainty there.  It’s a nuance but many men manage it.  That’s just the normal uncertainty of not knowing where the courtship will lead.   I think comfort may be what people feel after being married for years.  But  a long-term relationship is an entirely different kettle of fish vs. the early stages of courtship.

        3. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          Until masculine means being a partner or a parent.

          Being masculine is a sexual, attractant quality. Being a good partner or parent is a relationship quality. Two different things. I’m sorry it seems to irritate you that some women like confident men. It irritates me that so much of  a woman’s value is wrapped up in her appearance. Such is life. I don’t get to decide what the other side finds appealing.

        4. Jeremy

          I would say MOST if not all women like confident men, Emily.  And whether or not it irritates me is irrelevant, I guess.  They didn’t ask for or want my opinion on the matter.  I totally agree that being confident is sexual and being a good parent is relational – and will only be conflated when a person confuses one set of goals for another, which I’ve discussed ad nauseam.  It’s like my example of the poster that consent is sexy.  Consent isn’t sexy.  I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard “a man washing dishes is sexy.”  “A man changing diapers is sexy.”  “A man helping around the house is sexy.”  No, they are not sexy.  They are desired, but not arousing.

        5. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          I would say MOST if not all women like confident men, Emily. 

          Actually, confidence is a universal attractant. They’ve done studies across cultures, and confidence is the one quality most people can agree is appealing.

           Consent isn’t sexy. 

          I agree with you. Done in the right way and by the right man, an absence of consent can be sexy. We talked about this months ago when I referenced the NYT article on egalitarian marriage. Doing chores wasn’t turning the wives on. They wanted the husbands to be more aggressive.

        6. Clare

          Jeremy,

          “I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard ‘a man washing dishes is sexy.’ ‘A man changing diapers is sexy.’  ‘A man helping around the house is sexy.’ No, they are not sexy.  They are desired, but not arousing.”

          Hm. Again, I don’t think you get how nuanced a woman’s arousal system is, Jeremy. A man who consistently takes care of these kinds of things is sexy. One who doesn’t have to be nagged, fought with, asked repeatedly… just takes care of what needs to be taken care of, is EXTREMELY sexy. To me anyway. Why? Because it demonstrates a proactive, engaged, energised attitude. Proactive, engaged, energised=someone we can rely on=masculine.

          Not only does taking care of those tasks signal someone who is proactive and engaged (which is sexy) versus someone who is passive and lazy (very unsexy), it also frees up more of our energy to feel sexual and aroused. If a man taking care of the dishes or the laundry means we get to spend an extra twenty minutes on our appearance or on having a nap so that we feel refreshed, I promise you, the chances of sex are much higher. I can personally report (and this is just my own experience) that living with a man who rarely if ever did housework of his own initiative did much to kill my sexual attraction for him. I certainly wasn’t sitting there thinking: “He’s lazy, he’s slobbish, he always leaves me to make dinner and clean up and is quite happy with a dirty and messy house… God, I can’t wait to get him into bed!”

        7. Jeremy

          Hi Clare.  You wrote, ” If a man taking care of the dishes or the laundry means we get to spend an extra twenty minutes on our appearance or on having a nap so that we feel refreshed, I promise you, the chances of sex are much higher.”  This is only true if the woman finds the man arousing otherwise.  If not, I promise YOU that the chances of sex are no higher.

           

          I totally agree with you that a man’s laziness can be a turn-off.  It activates the sexual brakes and prevents feeling aroused, and can activate resentment.  But does a man doing chores activate a woman’s arousal?  Generally no.  If it did, the strategy that Nice Guys use to get a woman’s interest by doing favours for her would work.  If it did, the study that came out a few years ago examining the effect of doing household chores on sex life would not have shown that men who do more chores around the house have less (not more!) sex.  A man doing a masculine chore can activate a woman’s arousal sometimes.  A man doing household chores can de-activate sexual brakes or prevent resentment.  But a man doing household chores does not, in general, activate a woman’s arousal when she would not otherwise be inclined to arousal.  Men around the world have tried this and seen the results.

        8. Yet Another Guy

          @Jeremy

          A man doing household chores can de-activate sexual brakes or prevent resentment.  But a man doing household chores does not, in general, activate a woman’s arousal when she would not otherwise be inclined to arousal.  Men around the world have tried this and seen the results.

          You are 100% on the money with this assessment.  A man could take over all of the household chores and it will not result in him having more sex.

          It comes back to the reason why I have an N.  A woman either truly sexually desires a man or she does not.  If a woman has never or no longer truly sexually desires a man, nothing that he does can change that fact.  That is why it is fool’s errand to continue to court a woman beyond a certain point without there being a gesture toward the bedroom.  It has been my experience that the shorter the delta between the time I have met a woman and the time we slept together, the greater and longer lasting her interest in me sexually as well as the quality of the sex.  A woman who sets about trialling me before moving toward the bedroom is just not that into me sexually.  She may be into me for other reasons, but that does not cut it with me because I know that that type of attraction leads a pedestrian bedroom.  No one wants to have boring pedestrian sex.

           

      4. 20.2.4
        Emily, the original

        Jeremy,

        If simply treating a woman courtly made her aroused, we would not see memes about Nice Guys and harassment. 

        While I will agree with you that a woman has to find the man arousing first before she is more aroused by his masculine behavior of taking charge in the courting process,  I believe a man she felt neutrally about could become appealing to her after seeing that the guy will take charge. Nice guys court women in a way to win over and win favor. It’s coming from a place of needing to be liked, which makes it less masculine and less appealing. The courting process itself isn’t the issue. It’s the energy behind it.

      5. 20.2.5
        Emily, the original

        Nissa,

        Passively waiting for a woman to approach you is a feminine behavior and therefore unattractive on both a mental and subliminal level.

        What can be confusing is an outward masculinity — maybe the man even approaches you and initiates — but then you come to find out he needs a lot of reassurance.

      6. 20.2.6
        Nissa

        Adrian, IMO most of the guys who SAY they are those things, aren’t. Most of them are insecure or needy, and ‘being nice’ to them means doing what a woman has asked of them (which is nice) but having ulterior motives for doing it (which is not nice). So the woman will receive that as ‘not nice’, because the negative intention behind the behavior taints the behavior, and negates the positive effect.

        Women can appreciate that you are kind, but not want to date you if you aren’t good looking. Women can appreciate your compassion, but not want to kiss a mouth that smells like a trash can. If the guy is average looking, she may appreciate his fine qualities, but that’s not going to make her want to rip off his clothes. That’s physical and particular to each individual for the most part. For those qualities to count, there has to be a baseline attractiveness.

        1. Jeremy

          Nissa, you wrote regarding Nice Guys, “most of the guys who SAY they are those things aren’t.  Most of them are insecure…and “being nice” to them means doing what a woman has asked of them (which is nice) but having ulterior motives (which is not nice).”

           

          This has been repeated in popular media so often that people have come to believe it.  But it is BS.  ALL people have ulterior motives. No one is “nice” for the sake of being nice.  The dis-attractant of the so-called Nice Guy is not that he has ulterior motives, but rather that the woman does not find him attractive.  I mean, think about it – you’ve got 2 guys, one who wants to have sex with a woman and does nothing for her, the other who wants to have sex with her and is trying to do nice things for her to win her interest.  BOTH guys have the same motives. One has to work to win attraction, the other doesn’t – because the one is less attractive than the other.  Shame on the Nice Guy for thinking that he can win a woman’s arousal!  Wherever would he get the idea that that would work?!  Oh, wait….

        2. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          The dis-attractant of the so-called Nice Guy is not that he has ulterior motives, but rather that the woman does not find him attractive. 

          But it’s also how he approaches. One guy will make it clear he wants the woman. The “Nice Guy” will go in through the side door and not the front, making her think he wants a friendship. She lowers her guard; she tells him things she wouldn’t if they were dating. But then, weeks or months later, he starts to throw out low-level, tentative sexual comments. When she doesn’t respond the way he wants,  he gets passive-aggressive and mean. It’s his approach that kills it. He comes at it from a place of weakness and, frankly, manipulation. This has happened to me several times with male friends. It’s why I don’t think men and women can be friends because it’s not possible on the male end of things.

        3. Jeremy

          Sure Emily, but he approaches that way because he (usually rightly) believes he doesn’t have a chance if he approaches in a forthright manner, and because he was taught that if a man courts a woman by being nice to her, she will grow attracted to him.  So why don’t women put the kybosh on that notion?  Answer – because it serves them.  Just like the “consent is sexy” poster where the writers are trying to get what they want by appealing to what men want, women who want to be courted tell men that courting is sexy, that efforts are sexy, that niceness is sexy.  Not because they are sexy, but because they want them.  Women still raise their sons to believe that the way to get a wife is to get a job, not teaching the subtlety that the job only matters when the man himself is already attractive, otherwise it only sets him up to be used.

        4. Chance

          “When she doesn’t respond the way he wants,  he gets passive-aggressive and mean. It’s his approach that kills it. He comes at it from a place of weakness and, frankly, manipulation.”

