DISCOVER HOW SMART, STRONG & SUCCESSFUL WOMEN (THAT'S YOU!) CAN FINALLY Find Your Man
DISCOVER HOW SMART WOMEN LIKE YOU CAN FINALLY Find Your Man
Take this short quiz
to discover what you need to do now.
Take this short quiz now
This is part of a new video series that I shot with my friends at Three Day Rule, a national matchmaking service associated with Match.com. TDR sent a camera crew to my house to capture a dialogue between me and Kate Edwards.
For the next 9 weeks, I’ll be posting a new short video every Friday that should be a refreshing departure from the written blog posts I do on Mondays and Thursdays.
We kick things off with a video called “Is Modern Chivalry Dead?” Without giving anything away, Kate and I both agree that while it may be a little dormant with more passive men and aggressive women, many people still subscribe to the theory that men should court women.
In my opinion, men can complain all they want about how unfair it is that they’re supposed to call, plan and pay for the first few dates, but you’ll find few women who prefer passive men. Kate gives a simple explanation why in the video.
Thanks for watching and be sure and share both the video and your comments.
Good video but making the effort to call/plan/pay does not necessarily reflect the guy’s ability to be a good cave man. I recently went through this in a failed relationship. She kept telling me that I was doing everything right (calling, planning, paying, and much more) but she walked because she was looking for a more alpha guy who could provide more financial security (reading between the lines of what she said). I make over 6 figures and she makes about 2x what I make but her income was high risk and I think she wanted her partner to be able to secure her lifestyle without her income. I can’t do that. It was too bad (maybe).
Chivalry is just men putting in effort. PUA’s and Alpha players understand the type of effort needed to woo and impress a woman. The desire for short-term sex can often force men to put in more effort. But men who court for a prolonged length of time while a woman withholds affection will look like chumps. For the most part, men have more success when they can focus their energy on short-term relationships. Men often get lazy when it comes to long term relationships and women get bored when the excitement wears off for both of them.
This being a female-oriented blog, the video seems to only validate the “entitlement” attitude so many Western(ized) women exhibit these days. He should do this .. he should do that .. Other than re-enforcing confirmation bias (a bad thing) and the marketing promotion angle for Evan’s business (no shame in this; Evan’s just giving women [potential clients] what they want), what good does this video do to advance a solution to the problem? Hopefully, this series will offer relevant content that addresses what women can do to make themselves attractive to the men (generally alpha types, the top 10%) that they are attracted to.
But to answer the original question .. Yes, chivalry (a very traditional male act) is, for the most part, dead. But the real question should be “WHY is chivalry dead?” However, asking this requires a good amount of introspection and self-analysis thus making a lot of women uncomfortable. Ladies, you simply can’t expect men to continue honoring a traditional act when they see how women as a whole have abandoned theirs. This ‘lack of chivalry’ issue isn’t something that is experienced by women who keep their traditional obligations to the social dating/relationship contract, though I’m certain someone will chime in to counter with their anecdotal one-off experience …
I’m curious, what, specifically, is this “traditional act” or these “traditional obligations” that you allege women have abandoned?
Being subservient to men. And yes, it should be rightfully abandoned.
Scott,
Perhaps I’m a bit old-school on this one but I think the art (and it is one) of chivalry still matters. True, in the case you mention, it wasn’t enough to keep that particular relationship alive for you. Dating is like that, sometimes, you can do one thing, several things, or even everything right, and still lose out, in the end. Maybe though, you might have over-estimated what chivalry “proves” about us to a woman.
It’s true that chivalry, traditionally, had its basis in a man’s role as initiator, leader, and provider. The modern version of it (man seeks out the woman, asks the woman on a date, plans and leads the dates and other activities together, and pays for same; in other words, courts her) had its roots in a time when the role and status of women was far different. A lot has changed over the years; there are more women with advanced degrees, in higher-status jobs and professions. Many have taken on roles that were once reserved for a man’s world, and succeeded. The pill gave them more reproductive and sexual freedom, and while we can argue over how much gender equity there is, we can’t argue that there’s more than ever before. That’s changed men’s role somewhat as well; and it has led to a lot of guys not being sure how to navigate the sometimes turbulent waters. A lot of younger guys (and maybe you’re one), have started to ask, “If she wants to be equal, and she makes as much or more than I do, why do I have to plan everything, and pay for everything? Is that fair?”
Well, women have changed, and they have come a long way, but at the end of the day, they’re still women, and when it comes to being attracted to us, or not, one big, big part of it especially in the dating phase, is how we make them FEEL. Objectively, she may may not NEED you to take all the initiative, she may not NEED you to do all the planning for your dates, she may not NEED you to pay for it…but most of the time, she still WANTS you to do all that. She’s physical capable of opening a door, or seating herself, too…but she still wants you to do that for her. Why? In a word, because it makes her FEEL SPECIAL. Instead of wondering whether it’s fair or not, think about it like a dance, where you take the man’s role: take her by the hand, establish a frame and lead, and guide her around the dance floor. Think of it as a chance to let her experience you as a leader, as a protector, and a provider…as a MAN. You’re showing her, in action, not just that you can do that, but that you want to, for her. Whether that’s enough to win her heart, now that’s another matter; but what I can tell you from long experience, is that it will get you closer to that objective , than not doing it will.
I know there’s a school of thought out there, in PUA circles and elsewhere, that says that’s the wrong way to go; that traditional courtship is the way of the weak, the dreaded “Nice guy BETA male”. By that standard, the “Battle of the Sexes” is in fact that, Us vs. Them; be aloof, keep her off-balance, keep her guessing, after all the woman is your adversary; but if you’re really trying to find a relationship, is that the way you want it to start?
It’s just a thought, but instead of worrying about whether women expect too much from you, how about thinking of those gestures we call chivalry as your gift to her; something you do, just because she enjoys it, not because you expect something back in return; a gift that makes her feel valued as only a man can do. That attitude still may not win you the girl, (there’s always the possibility that she may need/want something else, that you don’t have) but I promise you it will make you a better man.
There is a problem with that Buck25. Most men have finite resources. Many men become bitter because they do everything right, and just as they allow themselves to start feeling “in love,” the woman will often leave for a better deal. Oh yeah, and then they will say that there was no exclusivity, so she didn’t do anything wrong when she started dating the new “Mr. Wonderful,” while also still dating the first guy who is doing everything right.
After this happens, men see “doing it right” as a fool’s play. They see it as a bad investment. Only a fool keeps betting on a horse that comes in last in every race. This how many men see it. Many just can’t be bothered anymore.
There is a debate going on about whether we should be living by the code, “a man never hits a woman,” or “a gentleman never hits a lady.” There is a huge difference between the two, but also something in common. What they have in common is that both require a code of chivalry from men.
What they do not have in common is that one creates an unsustainable situation because it requires nothing of women to get that chivalry. The other one requires something of her. She has to earn it. She has to complete the circle by acting like a lady.
What you see now is many men rejecting the first one and adopting the second one. As one young man said, “if she steps to me like a man, I will treat her like a man.”
The question being asked is, what’s in it for me. After all, the woman is in it for what she is getting out of it. There is nothing wrong, and everything right with the relationship between men and women being symbiotic. That’s sustainable and there’s security in that.
So what the two guys above you lamented about is that men feel it is a one way street, which they are tired of. So how can a woman change that? Well, even in these modern times, men are being asked to be traditional in dating. So, maybe women should do the same?
Maybe when a man takes her out to dinner, and other daytime activities like a walk in the beach, etc…, she can return the favor. But instead of an expensive date out, cook for him. If she isn’t comfortable taking him to her home, offer to cook at his place. If she isn’t comfortable going to his place yet, do a picnic basket, which can be done at his place of work for lunch, or at a park, the beach, etc…
I am curious what women think they can do to show that they are invested. To show that they aren’t a bad investment, or risky bet.
Sorry Russell, but you honestly lost me! I have no clue what you are trying to say when you start talking about hitting her; you’re not clear with the point you are trying to make.
I respectfully suggest that in the future you try to remember your audience.
What I mean by that is, most of your post seem to be attacking women, but remember this site is mostly for women. The few men who do comment like me, try to add to women understanding men with our comments, but mostly I try to learn more about dating from a woman’s perspective, so I don’t like to comment much.
While I strongly encourage you to challenge women on selfish or one sided thinking, I also need you to do it in a manor that is less bitter and angry, don’t attack women, because most of the women on this site are like you and I; they are trying to better themselves in dating.
Remember, Evan and his female readers didn’t make the rules for dating and courtship, they are just following them. It sucks if you are a physically, facially, or financially average or below average guy, but it is not wrong for a woman to want the sexy, tall, hot, successful guy.
…
Anyway, the one thing you did say your first paragraph that I agreed on (because I witnessed it countless times) was about why many men who aren’t alpha or players hate the idea of courting. Men invest time and effort into a woman we like hoping to win her, we honestly don’t even care about the money. But while we are doing all the courting and getting our hopes up, thinking we have a girlfriend who we are attracted to, that is also attracted to us (that is the key ingredient), the whole time we are on cloud nine, she is just interviewing us! If we fail the interview it hurts because we feel we wasted weeks on a women, that we could have been focusing on another women.
More importantly we get our hopes up, that is what really hurts about courting women, because we have to go through many rejections until a woman says yes, but it “seems” all women have to do is set back and judge the man, qualifying him like some kind of show dog begging for scraps. But those are the rules of courting, whining about it won’t change it, that is all Evan is trying to say, he doesn’t make the rules, he just reports it.
Even goes into better detail in “finding the one online” but this is why we men rush things so much
Many hot successful guys go into hiding (invisable) or they just sleeping with many of these women and when he gets older he will either get married to a much younger women or just not dating at all. The guys who go invisible are males that make very good money however they dress in average guy’s clothes and car. This way most women will leave them alone because we all know there’s plenty of women just attracted to money.
Hypergamy is the main reason. You see they want a man to take care of them however as women are making money the number of men available is much smaller so these women are competing like crazy. Women who wait for a man to take care of them end up with a man making much less than being with a man sooner because as she gets older her options are smaller.
Adrian,
Some good thoughts there. What I’m hearing in varying ways from most of the guys here, is a lot of frustration, maybe mixed with some anger, too.The question for us seems to be something like this: ” I have to invest all this effort, time. etc. in courting a woman, while she gets to just sit there, smile, and pick and choose. I have to put in all this work, only to be rejected; half the time, I don’t even know why, and that feels lousy! Why bother?” I know, used to make me feel exactly the same way. We can’t change the system, we can’t change women, and we can’t put the sexual revolution toothpaste back in the tube, so what that leaves us to work with is…us.
I’ve come to believe that some of our feelings come from a message we receive as men, from the time we’re boys. We’re taught to compete, to strive, to go for the goal….and we’re all also taught, sometimes directly, always at least by implication, that the way to do that is…TRY HARDER! Didn’t win, didn’t quite reach your goal…TRY HARDER! Keep falling short? You didn’t TRY HARD ENOUGH! Now, it’s a nice motivator…and there’s nothing wrong with it until it becomes an implicit promise that NO GOAL IS UNATTAINABLE, IF YOU TRY HARD ENOUGH! That’s a nice myth. IT IS ALSO A LIE! It is a lie, because it doesn’t include this little disclaimer …”so long as you have the innate capacity to achieve said goal”. All the effort in the world can’t make a midget into an NFL linebacker, or a half-wit into a neurosurgeon..and it’s not going to make an average or slightly above guy into every woman’s dream man either. Fact is, if we don’t have the ability to start with, we can try as hard as we can, for as long as we can, and that will get us…NOTHING. Still, that’s the lesson most of us absorb, and particularly when it comes to getting the woman of our dreams, it’s totally counterproductive. The reason repeated rejection hurts so much, the reason we get so frustrated with women, even angry with them, is because we continue to drink the “effort must eventually succeed” Kool-aid. What we need, gentlemen, is a new paradigm.
Obvious effort does not help our position with a woman; in fact, that more obvious it is, the more needy we look, and women despise needy men. Appear to be one, and a few women may pity you; NONE of them will respect you. Depend on it! The next thing is, focusing on a goal we do not have the wherewithal to attain is futile; that 9 or 10 we all want is just that, for all but the lucky 10% or less; stings, I know, but that’s reality.
So how do we do that? Well, once we focus on women we actually have a real chance with, there’s a lot less scarcity, and a lot less wishing and hoping invested in an uncertain outcome. That takes the pressure off, because each woman we meet is a new possibility, rather than the one and only choice (she may become that, with time and luck, but at first, she’s just another potential choice). Instead of trying to get every detail right, in order to get past the defenses of the inscrutable enemy (the way we see a woman, when we’re in try-hard mode), enjoy getting to know her, AND help her enjoy getting to know us. Taking the initiative, planning the fun, and yes, even paying for it) is a lot easier when we do it because we just want to, not because she demands it. When we can see it as a gift to her, which we give solely because it’s ours, as men, to give, not because it’s a means to a desired end, chivalry is actually fun.
We can’t change women, we can’t change the system, but we can change our attitude. Focus on the process, instead of the prize you may or may not get; focus on the moment, and just enjoy it. I don’t know how much better it works, but I do know how much better it feels.
Adrian, I apologize for not being more clear, if I lost you on that comment. So first let me make a few things clear. I have never had to hit a woman, and frankly, I would be happy if I live the rest of my life without having to do so. Maybe the reason is that I only associate with “LADIES.” I quickly remove those who are not ladies from my life. I just refuse to associate with them. I have been very lucky it seems, to not have one who is not a lady, set her sights on me in any way shape or form, such as some woman just taking issue with me for some reason in public.
What I was addressing in a broader sense is that we get the society that we encourage. Take for example the lesson about raising kids I listened to. The man said, “Don’t be mad at your kids if they only do what they are told once you start hollering at them because they are only doing what you have taught them to do.” In other words, if you tell a child to do something, and the child doesn’t do it, what do you do? Do you go administer discipline right away? Or do you let a few moments go by and then keep repeating your demand until you are hollering? And, only after hollering do you administer punishment? If so, you have taught the child that he/she doesn’t have to mind until you start hollering. So what do you have to do to get the child to mind? Holler.
Well, if you haven’t noticed, many young women these days seem to not understand reality. I say young women but there are some women who aren’t young who seem to have lost touch with reality, and that is that men are stronger. But, maybe they haven’t lost touch with reality. See, that is the first thought that comes to mind when you see some woman attacking a strong man. Ray Rice’s wife for instance. Was she crazy for attacking him not once, but twice? Maybe not. Maybe she has just had it ingrained in her that men are not allowed to hit her, no matter what she does, or how violent she gets. Why wouldn’t she think this? After all, hasn’t she heard many people, men and women say, “a man never hits a woman?”
I submit that this saying is actually very dangerous to women. What young girls should be taught from an early age is that they should not hit men, because men will hit back. Why? Because some will, even with that saying being the norm. Take Ray Rice again. He did not hit her after the first time she attacked. He hit her after she entered the elevator and attacked him again. Was he wrong? I would argue maybe not. He of course was in no danger from her slaps as far as getting knocked out. He was however in some danger. That woman has weapons on the ends of her fingers. As she is wildly flailing her hands at his face, he is in no anger of being knocked out, but he was in danger of having his life ruined. One finger nail to the eye and he might never play football again. A running back needs two eyes. Lose one eye and two thins happen. Loss of depth perception, which is crucial, and he now has a blind side, which could be deadly. In short, he would not be medically cleared to play, ever again.
But again, what on earth was a woman like that thinking? Would you attack him? I know I wouldn’t, and I know how to fight, and am of similar build. It would be stupid to attack him. He’s strong and even if I can fight, he can still do permanent damage to me. So no, I would never attack a man like that unless there was a very very good reason to do so.
As I stated, you can see videos on YouTube where women will actually hit a man and then say that he isn’t allowed to hit her back. Or they say it before hitting him. Insanity. But it has been caused by a society that has falsely lead them to believe that she does not have to earn a man’s chivalry.
How many of those domestic abuse cases were like the Ray Rice case? The woman is actually the abuser, and the guy is just defending himself? Ray Rice is not a wife abuser. He tried to walk away from her after she attacked him. He then got on the elevator, and she followed him in and attacked him again. Who is the abuser? The problem is that a man can do much more damage when he hits, so isn’t it better to teach girls to respect that? Doesn’t that make them safer?
I do see this much more with younger women, and I personally think it is not only because of one simple fact and that is because everywhere she turned, through her formative years, she was taught to disrespect men, taught that women were more physically powerful than they are, and also taught that men were not allowed to hit back. It’s a dangerous cocktail that has resulted in what we see out there these days, and it’s likely going to get worse. Heck, look at that FSU QB that got arrested a while back. The girl raises her fist at him, he grabs the wrist to keep from getting hit, so she punches him with the other hand, he hits back, and he gets arrested. Nice message that sends to young girls.
As I said, we get the society that we encourage. Girls should be encouraged to act like ladies, and then boys should be taught to be a gentleman and treat ladies with respect. Not one single thing wrong with that concept. In fact, it is the only one that is sustainable.
This video gives a hint as to the damage we have done to society. I am so glad that I am not a young man these days.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiBMzdU9i2I
My statement was that a gentleman never hits a lady. I see nothing controversial about that. No lady ever has to fear a gentleman. So maybe guys should only date ladies, and ostracize women who are not ladies, and women should do the same. Only date gentlemen, and ostracize men who are not gentlemen. And, the message to all kids should be, “Don’t hit unless you are willing to get hit back, because some people WILL hit back.”
This seems to be a common thread: why bother “courting” one woman if she’s just going to get bored and leave?
For one thing, I’ll point out that there seems to be this assumption that only one woman at a time should be focused on. I think that’s not the most effective way to go about it because everyone should have multiple balls in the air at first. So if one woman drops out, no problem, you’ve got a date with another one on Friday.
I’d say that if you’re concerned about the cost, then don’t do big dates in the beginning. Do drinks or coffee if it’s a first meeting for an online date, dinner on a second at a mid-price place like Applebee’s. Billiards or bowling are cheap, fun dates. A picnic in the park is free. Wine tastings are fairly cheap too.
However, I am always mindful of the cost, where other women may not be. I choose the $10 fettuccine Alfredo instead of the $30 lobster Fra Diavolo. I don’t expect guys to go broke treating me, but I do want them to show me a willingness to provide.
Jenn, that’s solid advice when a guy is single and looking for a girlfriend, and when cost is an issue. However, every man has been through the following scenario, often more than once.
A guy meets a girl, goes an a date, and things go great. Long story short, they continue to date, and he is doing nothing wrong. They are spending a lot of time together at each other’s place, on dates, at friend’s homes, texting regularly, calling regularly, etc… Many, or most friends will see them as anew couple. However, that’s not completely true.
There are many ways it happens but a new man comes into her life. Maybe a new guy she meets through work, or through a friend, or at a club when she won’t out on a lady’s night out, or just some guy she bumped into by chance encounter. Flirting ensues, then a date, then more, and at some point, the guy she was spending a lot of time with starts to notice something is off. At first he is told that everything is fine, and excuses are made, but eventually he confronts her and a bomb is dropped on his head. He learns that she met someone. His heart is crushed. She will state that she Sid nothing wrong because there was no agreement on exclusivity. Ever wonder why some guys now ask for that too quickly?
It leaves men jaded and bitter. The truth is that most men who are marriage minded do NOT like juggling more than one woman. They feel safer and more relaxed, more able to be themselves with just one woman.
This whole thing is best understood using the two ladders theory. A woman has two ladders she puts men on. The romantic ladder, and the friend ladder. Easy for a man to move from the romance ladder to the friend ladder but near impossible to move from the friend ladder to the romance ladder.
On the romance ladder are all of the men in her life that she sees as candidates to be her man, with the top rung being her first choice, though not necessarily the one she will end up with. He may end up being moved to the friend ladder by her, or he may remove himself by himself, at which point, she moves the rest of the guys up a rung.
So guy #1 from above is the guy who was recently moved to the top rung. He senses that, he feels it, and so he thinks he may have found his future wife. However a new player enters the game. For one or more reasons, she is intrigued by him and so he is placed on the top rung.
Guy #1 does not know yet that he has been demoted to fall back guy. She isn’t ready to cut him loose because she isn’t sure about the new player yet. But as time goes by she becomes more confident, and devotes more time to him. This where guy #1 starts feeling something is wrong. She isn’t ready to cut him loose so she makes excuses as to why they aren’t spending as much time together. In the end, one of 4 things happens. He finds out the truth. He simply gets to the point that he just knows something is wrong, the new player gets cold feet and hits the trail, usually after bedding her, or she is ready to date the new player exclusively.
MikeTO, Buck25, and Russell,
I am not disagreeing with you guys, I am just saying that everything you talked about, women face the same problems in dating.
We as men aren’t the only ones suffering in the unfairness of the dating game. Like I said, use this site to learn from women not to just blame and lash out at them.
Every woman is not a Megan Fox, every woman doesn’t have the hot guys chasing her, every woman doesn’t feel comfortable giving the man all the power in dating, letting him court her (will he call? Why did he choose to take me here, is it because he isn’t really into me? My parents taught me to never owe anyone, I feel uncomfortable letting a stranger pay for my food; will he think I owe him something in return now?).
Every woman wants a guys she is sexually attracted to, why is it okay for men to want this, to pass up women who would treat them like they are the most precious man on earth, she would do everything to make him happy, but she is just overweight, or is not “as” attractive as the average woman. Because of her looks he chooses not to date her and we think that is okay, but when a woman does the same thing, now it is a sin??? She is shallow, stuck up, only wants to date models, and so her punishment is she will regret it when she turns 40 and all the guys will make her feel like she made you feel but rejecting her for younger women???
The average looking, or below average looking, and the overweight woman get hit on all the time by guys and I am sure some even have full inboxes on dating sites, but what is the point of having hundreds of guys hit on you when you aren’t attracted to any of them? I am not talking about GQ models, just guys who put the work in to take care of their finances, their bodies (yes women don’t like fat guys either), and he knows how to dress and act respectful in public.
Why do some men feel that a woman wanting a man who can at least take care of himself, is a gold digger? Why does wanting someone who she (to steal this ideology from Karmic Equation) can see herself wanting to kiss verses forcing herself to be with someone who she doesn’t want to kiss make a woman shallow?
My whole point is, in some ways dating is unfair for men, in some ways dating is unfair for women, unless you are the top percentage of either gender, you will struggle in dating. So always posting negative comments blaming women doesn’t help anyone. Sure I want the hottest women I can find, but why would she want me? What can I do to improve myself to get that woman?
Jenn also made a great point about dating more than one person at a time, because YES guys! Women date guys who they really like that disappear for another woman, just like men date women who lose interest, the only difference is, most men even if not interested will still stick around long enough to get sex, which gives women the false sense of he really likes me. We men don’t have the monopoly on getting our hopes up about a person we like.
Ding ding ding! We have a winner!
Russell,
I understand what you’re saying but I’ll reiterate, if it’s still early stages (as in the first few months) of a courtship, both parties should be openly dating others. Until the exclusivity talk is broached, you’re both free to do that. Even marriage-minded people (such as myself) should still be open to meeting new people because for one thing, it helps to relax a person when they know there are others who want to date them. For another, especially when you’re looking for someone to marry, meeting as many people as possible is more effective than just focusing on one person at a time. Even just being open to the possibility of meeting others helps. Don’t put all your eggs into one basket!
Yes, it is fair enough.
And when a guy recognizes he’s a 5 in SMV according to women, he should probably date a woman 5. It’s the exact same thing a woman 5 should do when faced with a similar situation.
No one said life was fair. You are just very attuned to how it’s unfair for short, black guys, and very callous about how it’s unfair to older, heavier women.
@Adrian – I’m truly touched by your posts in this thread, my dear fellow. Thank you for understanding and expressing the fact that yes, sensitive and sincere people of Both sexes can find dating disappointing at times.
Men who complain about women being users and women who complain about men being jerks simply need to stop dating users and jerks; it really is that simple. I appreciate you being a male voice of reason on this blog; I have a feeling you’re going to find and win a lovely woman thanks to your positive and thoughtful demeanour. xo
“I understand what you’re saying but I’ll reiterate, if it’s still early stages (as in the first few months) of a courtship, both parties should be openly dating others. Until the exclusivity talk is broached, you’re both free to do that.”
Well Jenn, this sounds great on paper, but for men the experience is totally different. Most men don’t make 6 figures in income. In this country, men are generally expected to “Call, Plan, and PAY.” Dating 2-6 different women isn’t really much of an option for most guys. Dates can and often are quite expensive. After all, what is the guy trying to do here. He is trying to prove that he is invested, so no, cheap dates aren’t an option. I used to peruse another site, the circular dating site…what’s her name? Oh yea, Rory, I think. Anyway, I saw plenty of women there mention that they were worth a good quality date. One blog thread, the women were ranting about all the cheap dates, and I specifically remember one woman ranting that some guy she had high hopes for chose to ask her to meet him at Starbucks for a first date. She stated that she was at a minimum, worth a good meal in a nice restaurant.