           

          The friend-zone and FWB scenarios have been discussed ad nauseam around these parts so I’ll just bring up this one point that I don’t believe has been addressed thus far (I think):  the reason these situations are common is because both men and women manipulate themselves.  More specifically, both men and women lie to themselves in these situations.  In a friend-zone scenario, the guy typically believes that he actually is okay with being friends with the girl even though he’s also romantically interested in her.  The girl typically believes that she genuinely wants to be his friend independent of the validation she receives from the attention he provides.

           

          In FWB scenarios, the girl typically believes that she actually is okay with being friends with the guy while also being interested in a relationship with him.  The guy typically believes that he genuinely wants to be her friend independent of the sexual pleasure he receives from her.

           

          Of course, this all comes crashing down when the guy (in a FZ scenario) and the girl (in the FWB scenario) arrive at the conclusion that they will not be able to get what they were truly after, and then realize that they weren’t as okay with friendship-only as they originally believed (i.e., convinced themselves) they were.  S0, they move on.

           

          I think the point that Jeremy was getting at (and please correct me if I’m wrong) is that this nascent idea that the “nice guys” who get FZ’d are really the jerks is more of a way for women to let themselves off the hook for not being attracted to these “nice guys”.  Of course, women shouldn’t feel bad about their lack of interest in these guys, but these “nice guys” are no better or worse than the more direct and confident guys.  It would be similar if men created a social convention dictating that  the “cool girls” who get into FWB situations are really the mean ones since they actually want a relationship, and are manipulating these men.  But we know, both parties are really manipulating themselves in both of these situations.

        5. Emily, the original

          Jeremy,

          But he approaches that way because he (usually rightly) believes he doesn’t have a chance if he approaches in a forthright manner , and because he was taught that if a man courts a woman by being nice to her, she will grow attracted to him.  

          First of all, dating isn’t a meritocracy. You don’t earn a partner by doing x,y and z. And doing nice things for  a person makes you more invested in the person. The person doesn’t necessarily become invested in you.

          women who want to be courted tell men that courting is sexy, that efforts are sexy, that niceness is sexy.  Not because they are sexy, but because they want them.

          There are some women who grow attracted to a man who puts in the effort and courts them. Other women know in a few seconds of meeting the man whether they find him appealing. I never let these male friends “court” me. If we did hang out, and they insisted on paying, I paid the next time we did something.  And I asked their advice about other men I was interested in, as we talked openly about women they liked. And, yet… at some point, with only one exception, the sexual comments would start, tentative and weakly delivered that they were. They did that because they already knew the answer.

           

        6. Jeremy

          @Chance, exactly so.  I don’t blame women for not being attracted to certain men.  Nor do I blame men for being attracted to certain women.  Rejection and approaches are part of the dating/mating game.  Where I object is the notion that on the one hand men can’t earn affection by being nice, and on the other hand the notion that men should earn affection by being nice.  The “Nice Guy” is no more sinister-intentioned than any guy.  And yes, I liked your analogy of the “cool girl” being the more manipulative one.  She isn’t manipulative.  She’s making a mistake that she was taught “should” work.  She is a victim of bad messaging and erroneous hope.  But she is not an evil asshole, even if she does bring up commitment after feigning no interest in it.

        7. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          I think the point that Jeremy was getting at (and please correct me if I’m wrong) is that this nascent idea that the “nice guys” who get FZ’d are really the jerks is more of a way for women to let themselves off the hook for not being attracted to these “nice guys”.  Of course, women shouldn’t feel bad about their lack of interest in these guys, but these “nice guys” are no better or worse than the more direct and confident guys.

          I don’t feel bad for not being attracted. In the examples I used, that was never on the table until they tried to introduce it so late in the game. However, it was naive of me to think a straight man was hanging around to just be friends.

          A man who thinks he can do nice things for a woman to earn her affection is the equivalent of a beautiful woman who thinks everyone should be dying of love for her because of her appearance. She’s been taught from the fairy tales that all she needs is beauty and while that might attract some men (and keep some), others will walk if they discover she has no personality. Or she may be surprised to learn a less attractive woman is getting more male attention because that woman is approachable. Like the nice guy, she has to adapt her strategy when she learns hers isn’t working.

        8. Nissa

          Jeremy, Nope, can’t agree at all on this one. People, both men and women, can be nice because they want to be nice. I’m not saying they have NO motivation, I’m saying it’s internally directed rather than externally directed. When I smile at people, it’s usually a sign that I’m having a good day and feeling happy. It’s NOT an attempt to influence the behavior of others. It’s nice if they respond, but the behavior is independent of the behavior of others. Internally directed behaviors are still self serving (as in, a guy that directly asks if you want to have sex). When I give to charity, I do it because it makes me feel good to do it. No other motivation or external response is needed.  There is no force, no duress involved. The other person’s response is pretty much irrelevant to the motivation.

          Contrast that to the ‘nice guy’. That’s all about changing the other person’s mind, pressuring them, manipulating them to want what he wants. See how creepy that is? A guy can be average looking, or even nice looking, and creepy vibes will kill it in a second. That would kill any attraction that otherwise existed.

          In relation to Nice Guys, the behavior very specifically is an attempt to create more intimacy for the purpose of that which serves his wants, namely sex. It’s not solely internally directed. It seeks to change the behavior of the other. That’s force, and women feel it. It is because the ‘nice guy’ has ulterior motives that are externally directed. Both guys want sex, both might be attractive (plus or minus an average), BUT the critical factor is that the ‘no effort’ guy has no ulterior motives that are externally directed. His only ulterior motive is ‘get sex’. The ‘nice guy’ has two ulterior motives: ‘have sex’ and ‘change mind of other person to what I want’.  The second motive of the nice guy will come across as creepy, and kills the attraction that would otherwise exist. That’s why you are interpreting it as based on looks, but the creepy vibe so permeates the interaction that her attraction, which would otherwise be there, is killed.

          It’s worth reading Robert Glover’s No More Mr. Nice Guy, to see how the elements of Narcissistic Personality Disorder are there: an excessive need for admiration and lack of understanding of people’s feelings. One of the key points there is that these people don’t think they have a problem…which I have seen over and over with ‘nice guys’.

        9. Nissa

          Chance, I actually really agree with you on this. I do think that it’s manipulative to begin a relationship with one premise, then bait’ n’ switch to another, from both genders. However, there are a heck of a lot of people who lie to themselves as you said. There are a heck of a lot of people who don’t know themselves or what they want. These are the people who throw themselves into things and then see what sticks.

          I recently got to observe this in real time. There was a guy I knew who had two ladies interested in him. One was younger, more attractive and single. The other was older, still nice looking and married. Who did he chase? The married one! This sticks out in my mind because it made no sense whatsoever to me that he would pursue the one that was ‘unavailable’. But there were two differences: 1) the single one was interested in a romantic relationship, so she came across as ‘wanting something’ from him – from which he recoiled. 2) the married one, being unavailable, was less threatening and she was willing to settle for ‘friendship’….which included lots of time together, sharing intimacy, etc. It revealed to me that he had avoidant tendencies (that were obvious once he did that – he held himself apart from even the other men). She also kept calling him for ‘help’ with things, discussing  a ‘potential’ relationship with him over 2 years and eventually borrowing money. Her neediness was attractive to him (showing his avoidance tendency again). This was a guy who kept saying he wanted connection, a relationship, but he rejected every real offer he got. He wasn’t  that nice looking, but was easygoing, and a lot of women were attracted to that.

          I’m not saying that’s all there was to it, but I sure had a ringside seat.

        10. Jeremy

          Nissa, years ago, I was a Nice Guy.  There was a girl in school that I had a crush on, but she was out of my league and wasn’t interested in me that way.  Still, we were friendly, and when she needed help with schoolwork I offered.  I ended up in that classic situation where she considered me her friend and I knew I was not her friend – both because of our different levels of interest and because of the uni-directionality of service in the relationship.  I wished she would express some interest in me – some spark that would give me the go-ahead to ask her on a date, but it never happened.  But she didn’t consider me creepy, even though she obviously sensed my interest.  She even chose a post-graduate residency program just to be with me – I guess I made her feel secure.  Because although I was disappointed in her lack of interest in me, I wasn’t angry about it.

           

          When people believe something to be true and then life shows them that their belief is false, they have 2 choices – either to understand that the belief was false, or to believe that something is wrong with the world.  Terrorists who believe that America is the great Satan believe that something is wrong with the world that they are willing to die to fix.  And “Nice Guys” who believe that their behavior “should” elicit attraction get angry when that attraction never comes.

           

          I learned that my belief in what elicits attraction was false – there was nothing to be angry about except perhaps at myself.  Other men get angry because they believe something is wrong with women for not following the “rules.”  That is what is creepy.  That is what is scary.  Hoping to change someone’s mind is part of the universal human experience – it is how a child tries to get something from their parent by being on best behavior.  But believing that one is entitled to change another’s mind is pathological.  That, I believe, is the difference.  And it is why I am so vocal when someone makes the claim that good behavior will elicit attraction.  That belief is dangerous.