So men know this. We’ve had feedback that let us know we were cheap, if we ever did that. Plus, we also know that you women do circular date when not in a relationship. In truth, that’s all circular dating really is. Dating as if you aren’t in a committed relationship. Thus we know it’s a competition. This is stressful, not fun for the man. You are trying to build a connection with a woman, having to try to impress her, and you know that the truth is, the odds are actually against you. See, it is not the same, no matter what Adrian says. It’s not the same. Yes, women have the possibility that the best of those 6 guys may not want to actually marry her, but that doesn’t change the fact that she is the one who gets to sit back, go on paid for dates with no worries about money. She then gets to pick who is the winner among the guys she is dating. The guys are competing, and she is the judge. Rarely is this situation reversed. Oh sure, that top 10 percent of guys might find this the case, but for the other 90%, not so much.
i would just keep that in mind Jenn. Dating is not fun for men. Dating is fun for women because they get a free night out, having fun on somebody else’s dime. We can enjoy ourselves on a date, but dating itself is not fun…not when we know that she has other irons in the fire. Women of course know this so not one time has any woman ever made it clear that she was seeing other guys. You are just supposed to assume this I guess. But every woman has gone out of her way to leave a subtle impression that there is nobody else. She has probably learned early on that men’s demeanors change if she makes it clear that she is dating other guys. He is going to pull back, and guard his heart. So for marriage minded men, the fun really only begins with exclusivity. Only the PUA’s love the dating.
I have yet to meet an older man who has been married for decades, who doesn’t say, “I knew she was the one the moment I laid eyes on her.” That isn’t really true. What it means is that for most men, if they like what they see, they want to get to know you, learn how it feels to be with you. Most men know pretty quickly whether they both like the way you look, and like they way they feel when they are around you, and thus know very quickly whether you are somebody they want to be exclusive with. At that point, they would love to be exclusive, move in together, etc.. to see if this is something that can last. This is something most young men struggle with if they are a one woman kind of guy, because in effect, they want to get to the exclusivity very quickly, which ALWAYS wrecks things between him and the girl, because after all, she is sitting back enjoying dates with several guys, and is in no hurry to make a choice. It’s like men and women are not in sync.
It is my theory that marriage minded men want to get to the exclusivity pretty quickly, while the woman wants to hold off. But then, once they get to the point that she does want to be exclusive, she is pretty certain she wants marriage with the guy. He knows he wants exclusivity, but lags behind her on wanting to tie the knot. So now he is the one that wants to slow down, while she writes into blogs wondering why he isn’t popping the question yet.
I would also say that for women, things would be a lot better if they would go back to being the gatekeepers of sex. In fact, I think it would help everyone. Men would have to get more serious about finding the right woman, and would not waste time on a woman that they are not interested in for a LTR. This would help women in that the men left pursuing her, would be much more likely to be serious about her. It does little good to blame the PUAs for using women for sex when women are creating the playing field for them to play ball on. PUAs would disappear overnight if women went back to being the gatekeepers of sex. I truly believe this is the number one thing making it much harder for people to find the right person. I also think this is much more responsible for the increased age of people when they marry. It’s just harder to find the person who is actually interested in you long term. At a minimum, this is the biggest factor.
I know that it is impossible to put the genie back in the bottle, but I think smart women would simply stop putting out so easily once it is time to get serious. Yeah sure, have fun in college, and shortly after, but around 24 to 25, that should stop and she should start looking seriously for the right man, and if all women started doing that, men would have to get serious, and stop living the Playboy life. They say that men want sex and women want marriage. Well, you can’t blame men for not being in any hurry to get married when he is getting all the sex he wants without having to get married.
Hello dear @Rusty (or, as you now call yourself, Russell): I’ll keep this short, since it’s tiresome to read 7-paragraph bloviations.
I understand that some women will think poorly of a man if he doesn’t spend a lot of money while dating. So here’s an idea: stop dating those women! If you focused on going on creative-but-inexpensive dates, the women who demand costly experiences will excuse themselves from your dating pool and you’ll have a better chance of finding someone whose values are more closely aligned with your own. You would then be able to stop ranting on and on and on and on about the mercenary, slutty Western women who are always looking to “trade up” because you would be happily dating women who aren’t like that. And trust me: we’d all be thrilled if that were to happen.
What, and miss out on the women who bloviate about how all men over 40 are worthless, fat, bald, bad teeth, etc…?
Miss out on the chance to laugh when women here use the word Patriarchy while 77.9 % of suicides are men, 6 out of 7 homeless are men, women earn 140 degrees for every degree men earn, women get custody of the children regardless of who is the “better” parent, women don’t have to register for the draft, two college kids cna get drunk at a party then have consensual sex, but he can be charged with rape because she could not consent due her drinking alcohol, etc… Yeah the Patriarchy is doing wonders for men these days. Too funny and yet not a day goes by when I see that word used by a woman on this blog. Let me use the word Feminazi and Evan will call me out on it. Miss out on those laughs? Nay nay!
While YOU are bloviating, take note of your own, such as how you and everybody else here, excluding some men, have a double standard. See, there are tons of posts by women venting about how horrible men are, or men do this and men do that. Nobody says anything about it, save for me and a few men. But oh lord, let me of the other handful of men do the same, let us talk about negative experiences with women, or call out things that we see women do, and we are instantly called out, stating that, “Well men do that too, or things aren’t gravy for us women either.” Yes, it is a double standard, but excuse me if I’m not shocked by being on the negative side of a double standard. By this point, we are used to it, though also tired of it.
You are trying to build a connection with a woman, having to try to impress her, and you know that the truth is, the odds are actually against you. See, it is not the same, no matter what Adrian says. It’s not the same. Yes, women have the possibility that the best of those 6 guys may not want to actually marry her, but that doesn’t change the fact that she is the one who gets to sit back, go on paid for dates with no worries about money. She then gets to pick who is the winner among the guys she is dating. The guys are competing, and she is the judge. Rarely is this situation reversed. Oh sure, that top 10 percent of guys might find this the case, but for the other 90%, not so much.
i would just keep that in mind Jenn. Dating is not fun for men. Dating is fun for women because they get a free night out, having fun on somebody else’s dime. We can enjoy ourselves on a date, but dating itself is not fun…not when we know that she has other irons in the fire. Women of course know this so not one time has any woman ever made it clear that she was seeing other guys. You are just supposed to assume this I guess. But every woman has gone out of her way to leave a subtle impression that there is nobody else. She has probably learned early on that men’s demeanors change if she makes it clear that she is dating other guys. He is going to pull back, and guard his heart. So for marriage minded men, the fun really only begins with exclusivity. Only the PUA’s love the dating.
Russell,
Dating isn’t that much fun for women either. You think it’s fun for me, getting emails from lame idiots who constantly shoot off mass emails and dumb one-liners to every halfway decent-looking woman online? I’ve gotten to a point that when I see new emails in my inbox, I send up a quick prayer that that person won’t be lame, just because I’m so used to not getting good, sincerely interested replies from well-matched individuals. Then, when one of them actually manages to ask me on a real date (most don’t), I inevitably get my hopes up while sincerely trying not to pair our names together or imagine my wedding dress. More often than not, I spend an hour having polite conversation with someone whom I usually know immediately that I’m not even remotely attracted to, before going home completely dejected because of yet another failed attempt. And as for me not having to care about money? I make peanuts at my job compared to even the most low-income guys. Very few of the men I’ve dated have made so little, yet they still sometimes seem to expect me to split the bill, which is about the most unromantic thing a guy can do.
Some advice: if you’re going to complain about the cost of dating, then either do what you need to do to get a better income, or trim your existing expenses until you can afford to take out several women each week. It really shouldn’t cost you more than $100-200 to take out 3 women or more. Add to that the fact that since most women still want a man to do the asking and the paying, you have more control than you might think. You do the asking, which means you don’t have to wait, you can just go for it. You pick the place and the activity that best suits your budget. Do some research on places that always run good happy hour specials. Get creative! It’s not forever, just for now. Once you’re exclusive with someone you can scale back a bit, or use groupons or Living Social deals.
And remember, no matter how much time and money you’re spending on dates, it likely pales in comparison to the time, money and effort that women have to expend on our appearance just to be asked out in the first place.
“While YOU are bloviating…”
Dear @Rusty. Please calculate the length of your average post on this website. Then calculate the length of my average post. One, and only one, of us bloviates here.
Rusty/Russell — now that you’ve been outed, you may as well go back to being Rusty.
“What you have to understand also, is that just like there are men who will string you along for sex, there are women who will string men along for dates. Who wouldn’t love going out and having a good time when you don’t have to pay? Yes, before anyone says it, I know that not all women do that, just like all men don’t string women along just for sex.”
For men, this is an easy problem to solve: Don’t pay for extravagant dates. Go on budget-conscious dates that both you and your date will enjoy.
If you’re only dating “ladies” who require that you spend extravagantly on them, then may you should consider dating less entitled “ladies”.
The dating game is a game of chance. It’s not a meritocracy. You put money in, hoping you hit the jackpot, but if you gamble EXPECTING to hit the jackpot, yeah, you’re going to be mightily disappointed.
In the dating game, men gamble with money, women gamble with their bodies. Men spend money on dates with a woman he hopes to sleep with; women sleep with a man whom she hopes to have a relationship with. The woman walks away after date 3; the man walks away after sex.
Who loses more? Money can be re-earned. How does one re-earn the sex given? That gift is given and gone. You can’t re-earn it.
Please stop harping about how much money it costs to date.
Date the right kinds of women, in the right way, and you’ll get sex and/or a relationship, and it won’t cost you a more money than you can re-earn.
A woman can date the right guy, behave like a lady, pay her share of the date, but she still won’t be guaranteed a committed relationship. Even if she sleeps with him.
Please, tell me again, how much more it costs men to date (to get sex, because that is often their primary goal) than it is for a woman to date (to get a relationship, which is often HER primary goal)?
The dating game IS fair if you look at this reality:
– Women reject men BEFORE sex.
– Men reject women AFTER sex.
Men lose dollars, which can be re-earned, if he chooses the wrong woman to date.
Women lose self-esteem if she chooses the wrong man to date.
Yes, please tell me again of a man’s higher risk in dating than a woman’s.
“Rusty/Russell – now that you’ve been outed, you may as well go back to being Rusty.”
Outed? I wasn’t exactly hiding. Since Rusty is the nickname for Russell (I respond to Russell (full name) Rusty (nickname) and Russ (shortened full name)), and the Ohio State avatars should have made it very clear. It’s not like I was still using the Ohio State avatar but the name Eddie, or Rick, or Matt.
Anyone with their brain turned on should have figured it out the first time they saw it. Rusty is the most common nickname for Russell.
what exactly does “step to me like a man” mean????
I love this video! I wish I had seen it years ago while dating a very frugal multi-millionaire. During my 3 1/2 year relationship with him, I paid for my own movie ticket on Valentine’s Day! I had to split dinner meals with him! I did not go anywhere with him unless it was free! Evan is right. A man should make an “EFFORT” and show that he is “INVESTED” in the relationship. Thank you Evan! Thank you for your words of wisdom. I will repeat over and over in my head, “CALL”, “PLAN”, “PAY”.
Believe it or not many rich people are very cheap that’s how they become rich.
Yes, I completely agree with you. Still, finances are the number one marriage break-up reason. It’s important to find someone who can balance between savings money and spending money.
Ugh. It is one thing to be a saver (which I generally am) and financially intelligent, but someone like the man Nora dated is showing his lack of generosity and also self centered ness.
Nora, I don’t think the topic at hand has to do with who pays for what within a relationship. That is something that each couple has to decide on their own, and the man – in this day and age – should not be automatically responsible for paying. The topic here is dealing with who should pay on the first few dates.
Chance, The problem with that is a lot of women will assume a lack of interest if a man doesn’t pay on the first few dates. It takes time to get to know someone. Most people don’t lay out their philosophies on life, dating, marriage, etc. on or before date one. It usually takes months to get to know someone’s thoughts on those things. So it leaves a whole lot of guesswork, which is frequently wrong. If I were a man, and I was really interested in a woman, I wouldn’t have a problem paying for the first few dates to find out if she is someone I want to continue to get to know better. If she insists on paying her own way, that’s fine too. Obviously, she feels better about dating that way for her own personal reasons. Not wanting to feel like she owes you anything or maybe it’s part of her feeling independent and in control. It can also be because she’s not super attracted to you initially, and doesn’t feel right about allowing you to pay when she knows it probably won’t lead to another date. So the man is left with guesswork too. I will just say for me, personally, if I go out with someone on the first few dates, and he doesn’t pay, it makes me feel he isn’t very interested. That, in turn, puts a damper on my interest. When you’re really excited about a guy, and he takes you out and treats you like a lady, it makes you feel special. It makes you feel valued and desired. Why wouldn’t you want the woman you’re interested in to feel that way?
KK, I think there’s a misunderstanding. I was pointing out to Nora that this topic was not about who pays over the long-term (which is what she was talking about), but rather the man should pay for the first few dates. Evan only advocates this for during the courtship phase. He does not advocate that it is the man’s job to always pay in perpetuity.
“the problem with that is a lot of women will assume a lack of interest if a man does’t pay on the first few dates”.
Not true. Maybe you would assume a lack of interest if a man didn’t pay, but the first few dates are for both parties to determine if there is a connection worth pursuing. It’s what occurs on the date that determines if a man is interested, not how much money he shells out.
Now, if he begins to realize that he likes you a lot, and wants to up the ante by taking you out on a romantic date, then paying comes into question.
What is wrong with meeting a man at a concert in the park, festival, or an event in the city where you pay your own way for the first few dates? If you have a wonderful time with this man each time, and he demonstrates interest by consistently calling you and making time to see you, what’s the issue?
Maybe this differs among groups of varying ages, or maybe i’m fairly noncommittal in the beginning of any relationship, but i don’t understand this “if he doesn’t pay, I assume he isn’t interested” mentality.
Hah, does this video contradict the previous blog about “Too Many Men Hitting on Women who are not interested?” – does that mean that Men should become more passive or should men remain aggressive?
Not unless you are too simple to understand the differences between courtship, chivalry and “creepy stalker.”
One of the definitions of chivalry from The Merriam Webster dictionary: “an honorable and polite way of behaving especially toward women.” Since it was applied to Knights in the middle ages, it’s always applied to men.
That’s a good and general definition and I think it’s important to note that there is also a modern women’s code of chivalry- an honorable and polite way of behaving toward men. No, it’s not expecting women to open doors, pay, call, initiate (initially), etc… It’s taking the feminine role and doing it well. It’s being receptive, ladylike, appreciative, etc- all the things Evan tells women to do in order to make the man feel good about his role in the relationship.
So,,,, chivalry (proper behavior) should be exhibited by both parties in the relationship and should one party decide that the relationship isn’t right for them, they walk. Without chivalry on both sides, the relationship won’t (shouldn’t) even start. The relationship isn’t about chivalry. It’s about all the things that make a relationship.
O –
As a woman, I am not under any “obligation” other than to be a decent human being. Which I endeavor to be, because it matters to me, not because of any perceived benefit I might get from it. I see many people in my life (of both genders) making this effort.
ScottH’s words were appropriate and appreciated. Why shouldn’t we expect, as he says, respect and proper behavior, from both genders?
I wouldn’t bother with a person, of either gender, that failed to do so.
Obsidian 6.1, what do you mean that the right guy simply has to show up, and the ladies will do the rest? Not this lady. As much as I was attracted to the guy who became my husband, if he hadn’t paid for our dates, I would have wondered what was wrong with him, or whether he was romantically interested in me at all. It would have bothered me. And I was no gold-digger. I had pretty much become reconciled to the possibility of living on my own forever, and though I wasn’t making great money I could afford my little studio apartment.
Life involves the acceptance of risk. If you think you were doing “everything right,” and she falls for someone else, that is life. No one gets a guarantee. It happens to women too, who are gobsmacked when THEY think they did everything right and a guy just disappears on her. And we don’t sit back, either. We accept a lot of uncertainty and anxiety in the early stages, when we really like a guy and don’t yet know how things will play out.
“Simply put, for the right guy, he doesn’t have to “court” — all he needs do is show up, and the ladies will do the rest. “Courting” is for the lesser guys in the round, who may be able to convince a gal to go to bed with him, etc.”
Exactly. The way I think of it is, why should I pay for what she’s given to other guys for free?
Okay, McLovin. How is your “don’t call/plan/pay” philosophy serving you? Are you in a great relationship with a quality woman who appreciates you? If not, it’s entirely possible that the biggest problem isn’t courting but either you or your choice of women.
Put another way:
Courting, in and of itself, will not convince a woman to give you a chance if she’s not interested in you. That’s what you seem to think we’re saying. We’re not. On the other hand, courting is behavior demonstrating that you value a woman and take her seriously as a relationship candidate. Any woman who sticks around for the passive guy who expects women to call/plan/pay is either very masculine or has very low self esteem…to think that this is the best treatment she can expect from men.
Point is that it’s a self fulfilling prophesy. You are so bitter that some guys can get laid without effort that you actually sabotage your ability to get a great girl by refusing to be a great partner yourself.
Snark alert…
Maybe for all his faults, McLovin doesn’t believe in false advertising.
Couldn’t resist saying that.
On another note , I am bummed that TDR is not offered in my city. I think it looks like a great way to sift through the excess and get the most out of Match.com
I’m all for men asking and planning dates but I don’t think effort in this area is an indication of a good provider. I think you are much better off finding someone who is responsible, is gainfully employed, has a supportive family, and socializes with the same type of people. Testoserone helps men get over fears of rejection but the hormone doesn’t help men make financial choices in the modern world. Chivalry is great but not if the man has poor impluse control.
Obsidian my friend, I was debating if I would respond to you, but I have upon reflection decided against it.
Because you seem too bitter and angry, so no matter what I say, you won’t actually consider it as I would consider your side of the argument.
But I will leave you with a great quote from David De’Angelo: “Life isn’t fair… and that’s GREAT!”
I love that quote because it means that everything that has happened to you isn’t cosemicly ordained, which means that if you are having a crumy life or a hard time in dating, you can do something about it, YOU have that POWER! You are NOT destined to be where you are in life.
You might be a 5… if you improve yourself as best as you possible can, you still will not be able to get a 9 but you could possibly get a 6 or even maybe a 7. Eat the same meal everyday and even your favorite dish will not be as appetizing to your eyes, looks and beauty are the same way. You can get the 9 but after being with her everyday for a few years, the awe of her beauty wears off.
That is way I chose Evan instead of other dating coaches who focus on just men, because Evan is right, focus on the person who may only be a 6 in looks but is a 10 in compatibility. A woman who “wants to” makes you feel happy everyday, a woman who sees your flaws and still thinks you are special and she treats you as if you are special.
Obsidian, I recently turned 30 a few months ago and 3 months ago I started grad-school. I am surrounded everyday by 18 year olds who could put any celebrity you see on tv to shame. I understand why it is so tempting to choose the 18 year old with her smooth skin, tight firm body, and flat stomach over the 30 and 40 year old woman who has let herself go physically. But spend 5 minutes talking to one of these girls (I look much younger, so everyone thinks I am still 18) and you will gladly trade her looks and body for the older woman.
Unless you are only after sex, then a woman who knows how to put herself first in a none selfish way, will also know how to make a man happy. Trust me, you would be happier with a woman who knows how to make you happy then with a women who is just Hot.
Lastly, I was the shy book worm all through high school and undergrade in college, I was constantly passed over for the hot out going guy. Now years later, the same women who over looked me, have gained weight (I go to the gym), they are working in low level jobs (I make over 6 figures a year), and they have children and the stress associated with being single mothers (I don’t have children and for what it’s worth, my picture got an average 8.8 rating from over 150 votes on hot or not), they stress has aged their faces and the birth has given them stretch marks.
Who do you think is better off? Neither of us! I am not better than them, and I learned that from this website, by listening to the feelings of the female commentors and especially Evan. I was like you on the path to becoming bitter and only trying to date the Hottest women because now I could and it was my way of getting back at the type of women who turned me down. But it was wrong for me to think I am better or to take joy in the suffering of the dating lives of the type of women who once rejected me, they weren’t evil for not being attracted to me.
Obsidian – To a man, Adrian sounds so much healthier than you. Your diatribes are just your truth, not the truth – and they’re just markers of your pain.
Furthermore, regarding the cognitive dissonance of your last paragraph:
There is nothing dispassionate about your approach.
You take a ton of time writing screeds like this all over the internet.
You talk tough like you’re happy – “I’m fucking an 18 year old – I’m a winner.” Sorry, man. You’re not a winner over me and my 46-year-old wife any more than Charlie Sheen is a winner for having a harem of hookers. You know why? You’re not happy. Every word you type is seething with anger. Happy people don’t spend time trying to fight with the world.
You take plenty of joy in starting arguments that accomplish nothing. I sometimes take the time to respond to you, as did Adrian. And you completely fail to acknowledge the validity of his or my words.
Which means one of three things:
1. You’re stupid. I don’t believe this for a half a second.
2. You’re blind. You seem to think that you and your red pill have a monopoly on truth and that people who have other points of view aren’t just different but ‘wrong.’ We’re not wrong, O. Everything I write is backed up by reason, science, experience, etc. That doesn’t deny your experience – I acknowledge your truth. You just never acknowledge mine. Which means that you are either so blind as to think that your worldview is the only valid one – sort of a Tea Partyesque bent, OR…
3. You’re a bad faith arguer. You understand what I’m talking about, but to admit it would be to admit a strength of mine or a weakness of yours. To me, this makes you sound wise, human and reasonable. Bright, conscientious people communicate that way – acknowledging the truth of the other side and offering an alternate point of view that fleshes the world out into three dimensions. In other words, here in reality, you’re right (men are often dismissed by women), radical feminists are right (many men have an unhealthy patriarchal worldview), and moderates like me are right as well. The difference is what we’re focusing on. You’re focusing on being “right” above all and making people submit to your worldview. I’m focused on acknowledging the very real grievances of both men and women and helping people get into happy relationships.
If you’re a men’s rights activist, you may think it’s your duty to stir the pot, get attention, shout down dissenters, troll people who are sensitive to women’s needs. That’s fine. But don’t expect for anybody to take you too seriously – no more than anyone takes one-sided extremists too seriously of any ilk.
You think by dismissing Adrian line by line, you’re scoring points, but you’re not. The only people you’re scoring points with are people who already agree with you. Everybody else just looks at you as an angry bull in the china shop. You may think you’re winning the battle, but by refusing to see other people’s points of view, you’re doing the worst thing of all for your cause – inviting people to dismiss you out of hand.
Sorry, man. As you’d say: the truth hurts.
You make the fallacy of anybody thinking that they’re a 5.
5 men want to date 8 women.
5 women want to date 8 men.
I call it the Matchmakers Dilemma. Everyone overestimates him/herself and wonders why dating is so hard. You acknowledge that women overlook men. You seem incredibly tone-deaf about acknowledging that men do the exact same thing. Yet you say it in every post: “she’s gotta make my dick hard!”
Got it.
For once, just acknowledge what I said and Adrian said: it’s a jungle out there. It’s unfair. Men get overlooked because of height, money, education. Women get overlooked because of weight and age. That’s the way the world works. It’s astounding to me how you’re only attuned to your side and dismissive of everyone else’s plight. But hey, that’s your business. In all seriousness, take care of yourself. And please don’t respond with something snarky, like “I always do.” It’s tiring to be sincere and kind to someone who smacks you every time you try.
Obsidian, Evan is right. You’re showing everyone who you are, and proving his points perfectly.
The part that gets me is all a lot of woman would have to do to raise themselves high above her sister’s on the attractiveness scale is lose 20lbs., but they won’t do it because they don’t have to to get dates.
My circle is full of women 20-40lbs over their ideal weight who could have their pick of Men or be on the cover of Vogue if they just hit the Gym and cut back on the wine… Men on the other hand have to raise themselves on every level, physically, mentally and financially just to bump themselves up to a shot at dating a 5 🙂
“You seem incredibly tone-deaf about acknowledging that men do the exact same thing. Yet you say it in every post: “she’s gotta make my dick hard!””
Evan, you don’t think the OKCupid stats proved that while this is somewhat true, the problem is not equal. The men rated the women on a pretty healthy bell curve, while the women rated men on a much more critical scale, which rated 80% of men as below average. If they had a realistic view of their own SMV, about 50 to 60% of men would have been 3 star or above. That whole thing caused OKC to change from a 5 star to a 1 star rating system. You like or you don’t like. So I suspect that only 20% of the men will get a like.
And wouldn’t this logically fit when you consider that men are much less picky when it comes to having sex, while women tend to be much pickier in who they will sleep with. Thus, after all the fun sleeping with men above their SMV, it would skew their belief as to what their real SMV is, while men would tend overall to be more realistic, though not completely realistic, based on the fact that they don’t have a ton of experience having sex with women over their SMV.
I have to agree with much of what Obsidian has experienced. Many of these woman who might be considered a 5 won’t date a male 5 counterpart or even a 7. My local co-ed gym is full of men 35-60 who while are not model handsome are in good shape, dress well and have good jobs. Some of these guys have taken themselves from a 4 to a 7 through great effort on their part and are perfectly willing to date a 5, but the 5 won’t give them the time of day…
Obsidian,
Let me try to answer that. As I read it, you’re saying that unless you get, (through your efforts at chivalry, self improvement, etc.), the kind of woman (especially appearance-wise) you have in mind, it’s just not worth the effort, at least, not to you. You know, when I got back into the single scene three years ago, I felt the same way. Now, I wasn’t trying to date what you’d call a 9 or 10, by any means (I was 64, so a bit old for that), I wasn’t trying to date women half my age, either; I was trying to find a reasonably attractive women somewhere in her fifties, to early sixties. Now, in the time I was last single, that might have been a realistic goal. It isn’t now; even in that age group, there are few women interested in a man 7-12 years older then themselves: sample email response from a woman of 57 (attractive, maybe a 7 for her age group), “WAAAAY TOO G***DAMN OLD!!!!!!!”. Disappointing? Sure. Now, it hasn’t all been like that; since that time, I’ve met some very nice women; none that turned out to be a real romantic connection for me, but interesting, nonetheless. From your perspective, I suppose any effort I put into those dates was a waste of time; I mean, I didn’t get a long term girlfriend, I didn’t get laid, except in one three month relationship that ultimately failed. So what did I get? A couple of lasting friendships, quite a few very interesting conversations over drinks, or dinner, some fun evenings dancing, some equally fun day outings ; even learned to ride a horse, of all things. In short, I didn’t get what I was hoping for, but I still had fun, that I wouldn’t have had, sitting around, brooding over the frustration of not getting what I wanted, or trying to persuade women who weren’t attracted to me, that they should be, somehow.
I’ve learned a lot; that’s the point I was trying to share, even if I didn’t express it all that well. Yes, it’s hard to empathize with women, when you feel like you have to put on a show for them, while they sit there and judge you; but you know, they have their own insecurities, fears and doubts in dating to deal with too. They have to wonder if we’re who we say we are, what our real intentions are, and yes, they can feel like we’re judging them, too. If some of them have a heart of polished brass, a lot more of them can get hurt, and often do. I don’t claim to understand them; how they think, how they act; but I can read their stories here; and feel the bitterness, frustration, disappointment and confusion; they may say it differently; for all I know, they feel it differently, but I don’t think it feels better or worse to them than it does to us; I don’t think they’re adversaries anymore, just fellow travelers on a road that few find easy. So I’m willing to make a little effort, show a little chivalry, and kindness; when I was growing up it was expected, and I guess I never unlearned it, right or wrong. Like I said, it’s a gift that costs me little, and if it helps put a woman I really don’t know all that well yet a little more at ease, then it’s worth it to me. Then again, I’m not expecting anything (other than common politeness) back, and I almost always get that. You know, when I’m not trying to get anything from a woman except to just have a pleasant time together, dating really doesn’t feel like a major effort at all; if something more comes of it, that’s a bonus; if not, what exactly, have I lost?
Buck25 #10.2, maybe it’s a generational thing, but I am 61 and I loved what you had to say there. I do hope you have found/will find a good woman you can be happy with; she’ll be a lucky woman. You seem to have a healthy take on dating and relationships. Anyway, you made my day better, so thank you.
Obsidian,
I’m trying to figure out what exactly you’re trying to accomplish. You’ve made it clear that the most important quality to you in women is good looks yet you seem perplexed that you can’t attract a quality woman. I’m sure there are lots of women who exist that even you might think are the total package, but for some reason you aren’t able to attract them so you want to focus on the bad qualities and unattractiveness of the women who you presume would be interested in you. It seems like you’re gung ho for a battle of the sexes. Truth is, there are lots of wonderful people in this world; men and women. There are crappy people in this world; men and women. If you want a high quality woman, become a high quality man. Most people do not want to get involved with someone of the opposite sex if they hate their gender, are negative, and argumentative.
You said, ” I think a number — certainly not all or even most, but enough to be noticeable — have decided that it’s better to go it alone, than to pair off with someone who will, by definition, offer a lesser standard of living.”
If that’s your solution…. Good luck! No one is begging you to stay in the game.
Congrats, man. You once again hijacked a thread and made it all about you. All in the name of “debate” where everyone writes long diatribes and yet no minds are changed.
Someone asked me today if I enjoy this. I thought about it for a second. I think I find it “interesting,” but I don’t enjoy it. It’s a fruitless waste of time, as we’ve established long ago. You can continue to write on my blog all you want – I won’t censor you as long as you don’t insult me or my reader directly. I just don’t really see the point.
Good night.
Ronin,
And if “they don’t have to do it to get dates”, who loses? I’m beginning to think, we’ve gotten to a point, as men, where we believe that “we have to do it to get dates” is about the only reason to do anything. Now, it might be a good motivator; I mean, most of us do put a pretty high priority on finding “love, or something like it”; but do we really have to make achieving that objective the end-all, be-all of our lives? Is that the only reason to stay in shape, expand our horizons, or even try to gain little more insight into who we are?
You know, after my divorce, I not only had the usual emotional garbage to sort out; beyond that, I had gotten overweight, stressed out, pretty complacent, and my life was pretty much in a rut. I knew, (and at the time I had no idea just how tough the dating environment can be these days) that I had to make some changes. I did; I worked on myself, engaged in a lot more reflecting than I had in years…hell, in decades. I lost the weight, shaped up, got out and started trying new things, looked at some of my weak points and tried to improve them. Did that get me a lot of more and better women wanting to date me? I’m sure it got me some, but it was’t like there was no room on my social calendar. I felt like you do, for a while; women didn’t seem to feel so much pressure to exert that kind of effort; they must have been getting a ton of attention without it, I thought (judging by response to my emails). It didn’t strike me as very fair; and it felt even worse, when I first read this blog, and promptly got a metaphorical earful of what a lot of fifty-something, even sixty-something, women thought of any and all men my age ( yes, all the usual worst stereotypes of men 65+). It Hurt; here I was, being lumped in with every man my age who hadn’t put in 1% of the effort I had, automatically though of as being every negative thing I had worked not to be; If that’s how women were going to perceive me; what was all the work for? Sure didn’t pay off with them!
Then I noticed something; I felt better: a LOT better; I had more energy; my clothes fit like they should. My outlook and mood were better, and if my life wasn’t perfect, it was a lot more interesting. No, I still didn’t have women clamoring to meet me, but I was having fun. So what did I get, for that work at self-improvement? From women, not much; the same women that wouldn’t even look at my online profile because of my age, height, or whatever… STILL won’t. Doesn’t matter; to them it was a wasted effort; wasn’t and isn’t even worth noticing. To me, all it was is the best gift I ever gave myself! Think I should just undo it? I mean, after all, it didn’t “work”.
Self Improvement should be done for the “Self” and not because it gives you an advantage for dating. My point is that a man can make many great improvements in his health, mentally and physically at 45, but the pickings are slim if he’s looking for his female equvilient within his own age range.
This is what’s so sad about the whole thing. The men who are on the other side of divorce who have done all the hard work are not going to settle for women who haven’t, and the women who dream of such men expect them to fall out of the sky with no effort on their own part.
Ronin,
Exactly! For that matter, a man in good health, (or capable of regaining it) can make considerable improvement in himself at any age; you’re also right that the effort may not bring him great rewards from the women he’s attempting to date. It’s also fair to say that the man who has done that, has ZERO incentive to settle for a woman who refuses to make the same effort.
On the other hand, the rare woman who DOES make the effort makes an impression on me. I’m actually not dating anymore, because I’m in an exclusive relationship with a woman who a few years back was so obese it was quite literally killing her. The difference is, that unlike the whiners, excuse makers and the fat acceptance crowd here, she sucked it up and summoned up the courage to DO something about it. She had to lose weight before she could even have weight loss surgery; she battled until she did it. Result-five years, and well over half her body weight later, she’s more than met her goals, surpassed anything her doctors expected, she’s kept the weight off…and she did it all while going through the end of an abusive marriage and a difficult divorce! She had every excuse in the world to give up and quit on herself, but she never did. She’s transformed herself from “the little fat girl that nobody wanted” to a healthy, beautiful, curvy, very attractive woman, with a smile and personality that lights up a room, and she’s done it with an inner strength like none I’ve ever seen before. There’s a lot I love about her, but her sheer, awe-inspiring courage and determination won my heart.
I’m a big supporter of anyone, male or female who works hard to make positive changes in their lives. There is no guarantee this will help find the perfect person for you, but you will be confident enough to know the type of people you want in your life.
Sadly in this generation of whiners everyone considers themselves a victim of circumstance, all looking for a magic pill or someone else to fix their lives…It’s all pretty simple, quit making excuses, work on being the best you can be, pay it forward and lead by example.
In response to Russell’s comment:
“Well Jenn, this sounds great on paper, but for men the experience is totally different. Most men don’t make 6 figures in income. In this country, men are generally expected to “Call, Plan, and PAY.” Dating 2-6 different women isn’t really much of an option for most guys. Dates can and often are quite expensive. After all, what is the guy trying to do here. He is trying to prove that he is invested, so no, cheap dates aren’t an option.”
If a woman you are interested in declines a date with a man because he invited her on a cheap date, I would guess that the cheap date wasn’t the issue; she simply wasn’t that into him. Sometimes women make excuses for not dating a guy, but they know the real reason for that. If a woman truly declines a date because it is cheap, she isn’t worth a man’s time anyway. A thoughtful, cheap date is much more in my eyes than having an expensive dinner date.
“One blog thread, the women were ranting about all the cheap dates, and I specifically remember one woman ranting that some guy she had high hopes for chose to ask her to meet him at Starbucks for a first date. She stated that she was at a minimum, worth a good meal in a nice restaurant.”
Trust me, if this woman was really into this guy, she would take the starbucks date, especially if they are in the early stages of getting to know one another.
Agreed, Noemi.
What women want more than anything else, when she’s into a guy is TIME. She wants to spend a lot of time with him. Quality time is a common love language for most women. Right up there with words of affirmation.
So Russell, while it stings to be rejected, making it about money is wrong. Hot women (aka women with lots of options) will reject for whatever reason meets her fancy.
So if you’re always feeling like there’s a lot of competition for your dates, which, in essence, is your admitting you’re dating women way out of your league, then lower the league. Start dating women whom you’re neutral about (not ga-ga, not eww-yuck about). Most men are just a culpable as women in misjudging whom they should date. Both want to date someone who “takes their breath away”. Wrong standard. They should date people who (1) they’re ambivalent about, attraction wise and (2) continue to date them until they naturally get off the fence, (“nah, I can’t see him as more than a friend” or “wow! he’s really a great guy!”)
I suggest you try dating that way. Worse comes to worst, you’ll make a new friend. Or you could get lucky and find the woman of your dreams.
But unless YOU’re an 8 or higher, odds are whomever you end up with will not be higher than a 7. And 7’s don’t take peoples breaths away…until after you get to know them.
“So if you’re always feeling like there’s a lot of competition for your dates, which, in essence, is your admitting you’re dating women way out of your league, then lower the league. Start dating women whom you’re neutral about (not ga-ga, not eww-yuck about).”
That’s completely off base. Not the least bit true, neither about me or in theory. If a man is decent looking, and he is dating peers, she is going to have options. Like it or not, there is a big difference between being the person who pays, and the person who only has to say thank you. My point was not that I get rejected a lot. I don’t. I’ve even have very young women in their early to late 20s want to get married. One who is 24, and very cute, keeps messaging me on facebook, every single day. She is sweet and I like her as a friend, but I’m not into that. I realize that it would likely be a lot of fun for a while, but it would also likely not last because of the different places we are in life. Honestly, I would be worried that as Father Time starts winning the battle, she would leave for a younger guy. Not like there isn’t an epidemic of that these days. I would rather have somebody closer to my age that will still be with me since we would both be old at that point. I think 10 to 12 years younger would be my limit.
The point was that many men like to move fairly quickly to a committed relationship IF…IF…he is marriage minded. Once in a committed relationship, he now feels the security he needs to slow down and explore he relationship. No guy who is marriage minded is going to feel safe with a woman who is dating other men. If you don’t feel safe, you don’t feel comfortable investing in her.
I am not rich. Most men aren’t. Many of us also pay child support out of what we make. Thus for us, a date is an investment. It can get very expensive trying to date multiple women, so most men I have known don’t really enjoy dating multiple women at the same time. What you have to understand also, is that just like there are men who will string you along for sex, there are women who will string men along for dates. Who wouldn’t love going out and having a good time when you don’t have to pay? Yes, before anyone says it, I know that not all women do that, just like all men don’t string women along just for sex.
You’re perfectly right, Noemi! Men, as they gather more and more experience, should learn that there’s no point in courting or giving attention to a woman who does not clearly reciprocate a romantic attraction or interest. Therefore, I believe that chivalry and courting should be used by a man only when he already is pretty certain that the woman is into him…
Wrong, Theo.
Chivalry should be practiced at all times on women, even when you’re not dating them or into them. Good men are chivalrous.
If you equate “courting” to “paying for dates” then you’re only focusing on one small aspect of “courting”. Courting is calling. Courting is planning. Courting is showing a woman you like her. Courting is paying for dates.
If a woman likes you the same way, she’ll like whether you take her out for ice cream or to a 5-star restaurant or for a walk on the beach.
So men SHOULD court women he likes.
He should, however, be judicious in how much he spends on those dates. Spending “a lot” of money on a woman who’s not sure how much she likes you, will NOT make her like your more. But spending NO money on the same woman might make her decide against you.
Again, for quality women, it’s NOT how much you spend, but whether you spend on her. Of course, most women aren’t stupid. If you’re a CEO and taking her to McDonald’s, that won’t wash. However, if you’re a struggling musician, she might go “hmmm…McDonald’s?” in her head, but if your company and the rest of the date is good, she’s not going to hold it against you. If you’re a d*ckhead, then yeah, she will hold it against you.
Theo, I think you misunderstood my comments. Chivalry and courting SHOULD be used in the beginning of a budding relationship. My point, however, was that courting doesn’t require fancy, expensive dates. Courting is showing a woman you are interested in her by calling her and planning outings together. It has everything to do with spending time with a woman, whether it’s ice cream and a walk in the park, or enjoying a concert in the park together that has no price tag/small price tag attached to it. My point was that men who encounter women who complain that a man isn’t interested because he isn’t taking her out to a 5-star restaurant should simply move on and find someone else.
Chance, I apologize for that. I totally misread your comment. 🙂
Bye, Obsidian. You can now blog about this experience at A Voice for Men.
Noemi, I never said it mattered how much was spent because it doesn’t matter to me. We have a difference of opinions on how the first few dates should go and that’s alright. In my experience, what I stated has been true for me.
OK, I have to say this. I have been reading the responses here for a long time. What I see it this. It’s quite simple. Women will write a post bashing men. All they want is sex. Older men are garbage. Men can’t handle a strong independent woman. Etc… The posts are very one sided with regularity. And, nobody calls them out except for a few of us guys, and we don’t call out but a fraction of them.
On the other hand, when one of us men do something similar, we are castigated because we didn’t qualify it with, yes, I know women have dating problems too, etc… This mirrors everything many men are feeling in society these days. It’s what prompted Bill Maher to make the statement that in this country, it’s literally politically incorrect just to be male.
When a woman posts her completely negative experience regarding men, the tone her post is received with is generally supportive. Often she is told to leave the zero and get a hero, so to speak. If she is saying that it is all men, she is generally met with agreement. If a woman with 4 kids complains that she can’t find a man, she isn’t told she needs to reassess her SMV because 4 kids is a deal breaker for 90% of the men, and near 100% of the top shelf men. No, a lot of women will say that “She doesn’t have to settle.” Yes, check that blog, you will find a lot of stuff like that. The worst she gets is advice on how to possibly find a decent guy. What she doesn’t get is tough love telling her that she isn’t the same girl that was able to have her pick of men, and that she has to be way way more realistic about her situation. And she certainly isn’t castigated for wanting a top shelf guy.
If a woman complains that she can’t find a guy that can handle a strong, independent woman, she isn’t told that maybe the problem isn’t the men, but her attitude. Maybe she isn’t nearly as nice as she thinks she is. Maybe she’s actually quite brutish in her personality…but she is never told that.
When women just complain about men in general, they are never slapped down and asked what they are trying to accomplish. They are never told to go find some feminist board to post on. Evan does do that occasionally, but he does not read all of the posts so a whole lot of them go unchallenged because fellow female posters rarely if ever outright challenge such postings. As I said, I see a whole lot of back rubbing on the female side.
On the contrary, we men get called out regularly by the men, and of course a woman or two is quick to cheer for him when he does it. Don’t ever see that on the reverse side. But as I said, this largely mirrors what is going on in society.
False. You are summarily ignoring literally hundreds of posts where I tell my womn readers things they don’t want to hear from a man’s point of view.
Put it this way: if you think I favor women, you’re wrong. If you think I favor men, you’re wrong.
As for women readers, it should be no surprise they get bothered by women bashing on a blog designed primarily for women.
If a woman csme to a MGOTW blog to rip on men, she’d be treated even worse. So quit complaining. You come here to stir the pot with largely critical anti woman rhetoric, you shouldn’t expect a hero’s welcome.
Russell 19 – at least your post made me laugh. Out loud actually.
I have not yet met the man of my dreams but neither will I “downgrade” myself as you so kindly say “she isn’t the same girl that was able to have her pick of men?”
Really?
Based on what criteria? Age? Looks? Gravity?
Baloney to your text, really and I’m being very polite.
Reading Comprehension for the win. I was referring to the woman who had four kids and lamented that all those hot guys she was dating didn’t want anything from her but sex. She noted that she was very good looking ad when she was younger, had her pick of men. Before having 4 kids. That’s the point. The hot guys don’t want to marry a woman who already has four kids. Heck, even most average guys don’t. It’s just a fact, and not one that is a mystery to anyone.
Happy I could provide you with a laugh. I get plenty of laughs reading the comments and one should always give back. It’s just the polite thing to do.
Sorry Russell 19.2.1
There ARE hot guys who do like women with kids. I’ve known a few.
It’s possible, isn’t it, that women want sex too?
Absolutely true on both counts Judy. Some men do love kids. But the reality of it is that 4 kids cost a lot of money. It is literally 3 times more expensive to go to the movies vs taking a single woman. Now I am not saying that this would deter every man, but it will deter MOST. The reality is that a woman has to subtract some RMV points for every child she has. I say RMV because I think SMV does not fit because men will sleep with women they would never consider for a relationship, so we need to distinguish between a person’s SMV and their RMV. In my experience, a woman’s SMV is more often higher than her RMV, while for most men, their RMV is higher than their SMV.
This holds true for the woman in the 4 kids blog post Evan did. She had no shortage of men willing to sleep with her, but none wanted a relationship with her. So there were many suggestions for her. Find a guy who loves kids but can not have kids of his own. Find a guy who has a few kids, and thus has the same problem she does, and for their own Brady Bunch. Or find an older guy who likes kids but never had any of his own. Those are a few of her best options. What is not an option for her, period, is those top shelf guys her own age because those guys can and are getting women who don’t have kids.
This meme is how many guys these days feel about the situation. http://i.imgur.com/ZDYzphx.jpg
Now in truth, nobody is really wrong in the first half. The nerd thinks the hot girl is who he wants, and she thinks the bad boy thug is who she wants. But she has kids with the bad boy who either dumps her, or she becomes tired of his crap and dumps him. Now she wants the nerd she ignored because he offers stability and money for her brood. But now that he has found his place in the world, he wants no part of that. If he is smart, he finds the nerd chick he ignored and who was also likely ignoring him because she wanted the bad boy thug too.
This is just a meme and only shows one aspect to this very complex issue, but I do know that most men these days have very little interest in raising another man’s kids. What will convince him to see it differently is a woman who he sees as better than he is likely to find otherwise, and this isn’t just looks. It also involves how she treats him.
I have dared a few women with kids and warn men that it is not for the feint hearted, and that they need to get the idea out of their head immediately that it will be anything at all like dating the women they’ve dated who have no kids. If that is what they expect, it will have zero chance of success. They literally need to be ready to step right in and play daddy the moment the relationship becomes serious, and I also advise pre-marital type counseling to get advice on how to deal with the kids. For instance, he absolutely cannot be the disciplinarian for the kids, especially if they are beyond the toddler years. Even Dr Phil warns against that. I assure you that it will make most kids hate that man.
Anyway, back on topic…yes, some men do love kids, and most women love sex. But a woman with kids must deal with the reality that kids alters the way men perceive her. It is not the same as when she was a hottie in high school, or college, or just after college, and she had no kids. She has to be aware of the fact that this will be a deal breaker for many men with regards to relationships, but not necessarily some dates and sex. If she keeps this in mind, she can make better choices based on what SHE wants out of a relationship with a guy.
It’s definitely dead. I’ve never seen any proof that it’s still alive. I’d like to think there Is chivalrous, respectful men, but I haven’t seen one for years. I mean, yeah, their upbringing probably plays a small part in that, also the way things have gone all modern. I only date alpha men, and always check out whether he is worth keeping. He could look like George Clooney, but if he treats me like garbage, I don’t return. Not every woman or man, is so naive, that they can’t work someone out. I recognise when someone is shifty. They only have themselves to blame. I just hope it comes back to bite them, for not respecting me. After all, love is meant to be mutual, and if you don’t have a strong bond with the person, might aswell leave them behind. They’ll only change if they want you to know how special you are to them. If they can’t actually be bothered to even check that you’re alright, well that’s no relationship. In fact, what even is it? I’m just laughing so hard, because I’m now with a man, who helps me every day. I don’t ask for much. Just respect and effort.
In response to comments like those of Russell #19, I’ll point out that there have been times we women called out and criticised the viewpoints of women who were overly negative/cynical and making unfair blanket statements about men; I have done so, I’ve seen other women do so, and certainly Evan has done so many many times. Similarly, there have been women who pointed out that very often successful women are turning men off with their attitude, Not their good jobs; again Evan has said this many times.
But this is a blog with comments primarily written by women, and unsurprisingly the majority of foolish or overly-negative comments are written by women. There are a Lot of those comments, and we don’t have time or energy to reply to all. We just hope those women read other reasonable comments on this blog that will get them to rethink.
My mother spent the last 5 years of her like an an assisted living facility. She wanted that; a lot of her friends were there, and they enjoyed each other;s company more than living alone. Yes, Sarah, I saw a lot of flirting between some of those old men and old women, most of them well into their eighties or nineties. Most of them seemed to thoroughly enjoy it, and with some of them, there was little doubt that it led to more; it didn’t appear to hurt any of them, and the staff just smiled and pretended not to notice.
Of course, I suppose that if one is inclined to take their own bitterness/indifference/disinterest toward the opposite sex all the way to their deathbed, they certainly have the right to do so. I would think (based on my anecdotal observations) that those NOT so inclined soon find enough like minded company who enjoy their advances, to not waste time on those who don’t. Of course, your mileage may vary…
I am still treated with chivalry but maybe that’s because I expect it and because I behave well with men too.
However, should a man NOT treat me right, he will either be told (by me) or I will just dump him.
Life is WAY too short for bad manners.
Agreed. It just seems more and more people (both genders) have come to see good manners, thoughtfulness, kindness and even common civility, as only as a means to a desired end. If it’s not rewarded, why bother? Why bother? I don’t know; maybe….BECAUSE IT’S RIGHT? Or does that not matter anymore?
Buck25 – because being polite and courteous always helps others and makes society much kinder and warm. for yourself.
It’s not rewarded? I think there is a reward in being polite and courteous, including not letting yourself down and downgrading yourself.
Another thought. I recently met guy number one – slim, well groomed, and attractive (a 5/6 out of 10). He had equal qualifications to man two.
True story I’m afraid.
Guy 2 is seriously overweight but has a lovely personality, is courteous, fun and kind.
I decided to not bother with guy one and will give guy two the break he probably needs.
Had it not been for the courtesy, good manners and fun/intelligence, I would have looked past guy two. But he was interesting and a gentleman (and yes, he can swear and curse and so can I – but there are times when it just is not appropriate)
Judy, I think you misunderstand my point. I was reflecting in that post, an attitude expressed several times in this thread by some (I assume younger) men, and suggesting that instead of looking to be rewarded for good manners. etc. they might consider practicing some measure of chivalry without any thought of reward, simply because it’s the right thing to do. That’s why I put the words “because it’s right” in all caps. I don’t know if “because it’s right” is a fashionable reason these days to do anything(or refrain from doing it), but once upon a time it was, and at least for some of us, it still is.
Let’e take an example from outside the dating world, to help clarify the point. Suppose I encounter a wino on the street, down on his luck and hungry, and I offer him a kind word, and get him something to eat. He has nothing to give in return, and there’s not a soul around to see what I did, much less give me any sort of credit or reward for the act. By the reasoning some have expressed here, I might as well have just ignored him, and walked on by; there was nothing in it for me, after all. Tomorrow, he won’t even remember it; a week from now neither will I. All it represents is one simple act of decency, in a world often too preoccupied to bother. Why would I do it then? Because it was right.
I don’t know how many people would agree with me, in a world where we parse each word and phrase for nefarious hidden meanings, where all motivations are suspect, and many people can’t simply receive an unexpected gift, or even a compliment, without silently asking “Where’s the catch?”
I can only give what I can, whether that’s manners, or a kind word, a compliment, a thoughtful gesture, or speaking the truth as best I know it. Whether another chooses to reward that, censure it, or ignore it is out of my hands. The only motivations and actions I control at all are my own, and I only know one standard to guide those: “Because it’s right”.