        11. Nissa

          Jeremy, I’d agree with you that ‘hoping’ falls outside the creepy line. It sounds like the girl in question thought you were a great friend and appreciated your good qualities in a friend way. And I would agree with you that good behavior does not elicit arousal, for men or women. I think it does elicit attraction, if the arousal meets minimum standards. What is great is that arousal is so different. While some things are universally attractive (health, fitness), the baseline is actually pretty low. Good behavior can them elicit attraction if it is coupled with qualities that particular person finds attractive. Alain de Botton is a good example. I did not find him arousing when I first saw him. He seemed average, ordinary, but nothing off putting either. Then he opened his mouth. British accent, cha-ching! Talks about ideas! Ching! Kind to women and puppies! Now I’m on the floor, because I’m goo.

          So perhaps the girl you pursued found you averagely arousing, but her personal attractions were elsewhere, so it didn’t build into more than a friendship. As in my example above, there are some people for whom bad treatment or indifference is a more potent attractant, due to avoidant traits or low self esteem. Sometimes they just don’t know themselves, or find that we have qualities they don’t like, but won’t tell us about because they 1) don’t want to hurt our feelings but 2) don’t care enough to be honest with us either.

          I’m sure I wasn’t pretty enough for some guys I chased. And they were right (I’m sure most people cringe when they see photos of their younger selves, right?). I was too masculine for other guys. That was true too. (Doesn’t mean that I wasn’t crushed by it).  Some of my female co-workers told me I was insecure, and one male co-worker told me I ‘wasn’t easy’ because I preferred to date on the weekends instead of weeknights, and didn’t like spicy foods. So the things that make us unlikeable to others may never, ever have crossed our minds, or if it did cross, would be things that we saw as highly positive. On the plus side, I have great co-workers.

           

        12. Emily, the original

          Nissa,

          There was a guy I knew who had two ladies interested in him. One was younger, more attractive and single. The other was older, still nice looking and married. Who did he chase? The married one! This sticks out in my mind because it made no sense whatsoever to me that he would pursue the one that was ‘unavailable’. But there were two differences: 1) the single one was interested in a romantic relationship, so she came across as ‘wanting something’ from him – from which he recoiled. 2) the married one, being unavailable, was less threatening and she was willing to settle for ‘friendship’….which included lots of time together, sharing intimacy, etc. It revealed to me that he had avoidant tendencies (that were obvious once he did that – he held himself apart from even the other men).

          Maybe he liked the married one better. Maybe they had better chemistry. Maybe the sex was better. All of those things can be true, even though the single woman is younger and considered more attractive. Maybe the available one was clingy. People always throw out labels like “avoidant” if the person turns down a potential partner who’s interested and available, but perhaps he made a choice based on feelings rather than reason. I’m not condoning the choice but there’s probably more to it than simply one was available and one wasn’t.

        13. Jeremy

          Nissa, you wrote, “So perhaps the girl you pursued found you averagely arousing, but her personal attractions were elsewhere, so it didn’t build into more than a friendship.”

           

          Interestingly (at least to me), as we were in our residency together and both found ourselves single and around age 25, she began to hint that she was interested in more than friendship, after years of things going the other way.  She had dated many men whom she found arousing and was beginning to consider who would make a good long-term partner.  And lo and behold, the sum total of her calculations looked something like me, and there I was.  Every Nice Guy’s fantasy, no?    Thankfully, I had learned enough about relationships even at that early age that I knew to politely decline because I knew that she was not at all aroused by me.  I was her calculated choice.  She perceived me to be broccoli – not terribly appetizing but nutritious.  It was an exchange – she would receive all the comfort and security she ever wanted, good husband, good dad, and I would receive in exchange the good fortune of being with a higher-SMV woman.  In her mind, I would be the lucky one and she the one settling.  Ridiculous.

           

          So while Evan advises women to be the selective CEO of their dating lives (and I don’t disagree), I advise men to not date women who don’t feel lucky to be with them.  That feeling of luck must be mutual or else the relationship will fail.

        14. Tom10

          @ Jeremy
          “In her mind, I would be the lucky one and she the one settling.  Ridiculous.”
           
          Why’s that ridiculous Jeremy? It seems like a fair exchange to me.
           
          It’s no different to YAG dating down for sex; he’s exchanging quality for no-strings, they’re exchanging commitment for a higher-league guy. Fair exchange.
           
          In fact almost every single relationship/encounter in the entire world and history involves some sort of exchange no?
           
          Incidentally, what became of the lady from your college class; did she marry a different broccoli guy or continue on the treadmill?
           
          Btw, I think every guy was the broccoli guy at some point in his life; funny how vividly we remember the details isn’t it?

        15. Emily, the original

          Tom10,

          Btw, I think every guy was the broccoli guy at some point in his life; 

          I’m sure men have broccoli women. Too much broccoli and you get frustrated and find yourself face forward in the brownie pan.

        16. Jeremy

          Hi Tom.

           

          You’re right, there’s always and exchange, and some people are happy with a beauty-for-security relationship exchange.  But I’m not.  Being a validational sort of guy, I need the woman I’m with to actually like (preferably love) me and be attracted to me.  Her agreeing to be with me in exchange for comfort qualities just doesn’t do it for me.

           

          When I was dating my (now) wife, she would tell me how much she loved me, how she was attracted to me, and then would back up those words with actions.  For everything I did to make her happy, she would do things to make me happy.  We found each other attractive.  We did nice things for and with each other.  Both of us felt lucky to be with the other.  THAT is a good exchange – one that has potential for real commitment.

           

          What happened to the woman in my example?  She got married and is hopefully very happy.  I was at her wedding and she was at mine, but by the time we both got married we didn’t have much to do with each other.  She no longer needed me; I no longer wanted to date her.

        17. Nissa

          Well, I went to the source and asked him about it (in a very polite way) and the married woman also. He had a very hard time quantifying what caused him to choose what he did, and he was the one that specified that the single woman was actually better looking but he was ‘just comfortable’ with the married one. She said, he told her that ‘from the first, she felt like comfort and home to him’. He also met this woman first. She also said that he felt the single woman ‘wanted more than friendship’.

          What is funny is that he was dating a third woman during this time and he still picked the married one. What was interesting was that the third woman is still chasing him, and he is keeping her at arms’ length (since he is still waiting for the one that is now ‘separated but living with’ her husband). What I picked up from talking to him, is that he felt a subtle sense from the single girl that she ‘wanted something’, meaning that it wasn’t about him per se, but that he was ‘filling a role’ for her. Nothing specific, just a feeling. He said he didn’t call her back because she ‘didn’t seem interested’ when they did go out. This is a woman who always went out of her way to include him and who acted excited to go out with him. I can’t imagine that she said no to anything he suggested. What the single woman said was that he was perfectly nice, but wouldn’t discuss anything personal about himself, that he would just turn the conversation back to common topics when they went out – so she stopped asking. The married woman, on the other hand, seemed to just like him for who he was. That’s the nice guy thing again. No one wants to be used, and feeling like you are being used in any capacity, is an attraction killer, even when the person has no idea they are doing it. Jeremy, your story just confirms the premise. No one wants to be considered broccoli.

          We all want to be wanted, accepted, loved for who we are. Our hearts just can’t accept anything less. And we will reject anything that seems like less than that, whether it’s accurate or not.

        18. Emily, the original

          Nissa,

          He had a very hard time quantifying what caused him to choose what he did, and he was the one that specified that the single woman was actually better looking but he was ‘just comfortable’ with the married one. 

          Sounds like the married woman was his broccoli! He didn’t want to fill a role for the single one but couldn’t really say why he liked the married one. Was the married one filling a role for him? I’m guessing, of course. To be honest, this guy doesn’t sound like he’s capable of all that much. And is it that rough out there? That even an average guy has 3 women chasing him?

    3. 20.3
      Tron Swanson

      There’s what we’re supposed to like–in terms of what’s socially acceptable–and then there’s what we actually like. Sadly, both genders are guilty of having double-standards on this.

      Men talk about wanting a stable, non-dramatic woman, but we tend to go for the hot/crazy ones. Women talk about wanting a civilized, enlightened man, but they tend to go for the crude (but hot, confident, and charismatic) jerks. The majority of neither gender want to admit to this, so you have tons of people who are searching for unicorns: perfectly-balanced people who may or may not exist. An easygoing woman…who just happens to be insanely hot! A modern, cosmopolitan guy…who has the air of a dangerous alpha male! (Often softened to “A nice guy, but with a backbone!”) Suffice to say, these people are indeed unicorns, and most of us will never be in a position to land one of them. But we have to combine what we want with what society thinks we should want, so we end up claiming to look for a very unlikely combination of traits.