Sarah,
Chivalry, as it used to be practiced anyway, isn’t quite dead, but depending on which age group you’re in, you may not be likely to have experienced it.
We have evolved into a culture of “I want it all, and I want it now!”; in which, for most, it’s all about results, and the quicker the better; the process takes a distinct back seat. I know there’s been a lot of progress, but it’s hard to argue that society and social norms have become increasing coarse, crude, and yes, selfish, too.
My own viewpoint comes from an earlier and simpler time, when young men were taught that manners, chivalry and courting weren’t optional in dating; it was expected of us, to do and be less was unseemly, and rude. This was not something most of us even questioned; we knew no better. It’s not that there was no angst in dating; there was, for most people of both genders (as it always has been and will be); but there were “rules”, and and a process, which I remember as being more enjoyable that it seems to be today. I’m sure it wasn’t all idyllic. of course, but it was different.
I hope those practices, which I think still do provide a sort of social lubricant to the dating game, will not find their last refuge among those of us who, with more yesterdays behind us than tomorrows ahead, simply aren’t comfortable acting any other way. I hope there are men among the younger generations, who can still see chivalry simply as a gracious gift, rather than part of a mating strategy that seems devalued to them, in a world where the way of the “bad boy” and the player seems the easier and more likely way to win, in a world where “winning” seems to be everything.
Sometimes I read here, that for a man to be authentic, is foolish; that honor and integrity are naive, that even modest empathy and kindness are the marks of the weak and second-rate among men; that in this age of the the anti-hero, the man who shows any of that will neither be desired nor respected by the women of today. Deceit, a false image, manipulation, “fake it til you make it” seems to be the new order of the day. I think I’ll pass, not because I’m too virtuous (I’m not) but because that’s just not a way I know how to be. At 67, I don’t feel old, but all that does make me feel as obsolete as a fountain pen, or a mechanical typewriter…
Buck 25 – post 24
I just read your comment and understand what you mean and can empathise. However, I would still like to repeat (bang on :o)????) that just because you’re 67, doesn’t mean that good manners don’t count!
I’m also in your age group and quite frankly, a younger man would probably not be the kind of man I would consider (and I’m honest enough to know that he probably would not be interested in me either) but I would certainly listen/while away a coffee/tea/glass of wine with a younger man who is courteous.
If he’s rude at whatever age, just how attractive is that? Seriously.
Some guys don’t even have good manners outside of the bedroom, let alone in it.
Interesting debate with some fine comments, particularly from Adrian. I suppose what we are witnessing here is evolution and survival of the fittest in action in front of our very own eyes.
Having read this blog for a few years now my understanding is that women seem to have two instinctive mating drives: the first is to acquire the highest quality male genes they can (and they feel ‘chemistry’ when they find it) and the second is to acquire the necessary resources to raise the resultant progeny. Ideally these two drives would be fulfilled by the same guy, thus ensuring that he has the requisite motivation to invest his resources into the child, and by extension, her.
Traditionally, as women had no access to their own resources and were bound by social convention (shame was a handy way of controlling paternity prior to the invention of contraception and DNA-testing) they were often prepared (or rather, forced) to make a trade-off on the high-quality genes to access resources. And that was what courting and chivalry was about: demonstrating the ability to provide resources.
Nowadays, however, as women have access to their own resources and are free from stigma they have no necessity to make a trade-off on high-quality genes, therefore, logically, they won’t.
But as a result the guys — like Obsidian – who don’t have those high-quality genes lose out. So these guys are effectively being filtered out of the human race. No matter how hard he works to accumulate resources/improve himself it just doesn’t matter, as women have already decided that his genes don’t cut the mustard.
To compound matters, from his viewpoint, not only do women want their high-quality genes, but they still want to access the resources too! Therefore, his bitterness is understandable. And I do feel for him.
Until…he says that he has plenty of options but that they’re simply not good enough for him. Then I lose all sympathy and realise that he’s just like the rest of us: he’s a toxic maximizer desperately trying to date out of his league.
Tom10,
Your analysis is exactly correct and confirmed by science, I believe. It is also in accordance with the experience of my male single friends and myself. Looks and physical appearence are the main, close to only, factors of attraction, while status and money might have some minor importance for women with limited economic resources. If a woman does not find a man physically attractive early on after meeting him, no amount of chivalrous courting will make her want to have a romantic relation with him. However, if she finds the man hot and sexy, she will desire him and do anything to start a relationship with him, even if he does no courting whatsoever.
Let’s make something clear:
Women PUT up with poor treatment, lack of chivalry, and inconsistency from men when they’re attracted, the SAME way men put up with a ton of bullshit from attractive women.
So, if your complaints about women are that they are selfish, emotional, difficult and always trying to change you, your advice to them would be to stop being that way.
Similarly, my advice to men is that they treat women better, be generous and chivalrous and act consistently.
In other words, just because you can get away with being an asshole and people put up with you doesn’t justify you being an asshole.
That’s a gender neutral statement, by the way.
Evan, it always amazes me how often people’s so called problems in dating and relationships simply stem from the fact that the were never taught basic respect and decency for others. I cannot imagine that 50 years ago a person would publicly state they feel they have to in a sense “get paid up front” for treating their fellow humans with kindness, respect, and empathy because ” what’s in it for me.” This blog and most others are overrun with people who see others as disposable commodities for Getting their needs met but see a gross injustice in being treated the same way themselves.
On on another note, I see Obsiditroll is back. You are a patient man. I’d have blocked him a long time ago.
“If a woman does not find a man physically attractive early on after meeting him, no amount of chivalrous courting will make her want to have a romantic relation with him. However, if she finds the man hot and sexy, she will desire him and do anything to start a relationship with him, even if he does no courting whatsoever.”
Agreed.
However, your advice to men is stop courting. Period.
Evan’s advice, my advice, and the advice of all the other women on the blog is to stop courting women who are out of your league.
Court women in or below your league and you’ll have better results.
And your league is NOT defined by what YOU think you are. Your league is defined by the women who are willing to date you. If most women whom you ask out aren’t interested, then it’s safe to say they are out of your league and you need to aim a league lower. And keep readjusting until you find the league where most women will date you.
This is not different than the advice MEN give to women. A woman’s SMV is NOT defined by the league of men who are willing to sleep with her. A woman’s SMV is defined by the league of men who are willing to COMMIT to her.
Different sides of the same coin. And both men and women are both loathe to acknowledge this.
@ Karmic Equation 25.1.2
“Evan’s advice, my advice, and the advice of all the other women on the blog is to stop courting women who are out of your league.
Court women in or below your league and you’ll have better results.”
Er Karmic, you know I love ya, but why on God’s earth would a guy court women in or below his league? Sure, he can sleep with them without courting; therefore, he has no motivation to court her.
The only reason to court is so that a guy can access higher-quality women: i.e., so that he can date out of his league. So, in his mind, if he can demonstrate his ability to provide resources, he can access women with higher-quality genetics.
But this only works if said woman, simultaneously decides to compromise on chemistry to access his resources. But women won’t do that anymore because they don’t have to.
Which is why we’re here arguing. Gosh, isn’t debating modern dating so much fun 😉
Karmic Equation,
I agree, it is important in dating to be realistic about your SMV, even though it might sometimes be slightly painful. This is certainly a gender neutral statement, that we all need to think about and accept, if we really want a lasting relationship.
Haven’t you ever met a man that you really never thought twice about (ie., no initial attraction), but through certain circumstances (work, school, socializing), you actually get to KNOW this person a little bit, and start to feel an attraction? They might be very average looking but they have an amazing personality or maybe they’re well versed on a variety of topics, which makes them fun and interesting to talk to. There are so many qualities to consider besides just looks it’s hard to believe that grown adults would rule out someone of the opposite sex based on looks alone. I realize that most people aren’t going to give a hideously unattractive person a chance no matter how great of a person they appear to be. I’m talking about average looking people with very attractive qualities. I’ve found a lot of these men to suddenly become more physically attractive to me after I’ve gotten to know them a little.
“Er Karmic, you know I love ya, but why on God’s earth would a guy court women in or below his league? Sure, he can sleep with them without courting; therefore, he has no motivation to court her.”
Tom10, darlin’. You have to know you’re a man coming from the land of plenty. Tall, good looking (assumed from how and what you’ve written in other posts), well-to-do, if not stinking rich (also from indications from other posts), so while you’re a guy, you don’t see it from the life of the “not-hot” guy, like Obsidian.
I gave this some thought and have come up with this theory.
Women don’t like “numbers” because women typically don’t grade men on a numerical scale. Most of us just triage a guy into “Hot” and “Not-hot” categories. Similar to the way men triage women into “Do-able” and “Not do-able” categories. It’s binary. As demonstrated by the OKC survey, basically most women believe 20% of men are hot (equivalent to 8-10 rating) and the other 80% are not-hot. However, within the “not-hot” category, women DO have distinctions, as in “never in a million years” (a 0-4) or maybe, if some of her other criteria such as wealth, status, personality, and/or education are met, which would make him a 5-7. He is still “not-hot” but she’ll give him a chance IF he courts properly. And THEN he can “grow” to be hot in her eyes. That “not do-able” chick never gets that chance. (+1 for men).
The problem is that most men believe they are “at least” average looking, whether they are objectively so or not. Remember, women don’t have an “average-looking” scale. It’s just hot or not-hot, a binary scale. So any man that doesn’t fall into a woman’s “hot” category will HAVE to court her whether SHE is hot or not. That is just how women are.
And yes, the hot guys get special treatment. Just like hot women get special treatment.
So, Obsidian, I’m not being cruel, just stating reality. The 80% of not-hot guys out there need to court to have a chance with any woman who is 5+. Because HOT MEN created those unrealistic expectations. That hot guy *will* slum and bang a 6 and lower when he’s desperate or drunk or both. Leaving that 6 and lower woman to think she has a chance to land a “hot” bf, because golly gee, a few 8s, 9s, or 10s slept with her at least once.
So for all ye men (generic men, not you Tom10 from the land of plenty) who blame women for creating the “bad boy” who doesn’t commit, why don’t YOU tell those “hot” men to stop slumming so “unrealistic, entitled” women who think they can get a man several leagues above her to commit to her aren’t created?
Back to courting.
Agreed. >= 8 men don’t need to court. Women throw themselves at them.
Men < 8 need to court because most women have slept with 8+ men and think that she can land an 8+ guy for a relationship.
And so < 8 men have to be the ones who take risks (almost strictly financial as in paying for dates and making the effort to show he values a woman) during the dating/courting phase BEFORE exclusivity.
But what most men FAIL to acknowledge is that once a woman agrees to exclusivity, he ends up with most of the relationship power, because most women lack the courage to walk away from men who will not or cannot make her happy. She tries continually to make him “change” instead. Most women put up with a LOT of B.S. from men once she commits to him (hence all the bitter and broken-hearted women on this blog).
The fact is that BEFORE commitment, women have the power. AFTER commitment, men have the power.
So I really, really hate it when men complain that women have “too much” power during the dating phase. My ears are deaf to those whines. Because men do have power, but ONLY after they commit. So if they refuse to commit, then whose fault is it really that they “have no power” over a woman?
It’s true the women have the power in STRs and NSAs. But MOST women don’t want STRs or NSAs. They want LTRs. And MEN control access to that.
Agree with everything you wrote until the end. “The fact is that BEFORE commitment, women have the power. AFTER commitment, men have the power…because most women lack the courage to walk away from men who will not or cannot make her happy.”
That is accurate…but it doesn’t have to be. My entire business is about reminding women that they DO have power within the relationship. And anyone who thinks that the opposite sex has all the power is only speaking from a place of disempowerment. Your power is always to walk away.
If a woman walks away from a man who is not courting her properly, or treating her well within a relationship, she may be single, but she won’t be powerless.
Same with the Obsidians of the world who think that women have power and is taking it back by opting out of things like courtship and commitment.
The difference, of course, is that the women who choose to exercise their power will end up in happy relationships with men who treat them well…while the MGTOW crowd will die alone, all because of the false belief that all women are bloodsucking leeches – instead of equal relationship partners.
I have to admit, I am BAFFLED by the people on the extremes – the man haters and woman haters. I do think it’s hard to find someone you want to spend the rest of your life with – but not enough to hate an entire gender and rule out the possibility that there are good folks out there.
Well, you need two people to form and maintain a relationship. So to me, each person in that relationship has an equal vote, since they’re both an equal, 50/50 part of it. Either party can either choose to stay, or walk away, at any given time. In my own relationship, I don’t really see my boyfriend as having “power” over me. I could always walk away from him if I ever wanted to, as easily as he could walk away from me. I have always managed to get good jobs and support myself, so don’t need his money. I have a great group of friends and family I can turn to for emotional support, with or without him. I don’t even necessarily need him for sex either. I got plenty of offers for NSA sex while I was online dating and could still get them now, if I was seeking that out (as I’ve posted on other threads I’ve had men hit on me recently without even trying–there isn’t exactly a shortage of horny men!) It would be nice to have a wedding but, I’m also not so desperate for one that I’d stay with just anyone, just for a ring and fancy dress. In fact, when my boyfriend lately has asked what kinds of ring and wedding ceremony I’d like, I actually stumbled over the words because I hadn’t even given it much thought!
My being with my boyfriend truly is a choice I’ve made. I’m with him because I want to be with him–not because he has some kind of power over me that makes me be with him. I’ve walked away from dysfunctional relationships before, and would do so again here if this situation ever stopped being a happy one (just as it would also be well within his rights to walk if he stopped being happy with me). I would encourage every other woman to do the same.
@ Karmic Equation
Fantastic response. I really like the way you took my comment, had a think about it, and then absolutely nailed it in your response. Which is why I love ya 😉
“Tom10, darlin’. You have to know you’re a man coming from the land of plenty.”
I guess this is a fair point: I’m suppose I’m a bit guilty of sitting in my ivory tower at times. I’ll admit I’m tall and good-looking but I don’t ever remember writing anything about being well-to-do and “stinking rich”. It’s funny what one can infer from simply from the tone of another’s post. The truth is I come from quite a poor-ish background and don’t earn big bucks; a lot less than you in fact. But due to an unusual quirk in the real estate market where I live and good timing (or canny judgement), I have an unusually high net-worth for someone my age (i.e. my house is worth a lot due to a fluke in the market). So women think I’m rich whereas, in reality, I’m not really. But this distinction doesn’t really matter in dating I guess; as all that matters initially is the impression one creates.
My main strength, however, is demographics: I simply live in a city with a disproportionally high number of single educated women between 20 and 35. Bars and clubs often have a 70/30 female to male ratio so I simply have to be better-looking than average to do well. Additionally, women in my country far exceed their male peers in educational and career achievement; therefore the market is very lopsided for smart, attractive women looking for their equal. And whereas it’s great for me: my younger sister really struggles even though she’s better-looking and smarter than me.
But your analysis was excellent. I always thought the dating game was a linear scale: where the 8 guys hook-up with girls who are 6s but then commit to the 8s when he’s ready, the 7 guys hook-up with the 5s and commit to the 7s, the 6 guys hook-up with the 4s etc. However, having read here for some time it seems that in practice it’s more like a logarithmic scale: the 5-and-below guys get almost nothing, the 6s and 7s get some action, but the 8s and above really clean up and get more than they can handle. So I guess if one is an 8 or above they have no way of appreciating what it’s like for regular guys.
Except that I do. Because a significant proportion of the 8s and above weren’t always 8s: some, possibly most, start off as 5s but build themselves up to 8s over time. And I’m one of them. I’ll admit that I’m blessed with a build and face that women like. But the rest I did myself through sheer drive, determination and bloody-mindedness: women are much more complex than simply being turned on by a smiley face and long legs. Much like you did Karmic: you used your sheer intelligence and female guile to transform yourself into a woman that guys love. As confirmed by so many male contributors here.
As a few female commenters pointed out, Obsidian’s main problem isn’t his height or class: it’s his attitude. Whatever about the difficulty of transforming ones appearance; it’s far more difficult to transform one’s disposition, attitude and personality so that it appeals to a large proportion of the opposite gender. But it can be done. And I’m sure all of the successful daters who post here like you, Fusee, Karl R, (when he was here) Sparkling and of course Evan himself! did the same necessary introspective work to successfully adjust their personality to one that attracts a large proportion of people. Many people, including some super-smart people who post here, can’t seem to achieve this.
Your analysis in your reply, along with Evan’s adjunct, was absolutely spot-on so there’s no need for me to add further: there should really be a subject on dating in the education curriculum so that young men and women know how it works before entering, as it is just so complex!
@ Obsidian
Now that I think a bit more about your dystopian prediction of the Western world’s Roman-Empire-esque collapse due to a dysfunctional dating environment that you’ve opined here a few times I actually think that, in fact, it might be going the other way: as our population become ever richer and entitled, thus always selecting for the only the fittest genes when procreating, the population as a whole, and thus our civilization, is actually continuously improving. Through natural selection the population is actually becoming ever taller, more beautiful and more intelligent. Thus future generations will actually be superior to ours.
Your thoughts…?
PS: I’m still eagerly awaiting your vision of a fair dating environment btw…
Tom10 and Karmic Equation, I agree with most of what you both said (Karmic Equation I love your theory on women and looks), but I don’t know how much income can affect your Sexual Market Value.
I still think looks and height are main constants in the dating equation, whereas income level will be a variable. Because if a women is not attracted to you then you can’t even get a first date, regardless if you make 6 figures or not, especially for women who also make 6 figures or who don’t care about your being rich.
So I think the you should do all you can to improve your looks, dress nice, look and smell clean, then focus on improving your personality. In my opinion looks have a ceiling, but personality doesn’t. Both women and men like being with someone who makes them smile and is fun to be around.
Evan always talked about confidence being more important than looks and for the longest I thought he was full of B.S, just catering to possible clients trying to sell them the dream of being average looking and still being able to get a guy or woman who is a 7 or higher.
But one day while reading the comments (I can’t remember which post it was, but I know) the female commenter was bemoaning that fact that a guy she loved left her and she thought it was because she wasn’t as attractive as the type of girls he normally dates. I thought about that for a few days and the answer hit me.
The the guy didn’t leave her because of her looks, he left her due to the way she acted and carried herself because of how “she thought” she looked. He would not have asked her to be his girlfriend if he didn’t find her attractive. Upon re-reading her post it was clear that she thought he was out of her league and did not act with confidence, so I began to think about confidence and what was attractive about it.
A confident (not arrogant) person is happy, and being around them makes you happy because they always have positive energy, they say and do positive or fun things. They make you smile, WHICH! Makes YOU feel good about yourself and makes you feel good hanging around them, so you want to be around them more and more. Being around someone who you always feel warm, and are always smiling, and laughing out loud with, is more fun to be around. You feel comfortable, relaxed, not guarded or on edge around them.
For most of us regardless of if we are a 10 or 2 in looks, once we find someone who makes us feel that good just being around them, we won’t care about their looks or as many women on this site have said, that 5 will start to look like a 8 to us. This is why I now say that we men should look for women who love themselves and know how to put themselves first (in a none egocentric way), because a person who loves their self more will not let you mistreat them, but it also means that she will be emotionally healthy enough to do all the things Evan advises like, choosing the man who is a 7 in chemistry (looks) and a 10 in compatibility (your values and goals are insync) over the guy who is a 10 in chemistry and only a 7 in compatibility.
So first off sorry Evan, you were right about confidence being more of a aphrodisiac than looks. Secondly, I am not saying that if you are confident, fun, and a positive person but you are a 3 on the dating Sexual Market scale in terms of looks that you can get a 10 to commit to you, what I am saying is that, if you are a positive confident person, who loves yourself; you have a better chance of getting a person who is on a higher level in looks than you. But remember looks fade, personality and the way a person treats you is a constant.
Regardless of what people like Russell, Obsidian, and others say, I see older women, overweight women, and women with kids, all with good looking men that have good jobs, and I can tell from the way they interact, that these men aren’t just using these women for sex. Being confident, not arrogant, and being a fun person to be around is something that I have started to work on more, whereas in the past, I just focused on improving my looks and my wealth, but I was still single.
…
The reason I will not reply to someone like Obsidian is because he gets angry when women who are 6s and higher overlook him because he is a 5 but he said that he would be Stupid to date a woman who is a 2, because she is beneath him!!! Really!!!! To say you aren’t attracted to someone is understandable, but to think another human is beneath you because of the face they were born with (something for the most part they can’t control) is just…
Anyway, I refuse to engage him, this was a great post by Evan that got mutated by some people who didn’t come to learn, but to attack and vent their anger with dating.
…
Evan, since you have a women in the video with you, have you ever thought about doing scenarios instead of just talking? Since watching you talk is pretty much like just reading what you write, maybe you can get a few more miles out of these videos with acted out examples of what you mean… Just a thought.
@ Obsidian #25.2
“The flaw in your argument is that you presume that I want your or anyone else’s sympathy; I can assure you, I do not. Indeed, I am of the view that such overtures are highly overrated. Justice will suffice.”
Well, what do you perceive as justice? When the women who spent their prime years sleeping with the “Mr. Bigs” come looking at you, you are well in your rights to ignore them. Is that not justice? Why the bitterness though; just keep it moving.
“Anyway, and more to the point: what good would it do for me to, for example, attend the highschool prom with one of those homely, goofy looking girls my mom and sisters were trying to foist on me — given that I had no sexual attraction to them in the least? What would be the upside to that? How would that be fair, decent or humane, to any of them? I did them a huge favor of telling them outright that I had no desire to be bothered with them; we all know quite a few men and boys who would have done the deed simply because a warm body with a pulse in their minds, beats a blank.”
Well I suppose this is what marks you out as an outlier. Many, if not most, guys I know would rather have sex with a “homely, goofy looking” girl rather than have no sex at all. In fact the relative ubiquity of prostitution world-wide would lend me to believe that a significant percentage, if not most, guys would be prepared to compromise on sexual attraction (or ‘chemistry’) in order to have sex. Clearly you differ.
It’s just very difficult for me to understand your complaints about women refusing to compromise on chemistry, when you are guilty of the very same thing yourself!
“Moreover, if you have no sympathy for my position, then surely you have none for the scores of women who are in similar situations, yes? I would think even moreso, since I’m a relative outlier among guys.”
Well, for consistency, I guess I don’t really. The “scores of women who are in similar situations” also have options, but they don’t want those options, for the same reason you don’t want your options.
But Evan has consistently advised women to compromise on chemistry if they want to find meaningful relationships. But they really struggle with it because this involves fighting their biology.
“One thing no one wants to admit is this: if “leagues” and “scales” are real, with the higher numbers representing higher mating quality, then the inescapable conclusion must be, that the lower numbers have to represent by definition, lower mating quality — less sexual satisfaction, less companionate satisfaction, just less of nearly everything.”
Well, yes, it seems harsh, but that’s how I see how dating works in today’s brutal world. In fact, that’s how I see how nature as a whole, works.
“How is that “right”?”
Non-sequitur. What has what is “right” got to do with dating? Who said it has to be “right”? The same could be said about anything in life; sports, intelligence, music etc. Some people are lucky and just born with certain attributes and that’s life. What matters, however, is how you play the hand you were given, rather than complain about the actual hand, per se.
“I think this will be one of the fundamental questions humanity will have to honestly grapple with in the 21st century, and I just may be ahead of the curve in this regard.”
I think this is a reasonable point: due to the demographic, societal and technological trends over the last half-century, dating behavior has irrevocably changed. Darwinism has been, in essence, fast-tracked and there seems to be casualties, whose plight we are only finding about here on the internet.
“We cannot say that ours is a better, more actualized age, when so many people are so woefully unable to achieve it.”
Not with a straight face, anyway.”
Churchill’s phrase “It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried” springs to mind.
What do you propose would be a fairer dating-world in the 21st Century, Obsidian? Should women once again be deprived of the opportunities to have an education and employment? Should women be forced, by some sort of government decree, to compromise on chemistry, so that it’s “fair” on the guys who can’t generate it? Would you like if a government forced you to compromise on chemistry?
So, Obsidian, what does your dating utopia look like, where it “fair” for everyone? I’m all ears…
I have to ask, just how would the government force people to “compromise on chemistry”? Would government officials be armed with mind-reading technology, to make sure women are really compromising? Now I’m getting curious about how this utopian (or perhaps, dystopian) society would work!
Tom, Let me preface what I’m about to say with this disclaimer; I’m no longer in the dating game, online, or otherwise. I recently found a relationship in the real world; I hope this means that I have left the dating scene for the last time; given my age, and my experience over the last three years, there would be nothing there for me to return to. So personally, I don’t have a dog in this hunt anymore. I can only relate what my experience has shown me.
I do think it should be pointed out, that you and Adrian are not exactly average guys. Both of you, by your own accounts and statements, firmly fit into that fortunate 10 to 20% of men who do not have the dating problems most men do. My congratulations on whatever combination of work and good fortune placed you in that select group that all women, from the most beautiful to the homeliest, can be and are physically attracted to. I would point out that it is a good deal easier to be gracious, and understanding of women, from your position; I hope you will acknowledge that position is quite different from that of the other 80 to 90% of men, whose dating life is one of nothing but rejection, and whose best hope is that with enough effort, some woman might actually come to “love” them (though never in the same way she would love a man she is really attracted to). No woman, in short, can or will give to them the unconditional love and passion she would so eagerly bestow on you. It’s not just women who are “out of their league”, they have no hope of ever having ANY woman feel for them what she would feel for you! That is precisely what the women here have revealed about how they really feel about men, and I have no reason to doubt either their sincerity, or their complete inability to feel otherwise. In addition, you have stated ( and Adrian has implied) that you both live, dating-wise, in what we might call a “target rich environment” where you not only have that gigantic advantage, but a copious supply of eligible women to boot; the best situation you could be in. The “unlucky 80%” of men (Obsidian, who you and Evan have savaged here, being a case in point) enjoy NEITHER of your and Adrian’s rather considerable advantages. I’m not judging that, just clarifying that your view is the one from the mountaintop, rather than from the bottom of the abyss. I hope you recognize there is a distinct difference.
The average man’s view of this may not be your reality; once upon a time when I was young it wasn’t mine either. In my thirties, I didn’t have the height (I’m average, at 5’9″) but I was a very fit physical specimen, and that was enough to get the rest of what I had going for me a foot in the door. I didn’t get to date 10s, but I wasn’t trying to, and I had some pretty attractive women actually pursuing me. I mention that only to illustrate that I too had my time of abundance; and I am grateful for having had it, as it’s something most men will never know (most of them because of factors beyond their control).
When I emerged back onto the dating scene at 64, things were very different. My personality hadn’t become less, neither had my accomplishments; and if I was no longer a defined mass of young muscle, I still had a flat stomach and a pretty decent level of fitness for a man my age. I was more realistic than to try to date much younger women; I was quite content to leave the under 50 women to their own age group. What I swiftly found, online anyway, is that I was completely invisible to most women, even in their fifties and sixties, except for the ones who had so let themselves degenerate into obesity, that, even if I could have forced myself to be somehow attracted, they could not have kept up with me on my morning walk, much less my usual activities. (Try imagining a 50+ woman some 50 or more pounds overweight on a zip line or a downhill ski slope, much less a ten mile hike over mountain terrain to a scenic overlook; routine activities for me; impossible for them). I’m not in a major metropolitan area, so try to imagine the limited pool of potential dates available. Unfortunately, those few fit and active older women haven’t changed what attracts them visually, and since a man my age can’t be that, my end result was not so different from Obsidian’s experience. There is virtually no market for a fit, active man over 65 online (with pictures to prove it); doesn’t make any difference what one puts in a profile, no matter how well-written, if no woman fit enough to enjoy life with said man will even bother to look at it. A personality, however evolved, is worthless as an attractant if never even seen. So excuse me if I have some real empathy for the average schmuck, now that age has put me in his shoes for three long hard years.
I’m a lucky one. Not only did I have my day, even now I got lucky meeting a wonderful woman in real life, where a man who doesn’t have perfect looks still has a slim chance to shine, if he can. Personally, I have nothing to be bitter about. I can’t help but wonder, though, about the average man my age who loses a life partner, through death, or divorce. With all due respect to you and Adrian, and Evan, his prospects, especially online, are bleak to non-existent, and the more fit and active he is, the worse he will feel it. I don’t see any way to alter that. In the end it doesn’t matter who’s to bless, or who’s to blame; it is, what it is.
Buck,
Women don’t value “fit” in a man as much as she values “handsome face”.
For example, men have the term “butter face” for women with great bods but less than appealing faces. Women don’t have an equivalent term for men. He’s either hot or not-hot in totality.
And for most women, “hot” starts at the face, not the bod. So if a guy has what she considers an attractive face, she can usually overlook flaw in his body: lack of fitness, e.g., beer belly; bald; too much body hair; too little body hair, etc.
However, if he doesn’t have an attractive face, no matter how fit the bod, she’s going to have tough time feeling attracted to him.
So if I could counsel men in one thing, it is that he needs to make sure that his face is attractive. So groom those unibrows, nasal, and ear hairs. Get a nice hair cut. Bald graciously, as in go totally bald or get a nice trim on what hair you do still have – don’t wear baseball caps to cover up the baldness. Find a hair style that works with your male-pattern baldness. Get rid of the double chin — at my dermatologist’s last week I saw a poster about an injection that gets rid of “sub-mental” fat (double-chin fat), etc. Fix crooked or yellowed teeth. Dermabrasion. That kind of thing.
A nice bod doesn’t hurt, but it’s the nice face that gets you in the door with women.
Karmic,
Insightful and kind, as I have come to expect from your posts. I see I must be really getting obsolete, as I had not heard the “butter face” term before; as I recall, the term from from my younger days was “brown bag” meaning the girl was doable, as long as you put a paper bag over her head; I suppose that one lost currency with the coming of plastic grocery bags 🙂
If it’s mostly face I guess that explains it for me; just not the right facial symmetry, I suppose, since I still have most of my hair (slightly receding), stay pretty well-groomed (yeah including the nose, ears and eyebrows), still have my teeth (relatively white, too) and no noticeable acne scars ( I do have a couple other scars from halfway round the world a long time ago, but not terribly disfiguring; at least those didn’t seem to put off women in my earlier days. My current girlfriend doesn’t mind so I guess it doesn’t matter anymore. I think, in the online environment, it was more calendar age than anything else; reverse match searches showed few women under 70 interested in a man 65 or older. I never found one woman over 60 who could come even close to keeping up with my activity level, and I can’t adapt to a sedentary lifestyle, or a celibate relationship, which a lot of women my age and up seem to want. It’s ok; in that milieu, I’m an apparent oddity for my age, one that makes me simply a product without a market. In my case, I don’t know that some reconstructive work would have mattered much. When most women of 62-63 cut their preferred age off at one year older than themselves, well, I have to wonder if the slight improvement would have made any significant difference, since I was being effectively screened out anyway. Thanks for the suggestions all the same, and perhaps they may help someone else a year or two below the magic number. 🙂
Butter face = But her face 🙂 — as in, She’s got a hot bod, but her face…
The first time I heard it was on a Law & Order episode. And I had to ask a male friend what it meant.
And yeah, if you looked like Sam Elliot or Sean Connery, you’d probably have had your pick of women.
Facial symmetry is an attractant for women the way hot bods are for men.
@ Buck25 #26
Some reasonable points Buck, although I thought I’d addressed most of them in my previous comments. It’s interesting to read from the perspective of someone who has dated from a time and place very different to my own.
“It’s not just women who are “out of their league”, they have no hope of ever having ANY woman feel for them what she would feel for you”
But is this actually true? Obsidian mentioned that there were women he could have dated. But that they were “one of those homely, goofy looking girls”. This is what struck me. If I was in his boots — and I was — I would have considered one of those girls, as I would have had no choice.
He seems to be annoyed with women for spending their prime years sleeping with the “Mr Bigs” and then coming to him once their time begins to run out. Yet he spent the very same time looking for his “Ms Big” ignoring the women who wanted him, becoming bitter and upset with the ones who ignored him. Buck, as a reasonable and balanced commenter, can you not see the logic disconnect?
If he doesn’t want to date these women once they’ve given up on their Mr Bigs he doesn’t have to: no-one is making him. What’s he so bitter about? Well it seems he’s bitter that women can sleep with Mr Bigs whereas he can’t sleep with Ms Bigs. But that’s not the fault of women, that’s the fault of nature. Don’t blame the playa, blame the game and all that…
As an aside, with women now changing their dating behavior and filtering for looks/genes/chemistry like never before, I wonder if the proportion of good-looking guys will steadily increase from that oft-repeated 20% statistic into future generations? Thus, things might be a bit rosier for the majority of guys in the future? Hmm…just a thought.
“In addition, you have stated ( and Adrian has implied) that you both live, dating-wise, in what we might call a “target rich environment”
But could this strength not be achieved by anyone/everyone? I’m always amazed at how many people comment here about the disadvantageous gender ratio is where they live. And I always just think, well, um, why don’t you MOVE then, to somewhere with a ratio that’s in your favor?
Or is that being simplistic? I realize that people have lives built where they are, but for such an important aspect of life could they not move — even for a period of time?
“I can’t help but wonder, though, about the average man my age who loses a life partner, through death, or divorce.”
Well it’s very difficult for me to respond as it is way out of my zone of experience. All I can say is that it appears — from comments here – to be more difficult for their female contemporaries due to gender ratios. Therefore, if guys at that age can get their act reasonably together they should have no problem finding a partner. I’ll report back in 40 years 😉
Tom
In no particular order, some thoughts on your comments.
Move? Not in the cards for me. Maybe if I was 20 years younger. I live on a large, beautiful lake; water, sky and nature all around. I’ve been an outdoorsman all my life; the concrete jungle of a city, exciting as it is, makes me feel closed in after a few days. I can exist in that environment; I can’t LIVE in it. I made my home here on purpose; I live on land my ancestors walked 250 years ago. I’m Southern, Tom, and some of us have an attachment to the native soil that’s just visceral; if you’re not of our culture, you wouldn’t understand, and that’s ok.
As for Obsidian, yeah I see the disconnects; but bear in mind that as an African American, he lives in a subculture where Black men as a group have been demonized, shut out and marginalized in a way you and I could never imagine, and not just by the larger society, but by (especially by) women of their own ethnicity. Lots of reasons; a matriarchal culture, (in part because of a welfare system that long encouraged absentee fathers), low expectations, and so on; it’s a sad reality for those men and difficult to overcome. Degrade himself further (in his own eyes) or opt out; from his vantage point, that’s his choice; either way he still loses
That’s an interesting theory you have about generations to come. Of course, we have to remember that one’s physical characteristics are not absolute predictors of the genes he/she will pass on to offspring, so I suppose genetic testing to determine which individuals and couples were most likely to produce the new generation of Ubermenschen might work better, if that’s the desired goal. I have to say that in my mind, that has some unpleasant associations; I do hope everyone recalls, that some 75 years ago, the Nazis tried to produce the perfect new Master Race, by breeding their most physically superior appearing SS troopers with their most physically superior appearing “Aryan” women. As I recall, neither the experiment, nor the ideology that prompted it, worked out very well. Which raises this question: is this current iteration “progress”, or proof that no truly bad idea ever dies? That’s for you young folks to sort out; I won’t be around to see the result, good or evil.
On your last point, the overall population demographics, SHOULD shift the balance in favor of men. At least in the online environment, that does not seem to happen. It could be that the gender distribution online is skewed in the older age group, with fewer women and a higher percentage of men electing to participate. I do know there’s at least anecdotal evidence that women in that age group are less likely to remarry after death of a spouse, where men most often do , and often within a year or two. That could represent either a scarcity of men in the age group, OR, the possibility that older women handle being alone and single better than older men. in part because of a support network among their female friends, for which men have no counterpart. In other words they have less emotional need for a man in their lives than a man has for a woman in his. Of course, I believe even you or Evan would acknowledge, that while a man my age can easily find a woman that looks at least vaguely (in many cases, very vaguely) female, that’s of little use if she’s simply not fit or healthy enough to share the man’s lifestyle, whether or not he forces himself to settle for what she looks like, if indeed he can.. When I was dating online, I had a simple test for this. If the woman had any positive attributes on first meeting, and showed interest, I made the second date joining me on my daily walk- five miles, up and down hills, no stops, at military cadence. I find that quite easy; I’ve been doing it for years, and can carry on a conversation while doing it. The oldest woman I met who even completed it, AFTER I slowed down and waited for her, was 55 years old at the time. Not one woman over 60 made it even half way, despite claims from several that they “work out every day”. Never mind “chemistry” , attraction, or lack thereof, that’s someone who couldn’t even be a companion to me, let alone a sexual partner. Still think I’m too picky? Nice to know women online consider me “genetically unfit”, all the same.:-)
“I made the second date joining me on my daily walk- five miles, up and down hills, no stops, at military cadence. I find that quite easy; I’ve been doing it for years, and can carry on a conversation while doing it.”
If you’re using a 5 mile hike as a “shit test” to vet your women, Buck, despite all your eloquence, I’m afraid you’re still missing it. Your uphill hike test is as narrow minded, short sighted and shallow as a woman asking a guy to fix her sink or see if he gives her a fancy piece of jewelry for Valentine’s Day as a means to determine whether he’s worthy.
In other words, you can have a perfectly happy marriage if your wife doesn’t walk with you every day. It’s exactly what I tell fit women about guys with a bit of a gut. But everyone is so narcissistic to think that they deserve someone just like them but better (and without your flaws). Again, not how relationships work. I used to think my wife had to read literary fiction because I did. She doesn’t. I used to think that I needed to be with a liberal, Jewish, atheist like me. My wife is none of the above. So stop looking to date your clone, my friend. Choose a woman who accepts you, appreciates you and admires you – and treat her like gold. That’s a happy life.
@ Buck25 #26.2.1
Thanks for your well-considered response.
“I’m Southern, Tom, and some of us have an attachment to the native soil that’s just visceral; if you’re not of our culture, you wouldn’t understand, and that’s ok.”
Fair enough; I’m from a culture with a long history of travel and emigration, so spending large periods of one’s life in different places all over the world is almost the norm. Therefore you’re right, I probably wouldn’t understand.
“bear in mind that as an African American, he lives in a subculture where Black men as a group have been demonized, shut out and marginalized in a way you and I could never imagine”
Okay, another good point: I have no way of appreciating his experiences. Perhaps, on second thoughts, my tone to him was a bit harsh (yikes I didn’t mean to sound “savage”) but I’d still like to see what his — or anyone’s – vision of what a “fair” or “right” dating world looks like.
That said, I certainly don’t come from a position of privilege either, and despite having a few “dating” advantages, I have had other severe disadvantages to deal with in life. However, I refuse to allow them hold me back. In fact, I see over-coming obstacles as a strength, rather than a hindrance
Now that you say it, my theory about mating selection does have a slight taste of eugenics and other unpleasant associations. Perhaps I should keep one that under wraps from now on. Hmmm.
“Which raises this question: is this current iteration “progress”, or proof that no truly bad idea ever dies”
Well I guess that’s one of the themes worth exploring here on this blog. I guess time will tell…
Having thought about it for a while I think it goes in cycles. Another fatal STD could appear in a generation and suddenly sexual behavior and gender dynamics will quickly change. Or another war. Or another political/religious ideology. When one looks at the frescoes in Pompeii it becomes clear that we’re no different to people who lived a long time ago…
As an old man once said: “the thing with you kids these days is you think you’re the first ones to ever discover sex”
“When I was dating online, I had a simple test for this. If the woman had any positive attributes on first meeting, and showed interest, I made the second date joining me on my daily walk- five miles, up and down hills, no stops, at military cadence”
I dunno man, that doesn’t seem like much of a fun date to me. Although I guess I’m still at an age where I’m trying to bed her asap, therefore a 5 mile military hike would be the last thing I’d consider doing on a date. But I’m glad it worked out for ya 🙂
“If the woman had any positive attributes on first meeting, and showed interest, I made the second date joining me on my daily walk- five miles, up and down hills, no stops, at military cadence.”
Well, there’s your first clue they’re desperate. Unless the woman is a fitness fanatic, I don’t know too many women who would agree to that on any date, never mind a 2nd date.
And if you DON’T tell those women that’s what you’re planning, and instead say something like “How about we go for a little stroll on our date?” Then wouldn’t you be guilty of lying to them? Wouldn’t that be an indication of some nefariousness of YOUR character?
Anyway, the hike test is silly. And you pretty much guaranteed that you wouldn’t find a mate that way. And since your current gf used to be morbidly obese (perhaps when you met her? or had she already done the work and was slimmed down by the time you met her?) — If she had been morbidly obese when you met, wouldn’t she have failed your test? Or perhaps died while trying to pass it?
And if she didn’t pass that test, wouldn’t you have missed out on the wonderful woman you have as your partner now?
That is the point Evan’s making. Shit tests are just shit tests.
The only way to get to know someone is to spend time with them and being open to who they are.
Buck25, I apologize for replying to late to you, ever since I went back to grad school to get my PhD, I’ve been overwhelmed and had little time for my guilty pleasure that is visiting this site.
I’m not stating that men do not face hardships in dating, especially if he isn’t that attractive. But when you commented on my and Tom10’s looks, it seems you neglected the parts of our post where we both mentioned that our looks didn’t help us much in the dating world.
It was only when I (and I assume Tom10 as well) started to actively make an effort and put in work to get dates and girlfriends, that things started to change in my dating life. The work I’m talking about is what Evan and Karmic Equation keep defending… courting.
Looks aren’t a magic solution to the problems of dating, they are only a part of a set of tools needed to be successful in the dating game.
Adrian,
Looks may not be a “magic solution”; one does need a little more; confidence and some semblance of charm , for starters. Those aren’t that difficult, really. I’ve seen plenty of guys very average in intelligence, and pretty deficient in real character, courage and achievement do just fine., IF they had height, (6’+), a handsome face and a modest amount of confidence and charm. However, I have seen many men who had everything BUT those first two characteristics have difficulty even getting a date with average to slightly below-average women. There, character, achievement, integrity, impeccable dress and grooming , a background in actual leadership, and even charm seems to be second(or lower) order characteristics which even mature women did NOT appear to notice, if there was any handsome man over 6 feet tall around. So whatever else you do or don’t do (don’t know you, don’t judge you), if you pic is drawing 8.8 ratings, you ARE at a considerable advantage over any of the rest of us, who don’t look like that, and you (and any similarly advantaged man) retain that advantage, even if another man is your unquestioned superior in every other respect, but your “inferior” in height and looks alone. I don’t begrudge you your good fortune, like I said before, but don’t act like we’re all playing on a level field, because we obviously are NOT.
@Tom10,
You know, your compliments are going straight to my head…as well as my heart. Thank you, dear Tom.
A male friend of mine who’s divorced but now has been in a happy relationship for 3 years, says to me one. “You smell so good!” And I looked at him and said “Thank you. I think R (my bf) can’t smell anything. He’s never told me I smell good.”
Him: Doesn’t he know the rule? Do something nice and say something nice every day to your girl. She’s happy, you’re happy, right?
Me: Yeah, that’s right. You should tell R that rule. He didn’t get that memo!<with a laugh>
You compliment your future wife with fulsome, heartfelt compliments like that regularly and she’s going to adore you for the rest of her life.
Karmic,
I couldn’t respond directly to your reply above, but just to clarify, those women who I gave the “walk test ” to, ALL CLAIMED (operative word) in their profiles, and subsequent conversation via email and phone, to be athletic, active women who worked out regularly and enjoyed a high energy lifestyle. ALL had comments in their profiles about “NO couch potatoes wanted” and similar, and most if not all made some reference to being tired of men lying about their height, weight, activity level, etc.. That last is especially interesting (and I can think of a few other words, as well) considering, that, in each case, the woman who showed up for the first meeting was obviously not as she had described herself (in fact, these had done in their own profiles, exactly what they had berated men for doing).
Evan already pointed out that virtually everybody lies online; there’s just one little problem. I don’t. I guess that makes me stupid, not to add a couple inches to my height, take six or seven years off my age, but I’d feel like a fraud doing that, so I didn’t. I never put anything in my profile that wasn’t true.
Now Karmic, if these women had been who they said they were, that little walk would have been just pleasant exercise for them; as I said, it’s part of my normal routine. The point, my dear Karmic, was less about obesity/lack of fitness; than it was about deliberately (and pretty extensively), LYING about it.
Actually I hadn’t met my girlfriend back when she was going through her struggles with her weight. By the time we became acquainted she was working at a firm I do business with, she was still losing weight, but all of the worst of it was behind her. Neither of us was even available to date; I had recently separated from my now Ex, and she was just beginning the divorce process herself. We became friends who occasionally chatted over a quick lunch or a cup of coffee; and for almost two years, that’s all we were. She knew I did a lot of active stuff, and would ask me about it in conversation; what was it like to do some of the things she hadn’t been able to try before; to ski, to parasail, to zip line, or go rafting: And so I told her, as best I could, and eventually, this year, I started showing her, one thing, and then another. She had a blast…and so did I! As the months went by, we started enjoying each other’s company more and more, and you can guess the rest. Now true, she had already lost most of the weight when we first met: I only know that part of her life from the story and old pictures she’s shared with me; but unlike those woman who would rather lie about their weight than try to change, she had the courage to actually DO something about it, and she did. She dared to do the work to become the woman she wanted to be, and became more than she even imagined. I love the way we enjoy all the fun we have now, but she is without a doubt the toughest, most determined, most courageous woman I’ve ever known; and yet, she’s as utterly feminine and gentle as a woman can be. She’s one pretty amazing package. Oh, and the walk? She’s done it with me many times. The first time, she wanted to just see if she could do it… and when she made it, she had the biggest smile on her face; just utter joy in accomplishing something that for most of her life, she couldn’t have done at all; but then, that’s how she is, every time she conquers a new challenge. Sharing those moments with her, is just…awesome!
That was a long explanation without answering my question:
Did YOU lie to those women?
I think you did.
So if we applied that “liars have no character” filter to you, then you have no character, then, right?
Why were you so angry at those women? Other than lack of self-awareness and suffering from hypocrisy, did those women do anything to YOU to deserve that lesson you decided to teach them?
Would teaching those unfit, lying women a lesson really have punished the women you were truly angry at? The good looking, fit ones, who bypassed you on their way to someone younger and better looking?
Karma doesn’t work that way, Buck. Do good and be good and good things come your way, eventually.
Take it upon yourself to punish other people for whatever unforgivable sin you think they committed? Karma looks askance at that and punishes the punisher.
So don’t do it. Have pity on them instead. Avoid them if you can. Because hypocritical and un-self-aware people can be toxic and very likely will never find happiness.
Karmic,
No, I most certainly did NOT lie to those women, not a single one of them. I had told every one of them, both in my profile at the time, and directly again when I issued the invitation, that the walk was part of my daily routine (100% true), that I found it easy and enjoyable (100% true) that I usually finished in an hour or less (100% true) and the distance. Whether they believed what I told them, I can’t answer for, but I clearly was not joking. In several cases, I was frankly surprised they agreed to join me, but they did; what motivated them to do so is a matter for speculation; for all I know, perhaps they thought they could do it.
Interesting, all the same, that you pretty much called me a liar, not because of any indication of dishonesty on my part, but simply because I used a method you disapprove of for dealing with proven liars. Do note, that every single one of those women had every right and opportunity to decline my invitation. I note a lot of hypocrisy on this issue of lying, among the population of women online; I saw a constant stream of righteous female indignation, often in all caps in their profiles, condemning men in the harshest terms for (of all things) LYING , in their profiles, emails, etc. That’s fine, except those same women were willing to condone the very same behavior by other women, and indeed, in most of the cases we’re discussing my response to at the moment, by THEMSELVES! I’m sorry, Karmic, those who demand total honesty from the opposite gender, while asserting for their own gender and themselves an absolute right to lie whenever it suits their fancy, have neither a leg nor a moral compass to stand on, and if they fall on their face (with or without my assistance), have no one to blame but themselves.
As for anger at the younger, fitter women who didn’t respond, you’re assuming that, but why? A few did; there was simply no mutual attraction, but that’s neither my fault nor theirs. As for the rest, the word would be disappointment, and some frustration, that more didn’t respond, but that’s all. I’m not privy to their decision making process, or their wants, beyond what was expressed in their profiles. Since there’s no feedback, I can never be sure why, nor does it really matter why, they chose as they did. I think about the worst you could say, is that I took out some of my frustration on some obvious, deliberate liars. I make no apologies for that; not to them, and certainly not to you; I’ve not wronged you, nor for that matter, anyone else who didn’t clearly deserve it.
I have to wonder, whether you’d be quite so outraged at a woman who similarly “shit tested” men, who appeared to be less than congruent with their claims for themselves. Given the well-known and very widespread prevalence of women “shit testing” men for all sorts of reasons (damn near universal, in my experience over many years), I’d be very surprised if you were in fact so outraged.You have every right to do it, and men, likewise, have every right to comply, ignore…or dish it right back at you! Isn’t equality fun?
I’ve called out one poster for shit testing. She denied it was a shit test. As we were debating she went into an ad hominem attack because she couldn’t defend her position so she decided to attack the debater instead.
And I called out another OP for doing a shit test on a guy.
So yes, I’m an equal opportunity shit-testing-caller-outer.
My opinion is that shit testing is for people who don’t know how to read their fellow human beings. The shit test is their proxy for patient observation. Instead of taking the time to get to know someone’s character, they shortcut the process and administer the shit test so as not to waste time.
I believe that developing a good people-reader is better than shit-testing. No animals are harmed that way.
Have a good Thanksgiving 🙂
For all the bashing and piling on you just did, Evan and Karmic, you didn’t answer the question.
Why should I pay for what this same woman has given to other guys for free?
I seriously want an answer, if you can muster it.
Let’s answer a question with a question.
Why do you DESERVE what others got for free?
I didn’t say I deserve it, simply that I refuse to pay for it. And why should I?
I find this is usually a good question to gauge people’s stance on dating culture.
You still haven’t answered it, BTW.