      My two cents: women are absolutely justified when they say “Men claim to want nice girls, but they go for the hot ones that they can quickly have sex with!”, and men are absolutely justified when they say “Women say they want nice guys, but they actually jump into bed with jerks!”

      My first girlfriend described the traits that she was looking for in a man…but, as it turned out, she ended up marrying someone that was the exact opposite, though she’s tried to retroactively rationalize him into being what she claimed to want. It’s darkly humorous, really. In my own case, I got tired of pretending, so I’m one of the very few honest people out there.

      1. 20.3.1
        Emily, the original

        Tron,

        My two cents: women are absolutely justified when they say “Men claim to want nice girls, but they go for the hot ones that they can quickly have sex with!”, 

        I don’t think men go for the hot ones. They go for accessible ones, the ones who make it very obvious they are interested. It just makes sense. This is just one example, but a friend mine told me that when his parents were divorcing, several women came out of the woodwork to date his dad. I asked why his dad chose the woman he did to remarry. My friend said she chased him the hardest.

        1. Tron Swanson

          Men prefer the hot ones, but I agree with you to an extent: men aren’t necessarily the best at reading social signals, so we highly value obvious signs of interest. It makes things a lot easier for us. Also, some men will settle and choose accessibility over ideal hotness.

          While I’d love to live in a world where women chased men..at the moment, it isn’t a good sign, sadly. In my corner of the world, men are desperate for sex and/or incredibly lonely, and even the most unattractive women have multiple men pursuing them. They may not be the type of men they want, but they’re still being pursued. Women should be able to attract men just by breathing and blinking. Sadly, on the few occasions that I’ve been pursued by women, it’s turned out that the women had serious, serious issues.

          I also wanted to say that I agree with Tom 100%. When I was younger, women tried to give me relationship advice (well, they still try, but I no longer listen). It never worked. As Tom said, they were presupposing attraction–the advice would work as long as the woman was already attracted to you.

           

        2. Emily, the original

          Tron,

          While I’d love to live in a world where women chased men..at the moment, it isn’t a good sign, sadly.

          Chased probably wasn’t the right word. I meant a woman approaching you and striking up a conversation. If that happens, she’s hoping you’ll pick it up from there.

          even the most unattractive women have multiple men pursuing them.

          I don’t think that’s true.

          As Tom said, they were presupposing attraction–the advice would work as long as the woman was already attracted to you.

          Yes, I think that’s true to a certain extent. I do agree with what Jeremy said about some of it being context. I found a guy I worked for appealing after I saw that his telling me he’d take care of something was gold. He was helping me fight a battle with a vendor. I didn’t have the authority but he did and my previous boss had done nothing. This was a man I probably wouldn’t have noticed otherwise. Just not my type.

        3. Tron Swanson

          Emily,

          If I ever come across a woman who doesn’t have at least a few options, I’ll let you know. But I haven’t yet. Even the women who pursued me, as desperate as they were, were rejecting guys that they deemed worse than me.

        4. Emily, the original

          Tron,

          Even the women who pursued me, as desperate as they were, were rejecting guys that they deemed worse than me.

          We’ve got to work on your mindset! It’s defeatist.

        5. Tron Swanson

          I’ve learned that my mindset has very little to do with how successful I am with women. Whether I have a good mindset or a bad one, and whether I try hard or not at all, I still get roughly the same results.

          Regardless, I was stating a fact, not describing my mindset.

  21. 21
    Jeremy

    S, I want to address your comments because doing so is important to any man who may be reading or any woman who cares about men. Men everywhere have asked women for dating advice about what women want, and the advice women give them is usually terrible. Because instead of answering the question, they answer a different question. Not how to make a woman aroused, but how to make a woman happy when she is already aroused by you. Your posts fall into this category IMO, full of contradictions.

     

    You wrote that you are attracted to niceness, yet you then wrote that the overwhelming majority of people you find nice do not interest you. Perhaps because niceness is not the attractant, but rather the enhancer one attraction is already present? If so, is telling men that women are attracted to niceness serving them well?

     

    You wrote that a man treating you well in courtship is an attractant, then admitted that it is the uncertainty that is the attractant. But keeping in mind that the point of men’s courtship is to make you comfortable, not uncertain, should that growing certainty not actually lessen attraction  while it increases comfort? In fact, is this not what men around the world have observed?  If what women are attracted to in courtship is the risks men take for them, how will they respond when there are no more risks? Should they not them expect a lessening of dopaminergic arousal concomitant worth increasing oxytocin comfort?

     

    You might not like my theories on comfort and arousal. You might think they don’t apply to you. But young men would do well to consider them. Because giving women what women say they want doesn’t always work out as well as those women claim.

      1. 21.1.1
        Adrian

        Hi Evan,

        So… That means that you also agree with this:

        Jeremy said, “Courting a woman is the epitome of Beta behavior.  It is giving women the comfort they need and subsuming the man’s internal desires for her benefit.”

         

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          No. But I’m not going to get involved with this mess. Thanks.

        2. Chance

          Hi Adrian,

           

          Courting isn’t inherently “alpha” or “beta” behavior, nor does it inherently inspire comfort or arousal.  It’s the man, and how he carries himself during this process, that inspires comfort or arousal.  Jeremy has made a lot of good points here, but one thing I would disagree with him on is the assertion that courting is inherently “beta” or comfort-inspiring.  The concept of courting is tangential to the concepts of comfort/arousal inspiration, at best.

        3. Adrian

          Hi Chance,

          For what it’s worth… It’s looking like I should have listened to a lot of your advice more

        4. Emily, the original

          Chance,

          Courting isn’t inherently “alpha” or “beta” behavior, nor does it inherently inspire comfort or arousal.  It’s the man, and how he carries himself during this process, that inspires comfort or arousal.  

          yes.

        5. Jeremy

          Adrian, just to clarify my earlier comment, I think that using the words “alpha” and “beta” was not wise on my part.  Those terms have been so muddied by the manosphere that most readers will not perceive what I meant by them.  Instead, just think of what you want to elicit in a woman, arousal or comfort.  There is nothing wrong with eliciting comfort (“beta”), in fact, comfort is necessary.  The question is, when a man courts a woman, what is that courtship eliciting in her.  Answer – both, to some degree, but more comfort than arousal.

           

          Sure, initiating confidently is arousing.  Sure, taking a woman to a new environment ups her dopamine and creates a sexual context, both of which can trigger arousal.  But the main purpose of courting is for the man to show the woman in no uncertain terms that he likes her and is invested in her (and only her), which lets her know to start thinking about long-term plans.  This is comfort.

           

          I am not suggesting that men should not court, or that men who court are somehow weak or less-than (“beta”).  I believe the courtship is good and appropriate when a man has long-term intentions/aspirations with a given woman, and inappropriate when he doesn’t.  Because when a man has long-term interests in a woman, she will need some degree of comfort from him in addition to the arousal she feels for him.  Hope that clarifies it a bit.

  22. 22
    S.

    Wow. It’s so interesting how my comments are read.

    You wrote that you are attracted to niceness, yet you then wrote that the overwhelming majority of people you find nice do not interest you.

    I never said the overwhelming majority of people I find nice do not interest me.  I’m combing through my three comments and I can not see how what I wrote could translate into that.

    What I said and I’ll quote since quotes are exactly what I actually said was:

    Whereas a man who I never noticed ever, had no arousal for, who shows me kindness consistently I may start to have that spark for him. 

    This means that I had no arousal for him.  None, nada, zilch. Never noticed him, before he was kind to me.  I don’t know how to be more clear that than that.  Does this happen 100% of the time? No. But it happens.

    Perhaps because niceness is not the attractant, but rather the enhancer one attraction is already present? If so, is telling men that women are attracted to niceness serving them well?

    It’s the niceness.  This is how I’m wired.  Some of these men aren’t even cute to me at first and are way off my radar.  But it is the niceness.

    But keeping in mind that the point of men’s courtship is to make you comfortable, not uncertain, should that growing certainty not actually lessen attraction  while it increases comfort?

    I don’t know if I agree the point of courtship is to make one comfortable.  I think that courtship does lead to LTRs.  There is some comfort there.  But as I said, that’s different than early stage courtship.  Actually, marriage (or a LTR if you don’t roll with marriage) is the end of courtship.  I can’t speak much on marriage since I’ve never been married.  But I will venture to say that there should always be some courtship within a marriage.  But there may be more comfort at that point.  In a long-term relationship you are trading uncertainty for certainty and some lessening arousal for comfort.  But that’s what people who want to be married want. It shouldn’t mean the entire cessation of courtship and uncertainty.   There’s a balance. Maybe a married person could weigh in more than that?

    I don’t know if you’ll hear what I’m about to say, but there is something to be said here about balance and nuance.  How does a man keep the balance between comfort and arousal during courtship? How does the couple keep that balance during marriage? There should always be elements of both throughout.  A couple has to work on that.  There are always risks.  People may want to divorce, people get sick, lots of risks in life.  So yes, a big question, is how you keep attraction and arousal going during these very real challenges?  It’s not that a woman gives up on a man because he’s not a risktaker. That’s such a binary view of it.  The entire relationship takes a beating when someone is sick or out of work or whatever challenges occur.  Both partners have to work together to reconnect and re-establish that bond.

    Should they not them expect a lessening of dopaminergic arousal concomitant worth increasing oxytocin comfort?

    Yes, they should. I think that’s the deal of having a long-term relationship.  But it doesn’t mean no dopaminergic arousal at all.

    You might not like my theories on comfort and arousal. You might think they don’t apply to you. But young men would do well to consider them. Because giving women what women say they want doesn’t always work out as well as those women claim.

    What I don’t like is when words are attributed to me that I never said.  I try my best to be clear.  I don’t really have an issue with your theories.  You’re entitled to your opinion.  You do seem to think they are the majority opinion and there is no proof that they are.  Your theories are just as valid as my experiences.  Neither one may be the majority.  And that’s okay. People take what they will from our comments. And what is useful to them.

    1. 22.1
      Jeremy

      S, you wrote, “there is something to be said here about balance and nuance.  How does a man keep the balance between comfort and arousal during courtship? How does the couple keep that balance during marriage? There should always be elements of both throughout.”

       

      I agree with that.  And both should understand which behaviors factor into which category in the relationship in which they find themselves.

       

      Regarding my theories you wrote, “You do seem to think they are the majority opinion and there is no proof that they are.”  No.  I do not think they are a majority opinion.  If most people understood these things, I wouldn’t need to write them.  I write them because most people don’t understand them.

       

      ” People take what they will from our comments. And what is useful to them.”  Agreed.

      1. 22.1.1
        S.

        And both should understand which behaviors factor into which category in the relationship in which they find themselves.

        We agree on more than we disagree with.  As I was saying in another thread, I assume people reading this blog are more self-aware than most.  i shouldn’t but I do. I am aware of these factors in myself.

        No.  I do not think they are a majority opinion.

        Then we both agree. 🙂  I don’t think I’m typical of most women. I’m not.  But just because our opinions aren’t the majority doesn’t mean they aren’t valid.

        I understand your points even though you use terms like dopaminergic that I don’t use every day.  🙂 But I get what you’re saying.  Even Evan says, “Men don’t go both ways. ” I believe that, but it’s difficult if you really do want someone in the middle.

        Self-awareness is the first step.  These comments actually remind me that I still get crushes on very sweet men who bald, overweight, not very masculine, and just not noticed by me at all until they do something really nice for me.   It’s a very innocent feeling I have difficulty attaching the word ‘arousal’ too.  It’s not even sexual at that beginning stage.  I’m glad I’m still capable of interest in a man on that very simple level.

        This year I have been trying to date more masculine, confident men and well, it’s interesting and not at all comfortable.   The attraction is there, but there isn’t a sense of complete safety I’m used to which is a huge part of what allows me to let go sexually.   (I don’t mean physical safety, I mean emotional safety.)  I just don’t have the control (you would say ‘comfort’ but I’m calling it as I see it) that I like to have and I’m just seeing how that feels.  I’m completely aware of the differences and am simply observing them.

        I may end up going back to my baseline of the less masculine, less confident man.  We shall see. 🙂

        1. Adrian

          Hi S,

          This is just my opinion but I think the reason so many of the male commenters are pushing back on your comments (on this as well on the other post) is because your whole approach to dating goes against everything we have been taught and believe at our core…

          That what a man has on the inside matters more than what he has/looks like on the outside. Most women believe that “ONLY” they have the pressure of having their whole future of dating, love, and marriage dependent upon their looks… Well me men believe/know this too! We are just not recognized and supported for those unfair standards like women are.

          So when you come along saying that you can think a guy is hot but still want to go slow or that you can become sexually attracted to a good hearted but average looking man… I think the men who have experienced differently are pushing back on this because it means that they should have keep going out and meeting new women until they found one who was excited about his looks instead of quitting and  condemning all women as shallow and vain

          Anyway just my thoughts… I could be wrong.

          …   …   …

          You said, “This year I have been trying to date more masculine, confident men and well, it’s interesting and not at all comfortable.   The attraction is there, but there isn’t a sense of complete safety I’m used to which is a huge part of what allows me to let go sexually.   (I don’t mean physical safety, I mean emotional safety.)  I just don’t have the control

          Do you mind explaining this more?

          Why don’t you feel emotionally safe with these confident men?

          What do you mean ‘you don’t have the control’; control of what?

           

        2. S.

          I will try.  I don’t see male commenters responding to my comments.  Just Jeremy and I were having a discussion. And now you. 🙂

          That what a man has on the inside matters more than what he has/looks like on the outside.

          Did I say otherwise? I thought I had said, “I still get crushes on very sweet men who bald, overweight, not very masculine, and just not noticed by me at all until they do something really nice for me.” I don’t think I said that  what matters on outside matters more. Quite the contrary. But if I did or if something I wrote seems like that, please point that out to me.

          I have to reread my comments. I must be missing something. I never said anything about going slow or about looks in this thread.  I don’t think that was me.

          I can answer your questions about me choosing more masculine men this year, though. 🙂

          When a man is less confident, has less experience with women, it’s all kind of new to him.  And he treats me so well and well, he’s agreeable to a lot of things I want to do.  And yes, we do have stuff in common, but I can kind of take the lead.  We do a lot of stuff I like to do.  I’m a planner. 🙂 It’s stuff he likes too, but he isn’t used to planning stuff with a woman. Also, I feel more control of the ability to make him happy.  It’s nice to feel sure you’re making your man happy.

          With a more confident, more assertive man, he takes the lead. Most women like that.  I . . . it’s different. I find that in that case we do a lot of stuff he wants to do.  I let him because I’m trying to be less masculine in my relationships.  But unlike the other guy who is so safe, this guy I never know what he’s going to do.  Where we’re going to go, when he’s going to call.  It’s unpredictable.  Before I used to call so there wasn’t that uncertainty and I liked that.  Confident Guy is probably not going to do anything bad or wrong, but I never know.  It’s a little exciting, but it’s not as comforting as Jeremy would say.  I like a little bit of this, but I’ve dated men on the very low end of the masculine scale most of my life so this is different to me.

          Why isn’t it emotionally safe? The more confident guy (doesn’t have to do with looks) he knows his worth.  That’s attractive but you have to be on your game more with him.  Not that he’ll go somewhere else, but it’s just like dating someone very smart. You have to keep up. Sometimes it’s exhausting. Sometimes it feels like more work to make him happy.

          When I get home, sometimes I just want a safe place to land.  I don’t know what men think of this but I just want someone to hold me on the couch until I get turned on by that and climb on top of him.  That’s what gets me going.  😉

          Until this blog and a few years went by, this was what I did.  I still don’t know if how I get turned on is typical or atypical because the people posting on this blog may not be the majority. I may never know.  I do know I tend to be a bit more on the masculine side of dating and I’ve changed that because I don’t want to do all the work in dating which was happening.

          I was hoping for someone in the middle but Tron likens that to looking for a unicorn.  Good thing I still believe unicorns exist. 🙂

          Hope that explains.

        3. Emily, the original

          S and Adrian,
          S pretty well summed it up:
          When a man is less confident … I feel more control of 
          With a more confident, more assertive man, he takes the lead. … But unlike the other guy who is so safe, this guy I never know what he’s going to do.  Where we’re going to go, when he’s going to call.  It’s unpredictable.  Before I used to call so there wasn’t that uncertainty and I liked that.  Confident Guy is probably not going to do anything bad or wrong, but I never know.  It’s a little exciting, but it’s not as comforting as Jeremy would say.  I like a little bit of this, but I’ve dated men on the very low end of the masculine scale most of my life so this is different to me.
          A less masculine guy is safer. You can feel his energy and as a woman you take more of the lead and so you feel more comfort. With a more masculine man, he takes more of the lead and you have less control. As YAG writes, it’s scarier when you feel less control but, on some level, attraction is about feeling off balance.

        4. S.

          As YAG writes, it’s scarier when you feel less control but, on some level, attraction is about feeling off balance.

          Exactly, Emily, the original.  I just happen to be a woman that if that masculinity is too much, I feel more fear and discomfort than attraction.  I still need him to have a leetle bit of edge, of masculinity.  But probably less than other women.

          Interesting thing is the female friends I make are usually similar.  We self-select. 🙂 So in my POV, this is normal and within the spectrum of male/female relationships. Writing this I realize, none of my friends’ husbands are ultra-masculine.  Nope. But of course, we don’t see this as bad and they love their husbands and have great relationships.

          So interesting.  They found their unicorns.  It’s not perfect, but works for them.