But getting down to the meat of things: this is exactly why I have adopted my current strategy that you and Evan call weak, wimpy, beta etc. There is absolutely no reason to try to ‘grow to be hot in her eyes,’ because that doesn’t happen. Courting will only prove that you are an acceptable “beta bucks.”
Since women are the decision-makers in the dating market, there is no reason to court (i.e. dance like a clown for her begrudging approval). If a woman isn’t crazy enough about me to throw caution to the wind and pursue me, then she isn’t worth dating. She certainly isn’t worth having a relationship with.
“Acceptable beta bucks” get married and live happily ever after.
Your stance: “If a woman isn’t crazy enough about me to throw caution to the wind and pursue me, then she isn’t worth dating. She certainly isn’t worth having a relationship with.”
If that doesn’t sound a lot like the passive, feminine, entitled women you decry, I don’t know what does. Your way is simply INEFFECTIVE to achieve your stated goals – unless your stated goals are to rant on women’s message boards, and maybe convince some low-self-esteem women to chase you for the reward of not getting a commitment.
“I didn’t say I deserve it, simply that I refuse to pay for it.”
That is called hair-splitting. You are implying that if others didn’t pay for it, you should also not pay for it, so, in effect, you’re saying, “If others get it for free, so should I.”
So, I’ll ask the question YOU refuse to answer: Why should YOU get for free what others got for free? Why should you?
“He is still “not-hot” but she’ll give him a chance IF he courts properly. And THEN he can “grow” to be hot in her eyes.”
Karmic,
Do you understand why a lot of guys don’t see this as a good deal?
Nope. Not-hot guys can get a girl above his league if he courts her.
While a guy will sleep with a girl lower than his league, he’ll never be her committed bf or husband.
So men get a better deal, because he CAN get what he wants if he courts her and grows to be hot in her eyes. No matter how many times the ugly chick bangs you, she’s not going to be hot in yours.
So stop. Men get the better deal in relationships if it ends before kids.
Yes, women get the better deal if a relationship ends after kids.
So the moral of the story isn’t to “stop courting” — It’s either “Don’t have kids…ever” or “Choose a confident, secure, quality woman to commit to”.
If you’re can’t get confident, secure, quality women to date you, then you’re doing the right thing, just date the ones who will date you and then dump them when they want commitment.
The pseudo love that comes from a sexual relationship is not the same as the love that evolves from a committed relationship based on compatibility beyond just sex.
Sorry, Karmic. I just reject your premise completely. A guy who gets put on the “not-hot” list will never, ever, EVER make the “hot” list.
He may make the “acceptable, for now” (I.e. beta bucks) list.
Love…hahaha. How quaint.
You can accept or reject whatever your little heart desires. But it doesn’t change reality.
Once a woman falls in love with her “not hot” guy. He is hot. To her.
My current bf falls into that category. I considered him attractive, but “not-h0t”. However, now I consider him very hot. My eyes drink him in whenever I see him wearing dark blue. He’s balding, but slender. Doesn’t manscape, which I had grown accustomed to with my other bfs.
The bf before him. 6ft 260 lbs with a big beer gut. I couldn’t bang him enough. Drove me wild with a particular cologne that just complemented his natural scent like you wouldn’t believe. But he was a successful player, so he had confidence and charisma unmatched by any man I’ve ever met. He was also a narcissist and temperamentally volatile. But still hot as heck, not just to me, but many other women. I thought he was “attractive” when I met him. Didn’t think of him as “hot” until after we’d been an item for several months. But once he crossed over to the “hot” category, he remains hot.
I’m sure other women have similar experiences.
Well Karmic, I guess I must be some kind of freak then, because I won’t “bang” an ugly woman even ONCE. Quite honestly, I’d rather pay a hooker (some of whom don’t look that bad) than ever even kiss a repulsive woman, much less go to bed with her. Yes, I know a lot of guys don’t care. Then again, and I’ll try to put this politely, I have known one or two fools who would abuse the livestock down on the farm; a practice I never cared to experiment with either. Now that I think on it, there’s not much difference, at that, in the worst cases. In fairness, maybe that’s more a problem in my age group; I’ve found aging badly and obesity can make for some really nauseating combinations., that no personality could possibly make up for. Please try to understand that for the few remaining years I have, total isolation would be preferable to waking up to looking at something like that each morning . I know it’s rare for you, but have you never seen a man so ugly that the mere thought of even touching him (non-sexually) made you cringe? If so, you might have some slight inkling of how the very sight of a repulsive woman (which is about 70% of women over 60 in America today) affects me; can’t tell where the wrinkles stop and the folds of blubber begin.
I noted your suggestion in an earlier post, that we men should keep the “Hot guys” from “slumming” with average women. Now, since those guys get far more than their share of sex, and we all know it, I think that’s a wonderful idea; that is, if you can tell us exactly how (within the laws imposed by this now rather aggression-phobic society) you expect we can do this; I’m all ears on that one, really!
Because you’re so concerned with “being right” that you don’t consider the option of “being effective.”
You’re hung up on the idea that she doesn’t see you the way she sees Brad Pitt. Big fucking deal. How about you be the best McLovin you can be and land a woman who appreciates what you do bring to the table. It starts with you acknowledging that you’re no Brad Pitt, she’s no Angelina Jolie, and yet you can still have an amazing life as a couple. My advice to you is EXACTLY what I tell women. Don’t worry if you’re the hottest person he’s ever dated. Just be glad that he chose you and only you.
I’d much rather have a woman who thought I was a 6 and grew to love me like a 9, than to spend my whole adult life alone and railing against the opposite sex.
Sorry, Evan it just doesn’t work this way, at least outside of rom coms. You operate on the “just world fallacy.”
Passive, feminine? Ehh, if that’s your opinion, I don’t care. I have given an example of how I work this before, and it’s far from passive, but I don’t care to go over it again.
What is the difference between me and the entitled women I decry? I don’t whine and stamp my feet when it doesn’t work.
My stated goal is to extract what I want while expending as little effort and resources as humanly possible, and shielding myself from the drama, hassles, tantrums and bullshit that I’ve come to know as “modern woman.”
BTW, none of you has answered the question yet.
Dude, none of us remember your question. Nor do we think that if we did answer it, it would make a dent in your peculiar selfish world view where dating is a power struggle between men and women and the only way for you to win is to make sure she loses. Healthy relationships are based on generosity, selflessness and compromise. I see no indication in your posts that you have any interest in any of these. So remind me: why are you here again – on a blog designed to give advice for women on how to make healthier relationship choices? Is it to remind women what NOT to look for in a man? \
That’s not even an indictment of your character. You may be a great guy. But everything indicates that you’d rather be single, complain about women, fuck the hottest women you can with the least amount of effort. Great. Go do it. Just stop complaining about the life you’ve chosen. I would guess that “acceptable betas” are much happier with the outcomes in their life and don’t see the need to do what you and Obsidian are doing – preaching pro-man, anti-woman rhetoric to a bunch of women. Talk about a waste of your breath.
Not so quick, McLovin– think about the fact that at least a not-hot man can grow to be hot in a woman’s eyes, whereas a not-hot woman will NEVER grow to be hot in a man’s eyes.
The question is: why should I pay for what she’s given/will give to hotter men for free??
Seriously, Evan. Sell me.
The fact of the matter is that sexual empowerment has poisoned the well in a way that is never going to be reversed. The marriage rate is in freefall, so is the birth rate. These are not things that are going to change.
You’re probably right, though. Those “beta bucks” probably are happy…..for now. Until the wifey decides she needs to “find herself” and goes Eat, Pray, Love and leaves him with the bill.
I’m just feasting on the carcass of a dead ideal, Evan, and taking advantage of the ensuing chaos before something “new” takes its place.
I’ve told you why I’m here: To read the enemy’s playbook and get an occasional LOL.
McLovin,
This is really simple, man.
Life is not about right or wrong. It’s about effective and ineffective. It’s about what works as opposed to what doesn’t work.
I tell women what works: if you’re an alpha female, choose a more beta guy. Appreciate his easygoing and flexible nature. Don’t overvalue selfish, narcissistic alphas who don’t treat you well. Similarly, don’t get too hung up on chemistry or education or height. Judge a man for his kindness, consistency, communication, and desire for commitment. Look for a relationship that’s a 7 in chemistry and a 10 in compatibility and you’ll have a very happy life together.
I’m not sure if you want to argue with any of that, but if you do, you’re fighting a losing battle. That’s what works. That’s what’s most effective. That’s what I did. That’s what all of my happy clients have done. That’s what I recommend women do, and that’s what I recommend you do as well. So, to your questions:
1. Why should I pay for what she’s given to hotter men for free? Because life isn’t fair. Because life isn’t a meritocracy. Because being cheap and aloof is pretty much a losing strategy for everybody except for the “alpha fucks” type…and even for those guys as well. Unless your actual GOAL is to never have a real relationship, then, by all means, keep treating women like shit. It’s just a losing strategy if you want a QUALITY woman in a COMMITTED relationship. Women who commit to alpha assholes are committing to them IN SPITE of their poor treatment, not BECAUSE of it. Regular guys for the most part, can’t get away with it – no more than the average looking woman can get away with being crazy/bitchy. Why is this hard for you to grasp?
2. The marriage rate is not in freefall. Nor is the birthrate. If anything, different communities are being affected differently – people with less education and income are FAR more likely to have kids out of wedlock and never get married. But for my audience of college educated women? Life is still good. Here are a bunch of facts from my upcoming webinar:
– Fact: 96% of people eventually get married. (Statistical Abstract of the United States, 2012-2013)
– Fact: College-educated women who marry over the age of 30 have only a 20% divorce rate. (New York Times)
– Fact: The likelihood your man cheats on you is less than 6% per year. (PsychCentral).
– Fact: Men fall in love faster and need less personal space than women. (Match.com)
– Fact: 65% of men are open to remarrying after divorce, compared with 49% of women. (Pew Research)
– Fact: One-third of marriages in the past decade started online. (University of Chicago).
– Fact: Women in the top 15% of earners are more likely to be married. (Council on Contemporary Families)
– Fact: An educated single woman at age 40 is much more likely to marry in the next decade than her less educated counterparts. (Wharton Business School)
So, just because you and your MGOTW friends are opting out doesn’t mean the rest of the world is following. People still want love and always will. Both men and women have to adapt – men to more masculine women, women to more feminine men – but pretty much anyone who wants to find a partner can (and does) find a partner. You are just so surrounded by negative reinforcement that you forget that there are a lot of people like me out there. Sounds like Karl Rove on Fox News who couldn’t believe Obama won because no one he knew voted for him. Your whole world is confirmation bias. You’re entitled to surround yourself with angry likeminded folks who want to think that love isn’t real. But you’re wrong. Me, my clients, and pretty much everyone I know is living proof that couples can be happy.
3. I’m not a fan of the Eat, Pray, Love phenomenon either. But it’s really no different than the middle aged guy who leaves his wife for a younger woman. People make bad decisions when they’re young. They get married out of passion at age 25 but have no idea who they’ll be at 40. Then they want out. Take your time. Live your life. Get some experience. Learn how to be an adult and communicate. Figure out what works and what doesn’t. THEN get married. Most people who do it this way end up married to a good partner.
4. “A dead ideal”? Only according to you and your ilk. Virtually everyone I know is married because I moved to the suburbs and my wife is the head of the PTA. So all we see are couples just like us. All you see are guys like you. I’m not denying you exist. Why are you so intent on denying that people like me (and the women mentioned all over my site) don’t exist, aren’t actually happy are ultimately doomed? I’ve got an answer for you: it’s because our very existence challenges your entire worldview. In other words, my worldview doesn’t crumble because a bunch of angry guys pop off about how much women suck. But your worldview depends on you being RIGHT – that women are the inferior sex, that nobody’s happy, etc. Because then you don’t have to look at yourself as the common denominator in your own failure. We see this from women as well. I’ll say something like, “Trust men,” and they’ll come back with “you CAN’T trust men! Men are pigs!” It’s easier for them to believe this than it is to believe what’s patently obvious to anyone else: they CHOSE pigs. That doesn’t represent all men. You’ve CHOSEN the wrong women – selfish, entitled, critical, etc, etc. I don’t deny they exist. I’m saying that if you stop being so guided by your dick and choose a woman who is a little more average looking (like you), you can still have a really great sex life AND have a woman who treats you like gold. They exist, but not if you give up on finding them.
Now that you’ve been thoroughly debunked and eviscerated, you have two choices:
1. Tell me I’m wrong, and continue trolling my site – as if earnest, kind people who want to find love are any sort of “enemy.” Waste of everyone’s time, but hey, knock yourself out.
2. Admit that I’m right. I encourage both men AND women to compromise on the outside stuff to get the inside stuff – but not to the point that anyone should lack attraction in his/her relationship. Admit that you are angry that life is unfair and instead of working with what you’ve got, you choose to rail against reality and put up a futile fight that doesn’t even make you happy. Admit that there are just as many people like me as there are people like you – which is evidence enough that being happily married does not make me some sort of unicorn. Finally, admit that you’d rather be alone for the rest of your life than concede my points – because to have your worldview crumble would be akin to giving up your religion. And you would rather be RIGHT (according to your cadre of fellow unhappy MGOTWs) than to be EFFECTIVE (and find someone who loves you, accepts you and appreciate you).
You’re entitled to do whatever you want, but this is the end of your free coaching. I prefer working with people who are open to learning.
WOW!!! This gets a standing ovation.
For what’s it’s worth Evan. When you come hard like this, it DOES help many of your readers of both sexes who are feeling angry at how unfair the dating world is.
But as you continually say, it’s not about fair, it is about doing what is effective. This applies to both genders. We can be stubborn and single or adaptive and in a loving relationship.
As much as I know how the comments section irritates you at times, I also hope you know that every time you reply to one of your dissenters, you DO help other reader grow. You answer so many more “specific and challenging” questions in the comments, then you do in your normal blog post.
So for what it’s worth… Thank you.
@ Evan. Well, well, well, look who’s sore. Did I strike a nerve by suggesting that it’s ok for a guy to do to women, what every single woman on earth does to every single man she meets? Don’t quibble, don’t use weasel words; you know it, I know it, and every man here who’s ever dated a woman knows it. Sorry, I call Bravo Sierra on that one!
Look, as far as your relationship, I don’t try to tell you who or what you should like, be attracted to, love, or whatever. That’s your business, and if you and your wife get along, in spite of (so far as I can see from your comments,) not having very many attitudes, activities, or even beliefs and interests in common, then fantastic for you both, and I wish you a lifetime of happiness together, OK? But just because that floats your personal boat, doesn’t mean that can or will work for everyone else. Now, it’s not enough for you that I accept a woman no matter whether her appearance is completely nauseatingly repulsive to me; if she wants me, I owe her my love and devotion, right, because she’s a female, and she has the right to everything she desires, while a man (except you, naturally) has no right to expect anything? Well, that’s a big reach, but iff I can’t hope for any chemistry, or sex, I can at least expect some sort of compatibility, right, or is any woman who is interested the sole judge of that, too? That’s essentially what you’re saying, isn’t it? that I have no right to discover whether a woman can share my lifestyle and activities? I have a right to say no, just as a woman has. I have a right to test, for compatibility, or anything else, the same way a woman does. I don’t lose that right “because Evan says so”. You may not approve of my methods (I don’t care), but are you seriously going to suggest that you, or any random woman who wants something from me, are a better judge of what’s compatible with my lifestyle, core beliefs, and values, than I am? Because if you’re saying that, you’re saying that you and your sacred cows (er, women), have the right to tell me what to think, too! I hope I misunderstand, because if that’s what you’re advocating, you are far, far across the line. I should want to spend the rest of my days with someone I have exactly NOTHING in common with, because that’s what SHE wants? What on earth for?
I hope you let this part in, because it’s a valuable tool for combatting the common tendency (both genders) to lie in online profiles, etc. Not fudge, not fib, LIE! I don’t do that, and I don’t appreciate anyone who does. I tested those women, because every single one of them indicated on her profile that she was “athletic”, “works out five times a week” and wanted “a fit athletic man”. There were pics (i’m convinced some had to have been five years old). Needless to say, the woman who showed up at the first meet, was…a little less than congruent with that description. Oh what a tangled we we weave, and all that, so, I decided to neatly wrap these liars in their own web. Not only did I get the pleasure of making them actually get off their lazy fat backsides; I’ll bet they thought twice about telling the same lie again. I know a couple did, because they changed their profiles. That’s mean? Not half as mean as many things I’ve seen women do. Turnabout’s entirely fair play, whether you personally like it or not, Evan. Equality is a two-way street!
In any case, It doesn’t matter now. I’m in a relationship with a woman I met in real life. I’d have been there sooner, except she’s two years younger that the minimum age (50) I set, and after all the nasty things I’ve heard (primarily from women) about older men/younger women, I wanted to be extra cautious. My profile is down, and I’m out of the online madhouse. Best of luck to you, your clients, and all who choose to play the game. In closing, I think OLD works great, for a younger crowd; I don’t think it works for a man my age, honestly, but then, I’m not typical, and a more sedentary, slower, less active guy my age might find what he needs. I’m just not there yet, so for most of that audience, I’m a product without a market. Thanks to you and your readers for allowing me to share some final thoughts here.
Evan, just one more thing. It’s probably something you won’t understand simply because of the stage of life you’re in. You’re still at an age where you may be thinking of having a family together; most of your life, and hopefully whatever relationship you have, is ahead of you. My life, is mostly behind me. That’s not so bad, actually. I’ve had my ups and downs, good times and bad; I’ve lived hard, but thoroughly. Put it another way, at your age, you have far more to either gain or lose, than I do. It’s a pretty fair bet that I’m not going to have thirty or forty years with anyone. So this time for me, is not a desperate search for a mate; I’ve had that. It’s not even a search for love, I’ve had that too. This part of my life, basically is a bonus, extra gravy, or the icing on the cake. I have every incentive to maximize whatever I can get from whatever time I have left, and that’s what I’ve tried to do. One thing I decided early on, is that I would not settle for something that didn’t feel real, whole, and right. The odds of getting that at my age, weren’t very good, but would I really have been so much worse off, If I didn’t get it? At least, I gave myself a chance, and now, in an unexpected way, I may just have lucked out that final time. If that’s how it ends up, I’m a very very lucky man; if not, well, it’s still been a great ride!
My friend, that’s perfectly fair. There are different incentives at different ages. At age 43 with two little kids, I’ve made the right decision for me. If don’t want love or a mate – and simply want a warm, firm body every other week – that’s your business. I would just urge you to be as ethical as you can be without stringing along a woman who desires more of a commitment. Men who do so are far more character deficient than women who check the fit and toned box but are really “average.”
Evan,
Completely agree with you on stringing a woman along; that isn’t right…ever. It’s why I try to go slow with any new relationship. I think, if we’re honest with ourselves, we usually know pretty soon(maybe not after two or three dates, but pretty soon) whether we feel something that’s just OK, or something we’d seriously want long term, and if it’s not the latter, it’s time to bow out. I don’t have an exact timetable, but after two or three months, if it doesn’t feel like something I can see myself committed to for the long haul, it’s time to move on.
One clarification, though; I’m not just looking for “a firm body every other week” just because I enjoy a lot of active physicality in my life; I simply want a partner who can (and wants to) share my lifestyle, because that feels good to her too. I wouldn’t describe my girlfriend as a “firm body”; she’s distinctly curvy (some who prefer the reed-slim type would call her slightly overweight) BUT, she’s very active, pretty darn fit, and enjoys physical activity as much as I do. After all, she’s enjoying doing things now that for most of her life she simply couldn’t. Before I ever met her, she made the effort to transform herself from a woman literally crippled by obesity since childhood into the healthy woman she always wanted to be. It took her years to do it, but she made her own miracle. She didn’t do it for someone else, she did it for herself. Can you imagine the sheer joy of being able to actually do the things that for most of your life you could only sit and watch others do? That’s what she has! Now, she wants to grab on to every active, wonderful moment her new life holds! A woman reborn, at an age when many are slowing down, and an old warrior hanging on to every last bit of gusto life has left; two admittedly unusual people, and both a little extreme for some tastes; a man and a woman who came by very different paths to a passion for enjoying every moment of life to the max. I think we just might make it together.
So many misreadings, so little time.
1. I don’t advocate shit tests or games for anybody of any gender. I am remarkably consistent in my willingess to call out ineffective behavior in both genders. Your take is “two wrongs make a right.” You’re 67 years old. Do you really believe that?
2. I didn’t say that I have no activities or interests in common with my wife. You said that. I said that I’m liberal, she’s moderate. I said that I’m an intellectual snob, she’s more of the sitcom/pop fiction type. I said that I’m a non believer and she’s Catholic. I used to think these things defined me, just like you think being athletic defines you. It doesn’t – unless you make it that way. If you raise the bar so high that only women who run 6 minute miles can pass, that’s your right. It’s also your right to be alone forever. I don’t care. Just know that no marriage ever survived because of low body fat. Marriages thrive for the aforementioned reasons: consistency, communication, kindness, compromise and commitment. Yes, you have to be attracted, but you don’t have to be perfect clones. My wife and I are both extroverts; we like to talk and laugh and watch TV and films and plays and throw parties and raise our kids. Who gives a shit if she and I like the EXACT same things? Only single people say crap like that. So don’t put words in my mouth – you all or nothing thinker. I didn’t say have NOTHING in common or NO attraction. I said to let go of your hiking test. It’s dumb. Period.
3. I don’t edit people’s comments unless there’s a direct insult of me or another reader. Say whatever you want if you stick with the argument itself. Notice that in the same paragraph that you complain about women being cruel, you participate in cruel behavior. Two wrongs make a right. Third grade stuff. You must be proud.
4. Glad you’re happy with your relationship. I don’t advocate for games or madhouses. I’ve had many clients in their sixties find love. If you did it in real life, good for you. No hard feelings. But please, for your own sake, don’t delight in bad behavior, don’t wish ill on another gender, and please don’t base your relationship on how much you have in common – rather, how she TREATS you. Good luck.
Evan,
In my experience, anyway, when a woman “shit tests” a guy, it’s usually to see whether how he responds is consistent with the image he is presenting . It’s part of a woman’s B.S. detection circuitry, and they are usually very, very good at it; they have to be, given how guys will say or do almost anything to get laid. Now, in real life a woman can put up a phony front, too, but there, anything we can deduce from her appearance, and demeanor face to face is in the open. Online, where all we have is pictures and a profile, women can and do believe they can lie with impunity; in fact, many of them will lie, when the truth would serve them better. So they demand a fit active man, describe themselves as athletic when in fact their lifestyle is sedentary. Maybe they see it as their only chance to attract a “hot” guy, maybe they just figure it’ll get them a free dinner; I really don’t care what the motive is. It really shouldn’t matter. Tell me, Evan, does it seem reasonable to you, that someone who purports to want a long term relationship ( a thing in which trust is maybe just a little important, no?) would elect to start out by lying to a prospective partner (especially in an area which said prospective partner’s profile indicates is of some importance)? Let’s try it the other way round, shall we? If a woman’s profile says she’s into triathlons, and really wants a man who can be a training partner for her, would it be ok for a man to say he’s a marathoner and distance runner, when in fact, he can’t do a 10k training run on his best day? I don’t think so, do you? The way I see it, if I present myself to a woman as being “X”, then I had damn well better be prepared to show that I am in fact “X” if called upon. If I can’t, then I shouldn’t take it ill, when my lie is exposed. And when a woman tells a man that she’s active, and “athletic”, she needs to be sure she both looks and acts the part, or not be upset when her lie is exposed. Evan, if a woman told you that, and showed up for a first meeting looking like she hadn’t gotten off the couch in the last ten years, you can’t tell me that wouldn’t peg the needle on your own B.S. meter. Neither a man nor a woman needs to apologize for “shit testing” an apparent liar; it could be even considered generous to give them a chance to prove otherwise, if it’s really obvious, That’s not playing games, Evan; no man or woman who’s been truthful and authentic need fear it. It’s not “two wrongs make a right” at all; how can it be “wrong” to expose the truth as efficiently as possible, in an environment where lying is very prevalent, among both genders? Tell me, if a man’s a proven liar, would you suggest to your woman client that she waste any more time on him? Somehow, I don’t think you would. Incidentally, please don’t put words in my mouth, either, I didn’t complain of women being cruel; I simply said that I’d seen them do things at least as mean as my little “walk test”, and that as anywhere else things are purported to be equal, turnabout is fair play; I didn’t say it was “nice”, I said “fair”, and it certainly is, by any objective standard. I don’t expect to deliberately lie to a woman to get her attention, without being called out on it; neither should a woman expect to lie to me, deliberately, and not be called out on it,. Once again, avoiding the whole issue in the first place is simple, for men and woman alike: Just TELL THE TRUTH in the first place, dammit!. How difficult is that? You might not get a date, or get your email answered, but at least you’ll still have your integrity. I happen to think that matters.
By the way, on the HOW SHE TREATS YOU thing; that’s nice; now tell me, if woman lies to me, blatantly and deliberately, just how well is she likely to treat me otherwise? Once again, would you tell a woman that a man lying to her, blatantly and deliberately, was no indicator of how he would treat her otherwise? Am I wrong to think that a woman who’s perfectly ok with out and out, unambiguous lying to me on a matter of substance, most likely has little value or respect for me (or a potential relationship)? It appears so, to me. I don’t know whether this is a regional, cultural, or generational difference of some kind, but man, where and when I come from, the adage “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me!” is sound advice, ignored at one’s peril. So is the concept that “if you lied to me about one thing, what else are you willing to lie to me about?” Goes for both genders, by the way.