        5. S.

          I think the men who have experienced differently are pushing back on this because it means that they should have keep going out and meeting new women until they found one who was excited about his looks instead of quitting and  condemning all women as shallow and vain

          Adrian, I think I know what you mean now. I had to really read your comment several, several times.  I missed that you are referring to things I’ve written in multiple posts on the site.  That’s fine but just quote it for me next time because these posts get so long and unwieldy.  🙂

          Reading your comment makes me want to tell the men I have crushes on that I do think of them romantically!  There aren’t many and some I’ve moved on from.  When I have told (or shown) men this in the past, they were completely clueless.

          they should have keep going out and meeting new women until they found one who was excited about his looks instead of quitting and  condemning all women as shallow and vain

          The bald guy I like at my yoga class, well, he has no clue.  It’s a spiritual place, not a gym, so it’s not really where many think of romance. And I don’t want a spiritual place to become a place where I avoid anyone if it doesn’t work out.  But what I’m hearing from you is that in his experience he has no idea that I’m attracted to his personality and which turned into me liking his looks. (I now think he’s adorable, not what most men want to hear maybe, but if he showed just a little interest in me, that would turn to arousal in short order. ) This probably goes against everything he’s experienced as you say.

          Hmm. And it’s difficult. I’d love to clue him in, but it would take him being hit with ton of bricks (figuratively) because this isn’t his usual experience.  And  . . . I’m trying to be less masculine, lol.

          It takes two.  Men have to keep looking for that woman who will find their looks attractive.  She’s his unicorn and he’s hers.  She’s out there.  He has to believe that.  And women like me, probably have to be more proactive. Hey, maybe I’m a unicorn! LOL.  Evan has said that his advice differs for men who aren’t the most confident or knowledgeable about women.  Or for men who are extremely shy.

          Thanks, Adrian.  I think I understand your comment now. (If I misunderstood, let me know.) It’s hard out here to figure this stuff out, for men and women!

        6. Emily, the original

          S.,

           Writing this I realize, none of my friends’ husbands are ultra-masculine.  Nope. But of course, we don’t see this as bad and they love their husbands and have great relationships. So interesting.  They found their unicorns.  It’s not perfect, but works for them.
          I agree. It’s all on a spectrum. I have a friend whose husband is very masculine but she runs the show. She jokes that she’s the man. I guess he needs that and it works for them … but blech … that would turn me off.

        7. Emily, the original

          Hi S.,

          Hmm. And it’s difficult. I’d love to clue him in, but it would take him being hit with ton of bricks (figuratively) because this isn’t his usual experience.  And  . . . I’m trying to be less masculine, lol.

          But isn’t it so much easier to just forgot the whole thing because this guy is so clueless and it would take SO MUCH WORK? Isn’t it so much easier to interact with a man who has some degree of experience (I don’t mean a player) just because you won’t feel like you are directing the whole production? I have a guy friend who went to a party and a woman he’d never met sat in his lap! And he told me he assumed there weren’t enough chairs  and she needed somewhere to sit! I mean OMG. Could she have been any more obvious?

        8. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          A less masculine guy is safer. You can feel his energy and as a woman you take more of the lead and so you feel more comfort. With a more masculine man, he takes more of the lead and you have less control. As YAG writes, it’s scarier when you feel less control but, on some level, attraction is about feeling off balance.

          I believe that the same thing holds true for feminine women.  The following quote from one of my earlier posts highlights how much I love ultra-feminine women:

          She projects a lot of feminine energy, is impeccably groomed (hair styled for her face as well as being waxed with a nice manicure and pedicure), applies just enough makeup to accent her features, and wears clothes that flatter her figure (whatever shape it may be).  Women who possess these attributes are irresistible to me, and they are usually not the most physically beautiful women in the room; however, they are often the most feminine women in the room.

          The problem with ultra-feminine women is they are like Kryptonite to me.  I am a guy who usually projects a lot of masculine energy, but oh my lord, I completely lose control when I encounter an extremely feminine woman who rings my bell.  I find the I have to keep a safe emotional distance from this type of woman; otherwise, I feel like I am going to spiral out of control and crash to the ground.

          On a different note, I was out on a date with a woman seven years my junior last night. She is less feminine than I usually date; however, she is a fellow musician and music geek, so the date was a lot of fun. We talked about our musical influences and music geek stuff like how some bands change time signatures and insert syncopation into their music. I can tell you without reservation that her primary love language is physical touch because she broke the touch barrier very quickly. She was touching me the entire evening. She also had that starry-eyed look that a woman has when she is with a man who rings her bell loudly (i.e., the kind of situation where, in Emily, the original terms, a woman can get “dickmatized”).  It was clear to me that she has not been out with a guy who is buff in a long time because she kept mentioning how she could not believe how muscular I was at my age.  We chatted until they kicked us out at 1AM.  I walked her to car, and she offered to drive me to my car.  We wound making out like teenagers in her car until 3am.  I have not been kissed like that in long time.  She kissed me like I was the last man on Earth.  There was this raw primal desire in her kiss.  As a man, I can honestly say that it is a wonderful feeling to be with a woman you dig who desires you that badly.  Part of me wants to see her again.  Part of me knows that I desire what I desire, that it will not work in the long term, so I believe that is better to leave it as a wonderful memory.

        9. Emily, the original

          YAG,

          I completely lose control when I encounter an extremely feminine woman who rings my bell.  I find the I have to keep a safe emotional distance from this type of woman; otherwise, I feel like I am going to spiral out of control and crash to the ground.

          I understand that feeling well, but if you never let your guard down, you will continue to have the kind of empty interactions you described with your short-term sex partner. I’m not good at it myself. I can be very warm and supportive to friends, both men and women, but when I get around someone I’m attracted to, the shields go up and my entire personality freezes. It’s that wonderful song by Bruce Springsteen called “Brilliant Disguise”   “I want to know if it’s you I don’t trust. Cause I damn sure don’t trust myself.”

           Part of me wants to see her again.  Part of me knows that I desire what I desire, that it will not work in the long term, so I believe that is better to leave it as a wonderful memory.

          Why don’t you just go with it and see what happens? You are projecting an outcome before it even occurs. I went to a networking event the other day and the speaker said you have to align you life with your values. That includes your life financially, career wise, etc. I think deep down you would like a connection with a woman.

          On a different note, I was out on a date with a woman seven years my junior last night.

          How is it possible that they are all exactly seven years your junior? Is that a requirement you put in your dating profile?  🙂

        10. GoWithTheFlow

          YAG,

          “As a man, I can honestly say that it is a wonderful feeling to be with a woman you dig who desires you that badly.  Part of me wants to see her again.  Part of me knows that I desire what I desire, that it will not work in the long term, so I believe that is better to leave it as a wonderful memory.”

          Palm Hitting Forehead Now!

          Good grief man, I don’t think it’s possible for you to overthink and sabotage yourself any more than this.

          How about not making assumptions about what the future will bring?  How about take it one day and one date at a time?  Were you attracted to her?  Did you enjoy yourself?  It sure does sound like it!  Concentrate on having fun and getting to know her.

          Now one thing I think you may be doing is confusing external feminine dress with feminine characteristics.  Look at what you wrote:  “She projects a lot of feminine energy, is impeccably groomed (hair styled for her face as well as being waxed with a nice manicure and pedicure), applies just enough makeup to accent her features, and wears clothes that flatter her figure (whatever shape it may be). . .”

          You mention feminine energy then give a long list of how a woman grooms and dresses herself.  What you did not mention were actual feminine characteristics;  empathetic, nurturing, kind, agreeable, intuitive, sensual, etc.  Because I know of a lot of women who are gorgeous, can apply makeup like an artist, wear dresses and heels every day, have long hair and get mani-pedis on a regular schedule but they are driven, assertive, competitive, and self-contained.

          OTOH I know two women very well who don’t wear makeup, are usually dressed in jeans or casual pants and wear athletic shoes.  But they just radiate warmth and friendliness. Both are intelligent women with advanced educations, serious jobs, and are married with kids.  Their husbands adore them and people gravitate towards them.

          Now you say the woman you went out with isn’t as feminine as you would like.  Why do you you say this?  Is it because her hair is short or because she doesn’t wear stilettos or paint her nails?  One thing you do say she did was to touch you often and you had a hot makeout session.  That may or may not mean her love language is physical touch (have you read Chapman’s book?).  What it sounds like is that she may be a sensual creature–an actual feminine characteristic.

           

        11. Emily, the original

          GoWiththeFlow and YAG,
          You mention feminine energy then give a long list of how a woman grooms and dresses herself.  What you did not mention were actual feminine characteristics;  empathetic, nurturing, kind, agreeable, intuitive, sensual, etc.  Because I know of a lot of women who are gorgeous … OTOH I know two women very well who don’t wear makeup, are usually dressed in jeans or casual pants and wear athletic shoes.  But they just radiate warmth and friendliness.
          A lot of good points here.
           What it sounds like is that she may be a sensual creature–an actual feminine characteristic.
          And YAG, she meets your other requirement: wants to do you!   HA!   I see this as a win-win all around.   🙂

        12. S.

          Emily

          And he told me he assumed there weren’t enough chairs  and she needed somewhere to sit! I mean OMG

          I do yoga, so I’d sit crosslegged on the floor.  But hey, if only laps were available, it’s telling she chose his lap.  LOL.

          Evan wrote the article, ‘Men Don’t Go Both Ways’.  I read it many times and puzzled over it.  But I reluctantly concluded he may be right except for the few unicorns out there.   It’s work on either end.  I could choose a really sweet, inexperienced guy and I’m driving the pace of that relationship forever.  And he’ll adore me, but he’s not gonna change just cause I love him.

          Or I could choose a confident guy who also loves me that’s completely unpredictable forever.  He used to doing what he wants and he has to do that.  I know how it feels because I feel the same way. That’s what makes him a man and that’s what makes me, S.  He’s not going to change, either.  It’s work because I can’t always get my own way and I have to learn a whole new pattern and after all that it may not work out anyway. And it seems like more work because the more masculine he is, more of a man, the less turned on I am because of the way I’m wired.   Attraction is important in the beginning because it helps you overlook the things that will annoy you later.  With a masculine man, I’m less attracted so I see those things outright.

          Sigh. So it’s not easy.  But I keep looking hoping I’ll trip over a unicorn when I’m not paying attention.  🙂 And I make my life exciting enough on its own so that I meet really great men no matter where they are on the masculinity scale. I do love myself some men. 🙂 With the right one and when things are going well, it doesn’t feel like work.

        13. Yet Another Guy

          @Emily, the original

          And YAG, she meets your other requirement: wants to do you!   HA!   I see this as a win-win all around.   

          Touché!  That desire is a certainty with her.

        14. Emily, the original

          S.,
           It’s work on either end.  I could choose a really sweet, inexperienced guy and I’m driving the pace of that relationship forever.  
          I meant a guy who’s had some experience in picking up the signals and knowing how to get things off the ground. It took the friend I mentioned almost 4 weeks of dating to kiss his girlfriend. I meant with a guy like that the woman was to do the work because he is so tentative. Shy doesn’t bother me but painfully awkward/not a modicum of game turns me off.

        15. Nissa

          S, I’ve decided what I really need is a T-shirt that says “Unicorn” . Maybe that will do the trick, lol.

        16. S.

          @Nissa

          #UNICORN.  LOL.  Thanks for that. 😀

          And I thank Tron for being real about what unicorn-seekers are doing. It’s not easy and may not even be possible.  I myself may not be successful, but gosh, I’m going to try to have as much fun as I can seeking!

          🙂

    2. 22.2
      Nissa

      S, I’m in the middle on that. I’ve only ever once been attracted to a man that I didn’t initially like, and that was because I saw him exhibit qualities that I admired – openness, honesty, was good to his children, etc. But in spite of growing more attracted to him mentally, I was never that physically aroused by him. But I think I would have if he had been open to a relationship (he wasn’t, at least not with me).

      So I think you are right that women are more attracted to men via character, and Jeremy is right in that physical attraction tends to be a baseline, to which character attraction might be added. However, I don’t think that takes into account qualities like confidence, which is arousing, yet not a physical aspect.

      1. 22.2.1
        Jeremy

        Hi Nissa, I didn’t mean to say that only physical qualities are arousing.  Rather, I meant to say that there is a difference between arousal qualities and comfort qualities, and that different women will need a different balance of comfort/arousal, and that different women will consider different qualities arousing/comforting.  Many women do report that they find confidence arousing – hence being aroused when a man pursues them confidently.

        1. Nissa

          Hi Jeremy, you are right, you didn’t say that. I am just sitting here racking my brain to think of non physical ways of arousal, because for me they are almost all physical. Yeah, I think I’m shallow like that :-). For example, I love Anderson Cooper, but the arousal is for his perfect hair, his luminous skin and crisp white shirt. My attraction to him is for his mind, his commitments to journalist integrity (I don’t know him personally, so there’s a little projection here). I’m also attracted to young John McCain, but the attraction is not that high due to opposite politics. But he was do-able, for sure, in spite of the lack of comfort I find in not getting to make choices for my own body.

          I guess I would say that if a man met my minimum attractiveness standard (what you said) and acted masculine, my arousal would go up. So I’d agree that my arousal would not go up if he didn’t at least meet the minimum physical standard.

  23. 23
    Adrian

    HEY Tom10!!!

    Jeremy said what makes women aroused??? (^-^)

    So far he seems to be saying looks and selfishness…

    The looks part I understand but I don’t see how being selfish works on a woman whom you just started taking to in the checkout line at starbucks?

    If what the women are saying on here is wrong (as far as what triggers their arousal NOT comfort) then how do you trigger sexual desire from a woman you just met in line or at a party?

    Besides just being good looking I can’t think of anything… but from my experience looks only work on women with lower sexual market value (SMV) ratings. A woman of equal or higher SMV will not lust after me just because I am hot… because she is also hot!

     

    1. 23.1
      Emily, the original

      Adrian,
      If what the women are saying on here is wrong (as far as what triggers their arousal NOT comfort) then how do you trigger sexual desire from a woman you just met in line or at a party?
      Attraction is a physiological, hormonal response, but if you trigger that (no one can control that) and say something witty or funny … with a little gleam in your eye, a little flirtation.

    2. 23.2
      Nissa

      Selfishness can seem like the opposite of neediness. So I think women are turned off by insecurity/neediness, and think that selfish = confident. This may or may not be true, but I think that’s how women are interpreting it.

      For myself, there is a lot of pleasure in someone who has allowed themselves to be pleasured. That’s why we look into our lover’s face while having sex – the act of giving pleasure is pleasing. It’s appealing to know someone else enjoys us that much. Someone who is utterly selfless denies us that pleasure. So for some women, that can be a permission slip for them to be selfish too, when they otherwise would not allow themselves to be ‘selfish’.

    3. 23.3
      Tom10

      Hey Adrian!!!
       
      Apologies for my tardy response; I didn’t know what to write so I let your questions digest for a few days.
       
      “Jeremy said what makes women aroused??? (^-^)
      So far he seems to be saying looks and selfishness…”
       
      I think he’s correct; women indeed seem to be turned on by looks and selfishness. Although I would add status as being almost equal in importance to looks.
       
      They’re also turned on by a million other qualities as well though; namely intelligence, wit, suaveness, talent, education etc. but none of these matter much without the looks and status.
       
      “The looks part I understand”
       
      The looks part is fairly simple; they’re a direct proxy for genetic quality and physical health. Obviously women will prefer someone healthy with high-quality genes.
       
      “but I don’t see how being selfish works on a woman whom you just started taking to in the checkout line at starbucks?”
       
      Lol. I’m picturing you in the checkout line behind a pretty lady:
       
      Cashier: “hello ma’am that’ll be another two dollars please”
       
      Pretty lady: “oh shoot, I’ve no more cash with me” *as she furtively glances in your direction to help her out*
       
      You (trying to impress her): “no-way lady; that’s your problem, sucker” *as you hide your wallet behind your back*
       
      Pretty lady: “oh you’re so sweet; wanna meet for a drink later?”
       
      I’m not sure it works like that!
       
      But selfishness is a funny one as men find it very unattractive in women; my best guess is that it’s something to do with the accumulation, husbandry and judicious expenditure of resources. Selfish men will have more time and money for their own children than generous men will maybe?
       
      Also, as Nissa pointed out:
       
      “Selfishness can seem like the opposite of neediness. So I think women are turned off by insecurity/neediness, and think that selfish = confident.”
       
      I.e. men will tend only to be selfish toward women for whom they don’t really about in the first place (he wouldn’t risk the possibility of her leaving by being selfish if he really cared about her); some women will perceive this as higher-value mate behavior and thus be turned on.
       
      Why do you think women are attracted to selfishness Adrian?
       
      “If what the women are saying on here is wrong (as far as what triggers their arousal NOT comfort) then how do you trigger sexual desire from a woman you just met in line or at a party?”
       
      You know when you watch a music/talent competition on TV Adrian and some acts are immediately captivating and have “it,” whereas other acts are instantly forgettable? What do you think that “it” is?
       
      My opinion is that “it” is one’s perception of high-quality material.
       
      Now, as “high-quality” is a relative term, to trigger sexual desire from a woman (anywhere) you have to somehow demonstrate that you’re equal or, preferably, higher in quality than men she’s dated in her past.
       
      The details of the dating “strategies”, chat-up lines, clothes etc. aren’t actually really that important per se; it’s the overall package that you present that matters.
       
      So, be the best man you can be Adrian and then let the chips fall where they may.
       
      That and a few one-liner jokes always go down well; I always have a few at the tip of my tongue to cover most topics. Cue: “If Bing Crosby was great, imagine how good Google Crosby would have been”. Haha. 🙂
       
      What do you think triggers desire in women Adrian?
       
      PS. An important point to note is that one’s inherent “quality” can improve in time with focus and dedication; equally it can deteriorate if not properly maintained.

      1. 23.3.1
        Adrian

        Hi Emily, Nissa and Tom10,

        Emily said, “A beautiful woman who thinks everyone should be dying of love for her because of her appearance.