“If a woman’s profile says she’s into triathlons, and really wants a man who can be a training partner for her, would it be ok for a man to say he’s a marathoner and distance runner, when in fact, he can’t do a 10k training run on his best day?”
I would say that this woman is silly. She may want a husband who is a training partner, but she doesn’t need one. So it’s not wrong for her to desire a fit man; it’s somewhat foolhardy of her to make his 10k training time into some sort of litmus test as to whether he’s a good partner.
“Evan, if a woman told you that, and showed up for a first meeting looking like she hadn’t gotten off the couch in the last ten years, you can’t tell me that wouldn’t peg the needle on your own B.S. meter.”
Buck, I went on 300 online dates. If you think you’re going to teach me something I don’t know, you’re gonna have to try harder. Online dating is advertising. Men lie about height, weight, age, income, education, career. Women lie primarily about age and body type. We should cease being surprised at such transgressions. When a woman showed up 20lbs heavier than her photo, I just had an extra drink, made the best of the night and didn’t come back for a second date. No need to “teach her a lesson,” which is, objectively childish, not the humanitarian mission you make it out to be.
“if woman lies to me, blatantly and deliberately, just how well is she likely to treat me otherwise?”
That’s an erroneous slippery slope. When a 5’7″ guy says he’s 5’9″ to try to procure a date, he’s doing so because he knows that women are judgmental about height and he wants to get his foot in the door. He probably won’t get a second date, but, to him, that’s besides the point. He wanted to get a FIRST date. To suggest that this insecure short guy is somehow a pathological liar, prone to mistreating women and cheating? A bit of a leap there, Buck. People lie online because they’re insecure that telling the truth won’t work. 67 year old fit guys shave 7 years off their age to get the attention of women in their 50s. I don’t think it’s cool. But I also don’t think it’s an indicator of poor character that you think it is.
I’m afraid that these blog entries about how men need to court miss the mark because they fail to provide women with valuable advice on what they need to do to separate themselves from other women during the early stages of a relationship. I’m not sure that I even understand the point of them, to be honest, because they don’t seem to be consistent with the idea of helping women succeed in dating.
I keep hearing that the woman’s job is to be “receptive” and “appreciative” during the courtship phase. However, a woman isn’t really doing anything by being “receptive”. It’s simply common sense to be kind and warm when one is socializing with others, regardless of gender. Furthermore, it isn’t like women are suspending their desire to pay their own way for the purpose of “allowing” the man to showcase his masculinity by demonstrating that he can lead and provide. Most women expect the man to plan and pay regardless of how independent they claim to be. Finally, to show your appreciation for a man who calls/plans/pays is to exhibit basic manners and common decency, but it does not give a woman an edge over other women in the courtship process. It’s a good start, but it simply demonstrates that you’re not entitled and/or socially inept. A woman should always express her gratitude and appreciation to a man who takes the time to call/plan/pay – even if she isn’t interested in him.
It’s often said that the reason why women like men who court is because the man is demonstrating that he can be a good provider and protector. In fact, the lady in the video said the same. So, if this is what you want from a man, then a great way to separate yourself from the pack is to show that you can be a good nurturer. Listening to my parents talk, they would mention that it was common for girls/women to cook for the man that they just started dating to express their interest and to show that they can take care of their man (similar to how a man is showing that he can take care of his woman when he calls/plans/pays/walks on the inside of the sidewalk, etc.). Even better, perhaps she would bake him a cake or brownies. Why not do something like that? That is something a lot of women don’t do these days.
Also, why not make sure you support the man in his leadership when he’s taking you out (think of the girl in “A Bronx Tale” who unlocked her date’s door on the driver-side after he opened the passenger door to let her into the car). A good example that I can think of off the top of my head was when I picked up a women a few years ago on a first date, and she just pulled out her phone to punch in the restaurant that I was taking her to because I was new to the area and I wasn’t immediately sure how to get there from her place. I was going to do what anyone would do, which would be to punch it into the phone myself, but she beat me to it. It was a nice gesture to show that she wanted to help me out as I was leading.
Posts like this – even reasonable posts from reasonable guys like you, Chance – exhaust me.
This entire blog is a testament to a guy telling women how to do things better from a guy’s point of view. The fact that so many people are harping on literally ONE thing that I told guys to do better means that I was right for getting out of the business of coaching men. Seriously, get a thicker skin.
Telling you to court women is the ONLY point of the post. It would not make sense to write a post on how men should court women AND how women could do XYZ better. Seriously.
The advice you gave above – be a good nurturer, actively appreciate his efforts, etc, is the core of my business. I should not have to mention it in the ONLY post I’ve written for men in ages.
Evan, thanks for your response, but get thicker skin? Lol eeeeeeeasy there, man. You’re preaching to the choir in my case with all the “what works” business. You’ll get no push-back from me on that point.
Your response addressed the source of my confusion. To be specific, it is not readily apparent that this blog entry was written for men, especially in light of this very recent post written for women that basically deals with the same subject:
https://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/online-dating-tips-advice/is-tinder-that-bad/
…and this relatively recent post directly dealing with the same subject that was written specifically for women:
https://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/understanding-men/why-men-need-to-court-women-again/
These two posts were clearly not written for men, which was why I was always confused with the advice to some of the unreasonable male dissenters in the comment section. This advice was always along the lines of: “Look, you should court because that’s what works”. That’s true, no doubt, and it’s about the best advice one can give. However, it wasn’t consistent at all with the apparent theme of those blog entries.
So that brings me back to this current post. You gave excellent advice, brother, and the general premise of the folks who disagree with your advice is that women in their 30s/40s/50s still respond to men in the same way that they did when they were 21. However, I think you can now see how one might see this blog entry as a variation of a theme from previous blog entries dealing with the same subject that were clearly written for women – especially when it isn’t really that clear that this blog entry was written for men. Without clarity, posts like this run the risk of coming across as a benign attempt to establish credibility among a female client base to counter the fact that you do challenge them in other areas.
” The fact that so many people are harping on literally ONE thing that I told guys to do better means that I was right for getting out of the business of coaching men. Seriously, get a thicker skin.”
I don’t think that the push back you’re getting from a lot of guys is necessarily because they don’t like to be told to do things differently, Evan. After all, there is a flourishing industry of PUAs who pride themselves on telling men what they believe guys should do differently with women in order to be more effective at dating, and men flock to that industry by the hundreds of thousands, and many make changes based on that advice. I understand you don’t agree with it, but I think the disconnect has to do with the fact that a lot of guys genuinely don’t believe that courting is that effective.
To be clear, my dissent on a previous thread to this idea of courting was based on my mistaken assumption that by ‘courting’ you meant fancy, expensive dinners on the first date. If courting means calling, planning and picking up a $40-50 dollar drink tab, then I do that and have always done it.
I will say a few things, however, based only on my own observations and experience. While 99% of women will not take the initiative in calling and initiating dates, I believe that many successful, modern women have nonetheless thawed when it comes to one component of the courting process, namely paying their share. In fact, I’ve noticed that many prefer to chip in a little at the early stages because it allows them to assert their independence in a sense. Of course, there are still many who do not, but I don’t think either stance has anything to do with low self-esteem-the women who sometimes insisted on pitching in did not at all strike me as the type who lacked confidence.
I think the reason many women have adjusted in this one area has to do with technology. Many men and women now go on a several to sometimes a dozen dates in a matter of weeks. One female acquaintance of mine once told me that she went on ten dates in a week and turned down a second date with all the guys who asked because she didn’t feel any chemistry. I think most women who date like that-if they have a conscience-contribute to the bill because they realize that it would be a tad unfair to expect to have such a dating approach fully subsidized.
“I think most women who date like that-if they have a conscience-contribute to the bill because they realize that it would be a tad unfair to expect to have such a dating approach fully subsidized.”
I’m not sure about other women, but as contrary as this sounds, I’ll insist on paying if I’m NOT attracted to the guy. I want to be free of any obligation to see him again.
However, if I like the guy, I’ll offer to pay and just thank him nicely when he inevitably says, “No, I got this.”
My reasoning is that if we see each other again, I’ll pay one of the upcoming tabs…or eventually if we end up in a relationship, he’s going to get the better end of the deal.
Because frankly, after courting is over, and he’s your bf, most guys just sit back and absorb the nurturing, and rarely put in any effort that even comes close to his courting effort. Yes, I’m saying men get lazy after he gets the girl. And the girl ends up putting in most, if not all the effort, AFTER commitment.
I’m not saying I mind doing the nurturing. In fact, I don’t mind at all. It comes pretty naturally. What I am saying is that men don’t appreciate that nurturing after the relationship has started and often take it for granted, and they forget, except on Hallmark occasions (and often they even forget those), to make any effort at all.
KE, kudos to you if you nurture at all.
That immediately puts you at an advantage to the vast majority of millennial women. I can’t speak for Gen-X or Baby Boomers, but I suspect this is the reason most of those MGTOWs are young. A young woman can easily separate herself from the pack because her peers have set the bar so low. A woman wouldn’t even have to do a fraction of the nurturing that a typical man does of the providing/protecting, and she could still be ahead of the pack. It really is that easy.
Thanks, Chance.
But I think men don’t appreciate the nurturing women DO do that’s “not obvious”.
1) Laundry – my bf does sweaty work all day and he stays with me 4-5 days of the week. And only has 3 changes of work clothes. It took me a while to get him to bring over 2 changes of clothes. I was washing his work clothes every night he stayed with me for about 3 months before “I” took the initiative and grabbed two changes of clothes from his house to put in mine. So now I do his laundry every 3 days. Does he see this as nurturing? Probably not.
2) Junk food and cereal at my house – I don’t eat junk food and I don’t eat cereal. But he’s a midnight snacker. Whenever I grocery shop, I make sure I restock the snacks he likes. Does he see this as nurturing? Probably not.
3) Tums and Advil in my purse – He suffers from heartburn and headaches more than I. I’ve taken to stocking Tums and Advil in my purse. Does he see this as nurturing? Probably not.
4) We go places in my car instead of his. He has gas guzzling trucks that he use for business. So he gets to write off mileage, as well as the gas. But instead we put mileage on my car and I pay for the gas, which I can’t write off. He gets a benefit, but I don’t. Do I complain? No. Does he appreciate this? Not that I can tell.
I’ve only cooked for him once. He probably saw that as nurturing, but I only did it once.
So to him, I may not seem like a nurturing person. But I am.
I’m sure other millenials and “smart, strong, successful women” DO nurture, but not in the traditional “cook for her man” way.
Men just need to appreciate the nurturing that they DO do. But not expect the same kind of nurturing their moms did for them.
Hi KE, that is excellent that you do those things, and it should be recognized and appreciated. The examples you provided are exactly the kinds of things I’m talking about. Millennial women often take pride in not doing those types of things. No one has ever done laundry for me in my adult life. Most guys do all of the driving, or at least the vast majority of it. Same goes for the medicine. Like I said, you don’t have to do very much to put yourself ahead of these women.
Courting IS effective if a man is marriage minded. He might have to go through the process repeatedly to find the right woman for him. Doesn’t mean it isn’t effective. Same for women. We have to be willing to date, be courted, by many men before we find a fit.
PUA’s are trying to get laid, not have meaningful relationships. So, they either end up in a FWB situation with a low quality woman or they have to lie about their intentions with the high quality women. No integrity in deception, intentionally hurting others just to get your jollies.
“Now that you’ve been thoroughly debunked and eviscerated, you have two choices:”
Lol. You’ve done nothing of the sort. All you’ve done, condensed into it’s shortest form, is release women from their gender role while strictly enforcing men’s gender role, and advising women to do the same. It’s what you do, ad nauseum.
And, again as always, you dress it up under the guise of “effective,” thereby absolving women of any and all responsibility. It’s the same reason yourself and Obsidian can’t have a conversation, you simply refuse to engage the subject matter.
Chivalry and courting were for women who were chaste and who followed a gender role. Now that they are not and do not, there is simply no reason to observe these archaic traditions. The fact that they refuse to pick a side, and instead cherry pick the good from both sides is the central issue in the manosphere/gender war etc, and it’s a topic that you, again, refuse to broach at all.
Other than that, I’m not really sure to engage someone who says, ‘the marriage rate is not in freefall,’ this is an objective fact that will not yield to your retort of ‘nuh uh.’
There are other methods that are effective, and do not require me to prostrate myself repeatedly, at great cost to myself, for the approval of my supposed ‘equal,’ who expects me to call, plan and pay hahahaha. I’ve become an expert at one of these methods. The way that women are taught these days to be entitled monsters only makes it more effective. I can identify them easily.
Thankfully, as I move into my later 30’s and my sex drive wanes, I only need to play out the seduction a couple of times a year, for a couple of months each. 2-3 months is the ideal length for these types of relationships. I bat about .500 with these women, meaning I only have to engage 2 to get one relationship out of it.
So, it works for me. I’m in a relationship 4-6 months per year.
Good for you. Now I bid you adieu.
McLovin 35 – you might be in a relationship – but I betcha she isn’t.
I guess if being a serial monogamist is your goal….
Judy,
So much the better. She’ll have someone else to glom onto right away.
Well said Evan.
I hope that your beloved reader heard it this time.
Yes I agree with Adrian – these comments do make us grow. For what it’s worth, I recently met one of the most disagreeable persons ever who sent me the email from hell rejecting me (which was pretty weird, considering that he had invited me out and the date had not taken place!!).
Coming from a place of dignity, I thought, the hell, he doesn’t have any manners – I won’t even bother to answer.
Silence can be so eloquent too!
I couldn’t agree with you more Evan. I would say that old fashioned courtship is a good start because it is easier to appreciate a man who does something to be appreciated for than a man who wants to be appreciated for doing nothing. I would also say that it is easier to understand the intentions of a man who courts in this way than a man who does not. At my age I have tried to be a bit more open minded as there are still some unmarried men in my age category who don’t have the best social skills and just don’t get it. However, I am not sure I want to keep going through that.
I speak from the perspective of having been introduced to a friend of a friend recently on the basis of him wanting advice about living in a place I have lived before. After one coffee meeting that went on all day and one spa meeting (in a place where I am member and he asked to come along) which also went on all day (and involved no real discussion on the topic I was originally asked to help with) I was really confused what this guy wanted from me and I don’t really want someone taking up whole days if he isn’t interested in me.
He was then desperate for me attend a talk he was doing as part of a work project last night which I went along to (purely to support him as I have zero interest in IT technobabble), and after lots of emails from him on the subject. I caught sight of him from a distance in the beginning as he was coming out of the talk before but the talk I was in he handed over to his intern to handle and I didn’t even see him when I came out as he wasn’t there. No call, no email, no explanation so I walked thirty minutes in the rain to listen to something I have no interest in. Needless to say I am not overly impressed and in future will only make time for men who make an effort to court as you say. If he isn’t making the effort to court me, I have to assume he isn’t really interested as was clearly the case here.
I feel disappointed but as this friend of a friend didn’t actually follow dating protocol, I also accept I set myself up for the fall.
Karmic Equation,
“Because frankly, after courting is over, and he’s your bf, most guys just sit back and absorb the nurturing, and rarely put in any effort that even comes close to his courting effort. Yes, I’m saying men get lazy after he gets the girl. And the girl ends up putting in most, if not all the effort, AFTER commitment.”
Therein lies the problem with the courting game. It sets false expectations for a number of folks and leads us down the “you don’t do this or you don’t do that anymore” path. That’s why the win me over philosophy is so problematic.
Well, if a guy giving you compliments or trying to make you laugh is just a show, that’s sad.
I’m not talking about dinner out or spectacular take-my-breath away date nights. (I never got any of those btw from current bf).
But for example, he courted me by playing pool with me. He’s a 7, I’m a 4 skill level gap is huge. He’s an expert, I’m just an intermediate beginner. So when we used to shoot 8-ball, he would shoot his balls in rotation, e.g., 1-7, or 7-1, while I shot 8-ball the normal way. This put my odds of giving him a competitive game to 80/20 and my chance of beating him to 60/40. He doesn’t do that anymore. We play “regular” 8-ball and kicks my ass everytime.
So tell me, was his courting behavior really that tough to upkeep? C’mon.
I guess you could say that what I miss is the consideration and the feeling that he was doing something for me just because he liked me. Cognitively, I know he likes me. But that little bit of extra consideration…that I really miss. I don’t hold it against him. But I miss it. You know?
Men don’t need to keep putting in “take your breath away” effort after the relationship starts. But a little extra (just-because-I-like-you) effort, once in while goes a long way to making your girl happy. It doesn’t cost any money. Just a little bit of thought.
Karmic Equation,
I think I get where you are coming from. I know it’s a fine line, but hopefully you tell him that those little things keep the nurturing side of you going. I don’t know, but maybe he might have transitioned to the “honey do list phase”. The phase where we do everything you ask and assume that it is enough.
Chivalry isn’t dead. I only dated briefly between my grieving-psycho-divorcee period and my current boyfriend, so this is certainly small-sample data, but all but one of those men called, planned and paid. My boyfriend holds the door for me simply because he wants to treat me well, and I say thank you because I want to be with a man who makes an effort to treat me well. His kindness provokes me to be good to him in return, leaving both of us continuously looking for ways to charm and delight each other. I’m pretty sure he’s not regretting the effort, expense or emotional risk of dating me.
Is it fair? Nope. I feel for men who aren’t tall or wealthy and I feel for women who aren’t young or beautiful – oh, wait, that’s me! I’m one of those hateful 5s who didn’t “settle” for another 5. But I want to be with the smartest, sweetest, funniest, best-looking man who’ll have me, so I’m not going to renounce my good luck in the name of fairness. And I sure as hell wouldn’t see it as a kindness to “settle” for a man could probably tell that I saw him as a charity case!
Someone above commented that women will have to take men’s resentments more seriously or even more men will choose to drop out. But what if women don’t mind that exodus? Bitter and resentful is not what we’re looking for anyway. My boyfriend’s marriage ended when his wife found someone she liked better, and that wound runs DEEP, so I would understand if he treated me with suspicion, but I’d also leave over it. I’m not in a position to “fix” anyone’s past hurts and I don’t really want the responsibility – I’m busy enough working on me.
Karmic Equation,
Let’s confer for a moment. I was all poised to give Buck25 and all the others one last reply regarding looks being the most important quality women look for in a man but after re-reading the comments, your responses have thrown the proverbial: “monkey wrench into my plans”:-). I can tell that you don’t support their argument, though I can not tell if you do not agree with their views about looks or do you just not agree with their bitterness toward the advantages and selectivity of women in dating?
They argue facial beauty and height are the most important things to women when they first meet a man, and women will not accept a date with “most” men if they do not possess both qualities or at least a high level of facial beauty. It seems you agree with this, as long as they acknowledge that after the initial attraction is accepted, most women then place more weight on his effort to court, and his effort to show his value as a long-term partner, and you say most men are paid double the effort of courting back from the woman after she becomes his girlfriend.
In my opinion what they don’t understand is that looks vs effort (courting) depends on the Market Value of each person. Basically to a woman who is a 8, the looks of a man who is also a 8 or maybe even a 7 does little to impress her. So to her his effort to win her and display his long-term value as a life partner is more important. To a woman who is a 5, a man who is a 8 will have more sway, and he has to put in little effort.
If the man who is a 8 has more going for him than just looks, then most likely he will just sleep with the woman who is a 5 but not commit to her. The man who is a 8 in looks but lacks in every other category (living in his parents basement, 5 different baby mothers, working as a bagger at a grocery story , etc…) then he would commit to a 5 because all he brings to the table is looks, so he gets a better deal out of their dating, (I have personally seen this many times).
So a man who is a 5 should either focus on only dating a 5 and below or at least not sulk that he has to put in double the effort to only get a shot with a 6 and maybe, just maybe a 7. Again I think it is a looks vs effort thing only in the context of how they each match up.
Karmic Equation back to you, how does your hot or not-hot theory count for celebrities? I ask because I was looking in a magazine and saw a article about Hiedi Klum and it got me to thinking about why would a beautiful woman like her, Kendall Jenner, and so many more that I can’t count date ugly guys? In this case I don’t think either of our theories about attraction work. Because each of these women have money, and fame like the men whom they date.
Anyway, I’m curious to see what you agree and disagree with about what I have stated, also I look forward to hearing your theories. Helen Fisher says that genes (physical beauty) are most important to women, than, wealth, so I can see a women with kids trading her looks for wealth and the support that comes with it, but why would a single women? If this was true, then, the myth about just being rich getting you hot single women is false. A single hot woman would rather exchange genes with a hot middle class man than with a average rich guy right?
My final question: If these guys put aside their pride and dated a woman who was a 5 like them, do you think after some time and sex they would eventually start to feel some attraction toward these women?
Disclaimer: The following are my theories only 🙂
“I ask because I was looking in a magazine and saw a article about Hiedi Klum and it got me to thinking about why would a beautiful woman like her, Kendall Jenner, and so many more that I can’t count date ugly guys?”
I suspect most starlets are aware that the hottest male celebs get chased by and propositioned by women groupies everywhere he goes.
So the hottest women know that if she dates the hottest guy she can, she’s signing up for a challenging relationship. Blake Shelton/Miranda Lambert; Ben Affleck/Jennifer Garner; Justin Timberlake/Jessica Biel (although I would say that with the exception of Jessica Biel, the female in those relationships were not as hot as the men). — Because those women groupies will shamelessly and without conscience try to seduce her man away. And the men being men, have to have iron control to withstand that limitless cornucopia of temptation. And the men fail, time and again. I mean seriously, if Halle Berry’s (ex)husband(s) will cheat on her what chance do us mortal women have of keeping our guys faithful, right?
And the female celebs know this. So many Female Celeb 10s will choose men in the 7 and lower rating in looks, but who may have something else like exceptional talent or sex appeal to make him sexy to her. Christie Brinkley/Billy Joel (talent); Angelina Jolie/Billie Bob Thornton (sex appeal/bad boy); Julia Roberts/Lyle Lovett (talent?); Heidi Klum/Seal (talent); Elin Nordegren/Tiger Woods (talent); Sandra Bullock/Jesse James (sex appeal/bad boy). So her being a 10 and him being 7 or lower in looks, gives her some sense of security, possibly. She gets to be the “gorgeous” one in the relationship without question.
And, let’s face it. The hottest woman celeb will outrank the hottest guy celeb in hotness. So that means a 10 female celeb’s only pickings are always lower than hers in the SMV scale. So, couple that with the fact that hot celeb men face too much temptation and often fail to live up to their promises of monogamy, those female celebs would be wise to choose the LEAST objectively handsome man that she’s attracted to have a relationship with. And odds are that man will adore and value her more than the hottest guy ever could or would. (Of course there are exceptions, but they were from a different era: Paul Newman and Joanne Woodward for example).
I agree with your theory “In my opinion what they don’t understand is that looks vs effort (courting) depends on the Market Value of each person.”
“Helen Fisher says that genes (physical beauty) are most important to women, than, wealth, so I can see a women with kids trading her looks for wealth and the support that comes with it, but why would a single women? If this was true, then, the myth about just being rich getting you hot single women is false. A single hot woman would rather exchange genes with a hot middle class man than with a average rich guy right?”
Well, with the availability of contraception, that hot single woman can ALSO have her cake and eat it, too. Just like a guy. She bangs the pool boy when her rich hubby is at work. With no consequences unless caught.
“If these guys put aside their pride and dated a woman who was a 5 like them, do you think after some time and sex they would eventually start to feel some attraction toward these women?”
Within each rating, there is a continuum, imo. So a male 5 should try to date the hottest 5 he can, and hopefully, they work out. Looks get you in the door, it’s personality and character that keeps a man or woman coming back. So if you have a nice-guy-with-balls 5 dating a an-average-but-sane-and-nice-self-aware-girl 5, they could have a happy relationship. As long as both of them are satisficers, and not maximizers, it will work (and does work. Look around you when you’re shopping at the mall :))
I’ve been in 3 LTRs that lasted more than 3 years and 2 STRs that lasted about year. And the reality is that after 4-6 months, that “passionate sex” just turns into “nice sex” or “ok, we both need to get off before we go to sleep sex” — so as long as your partner and you are willing to have quickies as well as longies, sex is a necessary COMPONENT of a good relationship but it’s not the BASIS of a good relationship, which comprises of compatibility and genuine liking and wanting to spend time with the other person that has nothing to do with sex, and everything to do with how you feel when you’re with them.
In other words, you want to have a partner you enjoy having sex with. And a lot of times, once you genuinely LIKE someone and care for them, as long as they have the right equipment in approximately the right place and everything functions normally, how “hot” they are doesn’t even factor into the sex. What matters more is what your relationship is like when you’re NOT having sex.
I think Karmic might be right that those beautiful female celebrities might not want the hassle of dating men who every other woman will also seek out–even when those men are within their reach. I read an interview with Sophia Vergara, who actually said that she initially did not want to date Joe Manganiello because she thought he was too good-looking for her! She thought, every other woman would also want him (especially after Magic Mike’s release) and she didn’t feel like competing with them. She actually said it seemed like “too much work”. He had to do a lot to convince her to give him a chance. Maybe there can be such a thing as too good-looking!
Poor Evan. Every time he dares post about chivalry, Red Pillers come out of the woodwork (or, rather, their moms’ basements) to lambaste him. *sigh*
Your comment reeks of condescension, ignorance and bitterness. And it’s rather pathetic to preface with a disingenuous overture. I’m pretty sure Evan can manage fine without your fake sympathies. #TotalFail
No, AAORK, she’s right, and I appreciate her speaking up on my behalf. It’s tiring getting yelled at by men who only sympathize with men and women who only sympathize with women. I sympathize with everyone – but that doesn’t mean that everyone is “right” in every instance.
Of course Evan can manage ~ heck, do better than manage: thrive! ~ without my words. But my sympathies and overture are quite genuine. It must be tedious to battle the same 5 or 6 irate posters each time he writes about how men can date more effectively.
Hi Henriette. I don’t agree with a lot of what these irate posters have to say, or at least, I definitely don’t agree with their approach. However, it isn’t readily apparent that these posts were written for men (e.g., this post and the two other posts that I cited in a comment above). In fact, two of these three posts dealing with courtship were clearly not written for men. As a result, the tone of many of the male commenters is naturally going to be more irate in response to posts like these as opposed to a post that is clearly written in a way that shows the author is coming from a place of sincerely trying to help men. Ain’t rocket surgery 😉
I will remind you that my blog is for women. The fact that men read it is incidental to its purpose.
Yes, we all know this, which proves my point.
Henriette,
Thank you for your utter condescending arrogance. However, I haven’t lived in my parents’ (or anyone else’s) basement (or house) since I was 16. That’s about 51 years worth of NOT being the “worthless loser” YOU only WISH every man who contradicts you and your “messiah” here was. Thanks all the same for the gratuitous insult to every man who dares disagree with your personal POV. Thanks also for tarring every male here who doesn’t toe the ” women good, men bad” line with the same broad brush. If you read the posts, there are quite a few contrasts between the comments of a number of the male posters here, myself included. You might have seen those, if you cared to actually read and think critically, rather than simply emote; but then, it’s easier to dismiss any man who dares complain of any female behavior as “MGTOW”, “Red Pill” and so on, and therefore irrelevant, than to take a long hard look at your own attitude and behavior, as seen by men…isn’t it? I’m not here to pick a fight, personally, but I will raise questions where I think those are appropriate. Neither I nor any other man who posts here, is required to validate your personal attitude, or feminist agenda. We’re certainly entitled to question, and state our opinions, so long as we do it in a courteous manner. Your only response is a lame, nasty stereotype? Just who’s being ugly and without substance again?
Gosh, @Buck. I’m a Methodist so Evan Marc Katz is certainly not my messiah.
And I don’t consider every man who contradicts him a “worthless loser” (your words, not mine). For example @Adrian has at many times disagreed with or questioned EMK’s theories and yet everyone here seems to see him as a bright guy with valid concerns who makes thought-provoking points.
However, those who come onto EMK’s website, spewing irate ramblings attacking him and his posts, ranting against “Western(ized) women” certainly do seem “lame and nasty.” Their goal is clearly not to learn, or to add to the understanding between the sexes but rather to vent long-pent frustration. So who is choosing to “simply emote,” again?
Go back, read my posts, and tell me again where I was”Ranting against “Western(ized) women. I never said that, nor indeed anything close. Also, find anything I said that suggested men NOT courting/being chivalrous. I didn’t say that either. My “crime” here, if there is one, is that, (1) I DID offer up some sympathy to Obsidian (his situation within his own ethnic community is a bit different ( and more difficult) than what most other American men deal worth) (2) I’ve had a less than positive experience, as an older man, with online dating, and said as much (that’s simply the ground truth of my own experience; I clearly labeled it as such, and possibly not applicable to other age groups)(3) I admitted to “shit testing” some women, who lied (and lied rather extensively) in their profiles, even as those very profiles contained harsh denunciations of men for (surprise, surprise) LYING ONLINE-see just a tiny bit of hypocrisy in what they did? I sure did! The concept of “I can do it, but you better not!” doesn’t fly with me, no matter who’s saying it, male or female. Now, if you, Evan or anyone else, can’t see the distinction between that, ( combined with the rest of what I posted in this thread), and what Russell, Mclovin and Obsidian posted, you have a reading comprehension problem, (or like Evan did on another post of mine (something clearly labeled as Satire, for heaven’s sake!), you glommed on to one or two key “Buzzwords” that raised your ire, assumed what you wanted to, without reading the rest, and decided to attack). Then instead of argumentation, you offered up a lame stereotype. You’re smarter than that; but you just lazily tarred everyone with a broad brush, which seems to be common practice here. Oh well…some of you here can be more than a little overzealous, when it comes to “enemy identification”. I just wanted to clear that up.
In response to my post at 25.1.2, Christine wrote:
“Either party can either choose to stay, or walk away, at any given time. In my own relationship, I don’t really see my boyfriend as having “power” over me.”
Your boyfriend has power over the relationship. While you can both walk away, if you want marriage, and he doesn’t propose, you can’t get married. Or you can propose, but if he doesn’t say yes, you can’t get married.
So while both people in the relationship has “walk-away” power — and usually, it’s the woman who wants the deeper commitment — the man controls how deep it gets if the woman is unwilling to walk away when he doesn’t deepen it in a reasonable timeframe.
And because of a woman’s unwillingness to walk away from a relationship where he’s giving “ambivalent” vibes about marriage–he doesn’t propose, but he says he’ll consider it “some day”; (generic) you and he have been living together for 5 years and he knows you want to get married, but still hasn’t proposed; yet he tells you every day he loves you and can see spending the rest of his life with you (but still no proposal) — women are unwilling to walk away from this kind of ambivalence. And men know this. That’s why they play that card so often.
That’s the relationship power that men have. Women can end a relationship, but she doesn’t have the power to deepen the commitment.
Thanks Karmic for the reply. However, I have to ask, why would (or should) a woman want to deepen a commitment with a man who doesn’t want to do that with her? If the man has that many doubts about marrying her (after a reasonable amount of time getting to know her), then I think she should also have doubts about marrying him too. Then at that point, the woman should walk away, to free herself up to find the man who’s more sure about her. It’s too bad more people don’t exercise that “walk away” power more often, for whatever reason.
Caroline
I grew up in a time and place where the values I was taught, were quite different from what is “accepted” today. Honor and integrity were not optional; they were expected. There was no place for the wannabe, the phony, or the slacker. I know it’s considered “obsolete” now, but in my day, most colleges and universities (yes, not just the service academies)actually had an honor code, which usually went something like this: “I will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor will I tolerate those who do”. Note the last part; if you knew someone broke the code, and did not report it, you were as guilty as they were. Those standards are NOT obsolete, nor are they “too strict”. I still believe in them.
I’ve discovered it’s a different world today. Today, a lie, if it’s wrapped in something bright and shiny enough, is preferred to the humble unadorned truth. People prefer to lie about their insecurities, rather than accept the ones they can’t change, and fix the ones they can. Never mind the substance, it’s the image that sells! Even love, it seems, is reduced to consumerism and advertising (in fact, that is the premise that drives the whole idea of online dating; If you haven’t got the goods, then be the biggest and best fraud you can be (somebody might not notice!). I don’t suppose I should be surprised. Carefully crafted falsehood and fantasy is far sexier and more attractive than truth; at least, in the short run. That fact is the stock in trade of every one of those “players” some women are drawn to, then complain about. The attitude will persist, I suppose, until and unless the consequences of dishonesty outweigh any potential gain. The first time I came to this blog, the first discussion I encountered was about lying in online dating; there was no debate about whether lying was OK; the only question was how much! The excuses I hear, are “But I HAVE to! “(no, you don’t) and “But, everybody does it!” (uh, no, EVERYBODY doesn’t).
What I thought I saw, with these women, was a “teachable moment” ; a chance to impart a lesson as to why lack of personal integrity is not something to be desired. Whether it worked, I couldn’t say, although I did notice that a couple of them took their demands for “a fit, active man” and their comments about their “very active, fun lifestyle” out of their profiles, so perhaps they learned something about what they really wanted after all. This also had the added bonus of having these same women self-select themselves out of my life, without me having to say anything “rude” or “hurtful”, so maybe that’s something. I did not say one negative word to any of those women when they couldn’t keep up; I didn’t have to.; I let them show themselves who they weren’t, wishful thinking notwithstanding. How you can call that “rude”, I have no idea. I really don’t care. Obviously, your standards are not my standards, and that’s fine. Anyway, it’s a moot point now.
Buck,
Thank you for the reply. I found it rather interesting you went out of your way for as you call it a “teaching moment”. I gather it may have given you a sense of power to “right the wrong” or conquer the “injustice” of it all? I am also from the south and would have been in your search range online being 54. But in our home we were taught “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. We were also taught by example. Our parents, teachers, elders all strived to empathize. “Put ourselves in the other person’s shoes” so to speak. I personally never felt any need to lie to that date I met by asking/accepting another date under the guise of a “teachable moment”. Yes, it was enlightening to find that a self proclaimed traditional man would go out of his way to rudely prove his point by leading these women (plural?-really) on a military hike. I never treated the man who stated he was 46 (used old pics) but showed up in his 60s. I didn’t feel the need to shame a man who showed up 35 lbs heavier and who had to bring his special pillow to put in the small of his back while we ate dinner who proclaimed his active lifestyle online with pics of him waterskiing. I’m sure an intelligent man as yourself realizes taking the high road instead would have proven to be just as effective. Btw, I also was much more successful dating organically as you have. I think we are all so much more genuine and would most likely not impose such limits/laundry list of ideals on others as is done in online dating. Online dating sets the dater up to do this just by their questionnaire. I dated men (oldest was 66) both online and offline. I found your remark about women setting their age limits to one year above their age rather odd. In my many years of dating, most men set their limits at 1-5 years under their age.i actually dated the 66 year old for awhile. Our first date was a tennis outing but I didn’t feel the need to make it an all out competition to show him a thing or two. It was a date. To have fun and possibly connect with another human being. That’s what dating is all about. Connecting. Not “teachable moments”.
Caroline,
You know, I don’t think I was ever able to get past the feeling I got from the online dating environment. It always felt cold, remote, impersonal, and more than a little calculating; a catalog shopping experience of sorts. Real life doesn’t feel that way; there’s some “being on one’s best behavior” of course, (early stage dating always has a small element of artificiality about it); but overall, the experience is far more personal, authentic, and for lack of a better word, human. I’ve never had that “on trial and presumed guilty” feeling with women I met in real life. I find it hard to be natural, “connect”, or feel empathy, when I feel like I’m the subject of an inquisition, and that’s how the majority of my online “dates” felt. When I go to dinner with a woman I meet in real life, I’m pretty sure we’re at least going to have an evening of pleasant conversation, instead of a game of “Gotcha!” I know at least something about her that’s real, as she does with me, and we’ve already interacted face-to-face. I can get more cues to who a woman is,from a two minute face-to-face conversation, than I could from 10 emails and an hour on the phone, much less an online profile. The problem is not men, the problem is not women; the problem is the online medium itself, and its profound limitations. I think sooner or later, it tends to bring out the worst instincts in people; certainly, it did with me. I thought I’d better leave, before I started thinking that the women I meet in real life, might be like the ones I encountered online
Incidentally and just for clarity, my daily walk is not a “military hike”. I live on a big lake that was once a river valley, so the surrounding roads are hilly. Military cadence (counted off silently) is just a natural (for me) way of maintaining a brisk walking pace; about 5 miles an hour. You speak as if I invited these women on some equivalent of the Bataan Death March, or invited someone to join me for PT at 0 dark-thirty. A reasonably fit man or woman of 75 can do that walk without any problem; I know, because I have several older neighbors in that age range who do it, regularly. The women in question were simply invited to join me on my daily walk (individually, not as a group, in case you thought that, too). As I said, several of these women chose (for whatever reason), to accept; but in no way did I lie to them, deceive them, or promise anything, directly or by implication. I simply invited them to come along on my walk I suppose you would also insist that the “do as I say, not as I do” attitude of these “ladies” was appropriate. Now yes, I took out a tiny fraction of my frustration with the online cesspool on them, but I’m equal opportunity; you would have been well within your rights to walk out on the guy who used those old picture, and in my book you should have. If everybody did that, we’d soon clean up the mess, and drain the damn swamp.
I make no judgment about where women set their age limits; that’s for each of them to decide, without regard to what anyone else thinks (specifically including myself). I merely recount what I have experienced, in my area. As for me, I’ve “dated” (if you can call meeting someone you encountered online a “date”) women within and without my target age range. I’ve dated women in their forties: some charming dates, but not realistic relationship prospects-different life stage, different goals, different almost everything. I’ve “dated” women older than me, several of them. The oldest, as an example, was 72, looked more attractive than most in their early sixties and quite pleasant. Different lifestyle, different expectations, even different relationship goals (at least, I find the idea of a permanently asexual, “strictly companionship” LTR something I’m not ready for yet). It appears some women believe any man over 65 must be as sexually disinterested/nonfunctional as they say they are; (before you ask, I didn’t bring up the subject; in each case, I was taken aback when the woman brought it up herself). I suppose you think it awful of me to consider that just plain weird.
In any case, like I said, it doesn’t matter, I’m with someone, and however that does, or doesn’t, work out, I’m leaving the dating market, permanently. In case you were wondering, I’ve been ill, so I’m whiling away time here while I recover.
Thanks for the lecture.
I was curious. I Googled. Also, phrasing is important. I consider ‘a walk’ a stroll where we observe stuff and can speak without puffing. A ‘brisk walk’ is one where we are on a mission to burn calories, no talking necessary.
Here are the results of a study done by the Road Engineering Journal to help determine the timing of crosswalk signals. Pedestrian Walking Speeds
Of the 7,123 pedestrians observed, 3,665 were 65 or older. Some of the findings were:
* The average walking speed for older pedestrians was 4.11 feet per second, compared with 4.95 for younger pedestrians. (that’s 2.8 miles per hour for older pedestrians and 3.4 miles per hour for younger pedestrians).
Just to be clear, I never called it “a stroll”; it’s not, its a brisk walk (though I can comfortably carrying on a normal conversation while doing it). I get most of the benefits of jogging/running, without the wear and tear on my joints. Is it a fast walking pace, at almost twice the average for people over 65 in the study you cite? Yes. Then again, this is a sedentary nation, where obesity and lack of exercise is rampant, so I’d expect the “average” pedestrian to walk slower.
Buck,
First, I hope you are recuperating well.
I however was disappointed with how you seemingly, in my opinion, skirted the issue of motive for asking those women on your “walk”. IMO, an appropriate answer would have been “because I wanted to get to know them better”. Not, uh I don’t know why they accepted the invitation?! So, I’m wondering why a seemingly intelligent man would go out of his way to an invite a woman (who showed up overweight or not) to walk where he silently counts to keep up his pace. I read online that a brisk walk is 3-4 miles per hour. It also said that once you get over 4 miles per hour there’s a question as to whether one should walk or jog. I seriously doubt those women realized this was at as fast a clip as they thought. Now, don’t get me wrong, I never condoned them for lying in their profile. As you put it, “you must insist it was appropriate for these ladies to do as I say not as I do”-or something to that effect. To clarify, I inferred that it may be best to courteously just move on. What you experienced in online dating is pretty universal-yes people lie. But is teaching the “cesspool” a lesson really a good idea? Btw-if a woman on here claimed all guys online were scum and losers, would you think that a bit over reacting? Because you dated online, are you then scum and a loser? I dated online, I am not in the cesspool of humanity. I by far met mostly sincere, good guys; I just didn’t find one for me. Although I did date a guy from online for 8 months (he had a “ghosting” habit). Funny, we get together around the holidays for a drink to catch up though. We’ve remained friends. I didn’t have to teach him a lesson to quit his disappearing act, I moved on. I was able to keep my attitude about both myself and the opposite sex high because I realized what he did was more about him than me and that I had no idea what he was going through to act so rudely to me. I retained my self esteem and sanity while being available at my very best for the next man. Not stewing in indignation and anger.
Well written, Caroline. Agree with every word, but stopped posting because it seemed futile.
Caroline,
Thanks for the well wishes; I’ll be fine in a couple of weeks.
Out of curiosity, how long had you been single before you tried online dating? I gather from an earlier post that you tried the online thing for several years. I ask because I went into that after the end of a 16 year marriage (and I’d been essentially out of the dating market for three years before that, so almost a 20 year hiatus). I wonder now, whether a year or two of conventional dating before ever trying the online approach would have put me in a better position to handle the online experience. Do you think your previous conventional dating experience, helped you deal with the online challenges better than if that had been your first experience in a long time?
Glad to hear you’re on the mend Buck.
I jumped into online dating quickly upon my divorce and jumped right back out realizing I just wasn’t ready emotionally to date. It was a big transition after 23 years of marriage with the full responsibility of my two sons squarely in my lap. I actually started with online first realizing the only way to maintain my sanity was to take breaks from it as needed. As my social life and career started to fall into place, I began dating more organically as I met more people socializing, tennis league and various enrichment classes. I probably became more successful dating wise as I gained more alternatives in how I met people. I’ve been dating my guy now for almost 5 years ( we didn’t become exclusive until year 3). I guess what I’m trying to say is it was better when all my eggs weren’t in one basket and my life was socially fulfilling enough to be happy without a romantic relationship but still desiring one.
Caroline,
Thanks. I’ve since thought, in hindsight, that I would have been better off gradually easing back into conventional dating as my life rebuild slowly expanded. As it was, so I jumped into the online fray.. It was a trial and error process I knew my age would likely be a limiting factor (though I had no idea how much), so I felt some need to move fast, and online seemed the most likely way to do that. Of course, it was a trial and error process (most of the advice available to men, is more aimed at the 20-40 age group)in the beginning, but I tried to glean whatever information I could, and with the help of a woman friend, scoped out the competition. At first, this looked promising; (I was amazed how many well-educateed professionals can’t write well at all) . Writing a profile and emails that would stand out actually didn’t look so daunting. What was a lot less evident, was just how age driven the searching is; much easier to see on Match, for example, than some other sites. The other thing was that women50-65 seemed to be as visually driven as I remembered from my thirties and forties, perhaps even more so (probably the medium exaggerated the apparent effect); that was a bit of a surprise to me. Anyway, the result was, that I drew interest from everywhere BUT my target range. Most interest came from women older than me (late sixties, seventies) and much younger (forties). The cold, impersonal, catalog shopping nature of the beast quickly became apparent, along with the pervasiveness of deception ( I would have expected more authenticity, if only out of self-interest. On top of that, there was essentially no feedback so now way to tell why anything was happening the way it was, so it was a constant process of invention and re-invention. I think, if I were twenty years younger, I might have simply enjoyed the challenge; but then I noticed that each time my birthday came, the profile views dropped precipitously in both numbers and quality. the situation deteriorated fast. After I hit 66, I found myself largely invisible. Fortunately, by that time, my expectations for any meetings I did get had become practically non-existent; I had learned not to build up any expectations for women I know next to nothing about. The only good news was that in the real world, things were improving as my circle of friends expanded, and that was providing a lively, if very casual social life that was far more pleasant than the awkward, stilted, often inquisitorial meetings from online encounters. I’m sure it was an illusion, but it felt as if women online were hellbent on making sure I knew I was, above all else, just plain OLD, in the most negative way. I don’t think it would have felt quite that way, were I your age, but obviously I’m not. For me, I have to rate the experience as a complete waste of time, that ultimately was poisoning my beliefs about women; that bit of self-knowledge told me it was time to strike the tent and move on so that’s what I did. The irony is, that both the quality and quantity of women (in my desired age range) I eventually began to meet in real life were dramatically better, than I found online; still don’t know whether it was the age thing or whether some personalities (like mine?) simply don’t project well/accurately under online conditions. Given some communications SNAFU’s here, I suspect both. I know I irritate Evan here, when I say online “dating” doesn’t work for everybody, (I think he sincerely believes it does), but what am I to make of my experience? Pretend it didn’t happen? Pretend I was trying to date women half my age, when I wasn’t? Pretend I was only willing to meet the best looking women within my age group, when that’s not the case? Pretend I wasn’t willing to date down as far as I could humanly stand? Sometimes, whether anyone likes it or not, truth is truth.
Buck, I’m in a different demographic than you (a 36 year old woman) but I really do understand what you’re saying about online dating being so age-driven! I can’t call online dating a complete waste of time, because I did eventually meet my boyfriend online (when I was 35 and he was 41). However, it was sure a long and painful road to get there! I experienced something similar to what you did, being largely invisible to my peers and mostly being contacted by people way younger or older than me. I wondered, was it really too much to want someone reasonably close to my age, who I could relate to? Before online dating, I never thought that a woman in her 30s was too “old” for men her own age, or in his 40s. I found out the hard way that I apparently am, for most of them.
I’m really lucky that I somehow, miraculously, found an exception in my boyfriend–someone within a reasonable age difference, who didn’t mind my age. But boy, it did feel a bit like I grabbed the last train out of the station! If things don’t work out, I really don’t know if I could take the online dating jungle again.
Osidian says “No, every woman isn’t — but DNA evidence tells us, that down through human history, 80% of all women who ever lived was able to pass their genes on into the future, while only 40% of men did. That’s due to a number of factors, but one of them was the fact that far fewer men were deemed attractive.”
I suggest you head to the library and do some reading in the areas of anthropology and history. The reason most women passed their genes on and most men did not is that the strongest most dominant men in the tribe monopolized the women. How was that women’s fault? Please remember that these were primitive male dominated societies. What power did women have, even to say no to sex? Men were stronger. Yes it’s a sad and uncomfortable discussion for those who study human history but the reality nonetheless.
The advent of legalized marriage evened things out. The normalization of monogamy and prohibition of sex outside committed relationships allowed all men the chance to find a mate and father children.
It also allowed women more power to choose to mate with a man or not. Our modern courtship behaviors are rooted in this custom, where men display their fitness as a LT partners for women in very physical public displays. From gladiators to bull running to modern organized sports, this cultural trend seems imprinted on us.
Women chose strong partners, and vice versa, because it gave their offspring the best chance for survival in harsh conditions. Understand this. It was not a matter of women feeling entitled to be picky, it was a survival mechanism and the reason humans persevered and that you and I are here today to have this discussion.
Once land ownership and complex economic systems became the norm, a woman’s parents became the primary relationship/marriage gatekeepers in order to use marriage to advance the families finances and position in society. Then men began competing for women or more accurately competing for approval of her parents based on their assets and ability to make a good living. Once again this trend remains in current courtship, where men are expected to pay for dates and display their ability to provide.
What is the point in all of this? It’s that by and large women didn’t make or enforce these rules you hate so much. The men who have run virtually every society since the dawn of time did. I’m all for times changing and for the record, I don’t feel entitled to have men spend tons of money on me. However before you chalk up modern dating dynamics to women’s arbitrary pickiness and angry feminists, you might want to do some historical research.
Before you attack me asking for sources, there are thousands in any library and they’re free. My argument here was based on years of study and a degree in anthropology.
Obsidian,
I didn’t say women were not choosier than men, but saying that the females of most species are choosier does not equal female domination of social dynamics among humans, because it ignores the development of complex social structures in which norms were imposed on mating that are not biologically advantageous per se but socially advantageous, such as marriage. There is a difference between biological motives and social motives.
Women are choosier because women get pregnant and must raise the children. Being pregnant means you are out of commission so to speak for 9 months and women only have so many opportunities in a lifetime to bear children. So all it means is that casual sex was a bigger gamble for women and finding a suitable mate is and was a priority over satisfying sexual urges with the first available man.
I know it’s a common belief among many men that marriage was created to serve women’s interests. It wasn’t. It was created to legitimize children and thus heirs and to stabilize society around family units. The point is that as much as you would like to believe these social structures are proof of women’s dominance in society throughout history, they are not.
Besides if socialization doesn’t trump biology, then women can’t help being attracted to the best men available can we? Why get angry if you believe its inherent and out of our control?
On another note marriage was invented long before the 1920s so I’m not sure why you chose to randomly bring that into the conversation.
My last point, your snarkiness doesn’t make you seem smarter, it just makes you seem like a jerk.
Oh yes and “sources please?” I don’t have time to create a literature review for you on hundreds of years of history, biology, and sociological research and theory, but if I did I can guarantee Wikipedia wouldn’t be on the list.
I showed appreciation and still got burned! After many e-mail exchanges, “Doug” finally asked me out for dinner on Saturday. Unfortunately it was the only day I was not available. My response was, “I would love to continue our conversation in person! Unfortunately, Saturday is the only day that doesn’t work for me. Would you be available another day so we could have dinner?” His response was, “Rain check on the dinner. Awesome. People get scared off when I ask. I can understand.” Then gave me his personal e-mail and phone number and told me to call anytime. WTF!? Wow! I have your online program and started following you before joining match.com, Evan. Thought I had a good one for a moment. But this is ridiculous – like trying to find a needle in a haystack!