        So… This is probably going to be the meanest and most braggartly thing I have most likely said in the comments

        but…

        I think most of the male commenters are coming from a perspective of men who are at best average looking or slightly below average looking and their views and advice reflect it. Guys who always want beautiful women but can’t get them.

        They are ALWAYS going on and on about looks, beauty, SMV ratings, the sexy guy she had sex with on the first date; and how if a guy is hot enough a woman will let him do or get away with anything, etc etc etc…

        But as a very handsome looking guy who got an 8.3 score on hot or not and who is approached by women who would classify as 7’s and below ALL the time (wow, just typing this I feel like an arrogant A-hole) I can tell you looks only matter to the degree that most of these men think it does only when you are dating women BELOW your attraction level.

        A woman who is a 8-10 in looks won’t care how hot I am, she can get other 8-10 guys all she wants; so she goes okay you are attractive check! What else is there about you? What else can you bring to the table in a relationship with me? I have accomplished this what have you accomplished?

        But conversely women who are 7’s and below always overlook many of what I consider my flaws and the lower she is on the SMV scale compared to me (sorry if that sound arrogant) the more of my flaws I have seen these women brush off and say they would accept.

        Another thing I think I will interject her is how some guys say that “all men” will sleep with a women regardless of how she looks-Not true! Besides the fact that I don’t like misleading women, stringing them along, or breaking their hearts, there is also the fact that having sex with a woman I don’t find attractive is nothing to me-As Jeremy would say I get no validation from it so it would be empty.

        The only guys that I have honestly ever seen do this are the weak and desperate ones…

        Back on the topic of attraction this is why my questions always focus on other things besides looks but somehow the guys always go back to the looks standard. It also makes me think that they have never or have rarely dating really attractive women because despite the stereotype of hot women being “B’s” (something I think men made up to make themselves feel better for not approaching her or getting rejected by her and something women made up to distract them from the fact that they are not as attractive as they think or at least not as attractive as that woman) I have found most really attractive women to be well… human.

        You know like a human, some are good girlfriends, some are bad girlfriends; her looks have nothing to do with her character NOR her confidence. Sorry guys on here shocking I know but you can be a very attractive man or woman and still not be confident in dating because you are dating someone just as or more attractive than yourself…. Which means that you had better have other qualities that shine besides your looks or your sculpted body.

        Like Emily said the beautiful woman who had lower SMV guys allow her to be a bad girlfriend gets a shock when a guy who is just as attractive dumps her because she is a bad girlfriend.

        …   …   …

        Tom10 I have decided that my new year’s resolution is to leave this blog and stop following others ideas and figure out what does and doesn’t work for myself.

        I will miss your wisdom and you humor.

        …   …   …

        Nissa I think it is about balance. Certain things a man should be selfish about to show his woman that he is confident in his role and that he is worth her allowing him to take the lead, but that his overall character should be that of a kind, supportive, patient,  giving, and non-judgmental boyfriend.

        Like I told Tom10 I can only learn these things by not reading about them and just getting out and doing. I will never succeed if I keep being afraid of failure.

        …   …   …

        Emily I agree with you. A woman will either think you are hot or not from the beginning; her arousal will be natural. After that all you can do is increase or decrease her comfort by showing her your true self.

        On another topic: What is your opinion of women (30+) who say that they DON’T have any friends or who say that they only have male friends because all women are <insert something negative>.

        I am noticing this more and more from the women in my new city and it surprised me.

        Should I count this as a red flag?

        An adult who can not keep at least one real friend?

        And as you said most women know that if a man is saying he wants to be only friends he is lying. From our conversations I get the impression that every women I have talked to who says they only have male friends know deep down that these guys want more; yet they say they CAN’T be friends with other women… This seems strange to me.

        If you agree that it is a red flag why?

        If you disagree why?

        Is not having any friends the same as not have any female friends or are they two different red flag types?

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          “I have decided that my new year’s resolution is to leave this blog and stop following others ideas and figure out what does and doesn’t work for myself.”

          Respectfully, there are better New Year’s resolutions. Usually, they’re to cut off vices or improve oneself. I’m not positive how disengaging from reading others’ points of view on dating and relationships will improve your life, but I wish you all the best nonetheless.

        2. Emily, the original

          Hi Adrian,
          Like Emily said the beautiful woman who had lower SMV guys allow her to be a bad girlfriend gets a shock when a guy who is just as attractive dumps her because she is a bad girlfriend.
          That’s not what I wrote. I wrote a beautiful woman may get a shock when she see less attractive women doing better with men if those women are more approachable. The beautiful women in that scenario mistakenly believe all they need is to look good.

          Emily I agree with you. A woman will either think you are hot or not from the beginning; her arousal will be natural. After that all you can do is increase or decrease her comfort by showing her your true self.
          I actually wrote that some women can have attraction grow for them if the man courts them. For others, the attraction is there from the beginning or it isn’t. Isn’t that how it is for a man? If a man isn’t attracted to a particular woman, is her trying to win his approval or doing a bunch of things for him going to make a difference? Probably not.
          On another topic: What is your opinion of women (30+) who say that they DON’T have any friends or who say that they only have male friends because all women are
          Some women don’t like other women. They see them as competition. They live by the adage: There is no friendship when it comes to sex and guys. I must admit I talked to only a handful of women at my last job. I spent most of my day talking to men. At the morning break, I was the only woman in this one break room with about 10 guys. They were guy’s guys. That can be fun. But since moving, Mr. Adrian, the courses I’m taking are dominated by women and the few men are … the intellectual types. So in school I talk to mostly women. I think a woman should have at least some female friends.What do you think a date would say if you told her all your friends were women?
          DON’T LEAVE THE BLOG. DON’T LEAVE THE BLOG.

        3. Jeremy

          After reading all the advice here, why would you find anything you just wrote surprising?  Hot women are still women, still need a mix of comfort/arousal, still have sexual meta-goals and relationship goals, still have anxieties – same as a hot guy like you, no?

           

          Adrian, once I determined what I needed in a relationship and what women in general (and my wife in particular) wanted in relationships, I had the raw materials to craft my relationship any way I wanted.  With that in mind, I chose a way that allowed me to live ethically, create mutual benefit, and respect myself.  Gather your materials and decide how you want to be.  Sounds like you are on your way.

        4. Nissa

          Adrian, if you leave you will be missed :-(. I’m an outlier in regard to friends (a big surprise, I know, lol).

          I am friendly with both men and women, but not really friends. The men either want to date me (no, thanks) or are married (do I want to make their wives angry?), or fail to notice I exist (because they aren’t into me, don’t bother to attempt friendship). I end up talking to a lot of older men, who are lonely and therefore happy to just talk. Sometimes they take this the wrong way and I have to pull away, as I don’t want to lead them on. Talking to them makes me miss my Dad, though. They often have a sweetness that is easy to love. If they realize you don’t want them as boyfriends, they are the easiest friends to have. As they get older (and especially the ones that were married and are now divorced/widowed), they miss having someone to listen to them talk about their day. That may be what the ladies are telling you.

          The women are trickier. Most of them don’t have a minute to spare, unless it’s on the sidelines of a child oriented event with the other mommies. Even then it’s “Timmy did this and Annie did that and the school needs this…”. Very little of it is ideas. Women who don’t have kids (as I don’t) can be captivated with their hobbies, from BDSM, polyamory, cats, or God. That’s why I’ve been going to classes for 10 years. I get my idea fix, have people that care about me, and still get to go home without having to buy any girl scout cookies.

          But the real, genuine connection? The closeness? It’s not really there. Just like in dating, the ones that I can accept don’t want me, and the ones that want me, I can’t accept.

        5. Emily, the original

          Nissa,

          I am friendly with both men and women, but not really friends.

          I just made a real friend, a woman I really like and who values friendship, but this is not a common experience. Most of the “friends” I have are as you described — people to talk to, people to go to the movies with, etc., but I would never call them in a crisis. I don’t invest a lot in those kinds of friendships anymore. However, I have been feeling more positive about friendships and the idea of building a community. Certainly, if there’s one real friend ,there are others out there. Everyone can’t want shallow interactions and only talk about the cookies they baked.

  24. 24
    kenley

    YAG

    Why are you doing this to yourself?  You found someone that you like but you aren’t going to go out with her again because you don’t know how long it’s going to last?  Ugh!  I would kill to find someone I want to touch me let alone makeout with for hours.   Please reconsider your decision.   I am throwing in the towel, but I would love to see other people find love!

  25. 25
    KK

    YAG,

    You said, “Every so often. a woman comes along who I want to see more than one time, so I will add her back into my date queue for further exploration.  The two women who I have been dating for a while fall into this category.   Like I said, they are not lovers, but are also not platonic friends.  I have not had sex with either these women”.

    Dating for “a while”?

    But earlier you stated your “N” is 2. And that any man who doesn’t have an “N” is a fool.

    This appears to be a contradiction, so which is true?

Leave a Reply

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